On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Donna H wrote:

> Then Todd wrote: <<Incidentally, I got my wife to try Neanderthin,
> after over a year
> of enduring my dietary eccentricity. She enjoyed the meat and
> eggs and nuts, but didn't enjoy the rapid weight gain -- about 15
> pounds in 2 months.  It wasn't muscle either.  She is now happily
> losing that weight on Weight Watchers.>>
>
> I'm curious whether this was low carb or not? Women's bodies, IMHO,
> are the trickier to deal with. The Chinese say men are ruled by qi and
> women by blood-- something of a testament to how hormonally sensitive
> we are (long explanation I won't go into here). I, for one, gain
> bigtime on Weight Watchers, yet when I low carb I can eat much more
> calorically and lose. I think I have an upper threshold in terms of
> calories, but if I get too few I also gain. Again, the issue of
> balance comes up.

It was very low-carb -- ketogenic for a while, in fact.  We did
it this way because she wanted to "jump start" weight loss.  It
was frustrating for her to experience the opposite effect.  The
basic problem was the way in which the diet seemed to stimulate
her appetite.  She was eating a lot of food  -- more than I
was eating sometimes, and  I'm a lot bigger.  She said it was
because she constantly felt hungry an hour or so after eating.

Now, on Weight Watchers, her meals look more like Zone meals: a
piece of meat, some veggies or salad, a half cup of rice.  This
seems to do the trick for her.  I think you are right to point
out that cutting calories too low can also slow weight loss, or
worse, accelerates muscle loss.  Fortunately, the Weight Watchers
"point" system prevents this.  Basically, the new WW program is
just a calorie counting system, with a slight penalty for fat and
a slight incentive for fiber.  Macronutrient ratios can be
adjusted to whatever you want.

I do think that a low-carb diet gives some of us a bit of extra
caloric "slack", but based on what I have seen this is highly
variable among individuals.  The link between carb intake and
appetite and energy also appears to be a very individual thing.
Some people on the Zone diet, which is 40% carbs, complain that
they need still more carbs to avoid hunger and lethargy.  Others,
like me, do better on considerably less.  But one thing is
certain: if appetite and energy levels are not controlled, the
diet will fail. I very much doubt that "one size fits all" in
this respect.  It is certainly possible to adjust to a wide
variety of protein/carb/fat ratios and still be within paleo
guidelines, which is what I try to do.  On the other hand, my
wife is *much* happier with small amounts of bread, rice, etc. in
her diet.

Todd Moody
[log in to unmask]