What Should We Change?
Just recently it seems that I've seen a lot of people opining that it's silly, useless, just plain wrong, or even unhealthy to make major, permanent changes in the way we eat. We need a little junk food, they say. It's unhealthy to deny yourself the occasional donut or Coke. Food is about more than nutrition! It's about family and culture. To eat completely differently than we were brought up to is just wrong, somehow.
I've noticed, interestingly, that these criticisms are always aimed at low carbers. Does anyone ever criticize vegetarians for "denying" themselves meat, for defying their culture's food ways? Because if they do, I haven't seen it. Yet what percentage of American vegetarians grew up in vegetarian households? I'd guess it's less than 25%, and maybe less than that. Don't misunderstand, this is not a slam at vegetarians. It's a comment on how the criticism of various ways of eating is slanted.
Similarly, I frequently read that "any diet that calls for giving up whole food groups is a fad diet." Again, this is never aimed at vegetarians, or even vegans -- only low carbers. I actually brought this up to a dietician who wrote me to say just that -- that giving up any food group was the mark of a fad diet. I said "So, you're against vegetarianism?" She admitted that she'd never thought of it that way.
But what do these people recommend instead? That we keep eating the same old stuff, just less of it. So instead of learning to eat food that fills and satisfies us, and makes us feel well, even if it is different from the stuff Mom served us, we're supposed to eat the same stuff that's caused our problems, only less of it. Somehow it's a more reasonable, a more healthy choice to decide we're going to feel hungry, and very possibly tired, for the rest of our lives.
That this approach is notoriously unsuccessful is a whole other issue; the long-term success rate for "just eat less" is vanishingly small. What has been glaring at me recently is how bizarre it is to think somehow it's easier, emotionally healthier, more reasonable to go hungry.
Just low-carb food for thought.
- Dana's blog
- Login or register to post comments
also...
sorry, should have said i agree on all those different influences from media, culture etc that tell us low-carb is wrong - not just unhealthy, but wrong - i just thought i'd contribute a personal perspective of why someone who most needs to go low-carb might find it impossible to imagine doing so...
Deborah
the ease or difficulty of changing your diet
coming late to the conversation here, but I can definitely understand the people who say that they 'can't' give up bread/pasta/chocolate/insert your favourite carby food group. I used to be one of them.
I think that there are two factors involved. One is the obviously strong "but I love eating that food, that taste, I can't live without it" but the other really is the addiction factor, which most people aren't aware of (if they are carb addicts, which not everyone is).
I had done various low-fat diets a few times and found them next to impossible to stay on - constant hunger, constant craving. Still, twice in my life I stayed on them for months at a time, suffering all the way, and losing weight very very slowly. Of course at some point, both times, I 'snapped', started eating normally again, and put all the weight back on and more (so at the 'end' of the last low-fat diet I did, I weighed 75 pounds more than when I began it).
When I was considering low-carb, in my head the equation equalled feeling that hungry and that bad again, but on top of that, not being able to eat any of my favourite foods. When I ate low-fat diets I quite enjoyed the food - because I'm a carb addict. I hated the way I felt, and I was constantly hungry, but I could still eat potato and pasta etc, albeit in very very small portions. So the idea of food misery and hunger misery together was too much to bear thinking about, and I never imagined the experience would be different.
When I finally did start out low-carbing, I did it with the carb addicts diet, which still allowed me to eat high-carb once a day. I honestly don't think I'd ever have made the leap to Atkins, or 'full' low-carbing, without having that interim stage. It gave me a year or so to adapt two of my meals a day as low-carb, so I developed some taste/recipes for things I never ate before, and I didn't feel at all deprived, because I was still eating the things I loved once a day. And the cravings definitely went down. And I lost 50 pounds. But then I stopped losing (and I was still 190lbs at that point) and my 'one hour' of sensible higher carb eating was becoming a binge hour, and I was reading more about Atkins and how it actually wasn't this awful unhealthy fad diet, and I knew I had to make the switch.
I still didn't see it as a forever switch; I figured I'd do it, suck up the pain to lose the rest of the weight, and then go back to carb addicts, so I didn't have to give up those foods forever.
What I didn't expect, and this is what most dieters who would never consider low-carb can't imagine, I expect, is my *physical* reaction to being truly low-carb. I didn't *want* the foods I loved anymore. Sure, I still loved the taste in an abstract way, but even after only two weeks on Atkins, I didn't crave pasta (my favourite food) at all. It was this abstract knowledge that pasta was my favourite food, but when I came to make supper every night, it wasn't like a struggle in my head "want pasta want pasta want pasta eat salad" it was just "what kind of salad/meat/chicken/veg etc" shall I have. Pasta just stopped calling to me. Carbs became incidental to my life.
