The Maintenance Library - You on a diet




View Full Version : You on a diet


AnneWonders
11-07-2006, 11:19 AM
Have any of you maintainers read this one? I just picked it up and am starting to work through it.

Anne


Meg
11-07-2006, 11:22 AM
I just ordered it - should get it in a day or two.

It would be great if we got a discussion going once some of us have read it. :)

alinnell
11-07-2006, 01:41 PM
There is a support thread for this under General Diet Plans.


Meg
11-14-2006, 08:00 AM
Is anyone interested in doing a chapter by chapter discussion of You On A Diet, like we did with Thin For Life?

AnneWonders
11-14-2006, 08:17 AM
I just finished it this weekend, and while I liked the book, I'm not sure I think it was worth a chapter by chapter like TfL was.

Anne

lilybelle
11-15-2006, 02:57 AM
I haven't read it yet, but plan to. I just finished TFL and I'm glad I did.

alinnell
11-15-2006, 12:43 PM
I ordered TFL from Amazon and it should arrive today. I also bought the book 100 days of weight loss (I had seen excerpts and it looks very inspirational--I may read it and give it to my MIL). I was thinking of buying You on a Diet, but changed my mind. I'd love to hear comments about it, though. I guess I'll have to look for the thread for the TFL book.

karynlee
11-15-2006, 07:11 PM
I'm currently reading You On a Diet. I like the format of the book and, so far, it seems to be a pretty sensible approach to weight management. It's been interesting to learn about the mechanics of the body when it comes to food.

When I read something, I don't retain the information very long unless I take notes. I thought I would share my notes/thoughts as I go. Anxious to hear what you guys think, too.

The tidbits on HFCS (high fructose corn syrup) interested me so that's the first topic I delved into. It brought up some questions, too, which I'm hoping I can get some input on.

Sorry, this isn't going to be too terribly organized:

HFCS

* The body doesn't recognize it as "regular food" or excess calories, so it doesn't turn off hunger signals

* Avoid all:
Simple Sugars (more on that in a sec)
Enriched, Bleached or Refined Flour
HFCS

* Food Labels:
Avoid foods where HFCS or another simple sugar is more than 4g per serving
OR
One of the first 5 ingredients

* Sugar (why it's bad):
Excess Calories
Induces highs & lows in blood sugar (creates a cycle of craving more high-calorie food)

* Simple Sugars:
Brown sugar, dextrose, corn sweetener, HFCS, glucose, corn syrup, honey, invert sugar, maltose, lactose, malt syrup, molasses, raw sugar, sucrose

* Watch for HFCS in bread:
Go for 100% Whole Grain only (not "made with," multigrain, whole grain, blends, "good source," "supports heart health")

*Watch for HFCS in salad dressing:
Go for "low-cal," not "low-fat" (which can be loaded with HFCS)

So, here's how this translates for me:

* My Skinny Cow Ice Cream Sandwiches are a big no-no. They're low in fat and calories and have 3g of fiber, but they have 15g of sugar.

* So are the All-Bran bars I eat with my coffee. They're low in calories and high in fiber (which is why I eat them), but they have 11g of sugar and simple sugars are at the top of the ingredients list.

*My All-Bran Bran Buds (which I mix into my low sugar yogurt) has 8g of sugar (too high according to YOAD) and sugar is the second ingredient behind wheat bran. However, one serving packs a huge fiber punch - 13g! At this point, I'm not ready or willing to give them up because they're such a great fiber source.

So, I suppose my question is this... As they state, sugar causes highs and lows in our blood sugar causing cravings for high-calorie food. If I can eat things like Skinny Cows (one per day) and All-Bran and similar products (in moderation, of course) without experiencing problems with cravings, is the small amount of sugar I'm consuming not a concern? I'm very careful about sugar (for the most part), good fats, good carbs, protein, fiber, sodium and calories. I don't know anything about recommendations or general guidelines for sugar consumption (other than YOAD). Is there a certain number of sugar grams that we're supposed to stay under each day?

If the authors address this at some point in the book, I willl share what I learn.

Hope you're all having a good day. :D

K.Lee

WaterRat
11-15-2006, 08:35 PM
Karyn - I think that - like with many things - some people are much more affected by sugar than others. Like you, I eat a little bit of sugar and don't have cravings.

