It's okay to have this much cheese???

[Missy]

I don't mean to be a goofball...but, I'm just so unsure of this. :confused: I just can't believe that it's allowable, if that makes any sense. I feel like I'm doing wrong even if it's alright. lol :rolleyes:

I feel like the recipes that sound appealing to me, and ARE appealing when I make them are filled with such richness of dairy. Heavy cream, sour cream, cheese....you know. I just wonder if I should make them more as a "treat" then something more often per week. I don't want to be doing something wrong...yet, DARN, their GOOD!!!!!! lol

Good food, yet, "diet"....well...it's too good to be true....and well, that makes it unbelievable. I don't want to just enjoy it without there really being a "catch". You know?

I have ALOT of weight to lose....I just want to get my head around this correctly as I begin. I'll appreciate any advise.

Lynn

[Viking Dan]

I find dairy bloating and it congests me. If you don't react that way, go for it.

[Gaelen]

Missy, if you're far from your goal weight, and you don't have any allergen/sensitivity issues with dairy, by all means choose full fat dairy, and indulge in the recipes that taste good. Full fat dairy that is as minimally processed as possible (i.e., real cheddar, not Kraft processed cheese food) doesn't contain any extra man-made ingredients that were never intended to be involved in cheesemaking, while low fat dairy nearly always does--so by eating full fat dairy, you're actually (usually) eating less-processed foods.

Also, certain vitamins naturally occuring in dairy products are only fully metabolizable in full fat dairy (Vitamin D, for instance.)

So enjoy--and welcome in!

[Belfrybat]

You don't say how much cheese you are eating, so it is difficult to comment on whether this is OK for you with any accuracy. A couple of ounces a day probably won't hurt in the beginning, but do remember that cheese is very calorie dense, and calories do count. Also, if your goal is to lose weight, you might want to keep in mind that dairy also tends to stall a lot of people. Personally, I find I do not lose weight if I eat much cheese. But there's times when I opt for the dairy and allow the weight to stall for a week or so.

On a related note, the first time I was on PP in '98-'99 I was a lacto-ovo vegetarian and ate a lot of cheese. My cholesterol began to rise after a few months on the program. I contacted the Eades and their nurse advised me to cut down on dairy as it can cause a raise in blood lipids. Obviously not for everyone, but I was one of the "lucky" ones. Since I now eat meat and much less cheese, I haven't had the same problems.

[Knipfty]

Missy,

It sounds like you are in the correction phase of the plan. Me too. AS long as you stay at or under 10 grams ECC per meal and under 40 grams ECC per day, it's all fair game. I know it sounds wrong, but for the last 30 plus years, everything you have been taught may have been wrong.

That said, calories do matter. So if you find you are not losing weight, look for ways to cut some calories. Nuts are an example of what to avaoid if you are not losing weight.

I wish you the best of luck. Take it one day at a time. Keep a written log, it will prove to be worth its weight in gold, should you not lose weight in a week.

Knipfty

[Gaelen]

Everyone, I'm going to jump in here with something that completely contradicts everything everyone has heard/learned about nutrition in the last three decades--and because it contradicts everything, it's also hugely confusing, but it's a critical concept to low carbing, and to making food choices on Protein Power.

For decades, nutritionists have based weight-loss plans on the idea that calorie intake (and willpower :rolleyes:) was the critical determining factor of success. For decades, some people allegedly following those controlled-calorie plans experienced some success, but most people couldn't stick to their new ways of eating long enough to lose all that they needed to lose, or couldn't maintain their weight losses once accomplished. For decades, the phrase 'calories do count' meant "eat less than 1200 calories/day (if you were a woman) to lose weight." Unless I miss my guess, most of the members of this board spent at least a few months following that 'eat less, weigh less' advice at one time or another in our lives. There are exceptions here, but not many.

Low carb nutrition science flies in the face of the idea that controlling calories is the single largest factor in controlling weight. In fact, at least a couple of studies (check out http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com ) now support the science that people who eat a low carb/controlled carb diet, even in maintenance, can eat more calories and either lose or maintain more effectively than their counterparts on controlled calorie eating plans. There are scientific reasons for this--check the studies, and check some of the other discussions on this forum, to find the details.

The problem is that it's hard--sometime book publishers would say impossible--to hope to be successful marketing a new eating plan or diet book or cookbook in this day and age without paying some sort of lip service to the ideas that calorie control is part of the equation for success. So in the last five years, there have been several plans and books marketed to the public that appeared to try to adopt some of the principles from low carb eating plans while also falling prey to the old "eat less calories, lower fats to lose weight" equation--Agatston's South Beach Diet, Pescatore's Hampton's Diet, and even the newly-released Sonoma Diet by someone who's name escapes me right now. Even long-time low carb author and cookbook writer Dana Carpender's latest book bows to the conventional prejudices by opening its title with Every Calorie Counts.... The recipes are still Carpender's low carb focus, but the book title is clearly aimed at people who just couldn't turn off the decades of low-calorie information replaying in their heads long enough to try something new. At least Carpender admitted to her e-zine readers that the title was changed by her publisher because the publisher didn't think another low carb cookbook would have a chance in the market...but still. :rolleyes:

The phrase 'calories do count' is simply not being used, in this day and age, as the Drs. Eades intended it when they said that in PP, or PPLP, or even their 30-Day Solution book. Popular culture clings to what it's been told for the last 30 years--eat fewer calories, low fat, higher amounts of whole grains--to lose weight. Recent authors have co-opted the 'calories do count' phrase to take people back to the nutrition science comfort zone they know (eat less!)

Repeating 'calories do count' and considering that eating lower fat foods and fewer calories than we expend is the only way to lose weight is not what the Drs. Eades meant when they said 'calories do count' in their books.

The Drs. Eades said in Protein Power that "The metabolic alterations that take place as your insulin falls and your sensitivity to it improves will increase the rate at which you use calories, and you will find that the standard calories rules simply don't apply in predicting weight loss." In PPLP, they title a section, "Unfortunately, calories do count too--but not as much."

