Conference rocks::weight_control

    Please make clear the basis for your declarations of fact. Like:
    purely personal experience, experience of yourself and others, or
    perhaps you are a Doctor?
    
    A

    Oops Sorry I didn't get back to the topic sooner but my driving
    test got in the way...
    
    What I was trying to describe in the first topic is yet another
    finding by Doctors of how humans in general should eat so as to
    maintain their body's ideal weight...
    
    Experience wise I can only judge from the friends that introduced
    me to the method and both have had sucess. I am currently trying
    the method myself and so far I have lost some weight...
    
    Basically, the theory is that a person should eat foods that compliment
    each other so that one might eat green salad with some red meat
    as the former would help the digestion of the protein in the meat.
    However, eating fat based foods with proteins would be of no benefit
    as the proteins would not be digested properly and so on..
     
    The method that os suffested is that a person should only eat fruit
    in the morning and sour fruit should be eaten before sweet food
    such as bananas. Lunches and dinners should consist of balanced
    foods but the dinner should be eaten at least four hours before
    going to bed as this helps the digestion process.
    
    The eater is no longer reestricted to counting calories because
    sensible eating can make room for deserts too - but the ingridients
    must be carefully assessed -fats and proteins together are a bad
    combinatio!
    
    The two friends who tried this method and had success weren't both
    fat. One of them was underweight due to weight loss following a
    long period of illness. All methods tried before this were unsuccessful
    and now my friend has put on weight until quite naturally the weight
    increase stopped and my friend found that the weight gain was
    satisfactory. The other friend managed to lose 25 pounds instead
    and both were eating according to this diet.
    
    I can't remember the name of the book at this moment as I only use
    the food chart and not the book but I shall find out what the name
    is and pass it on...
    
    Please don't feel that this is the right solution for you because
    I am a true believer in using the method that gives you the most
    confidence and impetus as without those qualities diets don't always
    work.
    
    	Tahi

    I have heard of this method of grouping foods that complement each
    other to get more complete digestion and less stored foods.  I'd
    like more info on the subject if you could direct me to a book 
    or pamphlet on the subject.  It's really necessary for my health
    to loose a large amount of weight and I feel that temporary dieting
    is not the solution.  I need to modify the way I eat, and do not
    want to eliminate any of the food groups in the process.  
    
    Phyllis

    
    	I think it's all a myth.

	The body contains enzymes to digest foods, there's no reason to
    to eat "complimentary" foods for increased absorption.

	The effect you should see, when suitably selected foods are eaten
    simultaneously, is a reduction of nutrient absorption, due to food
    interaction (eg: oxalic acid will inhibit absorption of calcium).

-mike z

    It may be a myth.  It may work just because it makes you think about
    what you are eating.  That, in itself, can help people lose weight.
    I know that when I was a vegetarian and was not eating even things
    like lard, I would check the ingredients on cookies etc.  I found
    that only Sunshine was consistantly "vegetable oil" and that I had
    to decide whether I would eat lard or not eat the cookies.  I ended
    up being in much better control of my weight while I was a vegetarian,
    though I was not consciously dieting.
    
    However, there are loads of things we don't know about nutrition. 
    I think that nutrition is still in the "dark ages" relative to other
    medicine (and that medicine is in the dark ages relative to other
    disciplines, partly due to its complexity and partly to emotional
    issues, but that's another matter).  We are just discovering, in
    the last 10-20 years, many new essential vitamins and minerals, and
    many of the properties of the ones we know.  I'm not willing to rule
    out anything completely.  And if it works for you....
    
    --L

    
    
    Food combining has been in existence for ages.  Long ago civilizations
    did it naturally. It is only the modern man that goes against the laws
    of nature.  Have you ever known a calf to drink milk once it's
    weaned?  No.  But humans do..and not even human milk.  And folks wander
    around all winter wondering why they have colds??
    
    Holistic health stores carry many books on food combining.  
    Two good authors are Dr. Parvo Airola and Dr. Norman Walker.
    
    For example : Ever wonder why people get an upset stomach (gas) after
                     eating watermelon ?
    
    Well...most times the watermelon is eaten after a meal that most
    likely included meat, corn and veggies.  What happens is simple - 
    watermelon is a rapid digested food - mixed with slow digesting meat 
    (which by the way, meat can take as long as three days to fully digest) 
    the watermelon putrefies and you get bloat/gas/cramps.
    
    In food combining most fruits (especially the melons) are eaten alone.
    
    Try eating beans with beans and not meat and see if there is a
    difference.
    