Inconceivable
11-15-2006, 10:52 PM
The way I look at rules like this is that they are merely suggestions. Not all people will react to sugars in the same way. If what you are doing works for you, and you are as slim as you'd like to be and as healthy as you can be, than you may not need to make any changes.

But like me, if you're just not getting anywhere in the way you were previously eating, it couldn't hurt to try to make some new changes like these sugar rules.

AnneWonders
11-15-2006, 10:57 PM
KarynLee, thanks for the notes. I'm finally getting around to doing a quick review.

YOU on a Diet is divided up into 5 basic parts. The first, What a Waist!, talks about why waistline measurement is the right measurement to use from a health perspective. The second part, The Biology of Fat, is a summary of the hormones that influence our appetite, how food is digested and absorbed, the role of inflammation, the dangers of abdominal fat, and the role of exercise. The third part, The Science of the Mind, talks about the role of neurotransmitters and basic psychology on weight. Part 4, is a 'diet' and activity plan, and finally the appendices cover medical options, including prescription medications, plastic surgery and gastric bypass.

Things I liked about the book:

Emphasis on health and not on appearance
Long term perspective (100 cal/day=10 lbs/year arguments)
Accessible descriptions of fat biology
Discussion of medical options for a medical problem, and not as 'cheating'
Simple, clear guidelines for cleaning up diet and beginning exercise
The emphasis on moderation vs perfection in diet and exercise


Things I didn't like about the book:

Lack of references: no way to tell when the recommendations they make have been superceded by better studies
Unreserved recommendation for supplements (summarized on p 203): the research on some of these is very sketchy
The conclusions they present about fructose (esp HFCS) as somehow worse than other simple sugars is controversial. And there is absolutely no mention that most of the natural sugars found in fruit is fructose. This may come with the territory of trying to simplify such a complex subject, but it really bugged me.
Their diet plan didn't seem to follow through on their earlier statements about moderation and long term emphasis.
I found the discussion of inflammation pretty much incomprehensible.
As a style point, I thought the attempts at humor were pretty stupid.


I'm trying to figure out what I do (if anything) with the information in this book, as someone who needs to actively manage my weight. I found the discussion on hormonal and neurotransmitter regulation of appetite fascinating, and would probably recommend the book just on that basis. But in terms of real actionable ideas, it seemed a lot of the same to me--get the junk out of the diet, choose whole plant-based foods over refined ones, avoid trans fats, saturated fats, and added sugars. Exercise with walking and basic strength training.

I'm also one of those people that doesn't have a problem with carbs. I don't get the highs and lows after eating them. It's pretty much all good. So while I try to avoid foods with lots of added sugars of any type, I'm not really concerned if the naturally-occurring fructose in the raisins in my raisin bran put my simple sugar count above 4 g/serving. I'm a little skeptical of the one-size-fits all approach. KarynLee, the whole milk in my fridge has 11 g of naturally occurring sugars per cup, so depending on how much actual dairy goes into a Skinny Cow, the amount of added sugars may not be that bad (the nutrition panel does not distinguish added sugars from naturally occurring). Not that you'd want to build a diet on Skinny Cows, but as an occasional thing, it's probably not the end of the world.

Anybody have any different opinions? It's always possible I missed things, or just got a bug up my butt because of the whole sugar issue.

Anne

karynlee
11-15-2006, 11:48 PM
Pat & Alison, thanks for the reality check. You're right, we all have to strive to do what works for us as individuals. Sometimes, I get a little caught up in what the "experts" have to say and assume I'm doing something wrong.

Anne, your review was awesome. Thanks for putting that together. You make some great points and I'm feeling a little better about the fact that the section on sugars left me a bit befuddled. Like you, I was not impressed by the information they gave about supplements. And I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds their cutesy jokes annoying (and distracting!).

The next section I'm about to tackle is the one on how the body processes fats, proteins, carbs, etc. It really is fascinating stuff. :)

Meg
11-16-2006, 08:05 AM
Thanks for your review, Anne. :) I manage to read three pages per night and then fall asleep so am not making much progress. :dizzy: Like you, the science of weight loss and obesity is fascinating and I'm coming up to that chapter next.

