Gyroscopic Investing

Speaking of low GI diet, if you want to lose weight and keep it off, it has proven to be more effective than low carb, atkins, low fat, or many other diets.  If you want a really easy to follow guide that tells you basically everything to eat with recipes to cook delicious meals, I would recommend Ultrametabolism by Dr. Mark Hyman.  I think there are only a few recipes with soy milk in them, but you could easily substitute cow's milk instead.

Ultrametabolism focuses mainly on eating low GI carbs, but still a balanced diet with good fats, good carbs (low GI whole grains), and good proteins like eggs, yogurt, chicken and fish.  The main thing that seems to work is that you are eating 3 meals a day and 2 snacks in between meals, so you never go longer than 3-4 hours without food.  This schedule, combined with eating low GI carbs, means your blood sugar never spikes and never crashes - it stays at a constant level all the time, which seems to promote a ketogenic state where you can burn fat.  However, you also shouldn't feel tired and lethargic because you actually are keeping your blood sugar up and not letting it crash.

One thing I found similar to the PP is that he focuses on the psychological aspects of dieting.  For example, if you feel hungry all the time because you're not eating enough, you're going to starve, and your bodies natural defense mechanism kicks in and you get the uncontrollable urge to eat.  This is why most diets that just say "eat less" fail.  Your body has very powerful instincts and when it senses a shortage of food, powerful hormones kick in that almost force you to eat.  In a way, this seems to me to be similar to the greed and fear cycle of stock investors:  They load up on risky stocks out of greed, then dump them as soon as they lose value out of fear.  Most diets you might lose a few pounds in the first week, then you get really hungry, slip up, and end up binging and gaining back even more weight than you lost in the first place.

I've found low GI to be a pretty sustainable diet that you can eat long term without bad health effects.  In addition, low GI, or just diets that don't have a lot of refined carbs, seem to promote a number of other health benefits like strong cardiovascular health, better teeth (the other thread on dental health was eye opening), and much more.

Storm wrote:Speaking of low GI diet

Storm, how is that really any different from low carb? I mean, isn't "Low GI" really just another way of saying "Low Carb"? I don't really know the specific differences between the diets, so I'm just curious. But, if the idea behind low carb and low GI are both to avoid insulin spikes, that strikes me as being pretty much the same basic idea. "Low Carb" doesn't mean no carbs. Even the diet you describe sounds a lot like "low carb" from what I can tell. Both types of dieters seem to pay close attention to glycemic loads, etc.

1. Gumby,

Eating low glycemic carbs means I can have cooked barley as part of b'fast because it is low glycemic index, whereas I could not have that many carbs on a low carb diet.  As to whether eating low glycemic index is sufficient, or whether most people would be better off avoiding that many carbs I do not know.  I am a very strong advocate of tailoring the diet to the person, and in my case I believe based on TCM diet theory that there are advantages from eating certain grains FOR ME, so I do what I can to choose lower glycemic grains, and to minimize any glucose/insulin spike.

2. Hyman is one of the better sources of info last I checked.

3. On why skipping b'fast may be a good thing: 

Eric Cressey is a well known personal personal trainer type who keeps up on the latest nutritional research

http://www.ericcressey.com/5-lose-fat-g ... ter-1  (scroll down to 3)

Gumby wrote:

Storm wrote:Speaking of low GI diet

Storm, how is that really any different from low carb? I mean, isn't "Low GI" really just another way of saying "Low Carb"? I don't really know the specific differences between the diets, so I'm just curious. But, if the idea behind low carb and low GI are both to avoid insulin spikes, that strikes me as being pretty much the same basic idea. "Low Carb" doesn't mean no carbs. Even the diet you describe sounds a lot like "low carb" from what I can tell. Both types of dieters seem to pay close attention to glycemic loads, etc.

No, Gumby, low GI is not really close to low carb.  In low GI you still eat a normal amount of carbs, you just don't eat high GI carbs.  This is very different than reducing carbs.  In much the same way as you should try to eat good fats and not bad fats, low GI focuses on good carbs rather than bad carbs.  Getting grains as close to their natural form as possible, where they have the most vitamins and nutrients possible.

The problem with low carb is that it's not a sustainable diet.  Ask yourself, what will you eat after you reach your target weight?  If the answer is "I'll start to eat carbs again," then you should know low carb will ultimately fail because it is not a diet that is healthy to eat your entire life.  If you only cut bad carbs to lose weight, then add refined flour and sugar back again later, you'll just gain the weight back.  Low GI teaches you how to eat in a way that you are never hungry and reach a healthy weight naturally, without counting calories.  Then, when you reached a healthy weight, you can keep eating healthy without worrying about gaining weight again.

