With NO apologies to Jimmy Moore, who thinks that a blah-blah-blah-is-stupid title is stupid. Well, welcome to Snarksville. I won't stop, and I also won't eat a stick of butter with a candle on top for my birthday. (I just got a copy of Dr. Davis' latest cookbook. Yay!)
Anyway, where was I?
I should have called this "Diagnosing Autoimmune Diseases 101", if I hadn't wanted to catch your attention. Here's how its done.
Go to the doctor for something. The trigger for the AI path can be just about anything, anything on the continuum from pain to having been in the hospital for a week with everything failing.
The first test is ANA. If this test is negative they can send you home, declare you a hypochondriac, or send you down some other path that may be just as stupid but won't be covered here.
If it is positive, they diagnose you with lupus.
Now, the reason that AI diseases are stupid is this. Just like what my med-school entry advisor told me: "Medicine is the only educational pursuit where they weed you out BEFORE you get into school." The AI playing field is the only one where they diagnose the VERY WORST condition first, and then back off from that as more data comes in.
Can you imagine if you go into the doc's office for a small growth and you get back a letter saying you have cancer, and then a few weeks later you get back a letter saying it was just a wart? Yep, not gonna happen.
So....you go home with the diagnosis of lupus and read all about it on the internet. People are all carrying on, and you know someone who's sister got it really bad and she dies at 29, and what will happen to the kids? You start to get really worried.
You go to take a bunch of other tests, around ten of them usually. You don't test for an immune reaction to EVERYTHING!, just the major stuff. Stuff that will indicate that your liver or kidneys will explode. Stuff that will tell if you have one of the major AI conditions or the other. They aren't as interested in splitting hairs if they think that either-or won't kill you.
If something else shows positive, they might move you from the deadly lupus diagnosis to something that sounds a bit better, like arthritis, Sjogren's or thyroid disease. Once you have your new diagnosis, they won't usually test you for all the little diseases unless you have really terrible symptoms that don't respond to treatments.
They'll send you to a rheumatologist, who will watch you every few months while you get better, worse, or stay the same. They might also send you to someone else to take care of other symptoms.
In my case, I got diagnosed with lupus, had it changed to "not-lupus" with secondary Sjogren's syndrome, to UCTD, to "positive ANA" and told I didn't have to come back. (BTW, UCTD is the catch-all disease-name for "we don't know WTF AI disease you have, but you're achey and its not that bad".)
The tests for celiac aren't included in the typical AI diagnosis panel. Stupid? Hmmmm.
Showing posts with label Jimmy Moore. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jimmy Moore. Show all posts
Friday, May 2, 2014
Friday, February 8, 2013
My Answer to Woo - Part 2
Woo says that no one is making the low carb faddists declare their reasons for going low carb. I disagree.
Way back a long time ago, when the paleo pool was a bit clearer and not as much of a cesspool, people were free to eat what they wanted, as long as it was meat and veggies and they were both old. Then some of the over-exercizers got tired of the lower carb thing, and in order to maintain their over-exercise-routines, began adding carbs. Sisson came up with the nifty carb graph. People seemed happy with all this for a time.
Even before AHS11, the carb wars intensified.
It used to be that low-er carb was the paleo standard, and that if people wanted taters, they had to give themselves permission to do some neolithic cheating. Either from their exercise or diet guru, or by reading the tea leaves of their n=1.
Gradually, this situation changed into a plan where people were free to consume as much glucose-producing carbage as they wanted, as long as they could "cover it with exercise".
Gradually, some paleo luminaries changed this situation into a plan where carbs were again considered an essential nutrient, and people were required to consume a bit of glucose-producing carbage in order to counteract a carb deficiency. Their brownshirt followers went all over the paleosphere enforcing this new rule.
Eventually, people like me were required to show a note from the doctor in order to continue eating a low-carb diet without constant ridicule.
Eventually, this turned into a carbbist-inspired krystalnacht event within the paleo cesspool, even worse than usual. Folks casually mentioning to each other on a forum or two that they can't wait until the low carb people leave for good.