In an interview with WebMD (http://www.webmd.com/content/article/2/1700_51641?src=Inktomi&condition=Event%20Archives) which is also linked in the Getting Started forums of this board, Dr. Mike Eades said: "Calories do count. It's an unfortunate fact of life, but it's true. But they don't count as much in many cases as a lot of people seem to believe. A low-carbohydrate diet is in many cases a lower-calorie diet as well simply because a lot of high-carbohydrate foods, all of which have calories, are missing. But it has been shown in numerous studies dating from the late 1950s until just a few months ago that people following low-carbohydrate diets can consume more calories and still lose weight or maintain their weight than can those following higher-carbohydrate diets. This has been shown in multiple studies at multiple institutions and should be accepted as fact by now, even by the "calorie is a calorie is a calorie" crowd. But also there is no question that if you follow a lower-calorie, low-carbohydrate diet you will lose weight more quickly than if you follow a lower-calorie, high carbohydrate diet."

So bottom line--do not worry about your calorie intake, especially if you are just starting the plan, unless:

you are very small
you do not have much weight to lose (less than 10% of your bodyweight)
you are within 10-15 lbs of your goal weight
you were losing steadily and have not lost any weight for several months (a true plateau) for which the Eadeses recommend examining your portion sizes in general and overall

[Viking Dan]

It is kind of interesting to figure out your BMR (http://www.thetrainingstationinc.com/NutritionCalculator.html). I was stunned to find out I usually wasn't eating enough to "stay alive."

[Missy]

Gaelen,

I think you hit the "nail on the head" for me with the whole past "ways" of "dieting" before this plan, even though I'm trying to find a new way of eating, as opposed to seeing it as a "diet". It's very difficult to erase that old thinking...and I think that's my biggest concern.

All these numbers to keep track of....eventually makes you fearful of making ANY choices because it feels as though your not choosing enough, or too much of one area or the other. It makes my head spin.

I haven't been overly concerned with the calorie number...mind you, I'm mindful of quanity of food I eat...nothing out of the ordinary...but not focused on that because of reading this book.

It's as though you have to override your mind. As you said, we've been instructed our whole life of "diets" that calories are king. It's a hard one to over come. I'm not looking for quantity of food actually, I'm just wondering what my allowed boundries are in eating this way...and it seems too good to be true, if you know what I mean.

I have a LOT of weight to lose. I weight 370 pounds....so at my weight, I'm even allowed more calories, if I where counting them then most. So, I doubt that I reach the point of getting too many....nor do I feel that I get too little. But, I could be wrong...but? then I wonder why focus on that at all. You know, that constant battle with the little voice in your mind from all those yearrrrrrrrrrrrssssss of "calories do count". grrrrr....

Viking Dan....I think I'll take up your advise and finally face that BMR number....gulp. lol :rolleyes:

I'm only in my first week of PP woe. I believe that I will have to stay in the first "phase" for a long long while.

Thanks for everyone's input!

Lynn

[laughingW]

Those BMR calculators are highly suspect in my opinion. Does anyone know of even one, that talks about how they are derived? They all seem as if they were calculated using 20-something college student metabolisms. I sincerely doubt that whoever was doing the formulas, included enough people with BMI of 40+ to be statistically trust-able. The degree of insulin resistance makes a difference, and you never, ever see the formulas accounting for that.

For a good read on how insulin resistance changes the "burn" side:
"Problems in the Furnace"

http://www.hhmi.org/news/shulman3.html

I was so disappointed to read in Dr. Mike's blog the other day that he actually uses those formulas and calorie calculators. I personally know many, many 250 pound women who are stable on 1300 calories a day and are NOT lying about their intake, and it's because of the insulin resistance.

[Missy]

Laughing W.

Your link didn't connect for me...but I'll do more of a search to find it..as I'm interested in this very subject.

Insulin Resistance seems to be my life. But, I'm determined to change it if possible.

It's REALLY annoying/frustrating when you know you are doing everything as correctly as you can, and still the results come slowly. But, oh well, I'm here to fight the fight!

Lynn

[Gaelen]

Missy, Dan--here is a site with many fitness calculators that I'll be adding to the Getting Started forum. The Resting Metabolic Rate (http://www.gofit.net/fitness-calculators-07.html) calculator, IMO, is reasonably accurate, or as accurate as these things can be. ;)

Check it out.

[laughingW]

Yes Lynn I hear ya! It's doubly frustrating when "everyone" writes that heavier people lose faster. Well maybe, IF they have furnaces that are working. And "everyone" says, according to BMR formulas, that our furnaces all work the same, apparently.

In reality, if I have a very small furnace, and it doesn't burn fat very well yet, well naturally my rate of fat loss will be small at first.

I take heart in the fact that the rate of fat loss is not linear. I think it's like a Fibonacci series, where the rate at which you improve is a function of where you start. but that is really digressing! don't get me started on the fun of Fibonacci numbers!

[Viking Dan]

All these numbers to keep track of....eventually makes you fearful of making ANY choices because it feels as though your not choosing enough, or too much of one area or the other. It makes my head spin.

...

I have a LOT of weight to lose. I weight 370 pounds....so at my weight, I'm even allowed more calories...

Viking Dan....I think I'll take up your advise and finally face that BMR number....gulp. lol :rolleyes:

Its probably not neccessary to concern yourself with calories (at first,) particularly at 370 lbs. In a lot of people, their appetite normalizes itself and it all works itself out. But its something to keep in mind further down the road should you hit a plateau/stall.

A few people are fond of FitDay (http://www.fitday.com), which is a free website where you can track your calories/weight/exercise, etc.

I lost 6.3 lbs. in the past 5 days. So that's 1.2 lbs. a day(average)? According to FitDay I'm eating an average of 2700 calories/day. So to lose 1.2 lbs. of fat, I'd have to be undereating by 4410 calories. So that makes my daily calorie expenditure a <sarcasm>highly reasonable</sarcasm> 7110 calories/day.

This is too short a period to really make a judgement from, but taken over a couple weeks, it would probably be reasonably accurate.

Missy, Dan--here is a site with many fitness calculators that I'll be adding to the Getting Started forum. The Resting Metabolic Rate (http://www.gofit.net/fitness-calculators-07.html) calculator, IMO, is reasonably accurate, or as accurate as these things can be. ;)
The only reaon I linked to the other is because it used LBM for its calculation. Thanks, though.

[Missy]

Yes Lynn I hear ya! It's doubly frustrating when "everyone" writes that heavier people lose faster. Well maybe, IF they have furnaces that are working. And "everyone" says, according to BMR formulas, that our furnaces all work the same, apparently.

In reality, if I have a very small furnace, and it doesn't burn fat very well yet, well naturally my rate of fat loss will be small at first.

Laughing, OHHHH....did you strike a nerve with me on this! I used to weight over 400lbs (4yrs ago)...and successfully lost down to 332...but it was quite the struggle to do so. I belonged to another "site" for support as I was taking a weightloss medication...you know, a magic pill...lol Anyways, it used to upset me greatly when on occassion someone used to say that to me. :mad: It was so untrue for me, in my case. Matter of fact, it seems as though I needed to do DOUBLE the amount of effort for any results. Many people just can't comprehend that, and don't understand that insulin resistence is a factor.

At times I would feel so defeated that my own support group (not all) would say such a thing, and then not believe me when I'd mention what I was doing for my health (exercise and such) and get no results. Often I felt like they didn't even believe me. Very discouraging. Thankfully though, it was just a few who did that to me. As much as it would bother me, I let it go because I know I'm in this for myself.

Personally, for me, I can go a long while doing the "right" things...and it seems like it takes awhile for any results, but when they come, they come BIG. If that makes any sense? I'm what I call one of those "whoosher's". Nothing...nothing...nothing...and then whoooosh!!!!! Which, I've just come to expect that that's how it's going to be.

I've been up, down, up, down between 380 and 332...depending on where I am emotionally (whether I care, or I don't)...and well, I'd just rather be continuing downward and finish this job and get it all off. I think, upon the suggestion of my Dr to follow THIS plan that I can make this a lifestyle change and follow through.

I am a hormone problem child...lol I'm hypo (thyroid), pre diabetic, and am taking natural hormone replacement for pms. All hormone issues. At least I'm on the other side of knowing what to address.

Viking Dan,

Thanks for the tip, I've used Fitday before, it's very nice and helpful. Another good one is this: http://www.nutritiondata.com/

I checked it out Gaelen...it's recommending 185 grams of protein a day...eeeeekkkk!!!! :eek:

[Viking Dan]

Viking Dan,

Thanks for the tip, I've used Fitday before, it's very nice and helpful. Another good one is this: http://www.nutritiondata.com/



Yeah. At times you may think you're good at guessing what you're eating/doing, but a log is really the only serious way to handle it.

Its pretty easy for me, since I don't care if I eat the exact same thing for days in a row.

Good luck.

[Gaelen]

I checked it out Gaelen...it's recommending 185 grams of protein a day...eeeeekkkk!!!! :eek:

Missy, that is a lot of protein...but if you have a lot of body mass to support, it's not completely out of the question. Have you checked your measurements and/or done the calculations from Protein Power to find out what the plan recommends?

[Viking Dan]

Missy, that is a lot of protein...but if you have a lot of body mass to support, it's not completely out of the question.
I'd think she's trying not to support most of that body mass. Even half that is probably excessive for a woman (unless she's an athlete.)

I tend to agree with this article on excess protein:
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/carbsmart/howmuchprotein.html
How Much Protein Will Be Converted To Carbohydrates From Our Protein Intake?

Now, for fun or horror, (depending on how you look at it), we can calculate how many hidden carbohydrates the person in our above example will get from eating her required amount of protein. Since an average of 58% of the protein can become carbohydrate, we multiply 60 protein grams by 58%. The answer is about 35. Depending on how a person's body uses the protein it needs, as many as 35 extra carbohydrate grams may be available from 60 grams of protein consumed, in addition to the amount of carbohydrates that the person is getting from eating other carbohydrate foods.

There are two questions that you are likely asking yourself right now. The first question is, "Why hasn't Dr. Atkins talked about all this?" I think the answer is that since everyone must eat their required protein, and since many people can lose weight without concern for how much excess protein they are eating, low carbohydrate plan experts merely avoid talking about it. But, be assured that when Dr. Atkins, the Drs. Eades, Dr. Schwarzbein, or any of the others tell you to start your carbohydrate counting at 20, 30, or 60 carbs per day, they already are taking into account that you will be getting carbohydrates from protein conversion. This is one of the reasons why the amount of allowed 'regular' carbohydrates is so small.

The second question you are probably asking yourself is, "Are you going to tell us next that fat grams convert to carbohydrates, too?" Well, boys and girls, we will go into the whole story of dietary fats starting in a few weeks, but for now, the quick answer is: Yes, but not much; only about 10% of fat grams convert to sugar.

[Missy]

Gaelen,

Protein Power recommends at least 46gr per meal...and I personally "fall off" their chart...:eek: lol ...and then I about fell off my CHAIR! LOL ~ just kidding. That's ALOT of protein...and the only way I think I can manage to achieve it is to use Protein Powder drinks. You get a nice 24 or so grams per scoopful...and low carbs...like 4 or so. So, I'm even doubling up the scoops...one of a flavored powder (berry) and one of an egg protein, with water and some frozen strawberry's and 1/3 of a frozen banana to make it thicker. I know that I couldn't bear to EAT that much protein. I think the book recommends a breakfast of eggs and meat that I eat 6 eggs or 3+4 egg whites + 2 ounces of meat. That's alot of EGGS!!! :eek:

I also did the calulations from the site you suggested...and it said my RMR is 2378.38 (I'm not sure what RMR really means?) and BMI is 54.8....Although I don't know what those number truely mean...I'm positive I know that they are awful compared to "normal"...lol I always AM!!! lol (Thank goodness I have healthy dose self deprecating HUMOR!):cool: lol

I'm doing one protein (double powder) shake a day, and fill in with the rest of the day with regular food protein. Does that sound like a good idea?

Viking Dan...I'm still getting myself organized....and I totally agree with you....actually pluging in the numbers is an eye opener, then just guessing! I just grow weary after a bit, trying to specifically search around for the right ingredients/measurements for fitday to work acturately....but I don't let that stop me either. It's a great Idea and helpful tool. Your right, once you get onto what you eat portionwise, then it becomes a no brainer...but customizing it at first is time consuming.

[Gaelen]

Dan, you might want to take a look at this thread on Energy balance (http://www.proteinpower.com/forum/showthread.php?t=159) in the 'Science Behind PP' forum. Actually, the Drs. Eades do talk about this issue. While we do want to be careful not to consistently consume protein to great excess (one of the reasons for doing measurements and calc'ing your estimated minimum daily protein requirement), the concept of protein being used for energy isn't quite the simple straight line conversion to 'carbohydrates' that the article you quoted makes it out to be.

[Gabriel Guzman]

Those BMR calculators are highly suspect in my opinion. Does anyone know of even one, that talks about how they are derived? They all seem as if they were calculated using 20-something college student metabolisms. I sincerely doubt that whoever was doing the formulas, included enough people with BMI of 40+ to be statistically trust-able. The degree of insulin resistance makes a difference, and you never, ever see the formulas accounting for that.

