PCOS
Zarah
I got a letter from my PCP about some bloodwork that I had done a couple of
weeks ago. She says she wants me to come in to talk about Polycystic
Ovarian Syndrome. Are any of you familiar with this?
I've done a web search, and came up with a few sites, but the ones that were
in plain English weren't very informative and sometimes even downright
vague. The information that I did get... well, it frightened me a little.
Infertility, diabetes, and obesity... which of course I already have, and is
probably the reason she brought it up. At 21, I'm having this sudden rush
of the "I'm too young for this" feeling.
I'm about to dive into the alt.support.pco newgroup, but with almost 3,000
messages I'm not sure what I'll find. Either way, I have an appointment to
see my doc on Wednesday, so I guess worst case I'll get all the details
then. But anything that any of you might have to say would be great too.
Zarah
JeanC
You might want to check out SoulCysters.com. This site seems to be a
very good one and a fairly extensive message board.
Jean C
"Celebrate life - it has an expiration date"
http://www.uidaho.edu/~bjcraw/
my...@panix.com
> I'm about to dive into the alt.support.pco newgroup, but with almost 3,000
> messages I'm not sure what I'll find. Either way, I have an appointment to
> see my doc on Wednesday, so I guess worst case I'll get all the details
> then. But anything that any of you might have to say would be great too.
Try this site:
Also, a lot of people in the low carb group do so to help with PCOS (not
everyone there is trying to lose weight).
Myra
Sagittaria
news:usdmeq...@corp.supernews.com:
> Since you all seem like a nice, friendly, helpful bunch...
>
> I got a letter from my PCP about some bloodwork that I had done a
> couple of weeks ago. She says she wants me to come in to talk
> about Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome. Are any of you familiar with
> this?
Yep, many of us have it. The pcos newsgroup is a good one, although
kind of quiet. There are a bunch of yahoo groups, depending on your
particular focus (trying to get pregnant, dealing with hair removal,
etc.) Also see these websites:
http://my.webmd.com/encyclopedia/article/1840.56286
http://www.pcosupport.org/
http://www.obgyn.net/pcos/pcos.asp
--
---->Sagittaria<----
I've got cat class, and I've got cat style.
Zarah
more links that I hadn't found in my own search, and feel a bit more
prepared now.
Zarah
"JeanC" wrote
Zarah
about. I don't have PCOS. What I do have is a metabolic disorder that
*could* lead to diabetes, if I don't get it under control now. So, back to
water arobics three days a week, lay off the carbs and refined sugars, and
come back in three months to see if my triglycerides(sp?) are lower.
Thanks for the help/support. I don't mind being fat, but I do need to mind
my health.
Zarah
I wrote...
Eva Whitley
> Well, it seems that I'm fine - or at least, not as bad as I was worried
> about. I don't have PCOS. What I do have is a metabolic disorder that
> *could* lead to diabetes, if I don't get it under control now. So, back to
> water arobics three days a week, lay off the carbs and refined sugars, and
> come back in three months to see if my triglycerides(sp?) are lower.
>
> Thanks for the help/support. I don't mind being fat, but I do need to mind
> my health.
>
> Zarah
>
>
>
and that was just awful. PCOS and wacky hormone stuff is hell.
My friend Ted is diabetic (he hangs out on misc.health.diabetes) and
he's of the opinion regular exercise is of far more use than dietary
restrictions. But refined sugars are not your teeth's best friend so
there are other reasons to lay off on them.
Nice that your doctor didn't jump to a standard (and wrong diagnosis).
--Eva Whitley
Siobhan Perricone
>My friend Ted is diabetic (he hangs out on misc.health.diabetes) and
>he's of the opinion regular exercise is of far more use than dietary
>restrictions. But refined sugars are not your teeth's best friend so
>there are other reasons to lay off on them.
Just an anecdote here to support exercise. Frank was diagnosed with
diabetes about a month ago. His glucose was 330 when he was diagnosed and
just last night his two week average (he's been testing in the morning, and
before and after every meal because we're trying to figure out which things
work for him) is 116. We've noticed that walking for ten to fifteen
minutes after *every* meal makes a huge difference in his numbers. There
have been a few times when he could only walk before a meal, or not walk at
all because of a meeting, and his numbers showed it very graphically.
So now he's got plenty of gumption to keep walking. It's a habit with him
now and he's getting the diabetes under control. I'm *very* proud of him.
One thing we've found is that how one controls diabetes is very very much
an individual thing. What works for one person doesn't for another. The
problems come in when people insist that what works for THEM or X patients
MUST work for YOU. It's all very confusing and frustrating, but Frank just
decided, after doing a ton of reading and research, that he was going to
have to figure out what foods were doing things to him for himself. So
we've been doing that.
We've increased our fiber intake, as well. We're eating salads with nearly
every meal (I've started buying the baby greens in a bag and it makes a
nice quick salad so I don't have to cook a whole lot more).
It's also possible that he's lost a bit around his waist already, but I
haven't measured him. One of his pairs of pants is pretty loose now,
though.
--
Siobhan Perricone
some chick says "thank you for saying all the things I never do"
I say "the thanks I get is to take all the shit for you"
it's nice that you listen, it'd be nicer if you joined in
as long as you play their game girl, you're never going to win
- Ani DiFranco "Face up and sing"
Jessica Rosenberg
If you eat a carb, make sure to eat some protein with it. For example, if I
have a glass of juice by itself my blood sugar will spike. If I eat some
nuts with it, it keeps my reaction under control. Same goes for when you
absolutely have to have that candy bar. Just eat a few nuts with it. Also,
fiber helps process carbs, so if you eat a lot of carbs in a meal, make sure
there is sufficient fiber.
-Jessica
"Siobhan Perricone" <morgan...@starband.net> wrote in message
news:da9nsuc7oatbgli6d...@4ax.com...
Mark Kramer
Jessica Rosenberg <jsari...@attbi.com> wrote:
>A cool tip my nutritionist gave me for those that are carb sensitive:
>
>If you eat a carb, make sure to eat some protein with it.
And chocolate cake has no calories as long as you eat a carrot stick right
afterwards. Sometimes I forget the carrot stick, assuming that the cake
cannot suddenly gain calories if it had none when it was eaten. As far
as the cake knew, I was going to eat the carrot, and what the cake doesn't
know cannot hurt me.
Sorchas Lassair
arguement dripping with snide comments and sarcasm. Congratulations.
--
Lisa McCune
Mark Kramer wrote in message ...
Nancy Lebovitz
Siobhan Perricone <morgan...@starband.net> wrote:
>Just an anecdote here to support exercise. Frank was diagnosed with
>diabetes about a month ago. His glucose was 330 when he was diagnosed and
>just last night his two week average (he's been testing in the morning, and
>before and after every meal because we're trying to figure out which things
>work for him) is 116. We've noticed that walking for ten to fifteen
>minutes after *every* meal makes a huge difference in his numbers. There
>have been a few times when he could only walk before a meal, or not walk at
>all because of a meeting, and his numbers showed it very graphically.
>
Sounds like Frank's reinvented the "constitutional"--a Victorian(?)
custom of taking a walk after meals.
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com 100 new slogans
I want to move to theory. Everything works in theory.
aMAZon
Mark Kramer wrote:
For anyone who needs to watch carb intake so as to prevent blood
glucose spikes, Jessica's advice of eating a small amount of
carbs with protein is not wishful thinking. Your nonsense
about a carrot stick negating the calories of a piece of
chocolate cake sounds like a snide belittling of that,
and is uncalled-for.
Let's separate the fantasy and the reality here.
--
aMAZon
zesz...@worldnet.att.net
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."
Mark Kramer
aMAZon <zesz...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>For anyone who needs to watch carb intake so as to prevent blood
>glucose spikes, Jessica's advice of eating a small amount of
>carbs with protein is not wishful thinking.
The best way for people who need to watch carb intake is to actually
not intake the carbs, not try to mask them with other things. The carbs
do not magically dissappear just because they have something else to
hide behind, just like calories do not dissappear if they have some
roughage to hide behind. And I say this as someone who is on a very
carb-limited diet that monitors the situation closely. It matters not a
whit how much else is eaten, the carbs wind up in the bloodstream where
they aren't wanted.
>Your nonsense
>about a carrot stick negating the calories of a piece of
>chocolate cake sounds like a snide belittling of that,
>and is uncalled-for.
It was a joke. Lighten the hell up. You were supposed to get the fact
that wishes are not facts, and wishing away calories (or carbs) by
eating other things with them is still just a wish. If it worked, then
the silly idea that what the cake doesn't know cannot hurt me would be
true.
>Let's separate the fantasy and the reality here.
Ok, let's start with the myth that eating protein with a carbohydrate
removes the effect of the carbohydrate, shall we?
Mark Kramer
Sorchas Lassair <lisa...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>You have this amazing ability to turn any comment someone makes into an
>arguement dripping with snide comments and sarcasm. Congratulations.
I guess I should be polite and say "thank you", but your interpretation
is somewhat askew.
aMAZon
Mark Kramer wrote:
I said *nothing* about "removing the effect of the carbohydrate".
What I said was that it can help prevent spikes in blood glucose.
The best thing, of course, is to have a balanced intake of
protein, fats and carbs.
Your "lighten the hell up" is disrespectful, and the usual haven of
someone who said the wrong thing and wants to hide that fact.
"But I was only joking" doesn't hide the hostility.--
Sorchas Lassair
Nope - my interpretation of your comments is accurate - every post of yours
that I read leaves me wondering why you are here (and why don't you ever get
moderated) - you always come off as ill tempered, nitpicky, snide, sarcastic
in a nonfunny way, and incredibly argumentative. *IF* this is simply an
artifact of not being able to hear the "tone of voice" - as can be the
problem online - well, that may be, but your comments here *always* appear
to be negative, and put down others comments and opinions. Why is that?
Maybe instead of saying it's just a joke and "lighten the hell up" (which
was uncalled for) - maybe you should examine why you actually post here,
what do you get out of this group, what do you contribute to it, is any of
it positive, and what is it about your posting habits that many people
regularly interpret as negative (because it's not just me that has an issue
with your posts).
And if I am way off base here, I'm sure that others here will tell me so.
Mary-Anne G. Wolf
*** Gently, folks. ***
*** Please remember that we're a support newsgroup ***
Maybe I should have posted this sooner.
----------------------------------------
(remove hat)
Now, speaking as just me:
As one who does not always anticipate the emotional response to how
I phrase things, I can understand offending without meaning to offend.
I don't know whether this is the case here or not, but I am willing
to suggest we give the benefit of the doubt.
I suspect that the confusion in this discussion, is something about
how "low carb" works.
If I understand the discussion, there seems to be an argument that at
least for some medical conditions, eating fiber with carbs will cause
blood sugar to rise more slowly and/or less high than it would eating
the carbs alone. Is this correct?
If one had a medical condition where one's health required one to
reduce body fat or body weight by a change in what one eats (and I am
not referring to appearance), then it is quite possible that adding
nuts to one's candy might not improve the consequences of eating the
candy, which may have been what Mark was trying to say.
There may also be medical conditions where both weight and blood suger
matter, and there are plenty of people who will say diabetes is one,
but from what I have seen of thin diabetics, I do not agree.
I have a memory of some Native American tribe whose traditional foods
when combined had the side-effect of keeping their blood sugar down,
but with modern foods a great many of them had diabetes, and that some
of them were trying to return to the older foods for health reasons,
but I do not recall the name of the tribe. Does anyone else remember
hearing about this? It was a clear example of foods behaving
differently when combined than when eaten hours apart.
Mary-Anne
@--------------------
Mark Kramer
Sorchas Lassair <lisa...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Nope - my interpretation of your comments is accurate - every post of yours
>that I read leaves me wondering why you are here (and why don't you ever get
>moderated) -
Hmmm, your lack of omniscience is showing. I've gotten moderated, usually
for replying in kind to this kind of attack. I suspect that I'll get
moderated for responding to this, too. But you don't see the moderated
articles, so you assume they don't exist, just like you don't assume
there are any articles but those you hate.
>problem online - well, that may be, but your comments here *always* appear
>to be negative, and put down others comments and opinions. Why is that?
Because you want to read them that way? Because I don't typically post the
fluffy warm-fuzzy "me too" articles? Because this is a support group where
one is supposed to feel welcome to have an opinion, even if it isn't the
most popular? Hell, this whole group is based on a less-than-universally
(to understate it) held opinion.
>Maybe instead of saying it's just a joke and "lighten the hell up" (which
>was uncalled for)
No, it was a perfect response. What I wrote was so patently absurd that it
begged for some thought. Sometimes it's called reductio ad absurdum.
>And if I am way off base here, I'm sure that others here will tell me so.