So - I had never realised the power the cravings had on me. And when I met people who said they didn't eat sugar or bread and I looked at them in bewilderment at how they could possibly live like that, I never imagined I could become one of them, or that if I became one of them, it wouldn't make me miserable and impinge upon my quality of life. Because nobody who is a carb addict and has never gone cold turkey can ever imagine how strong those insulin cravings are, or how different they feel - how much better - without carbs.
As background, I should say I started carb addicts at the end of 2001, turned to Atkins spring of 2003, and apart from three months of godawful morning sickness earlier this year, have been low-carb ever since. With the occasional lapse, sure, but a lapse that involves one meal, or one day, never weeks or months. I maintained a loss of around 100 pounds for over 4 years until getting pregnant (which I am now), and I feel 100% healthier and happier on low-carb than I ever would have imagined. And I have no intention of ever going back to the halfway house of carb addicts diet, because I feel so much better physically without the carbs.
Deborah
What a great comment
Hi Deborah,
I've sent your comment to a friend. Thanks for posting it.
Other than the pregnancy part, your experience is close to mine in many ways. I lost a lot of weight by eating very small meals and fasting two days per week. I was always hungry, and always obsessed with food. I used to plan out everything I was going to eat, for every meal, for several days in advance.
I had determined that this had to be a permanent change, so I continued this for several years and kept the weight off.
I never, ever, ate at home or brought any food home, because if I did, I'd always get hungry late at night, lose my resolve and binge. The fact that I would have to deliberately go out and buy food to binge on was just enough of a safety valve to prevent this.
It was only possible to keep this up by constantly telling myself that my long-term health was at stake.
Once I discovered low carb, I lost additional weight effortlessly, felt much better, and lost the obsession with food that I'd had for much of my life. I still enjoy food a lot, but I now feel that I have a rational attitude about it.
- Paul
What Should We Change?
Actually, vegetarians and vegans DO get criticized in the exact same way as low carbers for being culturally different...it just depends on the geographic region of the country where you are located. I'm in Texas and you can find a lot more support for low carb eating here than you can find support for any eating plan that excludes meat!
But I love your point about well-intentioned but bad advice that is basically encouraging you to stay hungry and tired and miserable just so you will fit in with all the other hungry, tired, and miserable people!
Just replied to an email about this...
While playing catch up with emails today, I replied to an email asking my thoughts on whether a resurgence in the popularity of low-carb is in the air...noting that while I do believe that there is a growing interest in the data amongst researchers and medical professionals, I think we're now in a period where consumers are going to be less likely to favorably view carbohydrate restricted diets.
The reason?
The messages from the powers are clearly asserting that following such a diet is "abnormal" in the long-term because "normal" people eat a "normal" diet and no one can eat that way (low-carb) for the long-term anyway...it's just not normal to do so, so don't even bother with it.
As I said in my reply to the email I received...that is a more powerful message to the average person than the message that there is not enough data to support a low-carb diet - with growing evidence supporting low-carb diets, the message MUST be changed or people might start to make the modifications to their diet - so now the message is making a totally emotional claim - that people deserve to eat as they wish, that they are entitled to eat a "normal" diet and that restricting carbohydrates is deprivation. ...few people want to willingly take themselves outside of the group, outside the norm, outside what's acceptable to the majority.....to do so is to purposefully exclude yourself from your group and no longer fit in with what is defined as normal and acceptable...a scary place for most people....making it easier to swallow the message that eating "normal" (high carb) is the proper way to eat in our society.
The pressure to be "normal"
Yo, Regina! I saw that you'd registered. Nice to see you over here! Folks, Regina writes one of the best low carb blogs out there, Weight of the Evidence. Add it to your bookmarks or favorites list NOW!
Anyway, yeah, there does seem to be a concerted effort going on to convince people not just that "the evidence isn't in" about carbohydrate restriction -- like that stopped the Powers That Be from recommending fat and cholesterol restriction! -- but that it's freakish, unlivable, emotionally unhealthy. I point out again that the alternative they offer, feeling hungry for the rest of your life, is far, far more freakish on a biological level. Other than breathing, there is no stronger biological impulse than to eat when you are hungry. Yet denying that urge for the rest of our lives is somehow supposed to be the "healthy," "normal" way to control our weight.