Problem with paleo popularity leveling off? Blame it on those fat low carb people.
Problem with people thinking that paleo thing is just a fad? Blame it on those red-faced low carb people.
Problem with eating disorders? Blame it on the Low Carb scene.
Nope. It's not the Jews, it's not the feminists, it is the LOW CARB people, its JIMMY!!!!!
Now, we are being told that we have eating disorders. Eliminating. Entire. Food. Groups. EEFG, set to appear in your next DSM. What's next, a letter on our sleeve? Or, maybe another comment like this:
"From my nutrition training, it was well-known that those with eating disorders would hide behind the likes of vegetarianism or veganism in order to legitimise their food avoidance... it is an easy way to eliminate a boat-load of energy in one "legitimate" hit. "I don't eat meat".
There has been much talk behind the scenes about similar things occuring within the paleo community, especially with its increasing popularity and (unfortunately) links to the LC community (you just want to Hulk-smash those links, don't ya?)."
So, Paleo Guy, you are that much into hulk-smashing? Tell me Paleo Guy, who says stuff like that? No need for people like me to be afraid of a potato, when we have some hulk-smashing tater tots on board.
Way back a long time ago, when the paleo pool was a bit clearer and not as much of a cesspool, people were free to eat what they wanted, as long as it was meat and veggies and they were both old. Then some of the over-exercizers got tired of the lower carb thing, and in order to maintain their over-exercise-routines, began adding carbs. Sisson came up with the nifty carb graph. People seemed happy with all this for a time.
Even before AHS11, the carb wars intensified.
It used to be that low-er carb was the paleo standard, and that if people wanted taters, they had to give themselves permission to do some neolithic cheating. Either from their exercise or diet guru, or by reading the tea leaves of their n=1.
Gradually, this situation changed into a plan where people were free to consume as much glucose-producing carbage as they wanted, as long as they could "cover it with exercise".
Gradually, some paleo luminaries changed this situation into a plan where carbs were again considered an essential nutrient, and people were required to consume a bit of glucose-producing carbage in order to counteract a carb deficiency. Their brownshirt followers went all over the paleosphere enforcing this new rule.
Eventually, people like me were required to show a note from the doctor in order to continue eating a low-carb diet without constant ridicule.
Eventually, this turned into a carbbist-inspired krystalnacht event within the paleo cesspool, even worse than usual. Folks casually mentioning to each other on a forum or two that they can't wait until the low carb people leave for good.
Problem with paleo popularity leveling off? Blame it on those fat low carb people.
Problem with people thinking that paleo thing is just a fad? Blame it on those red-faced low carb people.
Problem with eating disorders? Blame it on the Low Carb scene.
Nope. It's not the Jews, it's not the feminists, it is the LOW CARB people, its JIMMY!!!!!
Now, we are being told that we have eating disorders. Eliminating. Entire. Food. Groups. EEFG, set to appear in your next DSM. What's next, a letter on our sleeve? Or, maybe another comment like this:
"From my nutrition training, it was well-known that those with eating disorders would hide behind the likes of vegetarianism or veganism in order to legitimise their food avoidance... it is an easy way to eliminate a boat-load of energy in one "legitimate" hit. "I don't eat meat".
There has been much talk behind the scenes about similar things occuring within the paleo community, especially with its increasing popularity and (unfortunately) links to the LC community (you just want to Hulk-smash those links, don't ya?)."
So, Paleo Guy, you are that much into hulk-smashing? Tell me Paleo Guy, who says stuff like that? No need for people like me to be afraid of a potato, when we have some hulk-smashing tater tots on board.
Saturday, September 8, 2012
How to reset your leptin - part 1
Hi folks, yes, I AM reading.
Recently I saw a commenter wanting to know of other ways to do a leptin reset. Both Drs. Rosedale and Kruse feel that they have the answers to this. Their plans are quite similar. Both call for a low carb paleo/style diet, limiting feedlot meats, cow's milk, and fake foods. Both limit snacking after dinner and don't recommend lots of exercise. Both would agree that a can of sardines is the most ideal meal/snack, although it looks like Kruse would rather you have them raw, with the heads on, and in the blender.