Storm wrote:Getting grains as close to their natural form as possible, where they have the most vitamins and nutrients possible.

So, what exactly does that mean? Grains have a lot of phytic acid (anti-nutrients) which blocks absorption of those vitamins and nutrients. How exactly does Dr. Hyman recommend that people neutralize those anti-nutrients? (Hint: you need to ferment or soak your grains in an acid, or use "sprouting" grains). Considering his dismissive attitude towards problems with soy, my guess is that he's clueless about phytic acid.

[align=center][/align]

Storm wrote: If you only cut bad carbs to lose weight, then add refined flour and sugar back again later, you'll just gain the weight back.

I think that's probably a mischaracterization. Low carb dieters seem well aware of the glycemic index. They know how to avoid insulin spikes just as much as a low GI dieter.

Personally I'm trying to gain weight. I just find all this very fascinating. I agree that Low GI is a great way to manage one's diet (provided you can avoid phytic acid when possible). My sense is that high GI foods seem to cause inflammation in the body and damage to organs.

The main problem I see with Low Carb diets is that they involve ketosis, which probably isn't very healthy long term. I suspect most low carb dieters just transition to a low GI diet when they reach their target weight.

It was my understanding that cooking grains or legumes reduces the phytic acid & lectin content, not requiring pre-soaking.  What evidence is there to the contrary?

I will say that I can't eat legumes continously (2-3 days) or I'll develop a flaking and burning skin rash on my nose.  Annoyingly, they also now cause my esophagus to midly burn after ingestion.  So I can't eat them but once a twice week if I even bother.

Its been said to put some baking soda into the water when pre-soaking legumes to help reduce the gas formation properties.  How does that make sense when it is not an acid?

Gosso wrote: I eat a big bowl of full fat yogurt, berries, and granola...

Storm wrote: Ultrametabolism focuses mainly on eating low GI carbs, but still a balanced diet with good fats, good carbs (low GI whole grains), and good proteins like eggs, yogurt, chicken and fish.

The potential pitfall with yogurt is that most of the commercial brands I've seen are full of added sugar.

I guess I'll look next time I'm at the grocery store, but is it typically pretty easy to find whole (not reduced-fat) yogurt with no added sugar? And if so, how does it taste?

Tortoise wrote: The potential pitfall with yogurt is that most of the commercial brands I've seen are full of added sugar.

I guess I'll look next time I'm at the grocery store, but is it typically pretty easy to find whole (not reduced-fat) yogurt with no added sugar? And if so, how does it taste?

Yes, good to check that label.  You'd want to go for the "plain yogurt".  Regular "whole" yogurt is good if full fat is your thing while "nonfat plain" yogurt is available for the low-fat folks.

Plain yogurt is quite tart but I've been eating it since I was a kid, so I love it.  Its section is usually smaller than the sugary, fruited-up stuff but it should hopefully be there at your store.

Tortoise wrote:

Gosso wrote: I eat a big bowl of full fat yogurt, berries, and granola...

Storm wrote: Ultrametabolism focuses mainly on eating low GI carbs, but still a balanced diet with good fats, good carbs (low GI whole grains), and good proteins like eggs, yogurt, chicken and fish.

The potential pitfall with yogurt is that most of the commercial brands I've seen are full of added sugar.

I guess I'll look next time I'm at the grocery store, but is it typically pretty easy to find whole (not reduced-fat) yogurt with no added sugar? And if so, how does it taste?

It should be at the grocery store.  Look for Greek yogurt, it will have no added sugar.  Check to make sure it has a high percentage of saturated fat (imagine saying that a few decades ago! ).  It is quite sour, but the berries and granola balance it out.  The granola has a lot of carbs and sugar in it, so it may not work for a low carb diet / low GI diet.  I guess you're stuck with eggs and bacon.

Here's a critical review of the merits behind a low GI diet: "It's Time to Let Go of The Glycemic Index"

Overall, these studies do not support the idea that lowering the glycemic index of carbohydrate foods is useful for weight loss, insulin or glucose control, or anything else besides complicating your life.

Gumby wrote:

Storm wrote:Getting grains as close to their natural form as possible, where they have the most vitamins and nutrients possible.