Worse, they're recommending that we go hungry while diluting our nutritional intake with worthless, empty "foods" in the name of "emotional health." There's currently an ad running for Light and Fit yogurt, where one woman compliments another, saying she looks great, then asks "Have you been counting calories?" The response is "Yes -- and vitamin D, and calcium, and..." While I'm not interested in buying their yogurt, the point is valid: Cutting calories in the context of a diet that makes "wiggle room" (see the Jello ads!) for junk food is a great way to end up malnourished. Yet this is the accepted version of weight control -- don't eat meat and eggs, eat these "100 calorie packs" of sugar and white flour, instead! It's the "normal" thing to do!
The pressure behind this appears to be enormous, and I hypothesize that it comes from a number of sources.
* People who don't want to give up carbs themselves. You and I know that carbs are addictive, or why do so many people choose to keep eating them even when it becomes clear that it's killing them to do so? Just as alcoholics become testy if those around them turn down a drink, carb addicts need others around them to keep eating carbs.
* The medical establishment, doctors and registered dieticians alike, who have been recommending fat and cholesterol restriction for lo, these many years. It has to be very hard to realize that the advice you've given thousands of people may well be wrong. To resist believing the evidence that that is so is only human.
Back in, oh, '99-'00, there was a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine that looked at the results of seven different studies regarding the effects of a low fat diet on breast cancer etiology. The conclusion was that not only did a low fat diet do nothing to reduce the risk of breast cancer, but that a very low fat diet -- 15% or fewer calories from fat -- actually increased breast cancer risk. I read one doctor who commented that he thought this was due to "an artifact in the research." I though to myself, "Yeah, if I'd be recommending a low fat diet for a couple of decades, I'd be blaming it on an artifact in the research, too."
In short, a whole lot of people have built careers and reputations on recommending fat and cholesterol restriction.
* The media. Next time you watch television, keep track of what percentage of ads are for processed junk food or fast food. Those ads are what pay for television -- indeed, ads, not entertainment, are the main purpose, the business, of television. The shows are only there to get you to sit in front of the television to watch the ads.
Now, ask yourself -- how many ads do you see for the basics of a low carb diet: meat, poultry, fish, eggs, cheese, vegetables, fruits, and nuts? Oh, there was the Incredible Edible Egg campaign, and "Beef: it's what's for dinner;" though I haven't seen those ads for a while. I see the occasional ad for cheese. But they're a tiny fraction of the food ads. No, the big ad dollars are in highly processed, carb-y junk.
And in drugs. Big, big ad bucks in drugs, both over-the-counter and prescription. Which leads us to another source of resistance to carb restricted diets.
* The pharmaceutical industry. Is there an American left who is unaware of the power, the influence, and the sheer profitability of the pharmaceutical industry? Now, ask yourself how many of those drugs are sold to treat health problems that are caused by eating a high-glycemic load diet, awash in junk carbs? How much money does the industry make in drugs for type II diabetes alone, not to mention diabetic testing supplies? (I own a couple glucometers, and I can tell you those test strips do not come cheap.)
How much of that ocean of cash would simply dry up if people stopped eating garbage?
* Political correctness. I'm hypersensitive to this because I live in a trendy-lefty university town where vegetarianism is overwhelmingly assumed to be the healthy and ecologically correct diet. As Regina pointed out on her blog, Earth Day was marked by reporters all over the country informing us that we need to stop eating meat to "go green." That the carbon impact of meat eating largely has to do with the switch from grazing animals to cramming them with grains and beans was rarely mentioned.
Add all this up, and there is a lot of resistance to the growing evidence that carbohydrate restriction is, at least for a large percentage of the population, the key to health.
the first 6 weeks
Dana: Approaching my 5th low-carb anniversary, I revisited my account of the first 6 weeks. It's funnier than hell, so I posted it on my web site. Take a look: it's the "Curmudgeon Classic."
michael grossman
travelingcurmudgeon.com
Curmudgeon Classic
Ooooh, mighty thews! I just love a man with mighty thews. Also a brain, a sense of humor, and the ability to write clear entertaining prose.
Good stuff. Thanks. But your cheesecake didn't really cost that much, you know. 'Cause one assumes you had Mockahlua left over, along with instant coffee, and some Splenda. And next time you knew to buy sugar-free chocolate bars instead of bitter baking chocolate. :-) And to use just almonds in your crust, instead of both almonds and hazelnuts, which are considerably steeper.