They differ in the amount of protein. Rosedale's protein recommendation is quite low compared to Kruse's. Their passionate arguments are on Paleohacks, if you even dare to go over there, but here's the gist. Rosedale thinks protein should be kept low to limit gluconeogenesis, and that doing so can also reduce the risk of cancer. Kruse says that doesn't matter, because the diet already reduces the risk of cancers.
To me, the Kruse argument is a little bit of "if you do what I say, and get so-and-so into balance, then it is not a problem". I think he might be putting the cart before the horse. It doesn't really address the transition phase. Rosedale's plan also limits fat in the early weeks. He said that he is a big fan of coconut oil, but did not put that in his book due to the editor/publisher pressure.
Kruse is trying to elicit certain outcomes by limiting food during certain intervals. In order to keep from being hungry during that time, he front-loads with plenty of protein at breakfast. Rosedale says not only is that not necessary, it is detrimental, since it encourages gluconeogenesis. He feels people would be better off if they ate when they were hungry and that snacking is not a problem as long as there aren't many carbs in the snacks. I think he might be putting the cart before the horse, too. When people get adapted to the lower-protein, low carb approach, they are fine with fat-burning, they lose their hunger and then it is easy to not constantly snack or to constantly be snacking on protein. The first few days can be really tough for people.
Rosedale's book came out in the 90's, and to me at least, it is the first "paleo" diet book out there. He is working on two new books, but seriously, Rosedale, you need to finish them.
My personal experience with both diets I will cover in another post. But I'll add here that I follow a modified Rosedale plan now. I did well on the leptin reset, but after awhile I gained all the weight back. I found that Kruse's leptin reset plan elicited many positive changes for me, but lots of weight loss wasn't one of them. Restricting my protein has been more helpful.
If you want to learn more about the two protein approaches, read Jimmy Moore's posts about his n=1 experiment with the ketone blood monitor, and also his recent ATLCE podcast featuring Dr. Layman. Dr. Layman is an expert in protein.
Recently I saw a commenter wanting to know of other ways to do a leptin reset. Both Drs. Rosedale and Kruse feel that they have the answers to this. Their plans are quite similar. Both call for a low carb paleo/style diet, limiting feedlot meats, cow's milk, and fake foods. Both limit snacking after dinner and don't recommend lots of exercise. Both would agree that a can of sardines is the most ideal meal/snack, although it looks like Kruse would rather you have them raw, with the heads on, and in the blender.
They differ in the amount of protein. Rosedale's protein recommendation is quite low compared to Kruse's. Their passionate arguments are on Paleohacks, if you even dare to go over there, but here's the gist. Rosedale thinks protein should be kept low to limit gluconeogenesis, and that doing so can also reduce the risk of cancer. Kruse says that doesn't matter, because the diet already reduces the risk of cancers.
To me, the Kruse argument is a little bit of "if you do what I say, and get so-and-so into balance, then it is not a problem". I think he might be putting the cart before the horse. It doesn't really address the transition phase. Rosedale's plan also limits fat in the early weeks. He said that he is a big fan of coconut oil, but did not put that in his book due to the editor/publisher pressure.
Kruse is trying to elicit certain outcomes by limiting food during certain intervals. In order to keep from being hungry during that time, he front-loads with plenty of protein at breakfast. Rosedale says not only is that not necessary, it is detrimental, since it encourages gluconeogenesis. He feels people would be better off if they ate when they were hungry and that snacking is not a problem as long as there aren't many carbs in the snacks. I think he might be putting the cart before the horse, too. When people get adapted to the lower-protein, low carb approach, they are fine with fat-burning, they lose their hunger and then it is easy to not constantly snack or to constantly be snacking on protein. The first few days can be really tough for people.
Rosedale's book came out in the 90's, and to me at least, it is the first "paleo" diet book out there. He is working on two new books, but seriously, Rosedale, you need to finish them.