So, what exactly does that mean? Grains have a lot of phytic acid (anti-nutrients) which blocks absorption of those vitamins and nutrients. How exactly does Dr. Hyman recommend that people neutralize those anti-nutrients? (Hint: you need to ferment or soak your grains in an acid, or use "sprouting" grains). Considering his dismissive attitude towards problems with soy, my guess is that he's clueless about phytic acid.

That means exactly what you say, using sprouting grains, brown rice, and soaking legumes overnight (I'm not sure about the acid solution).  For example, for breakfast today I had two eggs fried in butter on two pieces of sprouted wheat bread toast, and a banana.  The grains I mostly eat are brown rice, sprouted wheat (which is gluten free as well, I might add), buckwheat, quinoa, and wild rice.

I'm not really sure about the science of all the anti-nutrients.

Gosso wrote:
Here's a critical review of the merits behind a low GI diet: "It's Time to Let Go of The Glycemic Index"

Overall, these studies do not support the idea that lowering the glycemic index of carbohydrate foods is useful for weight loss, insulin or glucose control, or anything else besides complicating your life.[/quote]

One of the mechanisms which ages all of us at the cellular level is called "non-enyzmatic glycation" which means that sugar molecules damage the normal molecules of our body.  This can be seen extremely in diabetics, but occurs in all of us.  So if you are interested in health, you want to have a normal blood sugar as much of the time as possible and avoid spiking your blood sugar to the extent you can.

Glycemix index per se is flawed, and perhaps glycemic load is a better indicator, but the basic idea to avoid spiking blood sugar for health purposes is still valid

MachineGhost wrote: It was my understanding that cooking grains or legumes reduces the phytic acid & lectin content, not requiring pre-soaking.  What evidence is there to the contrary?

Cooking grains or legumes only reduces phytic acid by a small amount. Soaking, fermenting or sprouting are necessary to neutralize most of the phytic acid. This has been well established by traditional cultures and scientific research. If you're looking for a rundown of scientific evidence, see: http://phyticacid.org/

Even Wikipedia clearly states that cooking is not enough...

Phytic acid is found within the hulls of nuts, seeds, and grains.[2] In-home food preparation techniques can reduce the phytic acid in all of these foods. Simply cooking the food will reduce the phytic acid to some degree. More effective methods are soaking in an acid medium, lactic acid fermentation, and sprouting.[17]

Phytic acid has a strong binding affinity to important minerals, such as calcium, magnesium, iron, and zinc though the binding of calcium with phytic acid depends on pH[18] and that ascorbic acid (vitamin C) can reduce phytic acid effects on iron.[19] When a mineral binds to phytic acid, it becomes insoluble, precipitates and will be nonabsorbable in the intestines.

Phytic acid has a strong binding affinity to important minerals, such as calcium, magnesium, iron, and zinc though the binding of calcium with phytic acid depends on pH[18] and that ascorbic acid (vitamin C) can reduce phytic acid effects on iron.[19] When a mineral binds to phytic acid, it becomes insoluble, precipitates and will be nonabsorbable in the intestines. This process can therefore contribute to mineral deficiencies in people whose diets rely on these foods for their mineral intake, such as those in developing countries.[20][21] Contrary to that, one study correlated decreased osteoporosis risk with phytic acid consumption.[22] It also acts as an acid, chelating the vitamin niacin, the deficiency of which is known as pellagra.[23] In this regard, it is an antinutrient, despite its possible therapeutic effects (see below). For people with a particularly low intake of essential minerals, especially those in developing countries, this effect can be undesirable.

"Probiotic lactobacilli, and other species of the endogenous digestive microflora, as well, are an important source of the enzyme phytase which catalyses the release of phosphate from phytate and hydrolyses the complexes formed by phytate and metal ions or other cations, rendering them more soluble, ultimately improving and facilitating their intestinal absorption"[24]
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytic_acid

