NAAFA's Airline Tips for Fat People

Martin W. Smith writes:

I'm telling you that you can stop the crusade against low-carb
dieting.

I'm not crusading against low-carb dieting.

Your post reminds me of the occasional wild-eyed stranger who stomps up
to me on the street and yells "why are you following me??"

It works for a lot of people here for whom low-calorie dieting
doesn't work.

Any hypocaloric diet will work. Any non-hypocaloric diet will not work.
Whether it is low-carb or not is irrelevant to this.

Low-calorie dieting doesn't work for lots of people,
probably because they remain hungry on low-calorie diets ...

Nobody gains weight from being hungry. They only gain weight from
_eating_.

What matters to the people here is whether they can stick
with the diet or not. It is a lot easier to stick with a diet
when you aren't hungry all the time.

I agree.

I read wht they write.

Most of them aren't writing anything.

Nothing obligates you to write them.

But I like writing them. Should I conclude that you like reading them?

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Martin W. Smith writes:

I'm telling you that you can stop the crusade against low-carb
dieting.

I'm not crusading against low-carb dieting.

I know a crusade when I see one. You say it isn't a crusade. You are on
a crusade to convince people that all they have to do to lose weight is
reduce their calorie intake, even though virtually all these people have
tried that without success. The problem is people can't stick with that
method, because it leaves them hungry almost every waking hour. But on a
low-carb diet, they are only hungry when they haven't eate for several
hours, and for some fortunate few, they aren't even hungry when they
haven't eaten all day. The result is that these people stick with their
low-carb diet, and they don't stick with low-calorie diets.

Your post reminds me of the occasional wild-eyed stranger who stomps up
to me on the street and yells "why are you following me??"

It was meant to.

It works for a lot of people here for whom low-calorie dieting
doesn't work.

Any hypocaloric diet will work. Any non-hypocaloric diet will not work.
Whether it is low-carb or not is irrelevant to this.

And whether it is low-calorie or not is irrelevent to whether the people
who read this newsgroup will stick with it or not. What is relevant to
these people is whether they will stick with the diet or not, and they
determine that by whether the diet leaves them feeling hungry or not.
Low-calorie diets leave them feeling hungry. Low-carb diets do not.

Low-calorie dieting doesn't work for lots of people,
probably because they remain hungry on low-calorie diets ...

Nobody gains weight from being hungry. They only gain weight from
_eating_.

Gloriously useless here.

martin

--
Draft Wesley Clark for President!
www.DraftWesleyClark.com

Martin Smith email:

Following up to Martin W. Smith

I know a crusade when I see one. You say it isn't a crusade.

IMHO M will argue any point where he thinks he sees holes in
logic as he sees it. I doubt he cares over much about low carb
diets.

You are on a crusade to convince people that all they have to do to lose weight is
reduce their calorie intake,

IMHO M is basically just arguing the above is true (without
reading all the posts). Other things may also be true.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
UK walking "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Spain,cuisines and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

Martin W. Smith writes:

I know a crusade when I see one.

You are projecting your own emotional attachment to low-carb diets upon
me, IMO.

You are on a crusade to convince people that all they have to do
to lose weight is reduce their calorie intake ...

Not a crusade. I'm just informing people.

It was meant to.

Well done.

And whether it is low-calorie or not is irrelevent to whether
the people who read this newsgroup will stick with it or not.

That is generally true. But it's one thing to recognize what causes
weight loss, and another thing to recognize what causes a person to
stick to a diet.

Gloriously useless here.

It's a vital distinction.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Martin W. Smith writes:

I know a crusade when I see one.

You are projecting your own emotional attachment to low-carb diets upon
me, IMO.

I don't have an emotional attachment. I have a reasoned attachement. The
reasoning goes like this: I have tried for decades to lose weight using
the low-calorie approach. It never worked, because I was always hungry.
I tried the low-carb approach for six weeks and lost all the weight I
needed to lose, without being hungry at all.

You are on a crusade to convince people that all they have to do
to lose weight is reduce their calorie intake ...

Not a crusade. I'm just informing people.

You do not just inform poeple. You argue against them. The likely
outcome of your arguments will be to discourage some people from using
the low-carb approach. That isn't useful in a newsgroup whose purpose is
to support people trying to lose weight on a low-carb diet.

martin

--
Draft Wesley Clark for President!
www.DraftWesleyClark.com

Martin Smith email:

Martin W. Smith writes:

I don't have an emotional attachment.

You used the word "crusade."

The reasoning goes like this: I have tried for decades
to lose weight using the low-calorie approach. It never
worked, because I was always hungry.

Correction: It never worked because you always _ate food_ when you got
hungry. Had you abstained, it would have worked.

I tried the low-carb approach for six weeks and lost
all the weight I needed to lose, without being hungry at all.

Because you cut calories.

You do not just inform poeple. You argue against them.

I attack untenable opinions--opinions born of emotion or adopted
wholesale, without a sound basis in fact and reason.

The likely outcome of your arguments will be to discourage
some people from using the low-carb approach.

They can use any approach they wish, as long as it results in a
hypocaloric diet. Anything that cuts calories will produce weight loss;
it doesn't have to be low-carb (but it certainly can be).

That isn't useful in a newsgroup whose purpose is
to support people trying to lose weight on a low-carb diet.

rec.travel.europe?

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Following up to Mxsmanic

I tried the low-carb approach for six weeks and lost
all the weight I needed to lose, without being hungry at all.

Because you cut calories.

could I point out as its Friday now that the two statements above
are not contradictory and there is nothing to argue about?

Cut calories cut weight.

Cut carb calories, cut weight with claimed less hunger.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
UK walking "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Spain,cuisines and walking "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

The Reid wrote:

Following up to Mxsmanic

I tried the low-carb approach for six weeks and lost
all the weight I needed to lose, without being hungry at all.

Because you cut calories.

could I point out as its Friday now that the two statements above
are not contradictory and there is nothing to argue about?

Cut calories cut weight.

....put weight back on because of constant hunger.

Cut carb calories, cut weight with claimed less hunger.

....increase fat calories to eliminate hunger, keep weight off because of
absence of hunger.

martin

--
Draft Wesley Clark for President!
www.DraftWesleyClark.com

Martin Smith email:

The Reid writes:

Cut calories cut weight.

Cut carb calories, cut weight with claimed less hunger.

The claim I often here is cut carbs and you can increase calories, and
still lose weight. That isn't true.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

Mxsmanic wrote:

The Reid writes:

Cut calories cut weight.

Cut carb calories, cut weight with claimed less hunger.

The claim I often here is cut carbs and you can increase calories, and
still lose weight. That isn't true.

I have never seen that claim here. I have seen the claim that if you cut
carbs and increase fat you can lose weight, and that is true. Many of us
are living proof. You can also increase protein at the same time. Cut
carbs to near 0, increase fat and protein, and you can still lose
weight.

martin

--
Draft Wesley Clark for President!
www.DraftWesleyClark.com

Martin Smith email: