I bought a 16 oz bag of Lundberg Wild blend, a mix of wild and whole grain brown rice.I had a fridge full of veggies, in particular a nice butternut squash.
I cooked as follows:
water saute 2 small sweet white onions, 3 carrots and 3 ribs celery all chopped to medium chop, in a heavy dutch oven (deep pot) that has a lid.
add
1T minced ginger
1t ground cumin
1T curry powder(I will add more in future)
1 clove garlic, chopped
Stir
add 3C cubed butternut squash
rice mix(total of 2 cups)
1 apple, peeled and diced
1/2 T cinnamon
5c water (I need way more water than recommended to cook brown rice - must be a humidity thing)
Bring to a boil, reduce heat to medium and simmer, stirring, for about 45 minutes. This makes an awful lot, so I'll let you know how it freezes.
Next time I would up the hot spice and reduce the cinnamon. I can see adding different veggies. I think something like kale would be okay, but on a batch by batch basis - as I have found kale does not reheat. Mushrooms and coriander would probably be fab.
Thanks to everyone for the VitaMix information and reviews ....
Between my coffee bean grinder and my current blender, we're doing okay for now, but when those two appliances belly up we'll likely go ahead and replace them with a VitaMix. I hadn't remembered you could buy one refurbished; that's great, definitely an incentive to follow the lead!
Now that I satisfy my hunger with lower calorie higher nutrient foods, I drop weight if I exercise. For me, that means I make sure I get more nuts, grains, etc. because I'm breastfeeding and I am trying to hold my weight steady.
It's great that you're breastfeeding ~ in addition to the many other benefits, you're literally giving your beautiful little girl a taste for the foods you eat. People are always amazed at some of the foods my little ones eat, and it's because they've grown accustomed to the taste via my breastmilk. Same reason why ethnic babies can stomach spicier foods, whereas SAD babies often cannot. By the time she is a year old and ready for solids, your daughter will have developed a taste for the foods you prefer and it will be much easier to introduce some of the healthier choices to her.
I saw you are reading the Super Foods book - it's a favorite among many moms I know, and I love that she focuses less on meat than many other books available on the topic. Great reference, you'll get a ton of use of that book.
Success!!
I made the pancakes again, this time opting for oats/walnuts/orange zest/almond extract instead of vanilla/cinnamon and I had great results. They were fluffy AND delicious so I edited my original post with the new and improved recipe: http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=758867&postcount=1166 .
Ok, well that makes a little more sense. I've only read the China study, not ETL so I am only now realizing how much more restrictive ETL is versus just vegan/vegetarian. I thought I was doing awesome avoiding dairy and meat entirely, and I certainly feel better, but clearly not any thinner. :cry
Ugh, I hate feeling like I have to buy someone's book (only to find out it's a long ad for their products, supplements and gadgets) to lose weight, reminds me of every other diet out there! Inevitable I guess...
I haven't read either book, so I can't comment as to the specifics of the diet other than what I've read in this thread. But I'll say that from experience, most people do well to transition slowly into a new lifestyle - that is, they are more likely to stick with a new lifestyle if they ease into it. So it sounds like tho' your weight loss has plateau'd on just a veg*n diet, a positive is that you ARE feeling better and you are more likely going to be successful as you venture into the next phase: ETL. So you ARE doing awesome, and you'll do even MORE awesome as you continue on the journey to good health.
I didn't want to read either book for a few reasons, one being that I'm happy with my current 'diet' (way of eating, not plan to lose weight). But as this thread progressed, curiousity had gotten the better of me so I went looking for copies to read. I rarely buy books, especially read-once types, and neither book was at my library. So I emphasize with your reluctant nature to buy the book, but wanted to suggest you look to your own library. I live in a very small town, but I'd imagine most decently-sized cities would have a copy.
Sometimes my wife watches Biggest Loser at night while I do email on my laptop. I notice that the women generally lose the weight slower than the men and several contestants--men and women--plateau now and then.
It's true; woman are biologically inclined to hold on to their fat reserves, and the slightest thing can set off triggers that has our body plateau as it sorts out our environment. Too rapid a weight loss in particular, especially during childbearing years, will result in a body raising a red flag (hitting a plateau) .. even if you have a lot of weight to lose.
And it's just the nature of a woman's design; the hormonal flux from childbearing, nursing, and the "change of time" beyond that ... we're most subject to a plateau because we have more at stake biologically than does a man.
As suggested, we just have to hang in there and work through it ... KNOW that we will and can work through it, if we continue to nurture our bodies with good food and reassure it that we've got a safe (if somewhat different) environment than what it is accustomed to.
Anyone read "Good Calories, Bad Calories"?
As one who's become a bit obsessed with learning as much as I can about the state of the today's real science about nutrition (partly because I have very smart friends who often challenge my beliefs so I feel like I have to get smart about this), a friend of mine recommended the book Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. It supposedly contains a bunch of recent science on nutrition, though the author is a journalist who interviews scientists, not a scientist himself.
Here's a NYTimes review on the book which does say that it's heavy on citing science, but also calls into question some of it's conclusions. Here's another article on the book. Apparently, the book arrives at the conclusion that carbohydrates are what is making America fat and that a calorie of fat is much less fattening than a calorie of sugar. The author states: "the fewer carbohydrates we consume, the leaner we will be." All the reviews say that it's so full of science references that it's a hard read so it's certainly not meant to be a "populist read". From the little I've read in the reviews, the conclusions sound pretty suspect and some are in conflict with those of TCS and ETL. Avoiding refined carbs (like sugar) is completely consistent with TCS and ETL, but if all carbohydrates are equally condemned, then that's a clear conflict.
So ... has anyone else read this book? Any thoughts you could share? Any good web writeups on this book that help to put it's findings into perspective, particularly relative to the conclusions of TCS and ETL?
Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. Apparently, the book arrives at the conclusion that carbohydrates are what is making America fat and that a calorie of fat is much less fattening than a calorie of sugar. The author states: "the fewer carbohydrates we consume, the leaner we will be."
but if all carbohydrates are equally condemned, then that's a clear conflict.
Well I haven't read the book, but your description reminds me of some discussions that took place in a biochemistry class I took oh so long ago.
We were discussing cellular metabolism, the carbohydrate cycle, and how it all relates to food and energy production in an animal cell. It is really quite simple from a top down view: cells rely on glucose for energy. They get glucose from the breakdown of other organic complexes, and the ease of turning a particular food stuff into glucose varies depending on the kind of food stuff it is. Simple carbs (sugars) take less work to turn into cellular energy than complex carbs (found in grains etc), it is lots more work to metabolize protein into components that can then be made into glucose, same with fat, but it can be done and the body will do it when necessary.
When the body has found enough energy from food, it stores the rest of the energy it has taken in, in the form of fat. The trick is to balance the amount of energy intake and output for weight maintenance, take in more energy for weight gain and less for weight loss.
So, then there is the next level of complexity that goes beyond cellular energy requirements, to look at the vitamins, minerals, good fats and other nutrients that we are supposed to take in when taking in food for energy.
Next layer is to think about all the things in our food now that aren't supposed to be there, hormones, pesticides, etc. and further more how processing into componenets rather than looking at the whole food changes the interaction between those nutrients.
So all those years ago, my prof contended that one could survive quite well, without dietary disease, living on junk food if the calorie intake matched that needed for that individuals output. After all refined cereals and even chocolate bars are enhanced with extra vitamins and minerals. Heck, I can now buy orange juice with added omega 3 fat! WTF!!!!
Anyway, I don't think that a specific food group is to blame for the health of the America's. I think it is a series of choices that have been made by food manufacturers, government agencies, and by individuals in terms of level of activity. As well, by the medical community that is so willing to pull out the prescription pad because that is more likely to get buy in from the patient than a lifestyle change would.
No, I am sorry but I don't buy 'good calories, bad calories' as it pertains to carbs - maybe to actual food but not food components.
Freezes VERY well, reheats very well
this recipe makes 4-5 large patties or several smaller patties
tastes best hot (gets kind of gross when cold but is easy enough to warm)
stirfry - I am making these today - plan to bbq them. Will it work?
EDIT:
We bbq'd them and it worked well. They are very tastey too.
So, here is what I did (and where I made mistakes! )
I used 1 can each of romano, pinto and black beans. My primary error was that I did not drain them.....
Then I used a small white sweet onion
4 ribs celery
steel cut oats (probably a cup by the time I made up for the wetness from above error)
3/4 c diced portabello mushroom
flour to try to bind it, but it was really wet
cumin
for the wet ingredient (per stirfry's recipe) I used salsa - I had some black bean salsa and some pico de gallo that needed using, so it amounted to probably 3/4 cup.
In the end, in order to get rid of the excess moisture and form something similar to patties, I reverted to the trick we use with ground beef patties - I added crushed whole wheat (stone ground) crackers.
Hubby tried them - his pronouncement is they need salt...which of course I never add to anything.
But anyway, we had burgers, greek salad and bbq sliced potatoes - it is beginning to feel like spring so the menu should reflect that!!!
As one who's become a bit obsessed with learning as much as I can about the state of the today's real science about nutrition (partly because I have very smart friends who often challenge my beliefs so I feel like I have to get smart about this), a friend of mine recommended the book Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. It supposedly contains a bunch of recent science on nutrition, though the author is a journalist who interviews scientists, not a scientist himself.
Gary Taubes is another author that makes my eyes glaze... I haven't read the book because I can't get through his famous New York Times article.
He's completely focused on the tradeoff between fat and carbs but my issue is those terms are so general. It's like debating whether light or subject is more important in photography.
And I don't get his claims. In the NYT article he says:
It is also undeniable, note students of Endocrinology 101, that mankind never evolved to eat a diet high in starches or sugars. ''Grain products and concentrated sugars were essentially absent from human nutrition until the invention of agriculture,'' Ludwig says, ''which was only 10,000 years ago.'' This is discussed frequently in the anthropology texts but is mostly absent from the obesity literature, with the prominent exception of the low-carbohydrate-diet books.
But... What about fruit? In 11 pages of his NYT article, he doesn't say. Man never ate fruit in his evolutionary history?
Gary is a long-time Atkins devotee and understands the appeal of Atkins:
Atkins allowed his readers to eat ''truly luxurious foods without limit,'' as he put it, ''lobster with butter sauce, steak with béarnaise sauce . . . bacon cheeseburgers.''
His NYT article is data-free.
I think ETL, The China Study, Healthy at 100, in Defense of Food, etc., have it right that it's about food, not about general terms like carbs and fat. And I think there's an overwhelming body of evidence that fruits and vegetables are linked to lower rates of chronic disease. Some good-for-you foods are high fat, low carb, and some are the reverse. If you're going to restrict fruits and vegetables, which Taubes and Atkins do, it seems like you have to show that they aren't good for you. Is there any data that shows that? As far as I know, there is only a mountain of data that shows the reverse.
We bbq'd them and it worked well. They are very tastey too.
Thanks, stirfry - the recipe is great!
ann
Today, hubby had one cold, and liked it, the 17 yr olds gf is vegetarian and she had one reheated (in a fry pan) and has told me "they are sooo goood!". It's a keeper recipe and I recommend it for sure.
(and you know that you are entering a new phase of your life when you interrupt your kid & gf in the hottub...kissing!):uhoh :uhoh
I have read many a great thing about SPIRULINA (blue-green algae )...supposedly it's only fall back from being a perfect food is it's lack of carbs....Anyone using it or quit using it...seems it might be a good supplement .
I have read many a great thing about SPIRULINA (blue-green algae )...supposedly it's only fall back from being a perfect food is it's lack of carbs....Anyone using it or quit using it...seems it might be a good supplement .
I'm with Baldy, the focus on "superfoods" isn't that helpful. Instead of looking for superfoods or "perfect foods" just focus your diet on dark leafy greens, other veggies, and fruits. Round it out with some grains, beans, nuts, and seeds. The perfect superfoods are found right in your local supermarket's produce section.
Y'all don't want to hear me, you just want to dance.
I have read many a great thing about SPIRULINA (blue-green algae )...supposedly it's only fall back from being a perfect food is it's lack of carbs....Anyone using it or quit using it...seems it might be a good supplement .
My father tried SuperBlueGreenAlgae a few years ago. He eventually stopped without noticing much of any difference either way. Except in his wallet.
Today, hubby had one cold, and liked it, the 17 yr olds gf is vegetarian and she had one reheated (in a fry pan) and has told me "they are sooo goood!". It's a keeper recipe and I recommend it for sure.
(and you know that you are entering a new phase of your life when you interrupt your kid & gf in the hottub...kissing!):uhoh :uhoh
Oh, Ann! I'm sorry I missed your earlier question, but so glad to hear you gave the recipe a shot.
I am MORTIFIED that I forgot about the canned beans having extra liquid, and I will go back to edit my post accordingly. I'm so SORRY!!!
Glad you found it to be good ~ it's truly a lifesaver around my house because it can be changed enough to keep being interesting, and is such an easy thing to put together and/or freeze that we're never without something quick and easy and good.
(I have a 16yr old sister - I will never forget the time I picked her up from school, and was subjected to her an the BF's decades-long slobberfest right outside the passenger window. I'm STILL traumatized , perhaps moreso by the fact that sis now considers me officially "old" and "parental," based on my squirming and clearing of the throat to end it already!)
Gary Taubes is another author that makes my eyes glaze... I haven't read the book because I can't get through his famous New York Times article.
He's completely focused on the tradeoff between fat and carbs but my issue is those terms are so general. It's like debating whether light or subject is more important in photography.
And I don't get his claims. In the NYT article he says:
It is also undeniable, note students of Endocrinology 101, that mankind never evolved to eat a diet high in starches or sugars. ''Grain products and concentrated sugars were essentially absent from human nutrition until the invention of agriculture,'' Ludwig says, ''which was only 10,000 years ago.'' This is discussed frequently in the anthropology texts but is mostly absent from the obesity literature, with the prominent exception of the low-carbohydrate-diet books.
But... What about fruit? In 11 pages of his NYT article, he doesn't say. Man never ate fruit in his evolutionary history?
Gary is a long-time Atkins devotee and understands the appeal of Atkins:
Atkins allowed his readers to eat ''truly luxurious foods without limit,'' as he put it, ''lobster with butter sauce, steak with béarnaise sauce . . . bacon cheeseburgers.''
His NYT article is data-free.
I think ETL, The China Study, Healthy at 100, in Defense of Food, etc., have it right that it's about food, not about general terms like carbs and fat. And I think there's an overwhelming body of evidence that fruits and vegetables are linked to lower rates of chronic disease. Some good-for-you foods are high fat, low carb, and some are the reverse. If you're going to restrict fruits and vegetables, which Taubes and Atkins do, it seems like you have to show that they aren't good for you. Is there any data that shows that? As far as I know, there is only a mountain of data that shows the reverse.
Thanks. I hadn't see his own NYT article so I'll take a look at that and see if I can get a better idea what exactly he's claiming. Just to be clear here, I myself am fully sold on the concepts in ETL, TCS, In Defense of Food, etc... I'm just trying to learn how to explain to folks who have been following more Atkins-like principles where Taubes is off. He apparently uses enough science citings in his work that some folks think he has credibility.
So far, I think Fuhrman and Taubes would both agree that refined carbs are pretty worthless and, if you eat many of them, they could certainly make you fat. It ought to be pretty non-controversial that they are loaded with calories, have very little real nutrional value and contain very few of the things that make you feel full. Hmmm. High in calories, low in nutrition, doesn't make you feel satiated. Duh - eat much of this kind of food and you will get fat and not get appropriate nutrition. There certainly are better diet choices choices for both weight loss and health.
I will have to read more of Taubes to understand his position on fats and fatty foods because many kinds of fats have exactly the same characteristics (high in calories, low in nutrition, don't make you feel full). It can't possibly be more healthful to eat a fatty piece of meat than some fruits and vegetables.
Also, I want to find out whether he's condemning all carbs like those in fruits and vegetables because if that's the case, then he's clearly steering people in an unhealthful direction.
Does anyone on here watch Family Guy? The episode last night was awesome, and it made me think of you guys... The dad has a stroke after eating 30 fast food hamburgers and wackiness ensues (ok, that doesn't *sound* funny, but it was!)
I made the pancakes again, this time opting for oats/walnuts/orange zest/almond extract instead of vanilla/cinnamon and I had great results. They were fluffy AND delicious so I edited my original post with the new and improved recipe: http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=758867&postcount=1166 .
(Sorry, Schmoo :giggle )
-Anne
No problem! Whew, I spent the last hour going back 20 pages in this thread and adding recipes. The Tastebook has been updated! I hope I didn't forget anything or add in any recipes that don't want to live in there. I hope to dip into it and play around with some of the really great ones that have come up in the last several weeks.
Anne, the second (and third) times I made those muffins were much betterer. I do believe I totally overmixed them, plus I might have overbaked them the first time, too. Since then a batch of 12 muffins has been lasting Trav and I about 48 hours.
Broccoli May Help Boost Aging Immune System
"Eat your broccoli! That's the advice from UCLA researchers who have found that a chemical in broccoli and other cruciferous vegetables may hold a key to restoring the body's immunity, which declines as we age." Here's an article about that study at UCLA.
"Published in the online edition of the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, the study findings show that sulforaphane, a chemical in broccoli, switches on a set of antioxidant genes and enzymes in specific immune cells, which then combat the injurious effects of molecules known as free radicals that can damage cells and lead to disease."
It's a condensed version of China Study and Eat To Live, with F-bombs on every page
My wife was reading it yesterday, and last night I picked it up to see what it was all about.
Quick read, nothing new if you've read China Study and ETL, but a fun read nonetheless
I actually think that's a great alternative to get the info out there. I get a lot of people asking me questions about my diet change because it's been so noticeable, but their eyes glaze over when they hear Dr this and Dr that and research publications from universities....
I actually think that's a great alternative to get the info out there. I get a lot of people asking me questions about my diet change because it's been so noticeable, but their eyes glaze over when they hear Dr this and Dr that and research publications from universities....
Nancy loved "Girlfriend's Guide" to Pregnancy and thought this was very similar.
I went to Borders the other day to pick up some China Studies since I seem to go through them so fast and I was happy to see that Skinny Bitch was face-out on the front table, and featured prominently in the Health/Diet section (but not as prominently as Atkins, which still commands an entire shelf).
There were no ETLs in our Borders, nor the one I tried in Columbus, Ohio.
The shelves were filled with books that had titles like Ultrametabolism.
I love the branding on Skinny Bitch because you notice it, don't forget it, and most women (the market for diet books) want to be skinny. I love the avoidance of dairy and meat, using whole wheat instead of white, etc.
My only reservation is it's not the healthiest fare. It's more about vegan mac and cheese than kale smoothies, but you can't have everything and I know it takes time before you're loading up on veggies.
My only reservation is it's not the healthiest fare. It's more about vegan mac and cheese than kale smoothies, but you can't have everything and I know it takes time before you're loading up on veggies.
Hey, it's a lot more progress than most of America
We had to bring our own food to the track this weekend or our only options would have been Cheeseburgers, Double Cheeseburgers, hot dogs, BBQ pork and sodas. We had a huge bag of freshly made salad each and whole wheat pitas with organic peanut butter instead :ivar
BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
edited March 10, 2008
I continue to read Jane Goodall's book, which is definitely not light-hearted like Skinny Bitch. It makes you furrow your brow with very disturbing facts about how animals are raised, what it means for nutrition and the environment and our consciences. Really awful stuff. No wonder it didn't sell.
It has much more science and facts than Michael Pollen's book, but he sure knows how to be the journalist and write what people would want to read better than her.
