On Thu, 2 Apr 1998, John C. Pavao wrote:

> This was in April.  I followed Neanderthin religiously
> from April to November... and lost nothing.

John, I am going to offer yet another heresy.

Neanderthin tells us to reject thermodynamic thinking and so not
to think about calories.  Up to a point, I believe this is
correct.  The relation between calories in, calories out, and
weight is not at all linear.  But that doesn't mean there is no
relationship at all.

I believe the body seeks to maintain body weight by seeking to
maintain equilibrium.  If you eat more, it will try to burn more;
if you eat less, it will try to burn less.  This creates a sort
of window of calories and activity within which you will neither
gain nor lose weight.  If you consume a substantial surplus of
calories, your body simply cannot use them all, so it must either
store them as fat or excrete them.  Where else can they go?  We
are not really equipped to excrete very significant amounts of
fat, and our bodies are programmed to prepare for famine, so we
tend to store it.  If the diet is higher in carbs, the higher
insulin levels lower the "store fat" threshold, but even on an
all-meat diet we are making insulin in response to protein and
ketones.  And if there is insulin present, we will store that
fat.

Weight loss is as unnatural as weight gain.  It's not something
that the body was really meant to do.

When we have a lot of weight to lose and go on a low-carb or
paleo diet, here is what I think happens:  Because of the
anorexic effect of the low-carb program, we eat substantially
less than before, so we lose weight.  As others have pointed out,
as we lose weight our caloric expenditure drops.  So at some
point we enter the equilibrium window, as it seems you did in
April.

Now it gets tricky.  If you start consuming fewer calories, your
body will oblige by burning fewer, each minute of the day.  There
is, of course, a lower limit to this, beyond which you cannot go
without losing weight.  The trouble is, to go beyond this lower
limit will probably involve hunger, which makes long-term success
unlikely.

What is needed, of course, is a way to achieve a *small* caloric
deficit without slowing down the rate at which the body uses
calories.  How is this done?

Well, I'm not sure.  I have exactly the same problem as you,
except I am somewhat closer to my goal weight.  I haven't lost
any weight since maybe August.  Until just recently.  I think the
exercise variable is the key.  I have been trying to apply Art De
Vany's ideas about evolutionary exercise patterns, with lots of
variation in intensity and duration, to prevent my body from
settling into equilibrium.  I have finally lost another pound.
In terms of caloric restriction, I'm working more on the *timing*
of my eating than on the amounts.  After a meal, I don't eat
*anything* for at least four hours.  But I'm still experimenting
to see what works.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]