    Conservative doctors and modern journals I am sure balk at this theory.
    But I believe doctors are in the practice of treating symptoms
    and not the causes - other wise they would be out of business.
    Treat the cause and the symptoms disapear.  Also ask any doctor or
    nurse how much time is spent on the study of nutrition during their 
    schooling.  Their responses will be your answer.  Not much !
    
    
    Let me add, I am not pushing this theory on anyone.  I am a person that
    believes in "people need to do what they need to for THEMSELVES".  If
    it works for them...who are we to say it is wrong... or knock it down.
    
    
    ...to your quest for optimum health  :-)
    

.6>    weaned?  No.  But humans do..and not even human milk.  And folks wander
.6>    around all winter wondering why they have colds??

	Let's see here - a rhinovirus (a cold) is a result of drinking
    or eating non-complimentary foods.

	Do I have that right?


.6>    Conservative doctors and modern journals I am sure balk at this theory.

	I wonder why.

-mike z

    On one of my many quests for weightloss I too followed the Fit For Life
    and Food Combining programs.  Did it help me lose weight?  No, it only
    made a difference in the way I digested food.
    
    But as soon as I hit my lifetime program I managed to digest food at
    all times, and I don't combine, nor do I eat my fruit at particular
    times, just eat when I'm hungry or need a lift.  I usually have five
    meals a day and mix my proteins and carbs together too.
    
    Must admit I have not had a problem since following a low fat program
    and can only say that Fit For Life and others similar aren't what I
    thought they were.  Nor have I had a cold or flu or been sick.  The
    only sniffle I got was when my head was filled with too much conflict
    and once I cleared that so went the cold!! (^'
    
    ...dale

    re. 3
    
    Sorry to take so long with the name of the book but I have been
    off sick and I can't find my food chart.
    
    It is really interesting to see how different people have reacted
    to this topic some are for it and others don't believe in it at
    all - perhaps the wisest comment was if it works for you then that
    all that matters - I Agree...
    
    Tahi 

    I have a problem with people equating colds with milk. 
    
    I have a problem with people saying that "many new vitamins have been
    discovered in the last twenty years".
    
    The "if it works for you then that's all that matters" is a statement
    of faith/superstition that I profoundly disagree with when the 'fact'
    that it has 'worked for you' is used to influence others without
    scientific proof that the 'effect' is related to the 'cause'.
    
    I also find people selling books selling junk solutions to real
    problems extremely offensive. Many such can RUIN lives if followed -
    and I speak from the bitter experience of one that has watched someone
    put themselves through hell for no good reason.
    
    
    
    
    						- andy

    Yo Andy, what's the problem with saying that new vitamins have
    been discovered?  I've read a lot about this, and have been reading
    both "alternate press" type stuff and medical journals.  Plus, I've
    talked to nutritionists.  All three agree that nutrition has a long
    way to go before we can say we've discovered most of the vitamins
    or how they work, never mind *all* of them.
    
    I know there are many quacks out there touting totally bizarre stuff.
    I agree, it's not wise to support people spending money on stuff that
    does not work, or is not supported at all, or makes them sick.  But
    let's not throw out everything, just because it's not totally
    understood or scientifically proven.
    
    An example: we still don't know how aspirin works (I got that from
    a MD, by the way) and we still use them despite the side effects.
    If we stuck only to what we can scientifically prove and understand
    and what causes no negative effects, we would not use aspirin.
    So, does aspirin work for you? for others you know? do you support
    doctors telling patients that they should use aspirin although noone
    really knows *how* it works?  How about the ads on aspirin - mostly
    of the testamonial sort - probably because it's difficult to get
    scientific evidence on lessening pain.
    
    So, aspirin has been used for a long time and has effects on a lot 
    of people and food combining does not?  Well, food combining is part
    of many oriental practices going back a LONG way.  You get something
    acid or something with papayan at most oriental meals (pickles or
    a fruit) to aid digestion, for example.  While I am not an expert on
    food combining, I would bet there's a very extensive history of its
    use.  Perhaps someone else in the file knows more on this.
    
    --Louise

    Yep, I was thinking about this last night.  The book that describes all
    these different rules may be a bit overzealous -- such things often are. 
    But that doesn't mean that they aren't based in fact, and that following
    their suggestions will have no positive effect.  It is good to read this
    stuff with a skeptical eye, but do be open to the possibility that it's
    right!

    While I don't believe anything has been conclusively proven, I can easily
    believe that milk consumption is connected to increased colds.