She had dinner with the founder of Whole Foods and reported what he said as if it were probably true; the journalist bypassed him and instead looked at labels in Whole Foods that claimed "free range" and went to the farms to see what free range meant.
She appealed to our concern over animals and the environment; he appealed to our self-interest in our own health. She covered corporate self-interest; he covered corporate scandals.
In other words, the journalist knows how to investigate a story and make it appeal to consumers. She knows how to do science and report the brutal facts which make you recoil.
One disturbing thing she said is 80% of soybeans grown in American are genetically engineered and the farmers report that they are much easier to store because bugs, bacteria, mice and stuff don't like to make a meal of them. As Michael Pollen said in his talk, "They're not stupid."
Another is that the genetically-engineered growth hormone rGBH to make cows produce more milk is illegal in Japan, Australia, Canada, the European Union and 101 countries in total, but it's fairly widely used in the U.S. Monsanto sues makers of organic milk that put on their labels, rGBH-free. There is no requirement to label milk as having rGBH. Some very convincing data ties it to distress in the cows and cancers in humans.
I have to take the book in small doses so I don't get sick.
It's a condensed version of China Study and Eat To Live, with F-bombs on every page
My wife was reading it yesterday, and last night I picked it up to see what it was all about.
Quick read, nothing new if you've read China Study and ETL, but a fun read nonetheless
This is the kind of title I would avoid, but it is also the kind of book my daughter might just buy into. I particularly like the quote:
You cannot keep shoveling the same crap into your mouth every day and expect to lose weight.
which of course is what I try to tell her, but apparently not effectively. It's always been about making good choices and all things in moderation at our place but she would prefer the quick fix, pill or surgery.
And she needs to recognize that her healthy body weight isn't going to be 120lb nor is she going to fit into a size 2. At 5'11", she shouldn't expect to be built like twiggy.
Actually, for many years, I absolutely avoided talking about my size and shape or changing anything because I wanted to send her the message that she needs to accept the skin she is in. We are a big family, none really anywhere near overweight other than me(the boys are actually thin), and again all but me have maintained good activity levels.
I needed to change because I was feeling old and crappy. I have no desire to become 'skinny', just feel better and have some grasp that I am healthy.
I was chatting with my dh yesterday and made an analogy between the Omnivores Dilema/ETL information and our dietary choices and what was known 30+ yrs ago about the health dangers of smoking; and how the special interest groups and lobbyists had/have control over government decisions and the information that gets back to the public. I asked "will we look back, in 20 yrs, and say we should have listened to the information available then".
what it means for nutrition and the environment and our consciences. Really awful stuff. No wonder it didn't sell.
It has much more science and facts than Michael Pollen's book, but he sure knows how to be the journalist and write what people would want to read better than her.
She appealed to our concern over animals and the environment; he appealed to our self-interest in our own health. She covered corporate self-interest; he covered corporate scandals.
In other words, the journalist knows how to investigate a story and make it appeal to consumers. She knows how to do science and report the brutal facts which make you recoil.
I have to take the book in small doses so I don't get sick.
Interesting. Jane has spent a lifetime agitating and inspiring. She also has done some controversial things and had to be smuggled out of Africa on occassion. Do you know that she is trained as a secretary and had no specific scientific training prior to being hired by Louis Leaky to sit and observe chimps in Africa?
Comments
Of course, the darn thing still hasn't shipped yet - 8 days but who's counting...
I bought a 16 oz bag of Lundberg Wild blend, a mix of wild and whole grain brown rice.I had a fridge full of veggies, in particular a nice butternut squash.
I cooked as follows:
water saute 2 small sweet white onions, 3 carrots and 3 ribs celery all chopped to medium chop, in a heavy dutch oven (deep pot) that has a lid.
add
1T minced ginger
1t ground cumin
1T curry powder(I will add more in future)
1 clove garlic, chopped
Stir
add 3C cubed butternut squash
rice mix(total of 2 cups)
1 apple, peeled and diced
1/2 T cinnamon
5c water (I need way more water than recommended to cook brown rice - must be a humidity thing)
Bring to a boil, reduce heat to medium and simmer, stirring, for about 45 minutes. This makes an awful lot, so I'll let you know how it freezes.
Next time I would up the hot spice and reduce the cinnamon. I can see adding different veggies. I think something like kale would be okay, but on a batch by batch basis - as I have found kale does not reheat. Mushrooms and coriander would probably be fab.
ann
My Galleries My Photography BLOG
Ramblings About Me
Between my coffee bean grinder and my current blender, we're doing okay for now, but when those two appliances belly up we'll likely go ahead and replace them with a VitaMix. I hadn't remembered you could buy one refurbished; that's great, definitely an incentive to follow the lead!
It's great that you're breastfeeding ~ in addition to the many other benefits, you're literally giving your beautiful little girl a taste for the foods you eat. People are always amazed at some of the foods my little ones eat, and it's because they've grown accustomed to the taste via my breastmilk. Same reason why ethnic babies can stomach spicier foods, whereas SAD babies often cannot. By the time she is a year old and ready for solids, your daughter will have developed a taste for the foods you prefer and it will be much easier to introduce some of the healthier choices to her.
I saw you are reading the Super Foods book - it's a favorite among many moms I know, and I love that she focuses less on meat than many other books available on the topic. Great reference, you'll get a ton of use of that book.
I made the pancakes again, this time opting for oats/walnuts/orange zest/almond extract instead of vanilla/cinnamon and I had great results. They were fluffy AND delicious so I edited my original post with the new and improved recipe: http://dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=758867&postcount=1166 .
(Sorry, Schmoo :giggle )
-Anne
I haven't read either book, so I can't comment as to the specifics of the diet other than what I've read in this thread. But I'll say that from experience, most people do well to transition slowly into a new lifestyle - that is, they are more likely to stick with a new lifestyle if they ease into it. So it sounds like tho' your weight loss has plateau'd on just a veg*n diet, a positive is that you ARE feeling better and you are more likely going to be successful as you venture into the next phase: ETL. So you ARE doing awesome, and you'll do even MORE awesome as you continue on the journey to good health.
I didn't want to read either book for a few reasons, one being that I'm happy with my current 'diet' (way of eating, not plan to lose weight). But as this thread progressed, curiousity had gotten the better of me
It's true; woman are biologically inclined to hold on to their fat reserves, and the slightest thing can set off triggers that has our body plateau as it sorts out our environment. Too rapid a weight loss in particular, especially during childbearing years, will result in a body raising a red flag (hitting a plateau) .. even if you have a lot of weight to lose.
And it's just the nature of a woman's design; the hormonal flux from childbearing, nursing, and the "change of time" beyond that ... we're most subject to a plateau because we have more at stake biologically than does a man.
As suggested, we just have to hang in there and work through it ... KNOW that we will and can work through it, if we continue to nurture our bodies with good food and reassure it that we've got a safe (if somewhat different) environment than what it is accustomed to.
As one who's become a bit obsessed with learning as much as I can about the state of the today's real science about nutrition (partly because I have very smart friends who often challenge my beliefs so I feel like I have to get smart about this), a friend of mine recommended the book Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. It supposedly contains a bunch of recent science on nutrition, though the author is a journalist who interviews scientists, not a scientist himself.
Here's a NYTimes review on the book which does say that it's heavy on citing science, but also calls into question some of it's conclusions. Here's another article on the book. Apparently, the book arrives at the conclusion that carbohydrates are what is making America fat and that a calorie of fat is much less fattening than a calorie of sugar. The author states: "the fewer carbohydrates we consume, the leaner we will be." All the reviews say that it's so full of science references that it's a hard read so it's certainly not meant to be a "populist read". From the little I've read in the reviews, the conclusions sound pretty suspect and some are in conflict with those of TCS and ETL. Avoiding refined carbs (like sugar) is completely consistent with TCS and ETL, but if all carbohydrates are equally condemned, then that's a clear conflict.
So ... has anyone else read this book? Any thoughts you could share? Any good web writeups on this book that help to put it's findings into perspective, particularly relative to the conclusions of TCS and ETL?
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
Well I haven't read the book, but your description reminds me of some discussions that took place in a biochemistry class I took oh so long ago.
We were discussing cellular metabolism, the carbohydrate cycle, and how it all relates to food and energy production in an animal cell. It is really quite simple from a top down view: cells rely on glucose for energy. They get glucose from the breakdown of other organic complexes, and the ease of turning a particular food stuff into glucose varies depending on the kind of food stuff it is. Simple carbs (sugars) take less work to turn into cellular energy than complex carbs (found in grains etc), it is lots more work to metabolize protein into components that can then be made into glucose, same with fat, but it can be done and the body will do it when necessary.
When the body has found enough energy from food, it stores the rest of the energy it has taken in, in the form of fat. The trick is to balance the amount of energy intake and output for weight maintenance, take in more energy for weight gain and less for weight loss.
So, then there is the next level of complexity that goes beyond cellular energy requirements, to look at the vitamins, minerals, good fats and other nutrients that we are supposed to take in when taking in food for energy.
Next layer is to think about all the things in our food now that aren't supposed to be there, hormones, pesticides, etc. and further more how processing into componenets rather than looking at the whole food changes the interaction between those nutrients.
So all those years ago, my prof contended that one could survive quite well, without dietary disease, living on junk food if the calorie intake matched that needed for that individuals output. After all refined cereals and even chocolate bars are enhanced with extra vitamins and minerals. Heck, I can now buy orange juice with added omega 3 fat! WTF!!!!
Anyway, I don't think that a specific food group is to blame for the health of the America's. I think it is a series of choices that have been made by food manufacturers, government agencies, and by individuals in terms of level of activity. As well, by the medical community that is so willing to pull out the prescription pad because that is more likely to get buy in from the patient than a lifestyle change would.
No, I am sorry but I don't buy 'good calories, bad calories' as it pertains to carbs - maybe to actual food but not food components.
ann
My Galleries My Photography BLOG
Ramblings About Me
stirfry - I am making these today - plan to bbq them. Will it work?