But where on earth do you live that four eggs run you a buck-twenty? I could get four eggs for about half that around here. Heck, even good, local small-farmed pastured eggs cost me just $3/dozen ($2.70 if I buy 'em on Tuesdays, when Sahara Mart has 10% Off Day) -- that makes four eggs just a buck for the expensive ones. Cheap grocery store eggs run me about $1.60, or 13c apiece.
Anyway, that's the most fun I've had this evening. Thanks!
Thanks for kind words--glad
Thanks for kind words--glad you enjoyed it. As for costs, if I had any of that godawful mockahlua left over, I threw it out. (I've learned a lot in 5 years, but not making mockahlua was one of the most important things.) My wife says she pays $4 for a dozen eggs today (in Southern California) which would be $1.33 for four. Must have been less back then, so I guess I got them on one of those "inverse sales." Do they have more chickens in Indiana?
michael grossman
travelingcurmudgeon.com
Mockahula
In my defense, I have to point out that you admitted to messing up the recipe. Folks I've served the Mockahlua to have really liked it.
And yes, I believe we do have more chickens in Indiana. Cows and pigs, too. $4 a dozen, huh? Um... have you considered moving?
I could really annoy you by telling you what I paid for my house. :-p
Change
It always makes me mad also when I hear that as long as you stay on the low-carb diet you will lose weight but as soon as you go off, you will gain the weight back again because no one can stay on the plan forever (or so they say). Yet, I never near that said about other plans. Weight watchers encourages people to stay on their plan for life and that is okay.
Joyce
Low Carb For Life
Yep. My standing response to people who say "You just gain your weight back when you go off that diet!" is to smack myself on the forehead and say, "Er-duh!" I have made permanent changes in my eating habits. I'm permanently low carb. Had three fried eggs for breakfast.
Why Should We Change
I think a better question is - "Why do we care what 'they' say?" I know that I feel better, stronger and younger eating this way, so that should be the most important voice that I listen to. I have eaten this way off and on for 27 years (more off than on) and I experimented enough with my body listening to these experts to know that what they say does not work for me.
What 'they' say
I have friends who have commented admiringly on my weight loss (25 lbs two years ago) and the fact that I have kept it off...but are not willing to even consider giving it a try themselves. I'm not the strictest low-carber out there, so it's not like I have a diet that's extreme in the least - when they opt for a sandwich and fries, I opt for a salad; they snack on chips, I snack on nuts - that kind of thing. Yet they try weight watchers, jenny craig, low fat this and that, and continue to gain. I tell them that I had sausage and eggs for breakfast and they make a comment about how fattening it is, yet five hours later I'm not hungry and they are, after their "healthy" bagel breakfast.
I don't understand why the connection isn't made.
Why Don't People Get It?
I've known for a long time that most people would quite literally rather die than change their eating habits -- they do it every day. I don't know how much of it is physical carb addiction, which is very real, and how much is an emotional reaction to the idea. But people do find it terribly threatening.
I was at the grocery store recently, in the produce section, and made some passing comment to a couple of young women also shopping there about -- darn, it was some sort of produce that looked really good. Just "Wow, lookit those peppers!" or something
Anyway, they said something about how they'd cook whatever it was, and the dish they suggested was seriously carby. I said, "Sounds good, but I wouldn't do that; I'm one of those weird low-carb types you hear about." Said it with a smile, of course.
The woman said, "Oh, I should do that. But I can't. I can't give up bread and pasta." I said, "Sure you can. Don't give your power away like that. Say you don't want to. That's fine." "Oh, no, I can't, I just can't." "You really can. No reason you should, but c'mon, own your power. Say you don't want to." (Yes, I realize I'm pushy.) "Oh, no, I really want to. I just can't."
I gave up, 'cause I wasn't about to change this person's life in the produce aisle (although it has happened. I've run into people months after having a casual encounter and discovered they've lost tons of weight. Makes me happy.)
But I was struck -- as I always am -- by people's unwillingness to own their choices, to accept full responsibility for what they do. I think people don't want to change, find it very threatening, but they don't want to admit that it's a choice. I don't understand it, but I know it's widespread and powerful.
Please, whatever you do, own your choices. There's no reason you have to choose to eat healthy, or to save money, or to get organized, or whatever it is that you feel you "ought" to do. And some changes may be more challenging than others. But please don't say "can't." It weakens you.
Yup....