17. Phytates in cereals and legumes
18. Dendougui, Ferial; Schwedt, Georg (2004). "In vitro analysis of binding capacities of calcium to phytic acid in different food samples". European Food Research and Technology 219 (4). doi:10.1007/s00217-004-0912-7.
19. Prom-U-Thai, Chanakan; Huang, Longbin; Glahn, Raymond P; Welch, Ross M; Fukai, Shu; Rerkasem, Benjavan (2006). "Iron (Fe) bioavailability and the distribution of anti-Fe nutrition biochemicals in the unpolished, polished grain and bran fraction of five rice genotypes". Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 86 ( 8 ): 1209–15. doi:10.1002/jsfa.2471
20. Hurrell RF (September 2003). "Influence of vegetable protein sources on trace element and mineral bioavailability". The Journal of Nutrition 133 (9): 2973S–7S. PMID 12949395.
21. Committee on Food Protection, Food and Nutrition Board, National Research Council (1973). "Phytates". Toxicants Occurring Naturally in Foods. National Academy of Sciences. pp. 363–371. ISBN 978-0-309-02117-3.
22. López-González AA, Grases F, Roca P, Mari B, Vicente-Herrero MT, Costa-Bauzá A (December 2008). "Phytate (myo-inositol hexaphosphate) and risk factors for osteoporosis". Journal of Medicinal Food 11 (4): 747–52. doi:10.1089/jmf.2008.0087. PMID 19053869.
23. Anderson, Eugene N. (2005). Everyone eats: understanding food and culture. New York: New York University Press. pp. 47–8. ISBN 0-8147-0496-4.
24. Famularo G, De Simone C, Pandey V, Sahu AR, Minisola G (2005). "Probiotic lactobacilli: an innovative tool to correct the malabsorption syndrome of vegetarians?". Med. Hypotheses 65 (6): 1132–5. doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2004.09.030. PMID 16095846.

MachineGhost wrote:I will say that I can't eat legumes continously (2-3 days) or I'll develop a flaking and burning skin rash on my nose.  Annoyingly, they also now cause my esophagus to midly burn after ingestion.  So I can't eat them but once a twice week if I even bother.

Yep. That's phytic acid. Beans need to soak in acid for about 24 hours to really neutralize the phytic acid. Take corn, for instance. Even when corn is cooked, it's not very digestible. Before modern cookbooks, corn was traditionally soaked in limewater (or dolomite) for hours on end to unlock the nutrients. There was a very long tradition of doing this. When you eat properly prepared grains and legumes, your stomach will feel much better. It's really easy to do. It just takes a little bit of pre-planning:

See: http://thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/why- ... our-beans/

And here is an excellent video by the same person: YouTube: Proper Preparation of Grains and Legumes

Keep in mind that almost everyone used to do this 100 years ago. Cookbooks and magazines have often removed this crucial step to publish easy "30 minute" meals. Even packaging labels have changed to make food appear to be more convenient. And the FDA allows companies to display the full potential nutritional information on the label despite the fact that nobody can access the nutrition using the directions on the label.

MachineGhost wrote:Its been said to put some baking soda into the water when pre-soaking legumes to help reduce the gas formation properties.  How does that make sense when it is not an acid?

Right, but people added baking soda to their acid soaks. But, fully neutralizing anti-nutrients takes hours and requires acid, fermentation or sprouting.

Tortoise wrote:

Gosso wrote: I eat a big bowl of full fat yogurt, berries, and granola...

Storm wrote: Ultrametabolism focuses mainly on eating low GI carbs, but still a balanced diet with good fats, good carbs (low GI whole grains), and good proteins like eggs, yogurt, chicken and fish.

The potential pitfall with yogurt is that most of the commercial brands I've seen are full of added sugar.

I guess I'll look next time I'm at the grocery store, but is it typically pretty easy to find whole (not reduced-fat) yogurt with no added sugar? And if so, how does it taste?

Hang on there a second - I regularly buy quart tubs of organic whole milk plain yogurt.  The yogurt has a layer of cream on top.  There is no sugar added.  I add a handful of blueberries and top with a teaspoon of milled flax seeds.  This is a good breakfast.  It's not like we're buying those crappy sugar filled flavored yogurts.

Benko wrote:

Gosso wrote:
Here's a critical review of the merits behind a low GI diet: "It's Time to Let Go of The Glycemic Index"

Overall, these studies do not support the idea that lowering the glycemic index of carbohydrate foods is useful for weight loss, insulin or glucose control, or anything else besides complicating your life.[/quote]

One of the mechanisms which ages all of us at the cellular level is called "non-enyzmatic glycation" which means that sugar molecules damage the normal molecules of our body.  This can be seen extremely in diabetics, but occurs in all of us.  So if you are interested in health, you want to have a normal blood sugar as much of the time as possible and avoid spiking your blood sugar to the extent you can.

Glycemix index per se is flawed, and perhaps glycemic load is a better indicator, but the basic idea to avoid spiking blood sugar for health purposes is still valid

But if you are insulin sensitive then the blood sugar won't spike in the first place.  I wonder if avoiding high GI foods causes the body to become somewhat insulin resistant, thereby resulting in even greater damage from carbs when they are consumed as a treat or during a cheat day.