Mel
11-16-2006, 08:56 AM
I haven't read the book, so take whatever I say with that in mind. From what I've read here, and heard about it, it sounds very much like SugarBusters. The rules, such as they are, are all the same with the same emphasis on added sugars and the demonizing of HFCS.

Until I tried SugarBusters and followed those rules, NOTHING worked for me except outright starvation. No matter how much exercise and low cal/low fat I ate, my weight would barely budge unless I was below 700 calories UNTIL I GOT RID OF SUGARS and PROCESSED CARBS. Now I can eat double that and still lose, admittedly still not a lot of food. One serving of anything with sugar or processed starchy carbs, and the weight piles back on disproportionally to the calories- and it's NOT bloat. Further, it always goes straight to my abdominal area. I've been doing a lot of reading which attempt to explain why this can be true, and I'm beginning to believe it.

So for some people, everything I hear about this approach rings true. My take is that this IS a cookie cutter approach, but that a huge segment of the population fits neatly into that cookie cutter. Look around at most heavy men and wome. Yes, there are some who are still hourglass figures, albeit BIG hourglasses at 50-100 pounds overweight, but I think the majority that I see are big apples. These are the people who are likely to be insulin resistant, maybe pre-diabetic, or carb sensitive. We are the ones who benefit most from this type of diet.

Mel

AnneWonders
11-16-2006, 10:36 AM
So for some people, everything I hear about this approach rings true. My take is that this IS a cookie cutter approach, but that a huge segment of the population fits neatly into that cookie cutter. Look around at most heavy men and wome. Yes, there are some who are still hourglass figures, albeit BIG hourglasses at 50-100 pounds overweight, but I think the majority that I see are big apples. These are the people who are likely to be insulin resistant, maybe pre-diabetic, or carb sensitive. We are the ones who benefit most from this type of diet.

Mel, I think this is a very important point. If this book gets a few people to put to put down the super big gulp or the giant muffin because of the HFCS, then I applaud that. The growth of obesity-induced diabetes in this country is truly frightening.

But if all this applies to the 'apples', what is a 'pear' like me to do? I clearly have a lot of room to lose some weight, but my waist is a nice 32", which is 'healthy' by these standards. For that matter, my blood sugars were perfect back in the 250+ days (much to my doctor's apparent dismay at the lack of a solid biochemical fact to bash me with). Do any of the fascinating hormonal explanations even apply to me? Is my biochemistry different from what the book presents? I can't even check with no references. I guess the 'waist management' aspect of it should have been fair warning to me. Should 'pears' save our money and pass on this book?

I'm still conflicted. I don't see any inherent problem with the advice in the book, other than some of it is tough to implement, and I think it would do a lot of people a lot of good. I was very interested in the biochemistry. But I'm not sure I got my money's worth out of it.

Anne

Katpo
11-16-2006, 11:04 AM
Until I tried SugarBusters and followed those rules, NOTHING worked for me except outright starvation. No matter how much exercise and low cal/low fat I ate, my weight would barely budge unless I was below 700 calories UNTIL I GOT RID OF SUGARS and PROCESSED CARBS. Now I can eat double that and still lose, admittedly still not a lot of food. One serving of anything with sugar or processed starchy carbs, and the weight piles back on disproportionally to the calories- and it's NOT bloat. Further, it always goes straight to my abdominal area.
Mel, I am printing this out and taping it in my journal. It is totally ME.

I have just about convinced myself that SugarBusters is the only thing that works for me. I have journals dating back to March 2005 here at my desk at work (the others are at home, but I think 20 months or so is plenty of history) and when I look back thru them, the times I was strictly SB was when I was most successful. If I were to sit down and make a list of my favorite foods, 99% of them would be on the list anyway, so there's no reason why I would try to fight it.

I'm hoping that YOAD (still waiting for my copy but I did read excerpts from the first chapter abc.com) is like SB and incorporates the same basic theories. Sounds like it is.

AnneWonders
11-16-2006, 04:16 PM
There is a '99 Second Edition' of You on a Diet at the official site. It seems a little too close to home to post the link, but it Googles nicely. If anyone wants any info on whether the book would be useful to them, it might be a good place to check out.

Anne

FaeReverie
11-30-2006, 05:25 PM
Im not a maintainer, but I figured I would step here and add my two cents.