For a good read on how insulin resistance changes the "burn" side:
"Problems in the Furnace"

http://www.hhmi.org/news/shulman3.html

I was so disappointed to read in Dr. Mike's blog the other day that he actually uses those formulas and calorie calculators. I personally know many, many 250 pound women who are stable on 1300 calories a day and are NOT lying about their intake, and it's because of the insulin resistance.


I wrote a little about how those numbers are calculated under the Energy Balance (http://72.32.36.211/forum/showthread.php?t=159&page=3) thread in The Science Behind Protein Power forum, and in which instances those numbers are not accurate, if they're ever.

If the type of diet a person is on is considered, those formulas can be corrected to make them more accurate, but I suppose that the assumption is that everybody follows and FDA type of diet. What Mike Eades suggested in his blog when he mentioned the BMR formulas is that by standard methods (not necessarily the most accurate), the amount of calories that people were taking in the study he was blogging about, the amount of calories are way higher than what people was actually reporting. That doesn't mean that they used such formulas to guide their practice.

I don't use the phrase 'calories don't count' because it gives the wrong idea. The Eades tried to put it into the right perspective when they wrote 'Unfortunately, calories do count too--but not as much.' and still didn't click on people's minds. What I prefer to say is that 'is not calories what counts, it's their source'.

Amazingly, those responsible for the tremendous confusin and misuse of the term 'calorie' in metabolism are dieticians and nutritionists who, for some obscure reason, pick and choose what natural laws to include in their reasoning. I'm not going to go into details about it but suffice to say that when you explain the 'calorie is a calorie' concept to somebody who really knows how to interpret thermodynamics laws, they sort of laugh at the complete lack of understanding. In fact, the source of calores does count as it has been shown over and over that when the composition of nutrients in the diet changes, so the effects seen in the body. Eating in a way that includes more protein makes the body react different than eating in a way that includes mainly carbohydrates. The former produces a metabolic advantage translated in more satiety and more thermogenesis, both of which help controlling appetite and increasing basal metabolic rate, respectively. Controlling appetite through higher satiety results in reduced food intake without 'starving' and this control has been shown to be voluntary, not forced as it happens with diets that reduce overall food intake from all nutrients. Increasing thermogenesis, which increases basal metabolic rate, even when it's a small but sustained increase results in utilization of more energy. In a plan like Protein Power, where there is no emphasis on increasing fat consumption other than that coming from the protein sources of choice and the good kinds coming from plant sources, then the energy demand is supplied by the fat that's in store. Therefore, the standard calorie rule can't be applied under those nutritional conditions unless the composition of the diet is considered.

Under that perspective is really not surprising that people that reduce their carbohydrate intake and increase their protein consumption, when compared to a group that eats 'the recommended way', end up eating more total calories, yet use them in a completely different way and to their advantage. Note however that if we compared our way of eating now and the way we used to eat, we may also be eating significantly less (in total calories) than before because the dietary re-composition together with our body's adapation tot he new diet results in more satiety which makes us eat less tiems between meals.

When I started to follow this plan, the 'recommended' amount of calories for me was 2300 (using either of the BMR formulas). When I set the amounts of carbohydrate and protein according to my level of rehabilitation and level of physical activity, respectively, that number came down to ~1600-1700. I didn't focused on aiming to any amount of fat, only to include only good sources and whatever amount came in my protein source of choice (all kinds of meats and poultry, eggs, dairy, and fish). The only care I had, if I have to mention something, was to choose the leaner cuts of beef I could find but I can safely say that it was never less than 10% fat. So, whatever the amount of fat came with those cuts, that's what I had but didn't worry about the calories from fat.

One of the ways to correct the BMR formulas to estimate calories is to consider lean body mass (roughly everything int he body without fat), which means that people that are leaner (which higher lean body mass), which have a higher metabolic reate will score different than somebody with more body fat (obviously). The lean body is also a reflection of how much muslce there is compared to how much fat, and how much muscle is a reflection of how much protein we eat and/or how much exercise we do. When we estimate our protein intake based on our lean body mass and level of physical activity, we are already doing something similar to what the BMR formulas do, but more accurately as it reflects exactly our current status at any one time. The only difference is that we focus on providing what nurtures the lean body mass and most of the tissues in the body (protein and the fat that comes with it) while keeping what doesn't nurture much at a very low level (carbohydrates). Whatever the amount of calories come from that nutritional composition, is what we really need as a minimum and is tailored to our own specific needs. That is the main difference with the standard calorie rule that only considers your total body weight and forces you to aim to a specific number that may or not be tailored to the requirements of your lean body mass and in order to reach that number, you end up eating more, which in many cases isn't more of what you need.



It's okay to have this much cheese???


That question needs to be put in the right context. First of all, how much is 'much'? If you're trying to get your minimum protein intake only from cheese, then the answer is most likely NO if you're in the intervention phase. From what you wrote. The reason? You are trying to make your body use the energy in store and while there is nothing wrong with the fat that comes with the cheese, the body would rather use the energy that comes with the food instead of tapping into what's in store, which involves more work. Yes, it sounds very tempting to say 'becaue you don't want extra calories coming in...' because is not correct. However, you don't want extra energy sources (i.e. fat) that can be used before the stores are tapped into... that's a better explanation. Having said that, the only problem I see is that' since in intervention the carbohydrate levels are low, it's easy to stall any weight loss when we rely too much on energy sources that are easily used before that in stores.

People in transition or already maintaining probably can afford extra energy from fat that can be used before that in store. After all, reaching transition or maintenance levels means that their bodies have re-composed in a way that there is not excess of energy in the stores. Chances are that somebody in maintenance actually needs both, the energy coming with the food and that in stores.

[Missy]

Viking Dan....

I appreciate giving me more things to think about....as I'm still in the learning/wondering/experimental stage of my plan. I just wanted to update the point that in the last two months I've "added" exercise. I routinely exercise at the gym I just joined 3 times a week. Doing 30 mins of cardio...and then a round or so of resistance weight training. Plus, I bought a stationary bike that I plan on using at minimum two more days of the week to give me a total of five days worth of 30mins of cardio.

I'm no ARNOLD:rolleyes: ...lol but, this go round (of doing what's best for me), I've add at least this movement. I'm enjoying it very much...and can even begin to see my arm muscle giving me some definition....it's sooooo CUTE...minus the flabby part hanging BELOW!!!!!! :rolleyes: lol

I flex my muscle all the time to show it to my husband...to which he rolls his eyes! lol :D I'm VERY proud of it. lol
Lynn

[Viking Dan]

Protein Power recommends at least 46gr per meal...