Will you jump down their throats for telling you so, like you just did
to me?
Mark Kramer
aMAZon <zesz...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> Ok, let's start with the myth that eating protein with a carbohydrate
>> removes the effect of the carbohydrate, shall we?
>
>I said *nothing* about "removing the effect of the carbohydrate".
>What I said was that it can help prevent spikes in blood glucose.
If a spike in blood glucose is an effect of eating the carbohydrate, then
"prevent spikes" is removing that effect.
>The best thing, of course, is to have a balanced intake of
>protein, fats and carbs.
That is not true. For many people, perhaps, but as a blanket statement,
it is false. The "best thing", perhaps, is to be ABLE to have a
balanced intake of all three, but actually doing that is not always the
best thing for someone. And I think we are already limiting our
discussion to a group where actually doing that is not the best thing
-- "those who have to watch carb intake".
>Your "lighten the hell up" is disrespectful,
We all have our own opinions about what is disrespectful. I find
fantasy posing as fact to be disrespectful. That's the wonderful
things about opinions.
>and the usual haven of
>someone who said the wrong thing and wants to hide that fact.
That could be. Since I didn't say "the wrong thing", I wouldn't know
about that. It's ridiculous to think that I could hide the fact of what
I said, since it was posted worldwide. Your implication that I am
stupid enough to think I could do so is disrespectful. Will you
immediately modify your behaviour to prevent this in the future, like
I'm expected to?
>"But I was only joking" doesn't hide the hostility.--
You mean, like a carrot stick cannot hide calories, and protein cannot
hide carbohydrates?
Mark Kramer
Mary-Anne G. Wolf <m...@world.std.com> wrote:
>I have a memory of some Native American tribe whose traditional foods
>when combined had the side-effect of keeping their blood sugar down,
>but with modern foods a great many of them had diabetes, and that some
>of them were trying to return to the older foods for health reasons,
>but I do not recall the name of the tribe. Does anyone else remember
>hearing about this? It was a clear example of foods behaving
>differently when combined than when eaten hours apart.
The difference was not the combination, but the processing. Bleached
flour and sugar, and corn sweeteners, were not a principal part of
their diet originally. Whatever fat they ate was natural organic fat,
not hydrogenated manipulated fat added on top.
If you take out the non-carbohydrate stuff, add then add processed
carbs and fats, you get a very different diet than what you started
with. It's higher in carbs and fat than what you started with (and
probably salt, too). That they might develop diabetes from a diet
suddenly loaded with sugar is hardly surprising (at least nowadays.)
Stacia
>I have a memory of some Native American tribe whose traditional foods
>when combined had the side-effect of keeping their blood sugar down,
>but with modern foods a great many of them had diabetes, and that some
>of them were trying to return to the older foods for health reasons,
>but I do not recall the name of the tribe. Does anyone else remember
>hearing about this? It was a clear example of foods behaving
>differently when combined than when eaten hours apart.
Dr Andrew Weir speaks about it in detail in "Eating Well for Optimum
Health". He discusses Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, and Inuit
tribes and how, in studies, when these people ate their "traditional"
foods their cholesterol and blood sugars got to normal levels and they
sometimes lost weight even though they did not moderate their intake at
all.
As for foods being combined, the most common example is the complete
protein formed when beans and rice are eaten together. As someone else
already said better than I am, the combination of foods creating different
effects is not just wishful thinking.
* * *
Stacia * sta...@world.std.com * http://world.std.com/~stacia/
"Perhaps it was the spring. And something in her eyes
that was much older than Manhattan, Kansas."
my...@panix.com
> I said *nothing* about "removing the effect of the carbohydrate".
> What I said was that it can help prevent spikes in blood glucose.
> The best thing, of course, is to have a balanced intake of
> protein, fats and carbs.
Well, the problem is - if your body cannot properly metabolize
carbohydrates, then they need to be limited. Sometimes, the best intake
is not necessarily a "balanced" one.
This is no different than people with kidney disease who need to limit
protein intake.
My godbrother is married to a woman who cannot metabolize most fats - so
she severely limits her consumption of them.
That's just common sense, don't you think?
The best way to avoid a BG spike is to avoid those foods that cause
them. For a diabetic, fruit juice is no better than sugar water with a
few vitamins in it. Better to eat a piece of fruit (preferably berries
or melon, but not watermelon) than to drink fruit juice. Better yet -
eat a green vegetable and skip the fruit.