I bought the book because it looked interesting. And it is. But some of it wouldn't apply to me as much.... for example, HFCS is an ingredient in my green tea, which I do love to drink and indulge in once every few days. I don't see a huge problem with me drinking my tea. And Im an insanely picky eater; almost all of the recipes that they suggested in the book are things I don't like for one reason or another... I'm better off sticking to my calorie counting. But the advice about what to eat has made me even more aware of what I put in my mouth, and has lead me to make such decision as cooking and freezing food, rather than buying frozen meals... and that actually seems to be working better for me!

So I guess I can say that if someone hasn't found something that works, than this might be the trick. If you found a part that appeals to you, like I did, then you can incorporate that into what you are already doing.

And as for my copy of the book, I leant it to a friend of mine, who I think would get more benefit from it than I did! :)

QuilterInVA
12-01-2006, 03:16 PM
No, they said the waist measurement should not be over 32.5 inches for women but 1/2 your height was optimal. Not one size fits all - I liked their humor and I avoid sugar like the plague but there is a difference between naturally occuring sugar and added simple sugars.

Lovemylife
12-06-2006, 04:40 PM
I read this whole book in just 2 days. It makes a lot of sense. It is so true. It pretty much is a clean diet, somewhat Mediteranean (? spelling). Sounds like we won't be hungry on his plan. I will definitely be giving it a try.

ladyfirefighter1
12-28-2007, 11:20 AM
mel I was just reading thru on this post. I read your post. Do you follow the sugarbusters woe or what type of eating do you follow??? Thanks ladyfirefighter

ennay
02-10-2008, 05:42 PM
But if all this applies to the 'apples', what is a 'pear' like me to do? I clearly have a lot of room to lose some weight, but my waist is a nice 32", which is 'healthy' by these standards. For that matter, my blood sugars were perfect back in the 250+ days (much to my doctor's apparent dismay at the lack of a solid biochemical fact to bash me with). Do any of the fascinating hormonal explanations even apply to me? Is my biochemistry different from what the book presents? I can't even check with no references. I guess the 'waist management' aspect of it should have been fair warning to me. Should 'pears' save our money and pass on this book?

Anne

Late to this discussion, but I think it bears remembering that this is written from the point of view of a cardiologist. Its long been acknowledged that pears have less problems than apples when it comes to health at equal weights. He isnt writing a "how to fit in to a bikini" book, he is writing a "how not to die young" book. From that point of view, you are one up on us apples.

One thing to keep in mind is you are in your 30's now and a pear. My mom was a pear in her 30's as well. My mom is quite definitely an apple now. In her youth she ate very little refined food. As she got older her eating went to pot.

I think the book is useful if you think of it not as a weight management guide but a health management guide. Even if you dont have heart/diabetes/cholesterol issues NOW the continued OVERuse of refined sugars could appear in the future.

I didnt use to be sugar sensitive, now I am and I while I am no longer insulin resistant I am still sugar sensitive (and yes, I notice a difference between HFCS and table sugar). I will probably always be sensitive--the damage has been done. I think it is worth at least keeping these things in the back of your mind, not as a NEVER have, but as a "limited" product.

If for no other reason that being sugar sensitive is a royal PITA sometimes. How often am I somewhere and food is a ways off and I cant even eat the often offered "piece of fruit to tide you over til dinner" (sugar rollarcoaster baby).

It's like me and the diabetic diet. I am not diabetic, I try most of the time to eat as if I were, so that I can stay not diabetic, because it is a lot more pleasant to eat diabetic 80% of the time than HAVE to eat that way 100% of the time.

AnneWonders
02-10-2008, 07:04 PM
This book has clearly done a lot of people a lot of good, including the friend I gave my copy to. That should be acknowledged. Perhaps it even applies to more people than it doesn't, as Mel argued. I won't even argue that some day it could apply to me; life is long and people change, sometimes dramatically.

But it is marketed as a one-size-fits-all diet book, and from that perspective and in this phase of my life, I'm out about $30 and several hours of my time, neither of which come easy for me. I did come out of the human gene pool, and assuming there are others like me (biochemically speaking) out there, people deserve to know what is in the book before they spend their cash and their time. Hence my review, which covered its good points, and there were many, and its bad points, all from my perspective of course.