My personal experience with both diets I will cover in another post. But I'll add here that I follow a modified Rosedale plan now. I did well on the leptin reset, but after awhile I gained all the weight back. I found that Kruse's leptin reset plan elicited many positive changes for me, but lots of weight loss wasn't one of them. Restricting my protein has been more helpful.
If you want to learn more about the two protein approaches, read Jimmy Moore's posts about his n=1 experiment with the ketone blood monitor, and also his recent ATLCE podcast featuring Dr. Layman. Dr. Layman is an expert in protein.
Friday, September 7, 2012
Do Carbs cause cancer?
Hmmm, well maybe they do! Or, at least, the elimination of carbs can stop cancer in its tracks.
One of the probably most-offending links recently provided to [redacted]people consisted of Dr. Feinman's wonderful blog linking a paper he co-wrote with Dr. Fine and others. I posted both the blog post link and the link to the paper on the main message board's "pros and cons of carbohydrates" or something like that. That post has probably been removed, so you can read the link here.
When the topic came up, I had remembered that there was some research done on the connection between carbs and cancer, so I went looking. Concidentally, Dr. Feinman posted his blog that very day.
Folks who follow Jimmy Moore might remember that since checking his blood ketone levels and adjusting his diet, his skin tags fell off. Now it turns out that high levels of sugar cause the skin tags to grow. Turns out that higher sugar also causes some cancers to grow.
Dr. Feinman's paper outlines a study using a ketogenic diet for people with resistant cancers, and the types of cancers that they thought would probably respond favorably to lowered amounts of sugar in the blood. Turns out the patients did better when they had a bunch of kidney-trashing ketones running about.
I hope you will check it out. Here's the plan. Here's Dr. Feinman's blog. And here's the results of the study. After so much fixation on the low carb diet and weight loss, it is time to really take a look at the data indicating that the diet not only is not disastrous and dangerous, it may be more health-promoting than some "experts" want it to be.
One of the probably most-offending links recently provided to [redacted]people consisted of Dr. Feinman's wonderful blog linking a paper he co-wrote with Dr. Fine and others. I posted both the blog post link and the link to the paper on the main message board's "pros and cons of carbohydrates" or something like that. That post has probably been removed, so you can read the link here.
When the topic came up, I had remembered that there was some research done on the connection between carbs and cancer, so I went looking. Concidentally, Dr. Feinman posted his blog that very day.
Folks who follow Jimmy Moore might remember that since checking his blood ketone levels and adjusting his diet, his skin tags fell off. Now it turns out that high levels of sugar cause the skin tags to grow. Turns out that higher sugar also causes some cancers to grow.
Dr. Feinman's paper outlines a study using a ketogenic diet for people with resistant cancers, and the types of cancers that they thought would probably respond favorably to lowered amounts of sugar in the blood. Turns out the patients did better when they had a bunch of kidney-trashing ketones running about.
I hope you will check it out. Here's the plan. Here's Dr. Feinman's blog. And here's the results of the study. After so much fixation on the low carb diet and weight loss, it is time to really take a look at the data indicating that the diet not only is not disastrous and dangerous, it may be more health-promoting than some "experts" want it to be.
Thursday, August 30, 2012
My reply on Dr. Rosedale's blog
Dr. Rosedale recently posted an interesting "finale" to the latest AHS12 safe starch debate. This response is from js 290:
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Kruse Kontrol on the Cruise?
Looks like our newest "low carb guru" got to walk the gangplank recently, which is even worse than being voted off the island. I'll admit, I have never had my stateroom trashed and all my electronics confiscated, but I wonder what is worse, having to leave your fans at the dock, or being labeled by the media as "low carb"? Kiss of death either way, or is it?
I haven't heard too much about Krusegate from the low carbers, probably because they were on a wonderful cruise together, but I wonder why I haven't heard from many of the paleo luminaries about the type of behavior that has been going on for quite awhile. I have heard it from Robb Wolf, and rumors that it was discussed at paleof(x), but I find it interesting that you can go all over the paleoweb and hear people trash Kruse, but you have to buy a whole set of expensive DVD's to hear some luminaries say, "Hey, this isn't right!"
I'll leave y'all with a little personal story. Recently I started taking an exercise class at a local community center. Then I found out there was a little knitting group that met near the same time. Soon I started going to all of this Tuesday knitting session and I eventually ditched the exercise class (hip hip hooray for all that movnatty stuff anyway..)
We started having a fine ole' time in the knitting group, talking about all sorts of crafts, and lots about nutrition, and cause I am just a fine darn knitter, the ladies told me about a couple of other groups that meet on other days. Sounds fine, right?, so I decided to go to the other meetings and start knitting for charity.
The Wednesday group was fine after a couple of awkward first moments. When they asked about my skill level I said I could knit pretty much anything. They were skeptical, but put a bunch of yarn and needles in front of me and after a couple of weeks, that was all ironed out. They realized that yes, I could knit anything, and people started coming to the class specifically to take advantage of my free expertise.
The Monday group was not fine. I had even been warned about this group by some of the other ladies and members of the local community. When I sat down, one of the ladies told me I was sitting in someone else's seat and I needed to move. 'Course, that someone else wasn't there, and never did show up, and I am thinking that if they wanted a reserved seat they should buy a ticket online in advance. Oh well, anyway, I moved down at the end of the table, and they told me that now I was sitting in someone else's seat.
This went on for a couple of weeks, with the ladies alternating between telling me to move and telling me, "oh, it really shouldn't be like this," but none of them were willing to stand up to the lady I call the "Alpha Bitch". Not as a reference to her behavior, but more a reference to the dog-pack that she rules.
There was a change the third week. I got there early, and sat next to the only other person there, but it turns out I was sitting in Alpha Bitch's seat. (Forgive me if I hadn't memorized all the seat positions yet.) This caused quite a ruckus when Alpha Bitch strolled in later, as she proceeded to make fun of me right in front of me for the next three hours. One lady even told me I had my stuff spread out too far. As I examined my workspace and pulled out my tape measure to measure the amount of space, she quickly grabbed her ball of yarn as she realized she was taking more space than I. And I am thinking, wow! what is this, high school? No, they just a bunch of old ladies.
Finally, something interesting happened. Another lady, I'll call her Irene (cause, you know, they are all called Irene or Vera or Ann or Doreen at this age) asked me if I wanted to join her table to play Querko. I accepted the invitation. During the next few weeks, I quit trying to sit on Alpha Bitch's table, and joined Irene on our own table where we organized yarn or played games. As most of the other ladies filed in and took their assigned seats, they all said hello to each other but would refuse to say hello or talk to me. I noticed that some of the other ladies would talk to me only when Alpha Bitch left for the day. They would also invite me to the BIG TABLE at that time, though I politely declined.
Now Irene, she's an interesting lady, always inviting me into her circle of friends, saying encouraging words. Seems like she had been in the same situation earlier, until the rec center gave her the key to the yarn cabinet. See, in addition to organizing and doling out the yarn, this table is for the ladies to drop off any yarn donations and finished projects. It's a big table. But wouldn't you know that, no matter where I sat on that table, the other ladies would come over and dump their stuff right on top of mine. Just like dogs peeing all over their territory. Not satisfied with kicking me off the kool kids table, that made sure to claim the second space too. And Irene just smiles and rolls her eyes, and clears off another part of the table for me.
So, the question to the people in Paleoland is, do you want to be an Irene, or do you want to be an Alpha Bitch? Do you really want to be like the Monday group? We're watching and waiting for your answer. Oh, and the FBI is watching, and the CIA, and CNN, and B B King, and Doris Day. Can you dig it?
I haven't heard too much about Krusegate from the low carbers, probably because they were on a wonderful cruise together, but I wonder why I haven't heard from many of the paleo luminaries about the type of behavior that has been going on for quite awhile. I have heard it from Robb Wolf, and rumors that it was discussed at paleof(x), but I find it interesting that you can go all over the paleoweb and hear people trash Kruse, but you have to buy a whole set of expensive DVD's to hear some luminaries say, "Hey, this isn't right!"