I don't think it does. The protein requirements are worked off your lean mass (the % of your weight that isn't fat.) Calulate your bodyfat as the book suggests and you will find your needs are probably much lower than that.


I also did the calulations from the site you suggested...and it said my RMR is 2378.38 (I'm not sure what RMR really means?) and BMI is 54.8....

Resting metabolic rate? Basically the calories you expend just being alive. If you're not bed-ridden, you will probably burn more calories than that in a day.


I'm doing one protein (double powder) shake a day, and fill in with the rest of the day with regular food protein. Does that sound like a good idea?


The 46 grams/meal thing is way high. I'm 6'1 and I only work out to 40/meal.

That said, protein shakes are convenient and easy if there's no time for a regular meal.


Viking Dan...I'm still getting myself organized....and I totally agree with you....actually pluging in the numbers is an eye opener, then just guessing!
Yeah. FitDay is not perfect. For one thing I have to manually subtract fiber from my carb totals, but the reports and other features are good.

[mcsblues]

I don't think it does. The protein requirements are worked off your lean mass (the % of your weight that isn't fat.) Calulate your bodyfat as the book suggests and you will find your needs are probably much lower than that.

It depends which book you follow. PPLP has a simpler table for working out minimum protein intake which is just based on weight and height (not LBM as in PP).

[Gaelen]

Gaelen, Protein Power recommends at least 46gr per meal...and I personally "fall off" their chart...:eek: lol ...and then I about fell off my CHAIR! LOL ~ just kidding. That's ALOT of protein...and the only way I think I can manage to achieve it is to use Protein Powder drinks. You get a nice 24 or so grams per scoopful...and low carbs...like 4 or so. So, I'm even doubling up the scoops...one of a flavored powder (berry) and one of an egg protein, with water and some frozen strawberry's and 1/3 of a frozen banana to make it thicker. I know that I couldn't bear to EAT that much protein. I think the book recommends a breakfast of eggs and meat that I eat 6 eggs or 3+4 egg whites + 2 ounces of meat. That's alot of EGGS!!! :eek:

Missy, yes, it is--but I'm a shake girl from way back, too. Mainly, I just can't handle making food first thing in the morning, much less eating it, and I have NO time while trying to get dogs exercised and me ready for work...so I regularly have a cinnamon hazelnut mocha protein shake worth between 30 and 37g protein nearly every day. Another way to handle all of that protein is to break it up into several mini-meals during the day, and some people make a second shake, which they sip throughout the day, to ensure that they get in all their protein. I do the two-shake method on chemo days when getting in the protein...heck, when getting in ANYthing...is a challenge. ;)


I also did the calulations from the site you suggested...and it said my RMR is 2378.38 (I'm not sure what RMR really means?) and BMI is 54.8....Although I don't know what those number truely mean...I'm positive I know that they are awful compared to "normal"...lol I always AM!!! lol (Thank goodness I have healthy dose self deprecating HUMOR!):cool: lol I'm doing one protein (double powder) shake a day, and fill in with the rest of the day with regular food protein. Does that sound like a good idea?

Missy...RMR = resting metabolic rate, and BMR = basal metabolic rate. They each are supposed to represent the amount of energy your body spends just to lay still and keep breathing. I agree with Dan--an RMR or BMR calculator that takes lean body mass (LBM) into account is better than one that doesn't--but it's an idea, a visual. It also makes it pretty clear why eating 1200 calories or less simply doesn't work for everyone. ;) BMI = Body Mass Index, and for my money, this particular measurement is the LEAST accurate of all of them. It takes nothing into account--body frame size (I'm five foot tall, but truly heavy boned), natural attributes, etc. For instance, my original manufacturer's equipment on top is...ample...and I'd need reduction surgery to meaningfully subtract pounds there. Suffice it to say I will never be a 34B again. ;) But those flotation devices definitely affect my BMI, and no chart takes them into account. To me, BMI charts are like the old MetLife Insurance height/weight charts--they still recommend that I should *weigh* 118, which at one point was what my lean body mass equalled! Not!

Your plan for jump-starting your protein with the shake, and filling in through the day with solid food protein choices sounds dead on to me...and as for the healthy sense of self-deprecating humor, well girl--no way any of us could do this without it. Steady on!

[Missy]

Gabriel, thanks for you post. I'm still reading and rereading it to absorb it all. How much cheese...well, nothing out of the ordinary. I guess my question was just out of shock that it's even an option. You know fighting with this quote "“The difficulty lies not in the new ideas, but in escaping the old ones which ramify for those brought up as most of us have been, into every corner of our minds”. -John Maynard Keynes- " type of thinking.

Viking Dan....I'm 5'9", 370lbs. As far as I can tell, that's 46 grms per meal. Right?

Thanks for the explaination of the RMR rate. I personally just use these type of numbers as an awareness number. To get an overall "feel" of what you can shoot for. Perhaps thats laxidazical of me.

Lynn

[Ottawa]

My calculated Protein needs for activity level 7 is 135 grams/day (5'10"/210). This has dropped slightly (10 grams) since first starting at 305 lbs..
Most days I am above 135 grams since it is easy to get more protein while still limiting carbs. My startup is almost always a 40-45 gram/protein shake along with a little extra from the yogurt. Days that I workout in a class I have a second shake as well just water/whey protein and I find it makes a difference afterwards as far as the burn and DOMS go. If it is with heavy weights or a sculpting class I include some creatine and L-glutamine (sp?) since any exercise that tears/stretches new muscle seems to heal faster.

[Missy]

OOOOH GAELEN....I'm as BUOYANT as the come! ~ you could toss me over...and I could BOB FOR DAYS!!!!!!!!!!:rolleyes: lol I wouldn't even need to breath!!!! lol

You all are sooooooo helpful and informative. I really appreciate it!

Heck, I'm banking on some "reduction weight" due to reduction surgery's in my future. Heck...I wish I could just cut it all off now! lol I'd be good...I PROMISE!!! lol

Thanks Ottawa/Gaelen...I'll feel better about it now. I keep feeling like I'm cheating somehow. :rolleyes: My sister had some chocolate powder that I added some natural peanut butter too and it was tasty as well.

Lynn

[mcsblues]

I'd think she's trying not to support most of that body mass. Even half that is probably excessive for a woman (unless she's an athlete.)