EDIT:
We bbq'd them and it worked well. They are very tastey too.
So, here is what I did (and where I made mistakes!
I used 1 can each of romano, pinto and black beans. My primary error was that I did not drain them.....
Then I used a small white sweet onion
4 ribs celery
steel cut oats (probably a cup by the time I made up for the wetness from above error)
3/4 c diced portabello mushroom
flour to try to bind it, but it was really wet
cumin
for the wet ingredient (per stirfry's recipe) I used salsa - I had some black bean salsa and some pico de gallo that needed using, so it amounted to probably 3/4 cup.
In the end, in order to get rid of the excess moisture and form something similar to patties, I reverted to the trick we use with ground beef patties - I added crushed whole wheat (stone ground) crackers.
Hubby tried them - his pronouncement is they need salt...which of course I never add to anything.
But anyway, we had burgers, greek salad and bbq sliced potatoes - it is beginning to feel like spring so the menu should reflect that!!!
Thanks, stirfry - the recipe is great!
ann
My Galleries My Photography BLOG
Ramblings About Me
He's completely focused on the tradeoff between fat and carbs but my issue is those terms are so general. It's like debating whether light or subject is more important in photography.
And I don't get his claims. In the NYT article he says:
It is also undeniable, note students of Endocrinology 101, that mankind never evolved to eat a diet high in starches or sugars. ''Grain products and concentrated sugars were essentially absent from human nutrition until the invention of agriculture,'' Ludwig says, ''which was only 10,000 years ago.'' This is discussed frequently in the anthropology texts but is mostly absent from the obesity literature, with the prominent exception of the low-carbohydrate-diet books.
But... What about fruit? In 11 pages of his NYT article, he doesn't say. Man never ate fruit in his evolutionary history?
Gary is a long-time Atkins devotee and understands the appeal of Atkins:
Atkins allowed his readers to eat ''truly luxurious foods without limit,'' as he put it, ''lobster with butter sauce, steak with béarnaise sauce . . . bacon cheeseburgers.''
His NYT article is data-free.
I think ETL, The China Study, Healthy at 100, in Defense of Food, etc., have it right that it's about food, not about general terms like carbs and fat. And I think there's an overwhelming body of evidence that fruits and vegetables are linked to lower rates of chronic disease. Some good-for-you foods are high fat, low carb, and some are the reverse. If you're going to restrict fruits and vegetables, which Taubes and Atkins do, it seems like you have to show that they aren't good for you. Is there any data that shows that? As far as I know, there is only a mountain of data that shows the reverse.
Today, hubby had one cold, and liked it, the 17 yr olds gf is vegetarian and she had one reheated (in a fry pan) and has told me "they are sooo goood!". It's a keeper recipe and I recommend it for sure.
(and you know that you are entering a new phase of your life when you interrupt your kid & gf in the hottub...kissing!):uhoh :uhoh
My Galleries My Photography BLOG
Ramblings About Me
http://photos.mikelanestudios.com/
Oh, Ann! I'm sorry I missed your earlier question, but so glad to hear you gave the recipe a shot.
I am MORTIFIED that I forgot about the canned beans having extra liquid, and I will go back to edit my post accordingly. I'm so SORRY!!!
(I have a 16yr old sister - I will never forget the time I picked her up from school, and was subjected to her an the BF's decades-long slobberfest right outside the passenger window. I'm STILL traumatized
Thanks. I hadn't see his own NYT article so I'll take a look at that and see if I can get a better idea what exactly he's claiming. Just to be clear here, I myself am fully sold on the concepts in ETL, TCS, In Defense of Food, etc... I'm just trying to learn how to explain to folks who have been following more Atkins-like principles where Taubes is off. He apparently uses enough science citings in his work that some folks think he has credibility.
So far, I think Fuhrman and Taubes would both agree that refined carbs are pretty worthless and, if you eat many of them, they could certainly make you fat. It ought to be pretty non-controversial that they are loaded with calories, have very little real nutrional value and contain very few of the things that make you feel full. Hmmm. High in calories, low in nutrition, doesn't make you feel satiated. Duh - eat much of this kind of food and you will get fat and not get appropriate nutrition. There certainly are better diet choices choices for both weight loss and health.
I will have to read more of Taubes to understand his position on fats and fatty foods because many kinds of fats have exactly the same characteristics (high in calories, low in nutrition, don't make you feel full). It can't possibly be more healthful to eat a fatty piece of meat than some fruits and vegetables.
Also, I want to find out whether he's condemning all carbs like those in fruits and vegetables because if that's the case, then he's clearly steering people in an unhealthful direction.
I guess I have my next reading assignment.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
No problem! Whew, I spent the last hour going back 20 pages in this thread and adding recipes. The Tastebook has been updated! I hope I didn't forget anything or add in any recipes that don't want to live in there. I hope to dip into it and play around with some of the really great ones that have come up in the last several weeks.