I'll leave y'all with a little personal story. Recently I started taking an exercise class at a local community center. Then I found out there was a little knitting group that met near the same time. Soon I started going to all of this Tuesday knitting session and I eventually ditched the exercise class (hip hip hooray for all that movnatty stuff anyway..)
We started having a fine ole' time in the knitting group, talking about all sorts of crafts, and lots about nutrition, and cause I am just a fine darn knitter, the ladies told me about a couple of other groups that meet on other days. Sounds fine, right?, so I decided to go to the other meetings and start knitting for charity.
The Wednesday group was fine after a couple of awkward first moments. When they asked about my skill level I said I could knit pretty much anything. They were skeptical, but put a bunch of yarn and needles in front of me and after a couple of weeks, that was all ironed out. They realized that yes, I could knit anything, and people started coming to the class specifically to take advantage of my free expertise.
The Monday group was not fine. I had even been warned about this group by some of the other ladies and members of the local community. When I sat down, one of the ladies told me I was sitting in someone else's seat and I needed to move. 'Course, that someone else wasn't there, and never did show up, and I am thinking that if they wanted a reserved seat they should buy a ticket online in advance. Oh well, anyway, I moved down at the end of the table, and they told me that now I was sitting in someone else's seat.
This went on for a couple of weeks, with the ladies alternating between telling me to move and telling me, "oh, it really shouldn't be like this," but none of them were willing to stand up to the lady I call the "Alpha Bitch". Not as a reference to her behavior, but more a reference to the dog-pack that she rules.
There was a change the third week. I got there early, and sat next to the only other person there, but it turns out I was sitting in Alpha Bitch's seat. (Forgive me if I hadn't memorized all the seat positions yet.) This caused quite a ruckus when Alpha Bitch strolled in later, as she proceeded to make fun of me right in front of me for the next three hours. One lady even told me I had my stuff spread out too far. As I examined my workspace and pulled out my tape measure to measure the amount of space, she quickly grabbed her ball of yarn as she realized she was taking more space than I. And I am thinking, wow! what is this, high school? No, they just a bunch of old ladies.
Finally, something interesting happened. Another lady, I'll call her Irene (cause, you know, they are all called Irene or Vera or Ann or Doreen at this age) asked me if I wanted to join her table to play Querko. I accepted the invitation. During the next few weeks, I quit trying to sit on Alpha Bitch's table, and joined Irene on our own table where we organized yarn or played games. As most of the other ladies filed in and took their assigned seats, they all said hello to each other but would refuse to say hello or talk to me. I noticed that some of the other ladies would talk to me only when Alpha Bitch left for the day. They would also invite me to the BIG TABLE at that time, though I politely declined.
Now Irene, she's an interesting lady, always inviting me into her circle of friends, saying encouraging words. Seems like she had been in the same situation earlier, until the rec center gave her the key to the yarn cabinet. See, in addition to organizing and doling out the yarn, this table is for the ladies to drop off any yarn donations and finished projects. It's a big table. But wouldn't you know that, no matter where I sat on that table, the other ladies would come over and dump their stuff right on top of mine. Just like dogs peeing all over their territory. Not satisfied with kicking me off the kool kids table, that made sure to claim the second space too. And Irene just smiles and rolls her eyes, and clears off another part of the table for me.
So, the question to the people in Paleoland is, do you want to be an Irene, or do you want to be an Alpha Bitch? Do you really want to be like the Monday group? We're watching and waiting for your answer. Oh, and the FBI is watching, and the CIA, and CNN, and B B King, and Doris Day. Can you dig it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
"I’ve often wondered if the people claiming to have thyroid (typically low energy) problems on a VLC simply are not eating enough? That is, the claim is that by adding back carbs into the diet, they miraculously solved their low energy/thyroid problems. Perhaps all that really happened was they ate more, which happened to have been carbs. My guess is they would have experienced the same effect by eating more fat.
