High protein diet?

I though about trying a high protein diet. I dont really want to do atkins because I know it can be dangerous. What if I make my own diet? Eat about 4 servings of protein, 1 carb, all the rest fruits and veggies? Any opinions will help!

Thu. Dec 1, 10:46pm

fruits and veggies are carbs...Whatever you do, just make sure the calorie intake is less than the caloric output...

Thursday, December 1, 2005, 11:10 PM

IF, by chance, you have type O blood, look into the blood type diet. The diet for O types is a largely protein based diet. Makes you healthier, and you lose weight.

If you really want to make a high protein diet work, cut out wheat. Have rice, rye, spelt, sugar, and other carbs, but cut out wheat. You might be surprised at how good you can feel with out it.

Friday, December 2, 2005, 12:16 AM

blood type diet?

Can anyone point to a good web site about this? I've heard about it, but don't really know what it's about.

Friday, December 2, 2005, 3:49 PM

Body for life. Protein/fat/carbs. This is the best.

Link

Friday, December 2, 2005, 6:11 PM

Blood Type Diet

BEST DIET EVER!!!!! Love it, love it, love it. Healthier, happier, and thinner, in a short time. Noticeable, and amazing difference- emotionally and physically.

check out www.dadamo.com

Friday, December 2, 2005, 11:25 PM

anecdotes, not science

I'm happy the so-called blood-type diet is working for some...and it MAY be very beneficial, however, there is no real science or clinical evidence anywhere which demonstrates that blood-types make any difference whatsoever in HOW you lose weight. The mechanism for any diet boils down to only one thing, fewer calories in than out. Good luck whichever route you choose, just be informed. Debs

Sunday, December 4, 2005, 3:15 PM

Debs, I disagree. There's many studies out there done by Dr. Dadamo, and other doctors that support his findings. While the book may have lacked *some* (but not any) scientific support or citations in the original eat right for your type book, the live right for your type book did. Are you the same kind of person who dismisses homeopaths, and continues to look to prescription drugs for health?

Calorie intake and output is NOT the only reason for wieghtloss. Hormones, metablism, all kinds of things affect your wieght and your overall heatlh. And moreover, to only count calories, and ignore the reaction between your food and what's inside of you, is naive.

I mean, people here say you should drink more water, get enough sleep, try not to stay be overly stressed- those factors affect health and weghtloss, but are NOT part of the calorie in calorie burned equation. Things that some people swear by, such as food combining, is not part of a calorie input/output approach.

If calorie in calorie out was the healthiest and best way to lose weight, why is it that there are so many drugs for those with diabetes and high cholesterol for when "diet and exercise" is not enough. Why is it that high fibre starch diets work well for some, while for some atkins like diet work better for others?

A car will not work properly if you put the wrong fuel in it. A body will not function efficiently if you put the wrong fuel in it. But some of us are family cars, some of us are sports cars, and some of us are diesel trucks.

Sunday, December 4, 2005, 8:10 PM

http://www.dadamo.com/ask/ask2.pl?20050227.txt

Noweigan Medical Journal article:

Conclusion: The ABO-system, secretor status and other systems (MN, Rh) sheds light on the disposition for illness. Lectins in food affect our health, and the blood type gene influences near by genes. Interactions between blood type and environment can probably explain why some get sick while others remain healthy through a long life.

As a public health notice for diabetics, wheat increases insulin resistance (hint, there's more wheat in whole wheat product than refined wheat)

http://www.dadamo.com/ask/ask2.pl?20051122.txt <- you can find most of the quoted articles on google.

Link

Monday, December 5, 2005, 12:58 AM

I agree that we are all different and burn calories differently. Our metabolic rates vary. However, it all comes down to the law of thermodynamics. "Energy in" must equal "energy out". If you can determine how much energy you expend based upon your metabolic rate, which takes into account factors such as body weight, amount of lean muscle mass, exercise, etc, then you can evaluate how much energy you need to consume in order to maintain your weight. Consuming 20% more or less of this number will allow you to gain or lose weight safely.

Monday, December 5, 2005, 11:02 AM

so if thermodynamics is the be all and end all, then why do people plateau? You start with the assumption that all food is energy that the body will burn in the same manner. There you are wrong.

Your metabolic rate is a matter of how efficiently your body is working. Eating foods that slow your system down, that your body has a hard time digesting, will affect how easily your body can use what you put in. Eating what your body needs to work it's best, will increase your metabolic rate so that you don't have to work as hard, and your body will naturally use most of the energy you put in.