Myra
Sorchas Lassair
>Sorchas Lassair <lisa...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>Nope - my interpretation of your comments is accurate - every post of
yours
>>that I read leaves me wondering why you are here (and why don't you ever
get
>>moderated) -
>
>Hmmm, your lack of omniscience is showing. I've gotten moderated, usually
>for replying in kind to this kind of attack. I suspect that I'll get
>moderated for responding to this, too. But you don't see the moderated
>articles, so you assume they don't exist, just like you don't assume
>there are any articles but those you hate.
<snip>
>>And if I am way off base here, I'm sure that others here will tell me so.
>
>Will you jump down their throats for telling you so, like you just did
>to me?
Omniscience has nothing to do with it - the implication was that perhaps you
weren't getting moderated enough. As for jumping down throats, you mean
like the way you jumped down Jessica's throat?
My last comment on this subject is - as was pointed out to me, this is a
"support group" - when have you ever posted anything truly supportive on
this group? Sadly (and I do mean that) I've never seen it - and I've been
subscribed to this group almost from it's start.
Finally, to both be more supportive, and to bring my comments more on-topic
for this thread, I am glad to hear that you were able to bring your diabetes
under control. I don't have diabetes, but know several people who do, and I
feel for anyone who has to deal with it.
my...@panix.com
> I suspect that the confusion in this discussion, is something about
> how "low carb" works.
I don't, for obvious reasons, discuss my low carbing here, but suffice
to say I started it almost five years ago for my health. The weight
loss was secondary - then as now.
If anyone wants an explanation of how it works, I'll be happy to do it.
Also, just IMO, I think the American Diabetic Association is
perpetrating great harm on Type II diabetics by telling them to get 60%
of their calories from carbs. Type IIs cannot properly metabolize carbs
(i.e., glucose), and telling someone to get most of their calories
from something their body can't use is insane.
Or, as I like to put it - the ADA is great at what it does - promoting
diabetes.
Myra
Priscilla H Ballou
> As for foods being combined, the most common example is the complete
>protein formed when beans and rice are eaten together.
That's actually not a very good example, since we've learned since _Diet
for a Small Planet_ came out that you *don't* need to eat them together.
Priscilla
--
"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new."
- Albert Einstein
Mark Kramer
>weren't getting moderated enough.
No, the statement was "why don't you ever get moderated", which might
include an implication that I don't get censored enough, but also says
that I "don't ... ever get moderated". I do, but you wouldn't know that.
If you haven't seen it, it must not have happened.
>As for jumping down throats, you mean
>like the way you jumped down Jessica's throat?
I didn't jump down her throat. I didn't say anything about her personally,
I didn't try to psychoanalyze her, I didn't ask her why she was posting
here, or any of the other personal stuff you did. You decided that was
the right way to debate the issue, not me.
>My last comment on this subject is - as was pointed out to me, this is a
>"support group" - when have you ever posted anything truly supportive on
>this group?
I'm sorry I don't keep personal archives of this group. I do know that
I've generally regretted any participation in group discussions because
someone (you, this time) decides to make it personal and the mods don't
enforce the charter until I try to respond. Not long ago I tried to
discuss with someone why they felt betrayed by some action, but I
committed the greivious sin of using the word "think" intead of "feel",
and this supportive group of people let me know it in spades. I
learned that being supportive wasn't a supported activity.
>Sadly (and I do mean that) I've never seen it
So of course it has never happened. I know.
>- and I've been
>subscribed to this group almost from it's start.
I've still got the "promise to be good" email that talks about Babylon
5 newsgroups instead of this one, filed away somewhere. That was from
the first day or two of this group's existance. I guess I've been here
longer, for whatever worth you put on such things.
>Finally, to both be more supportive, and to bring my comments more on-topic
>for this thread, I am glad to hear that you were able to bring your diabetes
>under control.
What? Did someone diagnose me with diabetes and not tell me?
Catharine Honeyman
> I have a memory of some Native American tribe whose traditional foods
> when combined had the side-effect of keeping their blood sugar down,
> but with modern foods a great many of them had diabetes, and that some
> of them were trying to return to the older foods for health reasons,
> but I do not recall the name of the tribe. Does anyone else remember
> hearing about this?
