2 pound diet approach
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
you are doing.
For more information:
http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtloss.asp
--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Atlanta Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com
(please see web site for latest active email address)
Bill
"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <cardio...@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:3EE0F730...@heartmdphd.com...
This is the first I've heard of this interesting approach. For me, the problem
is more psycological than any lack of information - i.e. going to a
nutritionist does not help. I've always believed that some kind of plan
related directly to the weight of the food might be more successful - since
people can relate that to their own weight. For example, eating a pound (or
ounce) of butter will add a pound (or ounce) to your weight - and that may be
more of a motivation than knowing it is so many calories. (This is obtained,
roughly, by dividing the calories in a lb. of butter by 3500 - the amount of
calories one must consume to lose a pound.)
Drinking a pound of water will add essentially nothing to your weight in the
long run. And other things are in between. For example, I have a 1 lb box of
saltines that has a total of 2100 calories. Therefore, I will gain (about) 60%
of the lbs. of saltines that I eat. (2100/3500). So if I eat the whole box, I
will weigh .6*16 = 9.6 ounces more than I would have otherwise.
This kind of approach seems to me to be more meaningful than just looking at
calories.
Bill
Brad Sheppard
of the wrong kinds of foods. Two pounds of fried chicken in this diet
are equal to two pounds of strawberries. If retricted to two pounds of
food a day, who would eat the healthy one pound of strawberries (150
calories)? Who would eat a salad? Many of the healthiest foods have
low caloric density. Think veggies, fruits, and whole grains. Most
junk food has high caloric density. This diet may encourage junk food
and high fat food consumption.
"Bill" <x...@yy.zz> wrote in message news:<r_7Ea.1714$PS1...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com>...
Bill
"Brad Sheppard" <Br...@sheppardsoftware.com> wrote in message
news:b06e736a.0306...@posting.google.com...
> I disagree. This approach doesn't make sense, and encourages eating
> of the wrong kinds of foods. Two pounds of fried chicken in this diet
> are equal to two pounds of strawberries. If retricted to two pounds of
> food a day, who would eat the healthy one pound of strawberries (150
> calories)? Who would eat a salad? Many of the healthiest foods have
> low caloric density. Think veggies, fruits, and whole grains. Most
> junk food has high caloric density. This diet may encourage junk food
> and high fat food consumption.
>
That was not at all what I was suggesting in my note. In fact, I added a new
factor to precisely take into account your concerns. I don't know what to call
it. For here, let's call it the weight adjustment factor (WAF). You get the
WAF by dividing the calories of 1 lb of what you are eating by 3500. (3500
calories adds one lb.)
So, for example, the WAF of butter is about 1, saltines about .6, and water is
0.
If you eat a lb of butter, you gain about a lb. You eat a lb of saltines you
gain about .6 lbs. And water, in the long run, adds nothing to your weight.
As another example, I just tried it out with some granola bars I have. These
have a WAF of .52. Meaning that 1) I will gain about half a lb for every lb of
these I eat. 2) If my goal is a total of 1 WAF per day, eating a 1 ounce bar
will add (1/16)*.52 = .0325 to my total.
To me it is more meaningful, aand psycologically helpful, to be able to relate
what you are eating directly back to lbs gained or lost - rather than dealing
with a more abstract concept of calories.
A typical person might have a total of all WAFs of 1 for a day. To me, this is
much more meaningfull than calories. I can look at something, say butter, and
say if I have an ounce of that I'm going to be an ounce heavier.
Note, the WAF is always between 0 and 1 - it is the percent of the weight of
what you are eating that will be added to your weight, all other things being
equal.
Bill
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> I disagree. This approach doesn't make sense, and encourages eating
> of the wrong kinds of foods. Two pounds of fried chicken in this diet
> are equal to two pounds of strawberries. If retricted to two pounds of
> food a day, who would eat the healthy one pound of strawberries (150
> calories)? Who would eat a salad? Many of the healthiest foods have
> low caloric density. Think veggies, fruits, and whole grains. Most
> junk food has high caloric density. This diet may encourage junk food
> and high fat food consumption.
You concerns have previously been addressed.
See:
http://www.heartmdphd.com/wtlossfaqs.asp
Mu
<cardio...@heartmdphd.com> wrote:
>For those who have been trying this, please continue to update me on how
>you are doing.
It's been a year and, honestly, I stopped weighing food, and
journaling, after six weeks. I stopped journaling b/c I had all the
evidence I needed; I stopped weighing food since I intuitively know
how much and I am eating now. A volumetric awareness.
Of course, now I travel too much and don't have time to write. Things
have settled down, writing has begun.
Mu
Sheppard) wrote:
>I disagree. This approach doesn't make sense,
Exactly what doesn't make sense? Be specific, please.
>and encourages eating
>of the wrong kinds of foods.
Or you could say it encourages eating the right type of foods when,
TPD "encourages" nothing at all except eating less.
Have you read the website? don't lie; I'l catch you and expose you as
a fraud.
> Two pounds of fried chicken in this diet
>are equal to two pounds of strawberries.
And 2 pounds of feathers are equal in weight to two pounds of bricks.
> If retricted to two pounds of
>food a day, who would eat the healthy one pound of strawberries (150
>calories)?
People with common sense?
> Who would eat a salad?
See above.
> Many of the healthiest foods have
>low caloric density. Think veggies, fruits, and whole grains. Most
>junk food has high caloric density. This diet may encourage junk food
>and high fat food consumption.
It may also cause Jupiter to align with Mars which is about as close
to making sense as your analogy does.
The TPD is about 100% success rates in losing weight. Education about
what to eat and what not to eat can come later.
Or not at all.
Cure the obesity or you can forget about all those "healthy" and
"unhealthy" choices mattering at all.
Mu
>To me it is more meaningful, aand psycologically helpful, to be able to relate
>what you are eating directly back to lbs gained or lost - rather than dealing
>with a more abstract concept of calories.
Abstract or not, counting <fill in the blank> has a horrible failure
rate when tied to any diet. Carbs, cals, protein grams etc.
Not to mention, oh yes I shall, that you would need a bomb calorimeter
to get anything near and exact count of cals. Ever read Atkins? I have
and I swear if you did not have a degree in the Life Sciences, you
could not possibly intake all the pseudo science there.
>A typical person might have a total of all WAFs of 1 for a day.
All things will balance in the long run and the TPD is about the
longest run possible.
Your life.