I tend to agree with this article on excess protein:
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/carbsmart/howmuchprotein.html

Dan you do know that this article is complete nonsense? - sorry I'm not sure if you are being serious!:)

Gabe has probably covered this better somewhere else, but the bottom line is that while most amino acids can be used for gluconeogenisis - but unless you stop producing insulin all together (like a type 1 diabetic) the glucose production from protein is quickly switched off by rising insulin - so in the context of a low carb diet the amount of glucose produced is limited by demand (for those cells without mitachondria which rely on glucose for fuel). Check out this paper;

http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/1/1/6

That is why Atkins didn't mention it - because in real life it doesn't happen!:p

[Viking Dan]

Viking Dan....I'm 5'9", 370lbs. As far as I can tell, that's 46 grms per meal. Right?


That sounds more reasonable than 185. Yeah.

[Viking Dan]

Dan you do know that this article is complete nonsense? - sorry I'm not sure if you are being serious!
All this time I thought people could read my facial expressions over the internet.

Are we arguing if protein causes an insulin response? That was more of my point.

The glucogenesis thing I can't be sure on (although I read something to that effect in Protein Power---I'll check when I get home.)

...the concept of protein being used for energy isn't quite the simple straight line conversion to 'carbohydrates' that the article you quoted makes it out to be.
I know its not that simple, but OTOH ingesting significantly greater than your needs has to be counterproductive. If we want to further complicate the issue, I believe as total calories go up, protein requirements go down.

[gitfiddle]

Insulin Resistance seems to be my life. But, I'm determined to change it if possible.

You can change it. I started this because of my lipids and brought them all down in a few months. I also lost 45 pounds and dropped my diabetes meds. My blood sugars are normal as long as I continue low carb and moderate exercise. I believe that's an indication of less insulin resistance.

My problem at this point is I'm not getting any significant exercise and I've hit a plateau. Gaelen, I needed to read what you just wrote because I've also experienced the confusion that Lynn mentioned. I'm still 95 pounds away from maintenance, but I'm going to experiment with cutting back on dairy (ouch!) and nuts (double ouch!). Cheese and nuts are so darned handy.

[Viking Dan]

Cheese and nuts are so darned handy.

A food dehydrator, jerky gun and some cayenne pepper are even handier. ;)

[gitfiddle]

I have a dehydrator (somewhere) but can I make the jerky without all the salt? I know cheese and nuts have salt, but commercial jerky can be way too salty for my taste. And my blood pressure.

[Viking Dan]

I have a dehydrator (somewhere) but can I make the jerky without all the salt? I know cheese and nuts have salt, but commercial jerky can be way too salty for my taste. And my blood pressure.

It might not store as long without it, but drying it well makes salt less essential. How do you tolerate Morton's Lite Salt or Sea Salt?

[Ottawa]

When I make jerky I grind Montreal Steak Spice in the coffee grinder with a few packs of Splenda and a touch of Cayanne. I sprinkle this over the meat and dry it overnight in the oven at 140. The meat is cut into 8-10 inch strips, 1 inch wide and 1/4 inch thick or a little less. It shrinks quite a bit, looking like this strips of dark toffee and is very dry, snapping like a pencil when you break a piece off.

It is firmer than store bought and you end up breaking it off by hand or biting it into chewable pieces. The camping guys all liked it for the taste but also that a piece lasts so long when you are fishing or hiking.

I have found these in my pack a year later (in a plastic handy bag) and they taste just teh same and remain hard.

[Missy]

I have found these in my pack a year later (in a plastic handy bag) and they taste just teh same and remain hard.

lol...oh Ottawa...I hope you don't mind me laughing at what you wrote...but that just struck me as sooooo funny. Just the visual of someone scrounging around in the corner of a back pack desperate for SOMETHING to snack on and finds a year old piece of dried up ol meat...and eats it! well....lol that's a dieter for ya! lol

Gitfiddle, thanks for the encouragement!! I feel as though I can do it too. Until now though, "standard" weightloss sites/plans just didn't address my specific issues...so, I had to keep digging for me. Thanks to my Dr. I think I found it?

It's invaluable to have a place to come too for support. Keeps one's head in the game.

Lynn

[gitfiddle]

Just the visual of someone scrounging around in the corner of a back pack desperate for SOMETHING to snack on...
Hey, substitute "handbag" for "backpack" and I can relate entirely. Odds are, though, that he was cleaning out the backpack and just got curious. Right, Randy?

Dan, I've never tried either. Morton's Lite has potassium in it, does it not? Do either of you soak the meat in brine or just rub it in before drying?

[Missy]

lol....oh...I've SO BEEN THERE as well!!!! That's TRUE desperation!!! BEEN THERE DONE THAT!!!!!

Lynn

[Viking Dan]

Dan, I've never tried either. Morton's Lite has potassium in it, does it not? Do either of you soak the meat in brine or just rub it in before drying?

Morton's Lite is potassium salt with a nasty aftertaste (if you take a lot of it.)

I never soaked it in brine. I would just get some 80% ground beef from the store and run it through the jerky gun. I'd typically do a couple pounds at a time.

[Ottawa]

Just the visual of someone scrounging around in the corner of a back pack desperate for SOMETHING to snack on...
Hey, substitute "handbag" for "backpack" and I can relate entirely. Odds are, though, that he was cleaning out the backpack and just got curious. Right, Randy?

Dan, I've never tried either. Morton's Lite has potassium in it, does it not? Do either of you soak the meat in brine or just rub it in before drying?

Yes it was my camping pack and I had not cleared it out.
Missy,
I'd be pretty hard up to eat something that was lying open in my pack.:D I prebag these things. I also make a protein cookie that is hard and dry that lasts forever (not quite) as well, using Whey protein, cocoa, coconut, butter and some sweetener.

I don't soak the meat, just thin slice it in strips, lay it out and season it. I toss it around to get both sides and then lay it on my wifes cake/bread racks over cookie sheets in the oven.

[gitfiddle]

Dan, I think I remember someone saying that about Lite salt. I'd take my chances with the real thing. I also don't have a jerky gun, but I'll bet it' produces a more easily munched product. I think I'll try the oven method before I search the basement for the dehydrator. Low heat for hours, as I remember.

DH has a smoker, too. I'll bet I could get him to play around with jerky recipes. I have a friend who's a chef and made venison jerky here in the school as a lesson for his class. He hardly had any to take home with him! People would smell it cooking and "drop by" to see what he was doing after school.

