On Sun, 21 Nov 1999, Lynnet Bannion wrote:

> Kara wrote:
>
> > If life was as simple as calories in = weight loss, then all the
> > places that teach weight loss by low calorie dieting wouldnt have a
> > 95% failure rate.  That includes the 700 calorie liquid protein
> > diet.  And there wouldnt be many scientist looking for other
> > explanations of obesity.
>
> I agree completely with the statements of Kara and others about different
> people responding differently to the same calorie count.

Yes, the fact that *different people* use calories at different
rates doesn't entail that an individual person can ignore
calories and lose weight.  The trick is to find the diet that
makes it easiest to control calories.  Neanderthin may be that
diet, although there are not yet any studies of its failure rate.

> But it is also
> true that you can't forget entirely about calories if you want to lose weight.
> If you're eating way more than you're using, you will put weight on,
> even if you're eating low carb.

There is also a difference between the caloric point at which you
gain weight and the point at which you lose it.  There are
clearly people who don't lose weight on lowcarb diets because
they eat too much.  The challenge is to discover *why* they are
eating too much.

> The leverage that Neanderthin and Atkins
> gives you is to reduce the insulin, thereby reducing the appetite and fat
> storage, thereby giving you the chance that eating a reasonable amount of food
> will bring your weight back to what it should be.

It's not clear that insulin has much effect on appetite, but it
seems that abrupt *changes* in blood sugar do.  Lowcarb diets
should help to keep the blood sugar curve flatter, helping to
control appetite.  The problem for an insulin resistant person is
that the blood sugar is allowed to go so high before the insulin
can bring it down, the net effect of which is a "spikier" blood
sugar curve.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]