Gosso wrote: But if you are insulin sensitive then the blood sugar won't spike in the first place.  I wonder if avoiding high GI foods causes the body to become somewhat insulin resistant, thereby resulting in even greater damage from carbs when they are consumed as a treat or during a cheat day.

Actually, I believe it's the other way around.  Spiking your blood sugar regularly causes insulin resistance after some time, which makes carbs cause even more damage.  Diabetics normally have some type of insulin resistance.

If you are keeping your glycemic load normal throughout the day, you shouldn't have to worry about insulin resistance because your body never has to produce too much of it.

Storm wrote:

Gosso wrote: But if you are insulin sensitive then the blood sugar won't spike in the first place.  I wonder if avoiding high GI foods causes the body to become somewhat insulin resistant, thereby resulting in even greater damage from carbs when they are consumed as a treat or during a cheat day.

Actually, I believe it's the other way around.  Spiking your blood sugar regularly causes insulin resistance after some time, which makes carbs cause even more damage.  Diabetics normally have some type of insulin resistance.

If you are keeping your glycemic load normal throughout the day, you shouldn't have to worry about insulin resistance because your body never has to produce too much of it.

You could be right.  I just love my fluffy white potatoes smothered in butter and sour cream.    Plus they are loaded with nutrients, so that's a plus.

Gosso wrote:

Storm wrote:

Gosso wrote: But if you are insulin sensitive then the blood sugar won't spike in the first place.  I wonder if avoiding high GI foods causes the body to become somewhat insulin resistant, thereby resulting in even greater damage from carbs when they are consumed as a treat or during a cheat day.

Actually, I believe it's the other way around.  Spiking your blood sugar regularly causes insulin resistance after some time, which makes carbs cause even more damage.  Diabetics normally have some type of insulin resistance.

If you are keeping your glycemic load normal throughout the day, you shouldn't have to worry about insulin resistance because your body never has to produce too much of it.

You could be right.  I just love my fluffy white potatoes smothered in butter and sour cream.    Plus they are loaded with nutrients, so that's a plus.

Nutrients?  Do you mean carbs & fat or micronutrients?  If the latter, what nutrients?  I always thought potatoes were really just a bunch of unnecessary carbs.

Fresh Potatoes are generally loaded with potassium, vitamin C, polyPhenols, carotenoids, and a variety of other nutrients.  They also have lots of fiber.

Prep methods and proccessing by the food industry reduce these nutrients. A huge percentage of potatoes eaten in the USA are not made from fresh potatoes and have lots of the nutrition processed out of them.  Some potato products have potato starch added to them--which technically is still potato, but which reduces percentages of nutrients too.

And different varieties have different profiles. One of the best of the easy to find varieties is Yukon Gold.

moda0306 wrote:

Gosso wrote:

Storm wrote: Actually, I believe it's the other way around.  Spiking your blood sugar regularly causes insulin resistance after some time, which makes carbs cause even more damage.  Diabetics normally have some type of insulin resistance.

If you are keeping your glycemic load normal throughout the day, you shouldn't have to worry about insulin resistance because your body never has to produce too much of it.

You could be right.  I just love my fluffy white potatoes smothered in butter and sour cream.  8)  Plus they are loaded with nutrients, so that's a plus.

Nutrients?  Do you mean carbs & fat or micronutrients?  If the latter, what nutrients?  I always thought potatoes were really just a bunch of unnecessary carbs.

I'm talking micro-nutrients.  http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/veg ... cts/2551/2

If I had to choose only one food to live on it would be the white potato (or maybe whole milk).  It has a decent spectrum of minerals, and lots of essential vitamins.  It also has a full spectrum of protein.  The major thing missing is B12 and essential fats (omega 3 and 6).

I used to be a potato-hater, but Stephan Guyenent set me straight with this series:

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.ca/20 ... art-i.html
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.ca/20 ... rt-ii.html
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.ca/20 ... t-iii.html

Here's an interview with a guy that ate only 20 potatoes a day (with a little oil) for 60 days:

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.ca/20 ... of-20.html

Just thought I'd post an update. It's been only one week since I started my low-carb diet, and I have lost 5.5 pounds. How in the world is that even possible? I'm guessing it's mostly water weight, right? I haven't been starving myself--I just stopped eating bread, potato chips, and pasta and replaced them with fat, protein, and fiber. I feel fine; no change in my general sense of well-being.