Back on track, though, I need something to replace nuts and cheese in my diet temporarily and jerky would do it. I'm going to take a work break here for a while :D but I'd be interested in any other thoughts.

[banshee]

Lynn, you may already know this, but I hope you realize that one of the advantages of this way of eating is that you almost never have to worry about the whole "desperate for something to eat" experience. If you're hungry, eat something, just make sure it's on plan. You may end up eating what seems like a lot at first, but your body will gradually realize that you aren't starving it, and the hunger will begin to self regulate itself. Just remember not to "stuff yourself" - eat slowly so your body has time to recognize when it has had enough and stop when you are no longer hungry.

Not to say that we don't all have those odd moments where we're stuck somewhere without anything low-carb handy, but in general, you shouldn't be starving yourself. It's contradictory to everything you hear about "diets", but we're not trying to starve ourselve into losing weight. We're all about eating what our body needs to maintain our lean body mass while encouraging it to use our stored fat for energy.

This requires a shift in thinking away from the "diet mentality", and to returning the word "diet" to its original meaning of "The usual food and drink of a person or animal." In other words, this is the way you are going to eat for the rest of your life, and none of us wants to starve ourselves for the rest of our lives!

As I said, you probably already know this, and if so, sorry for the lecture, but some people do come to Protein Power with the misconception that they will "use the diet" to lose weight, keeping the idea that they have to portion control and will be hungry during the "diet", and expect to return to the way they ate before after losing the weight. Of course, they ignore the fact that the way they ate before is what got them fat in the first place!

[laughingW]

What Mike Eades suggested in his blog when he mentioned the BMR formulas is that by standard methods (not necessarily the most accurate), the amount of calories that people were taking in the study he was blogging about, the amount of calories are way higher than what people was actually reporting. That doesn't mean that they used such formulas to guide their practice.

I was remarking more on the conclusions he was drawing. Dr. Eades said:


If you run 220 pounds through one of the equations commonly used to calculate energy expenditure you will discover that these subjects require somewhere in the range of 2900 calories per day just to maintain their body weight. At the caloric intake they reported at the start of the program, they would be in an almost 1000 calorie per day deficit. What does it all mean? It means that the recording of the diets of these subjects was totally unreliable.


So based on a not-proved-reliable equation, he concludes that the subjects were unreliable in their reporting. This is the same old hooey that the ultra-fat have been experiencing for years. We do NOT burn like others and we DON'T always, always under-report. But I understand that for docs who have not considered the data sources on the equations, if one assumes the equations are right, then one is forced to conclude that we, the obese food reporters, are lying or at least kidding ourselves.

[Viking Dan]

Maybe one of the mods should split this into an "I like jerky" and a "BMR is crap" thread.

[gator8me]

Missy ~
When I first started eating LC I went wild with the cheese. Since I had alot of weight to lose it didn't hinder me. Now that I've been LC for awhile now my facination with all the cheese I can eat has faded somewhat. lol I still LOVE my cheese but now I am able to enjoy it in moderation like everything else. :D Just give yourself time, you'll settle into a groove eventually. Like someone else said earlier... Just focus on the main thing right now and thats X amount of carbs and X amount of protein per day. :)
Ally

[Missy]

Ottawa....man o man, your just making low carb recipes sound soooooo dddddeeelllicious!!!! lol :eek: NOT! lol

Banshee...worry not about sounding like a lecture....I don't take offense. We all need reminder's of those things. I don't even think of this way of eating as in that typical "diet" thinking...even though I've been throwing that word around. I know better. I also don't do the "starve" thing either. I've learned over the years that that's not right, and I've learned to listen to my body when it's hungry and feed it with something legal. I do appreciate your concern that perhaps I was though.

I WAS one of those people who HAD that thinking..."don't do low carbing to lose weight, because once you quit it will all return and then some" thinkers....until it dawned on me...well DUH! Of COURSE IT WILL RETURN...because you've added back the stuff that contributed to the problem!!! So, that rational FINALLY has hit home. Stunned as I am to that reality....it is in fact reality. :(

Slowly I'm adjusting to really being aware of what I must do in order to do this plan according to the plan. I don't know how I can explain it any better to what I'm feeling/thinking about mentally accepting this "plan" as a way of eating...and learning the lessons that it's going to teach me. I want to be as aware as I can so that I don't fall off the wagon due to ignorance. If I do choose to eat off the plan, which I have certainty occassions will come, I want to be really aware of what I'm chosing to do...so I don't fall victum of that mindless carb addiction eating.

I guess, I'd just be really pleased to experience some weight loss due to what I'm doing..and that will go along way to know that it's going to work for me and it will quiet my apprehension.

Gator, lol facination with cheese...LOL...that's it!!! That's me right now. lol I'm not going over board by any means....but I am enjoying a low carb cheese cake slice each evening! lol :D I think your right, this is a phase I'll soon pass through....cause I'm already growing weary of it! lol ~ okay...not exactly weary....cause it's CHHEEEESE MAN!!!!! CHHHEESE!!!!! :D

[SherryJ]

Don't let him fool you, Missy... Randy's (Ottawa) got some great recipes... shakes especially...

Sherry

[Gaelen]

Maybe one of the mods should split this into an "I like jerky" and a "BMR is crap" thread.

Nah, Dan...a little thread divergence into two very healthy conversations is exactly what makes this community so much fun to support. ;)

BTW, when you got home, were you able to look up the info you have from PP about gluconeogenesis? It's another area of the plan that actually makes PP a method that works because it's driven by science, rather than simply menu suggestions touted as working because some marketer thought they sounded appealing.

[Ottawa]

Ottawa....man o man, your just making low carb recipes sound soooooo dddddeeelllicious!!!! lol NOT! lol

You got me all wrong. These are just trail foods for when I camp/hike. They are ways of getting meals and snacks to be edible and store well. I maximize nutrition in a light weight, long storing format.

I can compete with the best of them on making a class act, Low Carb Dinner. Why I'm pretty sure I could out cook/out present pretty well anyone here on creating a delicious, multi-course meal under 15 ECC and not just due to the fact. I have a Chilli that rings in at less than 6 ECC/cup that won first prize for best overall Chilli.