I agree about what you just said here. It's okay to cut out meat but when you ask people about cutting out the wrong kind of carbs, you get, "It's SO unhealthy," "Don't you worry about your heart?" or "I can't do that" (with a self-deprecating look, as if the lack of willpower or motivation is due to some outside force.) I was told one day, "I don't see how you can do it. I love carbs way too much!" I said, "Yeah, I do too, actually, and they love me. They stick to my butt like little fat barnacles and just don't want to leave their home." I had one woman tell me all about how the PCRM was helping someone sue Atkins because of the health issues. I asked her if she also read the other side of matters and that, given that PCRM had ties with PETA, they were also mad that we were eating animals in the first place. People like one-sided research. It takes too much time from their day to look at both sides of the research, and that is unfortunate.
I am not doing low-carb just for looking good, I do this for health reasons. Low-carb eating not only helps me lose weight but also corrects my hormones in ways that "pill hormones" never could. Low-carbing fixed what $1000 in fertility drugs couldn't. After losing 60 pounds on Atkins in 2003, I got pregnant with my oldest son. I found myself unable to nurse him, so I went back on Atkins. I lost 45 pounds over 14 months, and ended up pregnant AGAIN even though I was on the pill. Every time I lose weight I get pregnant again! If I hadn't done Atkins, I would probably still be childless and 200 pounds. I'm on Atkins again, and have lost 10 pounds in 14 days. My fat percentage has already gone down 3 percent and I've lost at least 12 inches total off my body. I started craving nuts and seeds instead of pizza. With your recipes, I don't buy low-carb convenience foods (except the ketchup.) I make my own foods, even mixed snacks, because I control what I put in it. I get to challenge myself to take recipes and change them for what I need. It's great! I know that it's far more than just wearing skinny jeans. I turn thirty in August and I will be healthier than ever.
As for the "I can't do that"...my endocrinologist's PA had a great response for that. This is what we were talking about:
Him: You can change the way you eat and control what you put in your mouth. Do you smoke?
Me: Um, NO.
Him: Why not?
Me: It's disgusting and unhealthy!
Him: So you *choose* not to smoke?
Me: Yes, I choose not to smoke.
Him: What about when you were not married? Did you sleep with every guy you met?
Me: No. I'm not that kind of person.
Him: So, if you can make the conscious decision and stick to not smoking, and not sleeping with everyone you meet, then why can't you say no to a food you know is unhealthy, or say no to eating more than you know you should? Isn't that decision just as important to you overall?
Me: Point taken.
Why Do We Care?
I don't care for me. I went low carb long before it was cool, and I've stayed low carb since, and barring some hideous breakdown of civilization that makes getting animal protein, vegetables, dairy, nuts, and seeds impossible, I'll be low carb till I die. (And I just may get chickens for my 10 acre back yard, so that even if civilization goes to hell I can get animal protein. :-) )
I care for the millions of people out there who are struggling with weight, health, and energy problems on their "Eat a balanced diet, just eat less" or outright low fat programs, and who have been convinced by the yapping pundits that low carb is faddish, unhealthful, and downright stupid. People are dying because of bad advice. Maybe worse, they're dragging themselves miserably through unhealthy lives.
That's why I care.
The pharmaceutical industry
Dana,
I read your blog, I buy your books, and I recommend them to other people, but I have to say that what you say about the pharmaceutical industry in this post is unfair and, dare I say, uninformed. I have worked in this industry for over two decades, and we believe strongly in prevention. We work with physicians and payors to support and encourage people to practice good diet and exercise to deal with conditions like diabetes and high cholesterol. The idea that we want people to be sick so that they buy our products is completely unfounded.
Other than that, I love you!
The Pharmaceutical Industry
Well, thanks! -- for the love, and for being willing to call me on the carpet when you think I need it.
The pharmaceutical industry is huge, and employs many thousands, if not millions, of people. I am more than willing to believe that the vast majority of those people are good, kind, and honest. But where there are vast sums of money, there is nearly inevitably human misbehavior. The burying of the bad news about Vioxx is one example.
I don't know how to fix this. For any publicly traded company, shareholder profit must be the primary concern -- legally and ethically. But a man cannot serve two masters, nor can an industry, and profitability and public health are not always along the same path.
(Interesting side note: That Nice Boy I Married and I visited Colonial Williamsburg a few years back; he'd never been, and I hadn't been since I was ten. One of the interesting tidbits of information we picked up was that in colonial times there were three occupations which were considered "professions" -- law, medicine, and clergy. And they were all suspect -- because all of them depended for their livelihood on the continuation of that which they claimed to be trying to eliminate. So this is not a new problem.)