Moreover, knowing what your body needs to be it's best affects your overall health. You can get skinny by cutting your calories, but increase your chances of arthritis pain, diabetes, headaches, fatigue, and all kinds of other problems. Or, you can choose to eat what is good for your specific blood type, lose wieght, and increase health. Why not pursue both health and weightloss?

Monday, December 5, 2005, 12:14 PM

Your body like all else (e.g. the Earth) is continuously trying to reach homeostasis. People plateau (i.e. can't lose any more weight) because the amount they are consuming is equivalent to what they are using. That is why it's important to keep changing your exercise routine. Doing different exercises (e.g. interval training if you're used to endurance training) will cause you to increase your lean muscle mass. That's why one might get sore after doing a new exercise. With more muscle tissue on your body, you will burn more energy. Therefore, if your calorie consumption is constant, you will continue to lose weight.

And I agree that the body "burns" different foods more/less efficiently. For instance, the body doesn't digest fiber easily, therefore eating foods with fiber in them will satisfy your hunger longer than foods without. However, a calorie is a calorie. 100 calories of donut is just the same as 100 calories of cheese. You might feel hungrier sooner after you eat the donut but it's still 100 calories. And yes, YOU might get hungry 20 minutes after eating the donut, whereas I might get hungry 50 minutes later. That's because our metabolic rates are different. You can calculate your resting metabolic rate based on your oxygen consumption and body's efficiency. Add in the calories you burn doing daily activities and exercise, and voila! You've got a good estimate of the number of calories you need each day. Of course, if you're weight training and you're increasing your muscle mass over time, your resting metabolic rate will increase and you'll have to take this into account.
I think we both agree that a healthy balanced diet improves overall health, but I don't agree that a fried onion ring might not be good for me but may be good for you because we have different blood types. Our blood types may be different because we are genetically different. And because we are genetically different, we have different metabolic rates. The onion ring is still not a good choice for either of us.

Also...this was posted previously: "If calorie in calorie out was the healthiest and best way to lose weight, why is it that there are so many drugs for those with diabetes and high cholesterol for when "diet and exercise" is not enough. Why is it that high fibre starch diets work well for some, while for some atkins like diet work better for others?"

Diet and exercise is not a cure for diabetes or high cholesterol. Eating a balanced diet and exercise is recommended to keep your body in its best condition. There are skinny people with high cholesterol. A thin person isn't always a healthy one. And yes some people are more prone to certain diseases because of their genetic make-up. But an obese person, although they may have been more likely to become obese based on their genes, still has a metabolic rate just like the rest of us, which determines the amount of calories they need to maintaint their weight.

Also, the atkins diet, the grapefruit diet, etc., may work for weight loss, but they are by no means healthy diets. Obviously you're eating fewer calories on these diets than you're used to. How many eggs, pieces of meat and cheese, grapefruits, etc. can one eat in a day? These, unlike pasta, aren't calorie dense foods so you can eat more for fewer calories. A balanced diet of whole grains, fruits, vegetables, lean meats and dairy is, in my opinion, the best way to go. You're most likely to get all your essential vitamins, minerals, fats, amino acids, etc that you need, and you'd be able to maintain this way of eating for life.

Ok, that's all for now.

Monday, December 5, 2005, 5:16 PM

Exhausting your muscles, increases lean muscle mass (the tearing and repairing of your mucles). "Changing exercise" doesn't increase muscles mass. One gets sore after a workout most often because of lactic acid build up. I agree muscle increases the amount of calories burned.

Onions fried in Canola or olive oil are perfect for me (battered is bad because batter has wheat). But while I thrive on and crave red meat, my best friend, type A blood, gets sluggish and indigestion when she eats red meat. (And yes, there will be people out there who say I have A blood and I'm fine with red meat- I was "fine" with wheat until I eliminated it, feel better without it, and adding it in makes me ill)

How is it that a food is given a calorie measurement? You are told food x has y calories- but how did "they" come to that conclusion? How do you know that the apparent value of 100 calories of donut IS equivalent to the 100 calories of cheese? And what about that for some of us, wheat germ agglutinin will tell bind to our fat receptors and tell our bodies to stop burning fat, so while those "100 calories" of wheat may be only "100 calories"- it's not as healthy for some of us as "100 calories" of steak. You assume that the energy value in that food will be consumed the same way in everybody.

When you go to the doctor with a cholesterol problem, he tells you to eat a certain way. They tell you to exercise. But for many, that doesn't work. Cholesterol isn't a "disease" that needs a cure- it's a condition created or eliminated by what you eat (or prescription drugs you take)- but for some the diet they follow works, while another person can follow the SAME diet, and it won't work. Diabetes is affected by what you eat, but many can manage it by watching what they eat, while some will follow the same diet and still require prescription medicine.