    I've been told by doctors, and read in books on holistic use of herbs,
    that congestion can lead to infection -- mucus is a very friendly
    environment for bacteria and viruses.  Milk definitely causes increased
    mucus production. Thanks to the producers of milk, we've been taught that
    it's good for us -- real health food!  But the symbiotic relationship we
    have with cows is a fairly recent development in human history.  I'm not
    convinced that it's a good thing.  I've heard that about 1/3 of adults
    can't metabolize the stuff; to me, that says that it may not really be
    something we're designed to consume as adults.  Just because I can drink
    it without lactose intolerance symptoms, that doesn't mean that it's good
    for me!

    Andy, you've had great success with a strict and traditional program, but
    that doesn't mean that alternative approaches to nutrition are nonsense. 
    In our zeal to adopt all things modern, especially in the US, much
    traditional wisdom was ignored, and lost by many.  Some of these things
    are being rediscovered -- they were derived from years of experience, and
    they should not be so lightly discarded just because the AMA hasn't
    blessed them.  I don't accept the Godhood of the medical profession.

    Beverly

.11>    Yo Andy, what's the problem with saying that new vitamins have
.11>    been discovered?  I've read a lot about this, and have been reading

	Which vitamins are these?

	All the ones I know about were discovered in the earlier part of
    this century, including allegedly newer ones like vitamin E.


.11>    way to go before we can say we've discovered most of the vitamins
.11>    or how they work, never mind *all* of them.

	The physiological mechanics of how vitamins work, as catalysts
    for metabolic reactions, are already known.  What is not known are
    all the possible interactions between vitamins and the human body.

	We DO know how they work.

	We do not all the side effects of any drug or food, however, so
    this is not unique to vitamins.


.11>    If we stuck only to what we can scientifically prove and understand
.11>    and what causes no negative effects, we would not use aspirin.

	That is not true.

	Aspirin can be shown, empirically (by observation), to be an
    analgesic, and anti-inflammatory drug.

	Aspirin IS proven.

-mike z

    Thanks Mike. 
    --------------
    
    Beverley,
    		I don't attach labels such as "nonsense" lightly. As I said
    before, I just have this problem with the advancement of factoid
    statements that are incomplete or misleading.
    
    		It isn't clear to me that milk relates to mucus or that
    mucus relates to colds. 
    
    		Now, it is DEFINITELY true that it is not 'natural' for the
    human animal to ingest milk beyond 8 years of age or so, because in
    areas where milk isn't an adult drink, the digestive system loses the
    ability to digest milk at around that age. A direct relationship
    between consuming a food and succumbing to a virus is a little
    unlikely, wouldn't you say?
    
    		As to the AmA, being a Brit, I've nowt to do with them.
    
    
    
    /andy/

    
    This discussion on milk is quite interesting - it is true that beyond
    a certain age humans do not need certain foods as much as before

    ....Am I wrong in believing that Red Meat is one of these foods
    (no I am not vegetarian...) and that part of the reason so many
    people eat red meat nowadays (or perhaps I used say in the latter
    half of this century) is not a Health induced reason but a wealth
    induced one?
    
    Tahi_I_am_regretting_starting_this_topic_now..... 

    
> Beverley,
    
    Two e's, not 3 -- it's Americanized. :-)
    
> It isn't clear to me that milk relates to mucus or that mucus relates 
> to colds.
    
    Huh?  I've never had a cold that *didn't* have a lot to do with mucus! 
    And I've been told by a GP and a sinus specialist that getting rid of
    congestion and keeping it away was the best way to prevent recurrance
    of my chronic sinus infections.
    
    Next time you have a cough, try drinking a glass of milk.  I think
    you'll find that you have a lot more mucus.  Folk wisdom is based on
    experience of people over hundreds of years; yeah, some of it is based
    in ignorance, but a lot of it is right on target.

> A direct relationship between consuming a food and succumbing to a virus 
> is a little unlikely, wouldn't you say?
    
    No, I wouldn't.  My entire point is that it's *VERY* likely that many
    such relationships *DO* exist.  Your body is a very complex mechanism,
    and the food you put into it does affect the way it functions.
    
re .15:    
    
>    This discussion on milk is quite interesting - it is true that beyond
>    a certain age humans do not need certain foods as much as before
    
    It's pretty clearly true of milk, I don't know about other foods.

>    ....Am I wrong in believing that Red Meat is one of these foods
>    (no I am not vegetarian...) and that part of the reason so many
>    people eat red meat nowadays (or perhaps I used say in the latter
>    half of this century) is not a Health induced reason but a wealth
>    induced one?
    
    People eat a lot of red meat in this country because we've been taught
    that it's good for us.  By the beef farmers.  Beef is a very wasteful
    way to raise food, and should be regardede as a luxury item -- we'd be
    a lot healthier, and the planet would be a lot healthier.
    