Anne, the second (and third) times I made those muffins were much betterer. I do believe I totally overmixed them, plus I might have overbaked them the first time, too. Since then a batch of 12 muffins has been lasting Trav and I about 48 hours.
Photos that don't suck / 365 / Film & Lomography
"Eat your broccoli! That's the advice from UCLA researchers who have found that a chemical in broccoli and other cruciferous vegetables may hold a key to restoring the body's immunity, which declines as we age." Here's an article about that study at UCLA.
"Published in the online edition of the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, the study findings show that sulforaphane, a chemical in broccoli, switches on a set of antioxidant genes and enzymes in specific immune cells, which then combat the injurious effects of molecules known as free radicals that can damage cells and lead to disease."
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
It's a condensed version of China Study and Eat To Live, with F-bombs on every page
My wife was reading it yesterday, and last night I picked it up to see what it was all about.
Quick read, nothing new if you've read China Study and ETL, but a fun read nonetheless
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
I am surprised I haven't heard this book mentioned in this thread before! Hilarious yet sobering read.
50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 24-70 2.8L, 35mm 1.4L, 135mm f2L
ST-E2 Transmitter + (3) 580 EXII + radio poppers
I actually think that's a great alternative to get the info out there. I get a lot of people asking me questions about my diet change because it's been so noticeable, but their eyes glaze over when they hear Dr this and Dr that and research publications from universities....
Photos that don't suck / 365 / Film & Lomography
Straight talk, no BS. Rather funny, too
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
There were no ETLs in our Borders, nor the one I tried in Columbus, Ohio.
The shelves were filled with books that had titles like Ultrametabolism.
I love the branding on Skinny Bitch because you notice it, don't forget it, and most women (the market for diet books) want to be skinny. I love the avoidance of dairy and meat, using whole wheat instead of white, etc.
My only reservation is it's not the healthiest fare. It's more about vegan mac and cheese than kale smoothies, but you can't have everything and I know it takes time before you're loading up on veggies.
Hey, it's a lot more progress than most of America
We had to bring our own food to the track this weekend or our only options would have been Cheeseburgers, Double Cheeseburgers, hot dogs, BBQ pork and sodas. We had a huge bag of freshly made salad each and whole wheat pitas with organic peanut butter instead :ivar
Sign up for a SmugMug account and save!
It has much more science and facts than Michael Pollen's book, but he sure knows how to be the journalist and write what people would want to read better than her.
She had dinner with the founder of Whole Foods and reported what he said as if it were probably true; the journalist bypassed him and instead looked at labels in Whole Foods that claimed "free range" and went to the farms to see what free range meant.
She appealed to our concern over animals and the environment; he appealed to our self-interest in our own health. She covered corporate self-interest; he covered corporate scandals.
In other words, the journalist knows how to investigate a story and make it appeal to consumers. She knows how to do science and report the brutal facts which make you recoil.
One disturbing thing she said is 80% of soybeans grown in American are genetically engineered and the farmers report that they are much easier to store because bugs, bacteria, mice and stuff don't like to make a meal of them. As Michael Pollen said in his talk, "They're not stupid."
Another is that the genetically-engineered growth hormone rGBH to make cows produce more milk is illegal in Japan, Australia, Canada, the European Union and 101 countries in total, but it's fairly widely used in the U.S. Monsanto sues makers of organic milk that put on their labels, rGBH-free. There is no requirement to label milk as having rGBH. Some very convincing data ties it to distress in the cows and cancers in humans.
I have to take the book in small doses so I don't get sick.
This is the kind of title I would avoid, but it is also the kind of book my daughter might just buy into. I particularly like the quote: which of course is what I try to tell her, but apparently not effectively. It's always been about making good choices and all things in moderation at our place but she would prefer the quick fix, pill or surgery.
And she needs to recognize that her healthy body weight isn't going to be 120lb nor is she going to fit into a size 2. At 5'11", she shouldn't expect to be built like twiggy.
Actually, for many years, I absolutely avoided talking about my size and shape or changing anything because I wanted to send her the message that she needs to accept the skin she is in. We are a big family, none really anywhere near overweight other than me(the boys are actually thin), and again all but me have maintained good activity levels.
I needed to change because I was feeling old and crappy. I have no desire to become 'skinny', just feel better and have some grasp that I am healthy.
I was chatting with my dh yesterday and made an analogy between the Omnivores Dilema/ETL information and our dietary choices and what was known 30+ yrs ago about the health dangers of smoking; and how the special interest groups and lobbyists had/have control over government decisions and the information that gets back to the public. I asked "will we look back, in 20 yrs, and say we should have listened to the information available then".
just some random ramblings
My Galleries My Photography BLOG
Ramblings About Me
Interesting. Jane has spent a lifetime agitating and inspiring. She also has done some controversial things and had to be smuggled out of Africa on occassion. Do you know that she is trained as a secretary and had no specific scientific training prior to being hired by Louis Leaky to sit and observe chimps in Africa?
Which book is/was more meaningful for you?
ann
My Galleries My Photography BLOG
Ramblings About Me