The lack of references when dealing with a controversial subject still really bugs me. There is no way to check if the research cited is outdated, flat out wrong, or has been spectacularly vindicated in the last couple years.

I stand by that review, even though it is a year and half old now. I still don't think this is the best book out there for those of us who are not sugar sensitive. For people like me, I think paperback copies of Volumetrics and Mindless Eating would be a much better investment for about the same amount of cash.

Anne

suesully
02-10-2008, 07:40 PM
I got both hardcover & audio versions of YOAD & the new one, YOU: Staying Young for gifts last Christmas. The audio versions have PDF highlights, shopping lists, etc. that you can print out which is very helpful. I liked them both very much & enjoyed the illustrations & descriptions of how my body works.

The recipes & menu plans are extremely healthy. This would be a lifestyle that would eliminate processed & junk foods as well as everything most of us hold near & dear in the goodies department. I am not going to kid myself that I would eat their way 100% of the time...I like too many food items that are not on their lists.

Instead, I plan to use these books as guidelines on healthy eating, using many of their recipes & suggestions to help me continue with a good for you eating plan. And yes, I will have my goodies here & there, in small portions & in moderation. Don't tell Dr. Oz, but for me, that will be the way that I will stay slender. :)

gastronome
02-16-2008, 03:12 AM
I must have been living in the middle ages or something...I thought the You on a Diet thing was NEW because I just saw that new show on Discovery health on Wednesday...LOL! :o

Steve Parker MD
03-14-2008, 04:06 PM
For what it's worth, here's a review of "YOU - on a Diet" I wrote last year. I hope you find it helpful.

Drs. Roizen and Oz absolve you of responsibility if you are fat: the problem is a brain chemical imbalance. Take the authors’ weight-loss advice, and they promise to balance the chemicals, without hunger, without thinking about how much you’re eating.

Roizen and Oz recommend eating whole grain products, fruits, vegetables, nuts, olive and vegetable oils, fish, eggs, chicken, and low-fat dairy. Alcohol and specific commercial fast foods are allowed. This is healthy, Mediterranean-style eating. The foods are readily available and easy to prepare. Forty-two recipes are provided. No beef, pork, potatoes, or peas. Other forbidden or strictly limited items are simple sugars, high fructose corn syrup, enriched/refined flour, trans fats, and saturated fats.

The authors tell you what to eat daily for one week. Week two is the same, and helps to establish new habits. Variety is limited by design. They say that too much variety leads to overeating. You choose from among four different breakfasts and four lunches. Seven different evening meals are spelled out for you, taking 30 minutes or less to prepare. You repeat the pattern until you reach the authors’ healthy goal: waist circumferences of 32.5 inches or less for women, 35 or less for men. Weight is not important in this scheme.

Although never divulged by the authors, I estimate you are allowed 1450 calories per day. There is no allowance for your sex or baseline weight. Roizen and Oz don’t want you to focus on calories.

Incredibly, they don’t address what you do after you reach your goal waist size. Just add more of the same foods? How much? Can you ever again eat beef or potatoes? Maintenance of weight loss is certainly problematic, but that’s no reason to ignore it.

The authors make several controversial claims without offering supportive documents such as scientific references or a bibliography. I guess we are supposed to just trust them since they are medical doctors. Examples: 1. Having sex will curb your appetite, 2. Aluminum in deodorants promotes weight gain, 3. ½ tsp of cinnamon daily will help you lose weight, 4. Red pepper helps with weight loss, 5. Willpower is not important because it always fails, 6. Eating 70 calories of nuts 20 minutes before meals will help you avoid overeating.

Roizen and Oz provide great information on the process of digestion and the importance of exercise. Their exercise program is detailed and readily achievable: 30 minutes of daily walking, along with strength training.

The book is a quick, easy read. The cutesy style will amuse some readers, irritate others. Lots of pop celebrity references. And neologisms, such as “YOU-reka!” Sexual intercourse is mentioned more than average.

Bottom line: This is a fair program for most overweight women. After they reach their goal waist size, however, they are left without guidance. This is worrisome. For women over 210 pounds, and for nearly all overweight men, 1450 calories per day is not enough. These folks won’t be able to follow the diet for more than four days—their hunger will be too great.

-Steve