    I don't have all the figures with me, but I do know that in the state
    of California, which is in the middle of a serious drought, more than
    half the water used for any purpose in the state goes into beef
    production!  It takes 7 gallons of water to produce one pound of beef. 
    The energy used to raise and market beef is also outrageous when
    compared to vegetable protein sources.
     
    Beverly
    

    OK, ok, but mucous doesn't cause colds, whereas colds can cause mucous.
    
    IMO, of course...:-)

    Back to complementary foods... the focus was on foods that do not
    "interfere" with each other. But I've also seen a "diet", to lose
    5-10 pounds in 3 days, which alledgedly works on foods "cancelling"
    each other out and helping to rid your body of fat. (Drinking plenty
    of water is part of it as well.)

    Has anyone heard of or had experience with this "diet?" I've received
    copies from more than one source, but haven't tried it. (I despise one
    of the components, beets! Yucchhh! The last time I ate beets was
    when I was about 9 and my mother _bribed_ me to eat my bowl of borscht.
    I vowed to _never_ eat beets again.)

    /Peters

    I have heard of diets that involve eating foods that cancel each
    other out and seeing as I believe in complementary foods I guess
    that foods cancelling each other out may be possible. 
    
    However, I think that it is more likely that drinking lots of water
    is likely to be the reason that the food isn't digested properly
    because (I am told) water will have a diluting effect on body juices 
    which will than be less effective in the breakdown of food. This can 
    cause bloating after a meal and in some cases weight gain if you suffer
    from water retention.
          
    The bottom line being therefore that the foods aren't cancelling
    each other out so much as the water is inhibiting the disgestion
    of the food - This is just an opinion so feel free to make your
    own judgement(s)
    
    Tahi

    There is no flame, I'm not shouting, this is all in my opinion...
    
    When I was following Beverly Hills, Fit For Life, Food Combining, etc I
    was taking vitamins of all sorts and not drinking more than 1 to 1.5
    litres of water a day.  (I only drink water, not tea coffee, etc).  I
    was still having problems with digestion.
    
    Now, after more than 8 months on a very low fat program where I mix all
    sorts of food together at all times during the day, actually, I eat
    about six meals a day - I have no problems with digestion or bloating,
    nor have I taken ANY vitamins.  I have had one cold during that time
    which I managed to cut down to three days, stopped any bronchial asthma
    attacks and cut down the sinus problem to three days.  Normally a cold
    would take about 10 days, with me in bed on a breathing machine and
    sinus problems that would extend over two weeks.  I also drink a gallon
    of water a day, sometimes more! (^'
    
    Apart from that, my asthma is now totally under control, even with all
    the exercise I do.  The only dairy food I consume is nonfat yoghurt,
    about 12-24oz a day.
    
    I used to spout about how wonderful FFL etc was and how important it
    was to combine foods correctly, now I understand how important it is to
    just eat correctly - but cut back on the fats that create the fat! 
    Now, even without the vitamins and the food combining I have lost
    90plus pounds without one extra wrinkle on my face or neck, nor jowls
    around the jawline, and at nearly 43 my skin has never looked better
    and younger.  
    
    I have learned through experience on nearly every diet ever created
    about what works and what doesn't.  
    
    ....dale

    
    
    Mike z.  I have been away so this reponse is a little late.
    
    Dairy products are mucus forming.  When my children were little we
    cut back all dairy products in the winter and they did not get colds.
    
    As for the conservative medical journals balking at the theory of
    food combining - you replied " I wonder why."     I guess you did not
    read my note or you would have recalled I said "doctors of today treat
    symptoms and not the cause".  Treating the cause would mean curing
    the person and not needing further medical treatment = loss of money.
    Got a headache - take an aspirin and call me in the morning.  Not, lets
    determine what is causing these headaches.  Oops.  That would take
    longer than a 15 minute visit.
    
    When I refer to food combining I am not referring to Fit For Life
    (which isn't a true food combining method) and definitely not the
    Beverly Hills Diet.  I am referring to a holistic theory practiced
    by many.
    
     *flame on*
    
    I will not reply to this topic any more.  Mike Z. no matter what is
    written - in most any notes/file you take part in - you seem to disagree 
    or tear it apart.  If it's not your way - it cannot be right.  
    
    Andy - you have lost alot of weight - your way.  I really believe
    everyone has the right to do what works for them - even if it didn't
    work for you.
    
    *flame off*
    
    I am just relieved that there are people with open minds - or there
    wouldn't be new discoveries in medicine.  After all - modern man still 
    does not understand or even tapped a 1/4 of the potential of the brain.
    