Now Missy, the meat sticks, protein cookies and my rarely dug into pemmican are/were just experiments at maximizing nutrition and minimizing weight while maintaining a low carb count. They are meant for eating/snacking in the bush or hiking. Bring on the big challenges and we’ll see what might “sound soooooo dddddeeelllicious!!!!”. :cool: :p :cool:

Regardless of my charm, I could sweep a carb counter off her feet with her first spoonful of Sweet and Sour Soup. By the time dessert was done(strawberries filled with sweetened cream cheese and drizzled in chocolate), she would be hopelessly lost and unable to speak properly. I'd have to call her a taxi as she mumbled, "Just one more for the road?".

It happens all the time. :rolleyes:

[Missy]

roflmao!!!!!!!!! OHHHHHHHHHHHHHH....IN THAT CASE, I'm POSITIVE I'd be a total gonner!!! where's that blushing eyebatting smilie when you want one!!!!! lol :rolleyes:

I have a camper....:D ....and a husband. :)

[gitfiddle]

...and another one bites the dust! :rolleyes:

Randy, if you lived closer I would hire you for my chef. I have never made your trail recipes, but I will this summer when I go camping. In the past, I have lived off trail mix and granola bars because I don't use refrigeration. Meat sticks and melting cheese get old fast. When I get a free Saturday, I'm going to try the jerky, too.

[Missy]

I'm quite curious...where do I find these Randy recipes? I'm a camper too...but, my royal highness self doesn't ROUGH IT...ohhh no....5th wheel, microwave, refrigerator, AC, and a FULL BATHROOM!!!:D ~ I mean, a girls gotta have her BLOW DRIER!!!!!! :p

[gator8me]

I'm starting to think seriously about trading in my hubby for an "ottawa" model! :p lol
Ally
Day 3 :D

[Viking Dan]

BTW, when you got home, were you able to look up the info you have from PP about gluconeogenesis? It's another area of the plan that actually makes PP a method that works because it's driven by science, rather than simply menu suggestions touted as working because some marketer thought they sounded appealing.
I *may* have been confusing with the chart on p. 37. Or (more likely) I got it from here: http://www.low-carb.org/lylemcd/week08.htm


The book present a nifty little equation to determine the ketogenic
potential of any food or mixed meal. It is:

Ketogenic K 0.9 (fat) + 0.46 (pro)
-------------- = --- = ---------------------------------
Anti-ketogenic AK 1.0 (carb) + 0.1 (fat) + .58 (pro)

Note: all values for fat, pro and carb are in grams. The ratio should
be at least 1.5 for ketone production (which *is* what we're after,
right?). Keep that number (1.5) in mind.

Again, this formula is useful if you want to find out the ketogenic
potential of a given food or meal. When you work it out, you find that
you pretty much have to drown everything in some type of lard to
keep it ketogenic. If any meal becomes anti-ketogenic, there's a
high possibility, I think, of getting kicked out of ketosis.

[gitfiddle]

I'm starting to think seriously about trading in my hubby for an "ottawa" model! :p lol :D
Be careful what you wish for! He also goes camping in neck-deep snow in the Canadian wilderness.

[Gaelen]

Oh, rofl...y'know, one of my favorite threads on the old eatprotein site was the backpacking thread. It was mainly recipes, so it probably belongs in the "Let's cook" section, maybe in the 'Breakfast and Meals to go' forum?

I'll start it if we want to put all the jerky, trail bars, journeycake, and trail meals ideas there. It IS nearly safe to hike in the northeast at this moment. What do you say, gang--is it time for a 'PP on the trails' thread?

Dan, there is a huge difference between truly ketogenic diets used to control seizures and traditional low carbing and the ketosis state that Atkins dieters crave. Personally, the fact that PP doesn't demand a state of ketosis, and that the Drs. Eades have given many examples of why being in ketosis isn't necessarily accurately measurable by an over-the-counter method, or even necessary for effective weight loss, was a relief for me. Ketostix were never something I could get into--I did enough of that for years at work. ;)

(See--two completely on-plan discussions in not only one thread, but one reply! ;) )

Gaelen, who has 'roughed it' for years in tents, can drive a 33-foot motor home, and is currently inordinately fascinated with teardrop trailers (http://www.cozycruiser.com/), especially one model called the T@B (http://www.tab-rv.com/).

[Viking Dan]

Dan, there is a huge difference between truly ketogenic diets used to control seizures and traditional low carbing and the ketosis state that Atkins dieters crave. Personally, the fact that PP doesn't demand a state of ketosis, and that the Drs. Eades have given many examples of why being in ketosis isn't necessarily accurately measurable by an over-the-counter method, or even necessary for effective weight loss, was a relief for me. Ketostix were never something I could get into--I did enough of that for years at work.

Granted, I only get seizures listening to techno music;), but the fellow in question is a bodybuilder(and those guys tend to know all the bestest/sneakiest ways to drop weight)/exercise physiologist so it seemed/s reasonable. Those ratios are close to what The Optimal Diet (http://homodiet.netfirms.com/) reccomends as well.

I've never used ketostix and I am reasonably sure Atkins believed deeper levels of ketosis were more effective. Not that I'm in a hurry...

[Ottawa]

Re:"I'm quite curious...where do I find these Randy recipes? I'm a camper too...but, my royal highness self doesn't ROUGH IT...ohhh no....5th wheel, microwave, refrigerator, AC, and a FULL BATHROOM!!!:D ~ I mean, a girls gotta have her BLOW DRIER!!!!!! :p"

I'll post them later this week.
The meat sticks and Protein Cookies are ones that I use every trip, summer or winter, the pemmican was an experiment that has ended up being used as soup stock (beef/tallow/dried cranberries/seasoning) since it is quite firm after the tallow sets and even at room temperature is almost rock-like. The reason I made it was that it is considered the most calorie dense food and it had a historical reference of being the second most traded item in early North American history and I wondered what it tasted like. The average consumption/day was 7500 calories.

Re:"I'm starting to think seriously about trading in my hubby for an "ottawa" model! :p lol
Ally"

Thanks Ally. If it wouldn't send my wife off on a long talk about the "Online Carb Cult", I would show her just to have her more appreciative of me.:D She made me agree to no more online spending until I have put a major dent in the Visa bill.

[gitfiddle]

She made me agree to no more online spending until I have put a major dent in the Visa bill.
Well, gosh, a guy's gotta have some minor flaw or another!:p

If it wouldn't send my wife off on a long talk about the "Online Carb Cult"...
Same here. I'm glad we've all got each other.:rolleyes: In fact, I'm supposed to be doing some online research for DH. I was done a half hour ago.:D

Time to go home. Looking forward to the recipes, Randy!