You are right, genetics plays a role in pre-disposition to disease- and how you eat will affect the manifestation of that disease. (And there are many out there currently working on a genotype diet)

While on Atkins, one usually consumes more calories than your typical 2000 limit. And while on atkins, few people count calories.

We tell people not to skip meals because then their body goes into conserve mode, and won't burn as many calories, because the body thinks a famine is coming and will conserve energy thinking it needs to save it. We tell people to get enough sleep to allow our systems to balance and repair to work efficiently.

I'm not saying you shouldn't exercise, and I'm not saying gorge yourself on 5000 calories a day- nor does the author and creator of the blood type diet (BTD) (to achieve wieghtloss, BTDers are encouraged to exercise, and keep a calorie amount in mind, but not to obsess over balancing the amounts). BUT, hormones and other factors DO play a role in wieghtloss, as any health professional is likely going to tell you. Maybe, it would be clearer or more accurate for me to say that calorie in calorie out, is vital to wieght loss, but how efficiently you burn those calories is determined by how efficiently your body is working. And what you eat, not how many calories you eat, directly affects how efficiently your body is working. You may *think* you're burning X amount of calories while working out, but you're not, because you're giving your body the wrong kind of food. Following the BTD, allows your body to work better, and better use the fuel you give it.

"Eating a balanced" diet is not as easy as people make it out to be. O's should not eat wheat, A's should not eat red meat, B's should not eat chicken, and AB's should not eat bananas. But most would argue that all of these should be included in a "balanced" diet.

And with the greatest respect, it is ASSININE to place one's number on a scale, over the state of their health. And when you chose to have the cookies, and then cut back on something good for you because you'll ruin your calorie total, you are participating in risky behavior. To eat low calorie, but overprocessed foods, in an effort to be "healthy" is ridiculous.

Chosing to follow the blood type diet allows you to pursue wieghtloss AND overall health at the same time. Following the BTD enables you to get all your "essential vitamins, minerals, fats, amino acids, etc that you need," and is most certainly easy to follow and maintain for life.

Have you read "Live right for your Type"? Try reading the book. I've studied atkins, I've looked at vegetarianism/veganism/rawfoods, I've exercised and ate "healthy" (whole grains, little meat, no sugar yada yada)- but what has done my body, and my health, and even my emotions best, is the BTD.

Monday, December 5, 2005, 6:59 PM

at the risk of getting in the middle of this...

I think what might have been ment by the comment that changing exercise routine will increase muscle mass was this:
When doing the same activity at the same intensity over and over again, the body becomes more and more efficient at this exercise. Thus, increasing muscle mass (by tearing and rebuilding as mentioned before) doesn't occur. It is only through changing intensity, duration, type of exercise, etc that the body can be challenged and really build more lean muscle mass.
a calorie is a measurement of energy that in technical terms is required to raise the temperature of 1 gram of water by 1 degree celcius. I think the calorie in vs calorie out theory of weight loss is a good but simplified version of the truth. Hormones, genetics, etc all play a role in weight loss/maintenance/gain, because ultimately, the effect that they have one metabolic rate which all plays into the calorie in,/calorie out theory.
I haven't reviewed the BTD book, so I can't really comment on what I think there. From my medical background and the studies that I've red, I think it sounds a bit fishy. But, I guess the thing is, if it is working for you, and you are healthy (ie..blood pressure, lipids, blood sugar) then go for it. As a women, be sure you are getting adequte calcium as well as a good multivitamin.

Monday, December 5, 2005, 9:40 PM

I'm getting enough calcium. My blood pressure is perfect, my sugars are fine, everything is peachy healthwise- in fact it has never been better. My sasthma is gone, my allergies are controlled without meds, and even my skin is clearer. My mother has been able to cut her insulin intake in half, and has eliminated her arthritis pain.

What sounds "fishy"?

Monday, December 5, 2005, 11:34 PM

I don't think that anyone means for you to be offended (and therefore defensive) about the whole thing. What matters is that it works for you, and that is wonderful!!! As many of us know through trial and error, different diet plans work for different people. I love the South Beach plan, and have lost weight when I couldn't on any other diet. The point is that we will all sing the praises of what has worked for each of us individuallly, and is just that, and individual preference. Best of luck to you and everyone else! We are all here for the same reason, so keep up the support!

