----- "Paula" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: 
> Keith's answer to previous thread: 
> Here's an idea. Could it be that Kwasniewski's "Optimal Diet" takes us down 
> to our optimal weight? And that the optimal weight for Homo sapiens has a 
> few kilos more body fat than contemporary American ideals? That is, the 
> Optimal Diet won't take you down any further simply because further is not 
> optimal. 
> 
> It may be that if Kwasniewski examined you he would pinch that small roll of 
> fat around your tummy admiringly and ask where on earth you got the crazy 
> idea you had to lose another 20 lb. 
> 
> Keith 
> 
> Keith- 
> I have wondered, too, since we have discovered that so much of what passes 
> for generally accepted medical science (example is cholesterol heart disease 
> dogma) is nonsense, why we accept what is the best weight foisted upon us 
> from these same people. What is the true scientific basis for stating that 
> all women of a given height must weigh within a narrow range to be at 
> optimal weight? 

If I went by the usual medical charts, I'd need to lose almost 50 pounds more. At 6'1" and 238 lbs., I'm still considered obese by every medical standard, and my own standard. When I say that I "need" to lose 20 more lbs. or so, I mean only that I think keeping my weight below 220 lbs. is a reasonably realistic and healthy goal. The charts all tell me that I should weight 189. My weight has gone that low a few times in my life, and I can't say I felt particularly good. I haven't had my body composition measured in a while, but I don't need any fancy measurements to know that I'm still carrying around more body fat than is good for me. 

One thing that throws the charts and tables off is the fact that I have relatively short legs for my height. I wear 30" length trousers. I'm more muscular than most men my age (57), but I'm no bodybuilder. I know from experience that at 220 or less, I look and feel good. At that weight, nobody thinks I need to lose any. At that weight, even my doctor scratches his head and says, "Well, the tables say you need to lose weight, but you don't look to me like you need to lose weight. " 

I wear 36" waist trousers comfortably now, but of course I tend to wear jeans and other casual styles that are worn low and allow my belly to protrude above the belt, like so many other men in the US. At my current weight, the extent of belly protrusion is far less than what it was 35 lbs. ago, but it's still there. At 220, I wear 34" trousers with no belly protrusion at all. 

Ideally, one wants to be able to eat without conscious restriction and have one's body weight "normalize", i.e., stabilize at a level optimal for health, given one's general body type, activity levels, and so on. This is what many diets promise; I don't know if any, including paleo, actually deliver. My experience is that paleo, as well as other approaches, takes me so far, but well short of goal. The remaining distance requires conscious restriction. 

Todd Moody