    
    

    
    Plenty of open minds here. However, some evidence helps. Further,
    making exaggerated or hopeful statements like "new vitamins..." etc
    doesn't assist your street cred.
    
    Please understand, neither MikeZ nor I are being nasty. We're
    legitimately questioning such statements. 
    
    If you're not prepared to debate it, that's a shame, especially if you
    believe you have evidence, rather than faith, to back you up.
    
    
    /andy/

.21>    Got a headache - take an aspirin and call me in the morning.  Not, lets
.21>    determine what is causing these headaches.  Oops.  That would take

	A doctor who treats chronic headaches (I assume we're not
    talking about a one-time headache) with "take an aspirin" is
    hardly the norm.

	I doubt you'd be able to dig one of those lousy doctors up,
    without knowing where to look.


.21>    symptoms and not the cause".  Treating the cause would mean curing
.21>    the person and not needing further medical treatment = loss of money.
.21>    longer than a 15 minute visit.

	This is a common theory, among people who dislike or mistrust
    contemporary western medicine.

	It is my opinion that this is overly nearsighted and incorrect.

	It's like saying there are not enough medical problems in the
    world today.  On the contrary, we have way too many medical problems.
    Finding permanent cures for all the serious human illnesses still
    leaves all the minor ones like colds, sore muscles, earaches, tired
    eyes, hearing loss, toothaches, aging, freckles ... need I go on?


.21>    I will not reply to this topic any more.  Mike Z. no matter what is
.21>    written - in most any notes/file you take part in - you seem to disagree 
.21>    or tear it apart.  If it's not your way - it cannot be right.  

	You will find that when I write authoritatively, I have much
    research to back it up.  I do not assert my opinion unless I consider
    it to have some basis in fact.

	I have been involved in health, nutrition, and exercise since
    the early 80s, and have read extensively over that time period.

	I am not talking from limited exposure to a few ideas, I am
    speaking as someone who has spent 10 years reading all he could get
    his hands on with regard to health and fitness.

	I am sorry, but when I read silliness, I identify it as such.

	Please don't take it personally.

-mike z

    Well, I found a chicken-scratch version of that "self-canceling" diet.
    Has anyone else seen this?

    DAY 1
      Breakfast
    	1/2 grapefruit
    	1 slice toast (rye)
    	2 tablespoons peanut butter
    	coffee or tea
      Lunch
    	1/2 cup tuna
    	1 slice toast (ye)
    	coffee or tea
      Dinner
    	2 slices meat, your choice
    	1 cup string beans
    	1/2 cup beets [YUCCHH!]
    	1/2 cup vanilla ice cream
    	1 small apple

    DAY 2
      Breakfast
    	1 egg (hard-boiled)
    	1 slice toast (rye)
    	1/2 banana
    	cofee or tea
      Lunch
    	1/2 cup cottage cheese
    	5 saltines
    	coffee or tea
      Dinner
    	2 franks
    	1 cup brocolli
    	1/2 cup carrots
    	1/2 banana
    	1/2 cup vanilla ice cream

    DAY 3
      Breakfast
    	5 saltines
    	1 slice cheddar cheese
    	1 small apple
    	coffee or tea
      Lunch
    	1 egg (hard-boiled)
    	1 slice toast (rye)
    	1 small apple
    	coffee or tea
      Dinner
    	1/2 cup tuna
    	1/2 cup beets [there they are again!]
    	1 cup cauliflower
    	1/2 cup canteloupe

    Further instructions: drink lots of water, no substitutions or alterations
    of quantities. Several people I know swear by it (">5 pound in 3 days"),
    but, like I said, I haven't tried it myself since I was doing O.K. without
    the beets. :-)

    /Peters

    
    Hi           
    
        Yes i have tried this chemical breakdown diet, and it does 
        work. Only the bread was not rye but it was toasted wheat.
        It wasn't that bad at first if i remember correctly you were
        on it for three days and off for four or something like that.
        It gets old quick, but does take off the weight, i think ill
        try it again someday soon.
                                              
        Laura                 

    Re:24
    
    Looks like the old "rotation" diet to me.  Works, but then it is rather
    a limited intake.  I tried it once and it gets old real quick.
    
    Linda B

	The diet in .24 "works" by causing you to lose water from your
    body tissues.

	You won't lose much fat on that diet since the human body cannot
    efficiently metabolize fat while in a state of dehydration.

-mike z

    If anyone is still interested in the name of the book mentioned in .1
    it is called 
    
    Food Combining for Health - by Dorris Grant and Jean Joice
    
    Tahi