This is really a very fundamental concept that anyone who’s gone through a differential equations class should pick up very quickly: the concept of a coupled system. That is, energy input and energy output are coupled in the mathematical sense; therefore, they cannot be treated independently. Changing one affects the other, probably in very non-linear ways. So, if one understands coupled systems, then one can immediately reject the notion of “eating less and moving more.” Because eating less may cause one to move less. And, in order to move more, it may absolutely require eating more.
As an unqualified skeptic, that’s my guess on the supposed “thyroid problems” that people claim to experience. They either aren’t fully keto-adapted, they aren’t eating enough, or both."
Gotta luv it when diffyQ is invoked, like that makes the argument sound more plausible, especially for those folks who cover their eyes during the mathy parts. Clearly, this person hasn't a clue with what is happening to some of us on this type of diet. JS also seems to be quite caught in the lure of thermodynamics.
I was on the leptin reset for several weeks with little weight-loss success, and feeling colder and a bit tired. When I went off the diet with one carby meal it immediately kicked me into something that worked better. My energy was better, my mood was better, sleep got better and I started losing weight. Yes, the calories were higher than a typical evening meal, but overall not as high as many other days on the plan. On days I was eating the Big A$$ Breakfast featuring fatty hamburgers lots of un-drained bacon, the overall calorie level was relatively high compared to the caloric level on a more typical pre-leptin-reset day.
I responded:
"Your calorie explanation sounds plausible, but untrue in my case. I think one of the problems with many of the theories and chatter about this effect is that it is very difficult for people who have few problems transitioning to the diet to understand or even believe that the issue exists.
The problem with the explanation by many low carb experts is that it oftentimes does not adequately address that transition phase. I know in my own case, had I not backed into a lower carb diet accidentally, I would never have stuck with it. Returning to the “safety” of a high carb diet can really make a difference to people who are on the edge hormonally, at least adrenally.
It doesn’t help much when people continue to insist that we are all doing it wrong. I followed a number of plans religiously. Now that I know how it feels on the other side, I have no problem going through a bit of hell to get back into a fat-burning state if I get out it for some reason. I have developed short cuts. Before I did Kruse’s leptin reset with CT, re-entry meant certain loss in weight, but also loss of sleep ability, libido, energy, and feeling constantly cold.
I do not think it is wise for the low carb community to ignore such data. There are plenty of people in the high-carb community who are more than ready to bash us for their perception of the failings of our diet. Let’s not give them any more ammo by not dealing with it. Instead of sweeping such data points under the rug, it would serve us well to stir them up, take a look, and make the diet more workable and successful for everyone."
And, lucky for the state of my low carb journey, adding back carbs more than a meal here and there always makes me feel much worse. I would never want to pitch my tent in the "safe starch" camp for very long, preferring to view the extra carbs as more of a temporary drug with significant negative side effects. Better, ya'know, in those one-pill-per-prescription bubble-packs so it is hard to overdose and kill yourself.
I read Animal Pharm's leptin reset post with great interest. She was unable to successfully do the leptin reset as written. It sounds like her experience was similar in some aspects to mine, and people should be reading and talking about it.
I would suggest that Dr. Rosedale and others not have his post be the final word in this matter. Just take a look at his quote picture at the top of his post. People who don't do as well on VLC aren't even fully into the ridicule stage yet. It is still pretty much total denial. Nobody over on his "team" even responded to my comment.
I listened to Jimmy Moore's podcast with Dr. Phinney, and came away disappointed in the range of the doctor's answers to stalls. When a questioner mentioned thyroid and adrenal issues as possible players, he strongly denied any thyroid issues based on his experience, but he never even approached the adrenal question. And another thing that really bugged me is that he discounted one thyroid comment that he heard because the comment was from someone who had a "terminal" degree. Hey, Dr. Phinney, Dr. Schwarzbein does not have a terminal degree. Maybe you should stroll on over to her site and see about what she has to say.