The other times I've gone on diets (usually a combination of calorie counting and exercise), my body seems to do this--it loses several pounds in the first week and then tapers off to maybe 1/2 to one pound per week after that. Any ideas as to why that happens?

if its working the way it is supposed to, your body has adjusted to burning fat instead of storing it and your appetite has normalized and the carb related hunger pangs have stopped, i don't know how much water weight loss vs fat loss is happening but when i went low carb i lost about the same 5+ pounds in the first week and around 1/3 of a pound every day after, by the end of a month i had dropped around 30 lbs..  

Tortoise wrote: Just thought I'd post an update. It's been only one week since I started my low-carb diet, and I have lost 5.5 pounds. How in the world is that even possible? I'm guessing it's mostly water weight, right? I haven't been starving myself--I just stopped eating bread, potato chips, and pasta and replaced them with fat, protein, and fiber. I feel fine; no change in my general sense of well-being.

The other times I've gone on diets (usually a combination of calorie counting and exercise), my body seems to do this--it loses several pounds in the first week and then tapers off to maybe 1/2 to one pound per week after that. Any ideas as to why that happens?

Congratulations!  It might be mostly water weight, but it does feel good to have some immediate results.  My weight can fluctuate +- 2-3 pounds a day so don't be discouraged if you gain some back.  If you do keep losing weight at this rate it might be a little unhealthy so you might want to increase your caloric intake.  I think a healthy weight loss rate is more like 1 pound per week.

my weight also can fluctuate 2 to 3 lbs up or down during a day, weighing yourself during a diet is a bit like watching your PP...  it is interesting and helps you understand how its working, but do it to much of it and you may obsesses in ways that are detrimental to the results you want..  i had up days and down days the 1/3rds of a pound figure is an approximate amount for 30 to 40 days on low carb, after the ketosis portion of the diet had done its work i began adding small amounts of carbs back in to hit my "stable" diet, still technically low carb but not in ketosis and not loosing or gaining weight...  good luck and congrats on the good start

Tortoise wrote: Just thought I'd post an update. It's been only one week since I started my low-carb diet, and I have lost 5.5 pounds. How in the world is that even possible?

Sure, totally normal!  There's going to be an additional "whoosh" of water weight loss at the beginning or most diets but it's especially pronounced in a very low-carb diet.  Carbohydrates, especially sugars, play a role in fluid retention.

Don't worry, you've certainly lost a good deal of fat as well.  Just don't necessarily expect a second week quite like this one.  (Otherwise, you'll disappear in a few weeks!) 

One common complain of people coming off of a low-carb diet is that they "gain 3 pounds" the moment they touch any sugar.  This is usually just the same process in reverse.  I'd remain indifferent about the lost water weight but give yourself a big pat on the back for the fat loss!

Also, as Storm said, if weight loss does continue at this rate, something might be wrong.  Make sure that your levels of strength and lean muscle aren't dropping.

Lone Wolf wrote:

Tortoise wrote: Just thought I'd post an update. It's been only one week since I started my low-carb diet, and I have lost 5.5 pounds. How in the world is that even possible?

Sure, totally normal!  There's going to be an additional "whoosh" of water weight loss at the beginning or most diets but it's especially pronounced in a very low-carb diet.  Carbohydrates, especially sugars, play a role in fluid retention.

Thanks, LW. Coincidentally, last night I came across a passage in Taubes's book Why We Get Fat in which he provided that same explanation of how refined carbohydrate consumption leads to water retention. It's good to know that high weight loss in the first week is normal. Sounds like I won't be losing nearly as much weight in the coming weeks, which is good since I don't want to melt away completely into a puddle of grease and protein

I'm impressed by some of the new ideas I learned about in Why We Get Fat. I'm sure that some of it is oversimplified, but the basic biochemistry of fat metabolism explained by Taubes is apparently accepted by most physicians and scientists. The ideas in the book helped to explain some things I had noticed before but couldn't quite explain, such as why people from poor populations tend to have much higher rates of obesity than the general population. You'd think that having less money would imply less food consumption, which would then imply less obesity, but that's not what we see. Turns out that refined carbohydrates and sugar are generally the cheapest calories available, so poor people tend to get a much higher percentage of their total calories from carbs--which raises their insulin levels and causes them to become fatter.

It's not hard to see why we have an obesity epidemic in the U.S. Just walk into almost any grocery store or restaurant, and 90% of what you'll see on the shelves or the menus is loaded with refined carbs and sugar. It's funny how we often don't notice things like this until we actually start looking for them.

Now, since a low-carb diet replaces carbs largely with fat since it's difficult to increase protein intake significantly, I just need to convince myself that the decades-old medical theory that saturated fats and cholesterol cause heart disease is complete bunk...