Could you be thinking of the Hawaiians and Dr. Terry Shintani's Waianae
Diet? It's amazing how we are able to wipe out type II diabetes with
mild exercise, poi, greens, sweet potatoes, and a little fish.
--
Aloha,
Catharine
Character is what you do when no one's watching.
Miche
Catharine Honeyman <cat...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> Mary-Anne G. Wolf wrote:
>
>
> > I have a memory of some Native American tribe whose traditional foods
> > when combined had the side-effect of keeping their blood sugar down,
> > but with modern foods a great many of them had diabetes, and that some
> > of them were trying to return to the older foods for health reasons,
> > but I do not recall the name of the tribe. Does anyone else remember
> > hearing about this?
>
> Could you be thinking of the Hawaiians and Dr. Terry Shintani's Waianae
> Diet? It's amazing how we are able to wipe out type II diabetes with
> mild exercise, poi, greens, sweet potatoes, and a little fish.
Wasn't there also a similar study done with the Pima, which showed them
to be much healthier when they ate local and traditional foods rather
than a Western processed-food high-fat high-sugar diet?
Miche
--
So what if the universe is a pointless mass of hydrogen refuse powered
by entropy. I'm spreading ketchup on a rubber duck, and after that I'm
going to brush its teeth. So there.
-- Rob Landley
Mary-Anne G. Wolf
Miche <mich...@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>In article <20021129010731.252$s...@newsreader.com>,
> Catharine Honeyman <cat...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>> Mary-Anne G. Wolf wrote:
>>
>>
>> > I have a memory of some Native American tribe whose traditional foods
>> > when combined had the side-effect of keeping their blood sugar down,
>> Could you be thinking of the Hawaiians
>Wasn't there also a similar study done with the Pima
Yes, it was the Pima I was trying to remember.
What I wonder is whether any of the information about the Pima,
or the Hawaiians, for that matter, can be applied to "regular"
type 2 diabetics.
Mary-Anne
@--------------------
Catharine Honeyman
> What I wonder is whether any of the information about the Pima,
> or the Hawaiians, for that matter, can be applied to "regular"
> type 2 diabetics.
I don't see why not. It's using complex carbs, small amounts of lean
animal tissue, and very little fat sugar, or processed foods.
Interesting: Our new governor, Linda Lingle (the first female governor of
Hawaii! Yay! Even if she is a Republican!) is booting around an idea
that would see the Waianae Diet served in prison and in juvie. She is
looking at stats that reported less family strife when the original
Waianae group was on the diet. Of course, they also had to do lots of
native Hawaiian mental-healing practices. I hope she institutes the
whole program, not just the diet part.
Bess
cat...@spamcop.net wrote on 11/28/02 11:07 PM:
> Mary-Anne G. Wolf wrote:
>
>
>> I have a memory of some Native American tribe whose traditional foods
>> when combined had the side-effect of keeping their blood sugar down,
>> but with modern foods a great many of them had diabetes, and that some
>> of them were trying to return to the older foods for health reasons,
>> but I do not recall the name of the tribe. Does anyone else remember
>> hearing about this?
>
> Could you be thinking of the Hawaiians and Dr. Terry Shintani's Waianae
> Diet? It's amazing how we are able to wipe out type II diabetes with
> mild exercise, poi, greens, sweet potatoes, and a little fish.
The Pima Native Americans were the people I heard mentioned in nursing
school.
Bess
Felis Concolor
>Interesting: Our new governor, Linda Lingle (the first female governor of
> Hawaii! Yay! Even if she is a Republican!) is booting around an idea
> that would see the Waianae Diet served in prison and in juvie. She is
> looking at stats that reported less family strife when the original
> Waianae group was on the diet. Of course, they also had to do lots of
> native Hawaiian mental-healing practices. I hope she institutes the
> whole program, not just the diet part.
Sheesh! I hope they give the prisoners the choice _not_ to be on this
diet, or follow the healing practices. Such activities may not really
be right for all.
Another question: Were the native Polynesians fat before the white
man came? I'd guess that they were, just not as fat as when they
follow a Western regime.
Lenore Levine
--
"I repeat for all prospective despots, kings, saviors, democratic
freedom fighters, and the like: _Frequent rummage sales_. You never
know but you might pick up the secret of universal domination at
one, and at a sweet price." -- Tony Daniel