Tuesday, December 6, 2005, 12:19 AM

what I find fishy is that when I go to the leading source for medical literature including review articles, and primary research ...Pubmed, and I find no articles to support this way of thought. It is not enough to have a small group of people that try something and swear that it works. It is not enough to have a book written by someone with the letters MD following their name. That is not scientific. You can't say that because you started diet A and then B occurred, that A caused B. There can be all kinds of factors, C, D, etc that you never knew were occurring that actually affected the outcome.
Also, for example, let say you follow the blood type plan that cuts out certain things among them wheat but also others. Well, when you change multiple things, it is impossible to attribute the change to all modifications or even just a single one. When one single change alone may have caused the result you desired without all of the other modifications. An example, lets say you cut out wheat, red meat, and dairy. All of a sudden you feel great...lots of energy, etc. Well....what caused the change?...the exclusion of dairy, wheat, red meat, all, or just one fo them?? You can't tell!! Maybe this hypothetical person had a mild form of celiac disease and the exclusion of wheat was what made the difference? Maybe the exclusion of certain food groups lowered diet variety resulting in decreased daily caloric intake which resulted in the beneficial effects?

Like I said before, if it works for you...knock yourself out. Maybe it will be the answer that we have all been looking for. But until I see evidence, it is just going to sounds "fishy" to me. Oh and the webbased outcomes that can be reported on D'Adamo's website doesn't count as being scientific.

Also, don't go handing out advice like diabetics should avoid whole wheat products. While there may be some evidence indicating that there are some people that produce antibodies to wheat that may hasten insulin resistence upon exposure, there is no proof that wheat causes insulin resistence on a large scale (ie, all diabetics or prediabetics). When you dispense blanket statements like that on a forum like this, you risk confusing people into improper decisions. Whole grain products are currently recommended in general because they have a slower rate of gastric break down, a slower effect on blood glucose, and provide fiber.

but anyway, like I said earlier, do whatever makes you feel good.

Tuesday, December 6, 2005, 12:34 AM

I get defensive when someone says there is no scientific background- because they're wrong- that's a matter of fact, not opinion. Beyond that, I'm fully aware everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I'm simply curious what sounds fishy. If the poster hasn't read the book, I'm not sure what he knows about, that he thinks sounds fishy. Could be he believes that wheat is good for everyone, could be he doesn't think red meat is good for anyone, or that chicken is bad for anyone, or that your blood type affects anything at all- I don't know, hence why I was asking.

The BTD is technically about 10+ different diets- based upon your blood type. (variables include ABO type, secretor status, rhesus facor and mn status) Different diets work for different people- you're right- because we have different blood running through our veins. Have you thought about why different diets work for different people? Obviously the BTD isn't the only diet that works for wieght loss. It wasn't really even designed to be a "weight loss" diet- it was designed to help people disease and other medical problems- but when you're healthy, it's easier to have a healthy wieght. Those I know who have tried the diet, love it, and how it makes them feel.

And if I sounded snotty or short pointing out the benefits I've recieved from the diet, I apologise- I was simply trying to illustrate the variety of benefits besides weightloss one can have. I understand the diet goes against mainstream nutritional thought- which makes some skeptical, but once upon a time, the idea that the earth rotated around the sun wasn't mainstream either ;)

Tuesday, December 6, 2005, 12:59 AM

DId you check the links I previously provided? One SPECIFICALLY, mentions articles on PUBMED that show that wheat germ agglutinin raises insulin intolerance- and these are all articles not written or participated in in anyway by the author of the book. Insulin intolerance is detrminental to diabetics. I'm not saying they should avoid grains- barley, spelt, rye, rice, etc., are all grains. But they're not wheat. Do you think anyone is actually going to be harmed by not eating wheat? (and I'm not celiac because I routinely eat gluten grains, with no problem)

If you actually go to his site, or read the book, he provided numerous research studies and their citations to support his findings. Studies that he did not partake in. I won't argue that the first edition published in 97 had little of the typical "scientific" research that some need to accept something as true. But that was 8 years ago, and much has happened since.

Tuesday, December 6, 2005, 1:08 AM

the articles sited to support the wheat - insulin resistance theory were about 20 years old. here is a current 2005 article that I found that explores whole grains, including wheat:

" Med Hypotheses. 2005;64(3):619-27. Related Articles, Links
Click here to read
Magnesium may mediate the favorable impact of whole grains on insulin sensitivity by acting as a mild calcium antagonist.

McCarty MF.

Pantox Laboratories, 4622 Santa Fe Street, San Diego, CA 92109, USA. mcarty@pantox.com

Recent epidemiology has linked high consumption of whole grains with reduced risk for diabetes, coronary disease, stroke, and various types of cancer; there is reason to suspect that improved insulin sensitivity is largely responsible for this protection. This phenomenon may be partially explained by the lower glycemic indices of some whole grain food products in comparison to their fiber-depleted analogs. Nonetheless, the fact that whole wheat flour promotes insulin sensitivity relative to white flour--and yet has a near-identical glycemic index--suggests that certain nutrients or phytochemicals in whole wheat, depleted by the refining process, promote preservation of insulin sensitivity. Magnesium is a likely candidate in this regard; magnesium deficiency promotes insulin resistance in rodents and in humans, whereas supplemental magnesium has been found to prevent type 2 diabetes in rodent models of this syndrome, and to improve the insulin sensitivity of elderly or diabetic humans. Magnesium-rich diets as well as above-average serum magnesium are associated with reduced diabetes risk in prospective epidemiology, and with greater insulin sensitivity in cross-sectional studies; moreover, other types of magnesium-rich foods--dairy products, legumes, and nuts--have been linked to decreased diabetes risk in prospective studies. The biochemical role of magnesium in support of insulin function is still poorly understood. In light of evidence that magnesium can function as a mild natural calcium antagonist, it is interesting to note suggestive evidence that increases in intracellular free calcium may compromise the insulin responsiveness of adipocytes and skeletal muscle, and may indeed play a pathogenic role in the insulin resistance syndrome. Thus, it is proposed that some or all of the favorable impact of good magnesium status on insulin function may reflect antagonism of the induction or effects of increased intracellular free calcium. Further research concerning the potential health benefits of long-term magnesium supplementation is clearly warranted. These considerations, however, should not detract from efforts to better inform the public regarding the strong desirability of choosing whole grain products in preference to refined grains."

finally, "scientific fact" is a bit of a misnomer. There bascially is no such thing. Science may support a certain hypothesis, but to say something is a fact...well, it just isn't put that way.

ok, anyway. I think we just see it different ways, and thats ok. Best of luck with everything. I won't write anymore because I don't think this is going anywhere productive.

Tuesday, December 6, 2005, 8:33 AM

Ok thank you everyone!

Wednesday, December 7, 2005, 12:11 AM

blood type and diet

Debs-the blood type diet is not for losing weight at all. It is about allergies and intolerances to certain types of food. It is very beneficial. It is not a rule for those bloodtypes, but it is definately what is general for people with those blood types. Holisitc medicine/health benefits are rarely supported by "scientific" or "clinical" studies. It is nonetheless highly beneficial.

Sunday, November 11, 2007, 2:10 PM

re

Thanks for post. It’s really imformative stuff.
I really like to read.Hope to learn a lot and have a nice experience here! my best regards guys!
grapefruit diet--grapefruit diet

Link

Sunday, August 2, 2009, 7:03 AM

re

Hello, I’m interested in advertising on your site. I’m currently looking for text link ads or blog post, please let me know if you accept sites such as mine and if you do what your prices are.
seo jaipur--seo jaipur

Sunday, August 16, 2009, 3:02 PM

Related Content: How To Lose Weight- The Basics Weight Watchers Points System The Fat Smash Diet The Eat To Live Diet The Beck Diet Solution How To Get The Motivation To Lose Weight		How To Be Successful Using PEERtrainer How To Burn Fat Online Weight Loss Support- How It Works Does Green Tea Help You Lose Weight? Tips On Using PEERtrainer Visit The PEERtrainer Community Diet and Fitness Resources
Fitness Weight Watchers Meetings Learning To Inspire Others: You Already Are Writing Down Your Daily Workouts Spending Money On A Personal Trainer? How I Became A Marathon Runner		Preventive Health How To Prevent Injuries During Your Workout Flu Season: Should You Take The Flu Shot? Are You Really Ready To Start PEERtrainer? Super Foods That Can Boost Your Energy Reversing Disease Through Nutrition
New Diet and Fitness Articles: Weight Watchers Points Plus How To Adjust Your Body To Exercise New: Weight Watchers Momentum Program New: PEERtrainer Blog Archive Review Of The New Weight Watchers Momentum Program		Weight Loss Motivation by Joshua Wayne: Why Simple Goal Setting Is Not Enough How To Delay Short Term Gratification How To Stay Motivated How To Exercise With A Busy Schedule
Real World Nutrition and Fitness Questions Can Weight Lifting Help You Lose Weight? Are Protein Drinks Safe? Nutrition As Medicine?		Everyday Weight Loss Tips How To Eat Healthy At A Party How To Eat Out And Still Lose Weight The Three Bite Rule Tips On How To Stop A Binge