I Make Failed Low Carbers Famous!!!!
And they made up tee shirts to brag about it!!! Scamming one's readers must be good business these days if these two frauds have the money to make up T's (fashion tip ... large lettering isn't flattering) to mock those they "have no use for" nuisance bloggers. Well blogger, singular.
OMG. You can't make this up. Check out Amy Dungan and Jimmy Moore at the recent low carb meet and greet hamming it up. Here's what Georgene (low carb failed me so I had gastric bypass surgery and now wrote a book about that) Harkness had to say:
My favorite moment was when Amy Dungan and Jimmy Moore donned their brand new “Haters Make Me Famous” Tee Shirts! Here they are hamming it up for the camera.
Those of you who have known Amy and Jimmy for any length of time know why these tees are so funny! Much laughter was had at the expense of the “hater” referenced in these tee shirts! Sometimes, all you can do is laugh and keep on being yourselves, knowing that in the end, the hater is going to lose.Those of you who have seen the before, after and before, after and after after and whatnot from these two, will know why these are anything but funny.
Here's Amy's 2007 "Success" and here she talks about her 2001- "Success" , which she doesn't even remind her readers of anymore, but was there earlier this year (sans any update of course).
2001-3 Maintained for 6 months before the regain began. You can read all about that HERE when in 2007 she found herself at 203 lbs and managed to get down to 159 lbs ... apparently before something got in the way.
 |  |
They are sad. Very very sad. And to make up tee shirts? Is there really no shame? I guess not. At least Jimmy brings us podcasts, but Amy only hedges and outright lies in those she's been a guest on.
Enjoy your fame, I suppose ...
Comments
no "ad personam" post fails to mention what donations J Moore gets, or what services Dr Lustig can afford, or what clothes they buy etc. :)
Just waiting for Jimmy to break out in song & dance to the theme from the 80s movie, "FAME".
well, I'm glad they're laughing, 'cuz dey soitenly ain't losin' no weight. *sigh* HOW is it "the masses" can't see who they're taking diet/nutrition advice from????
The sunk cost fallacy is a well-known concept in behavioral economics. Briefly summarized, the more you spend on something, the less you’re willing to let it go. The resource invested can be money, time, mental or emotional energy - it's all the same.
This unwillingness to let go will often lead to continued investments, not rarely in spite of negative effects. Since you've already put your money, time, or energy into it, so you simply keep pouring it on - you're throwing good money after bad, as the saying goes.
Why? You might be thinking that the payoff is just around the corner. If you give up now, all that time and energy will have gone to waste. So you cling on to this sinking ship, as it drags you further into the void.
http://www.leangains.com/2011/12/like-water.html
Keep doing what you do, Evelyn.
Not unlike models or actors, who look atrocious when they gain weight and show up in fan magazines with belly blubber. Difference: people in show biz don't normally posit reasons that the 'rest of us' get fat. They don't earn a living doing that. If they do earn a living being thin, and they can do that the vegetarian way, the Fruitarian way, the Ultimate Cleanse way, etc., they are usually called models.
Can't remember the last time a model or actress went online, or in print, and told the rest of us what we do wrong.
It's generally in bad taste to call attention to people's weight. Unless, of course, those people are making a living on their weight and their weight-loss techniques. Then it's perfectly fair.
I find it to be very childish and I lose respect for the person when they call others "haters". Its nothing more than grow-ups whining.
...
and all I got was this lousy Tee shirt"
Dunno if that was your intention.
T-shirts are never flattering.
Besides, anyone too lazy to button a shirt is never going to lose weight.
It's almost as if they are offloading their glaringly obvious lack of weight loss success (particularly Amy who is incredibly much fatter after her attempts at dieting) by shifting attention onto critics. I am in favor of low carbohydrate diets for weight loss, obviously, however this picture is simply S-A-D. The psychological motivation is obvious. "The problem isn't that I gained 100 pounds. The problem is that people are critical of my diet." <--- wut?!
It would be like Sandusky hanging out at a boyscout meeting wearing a shirt that said "haters make me famous". No, sir, the problem is you rape children, the problem IS NOT that we are "hating" on you.
TBH, I wish Jimmy Moore et al would pipe down a little. There are hundreds and thousands of ordinary people losing weight and keeping it off with low carb diet plans, but for some reason he has become the walmart of the low carb world, even though he is far from an ideal personal example. He fad diets, he thinks in rigid black or white absolutes, he demonstrates a very poor insight and awareness into his motivations, he isn't particularly concerned with scientific reality either (e.g. not at all being concerned that dietary fat increases insulin signalling in fat tissue, and will absolutely promote fat gain after a certain point).
Sorry to be a hater, but this needs to be said.
There are many examples of people who are applying carbohydrate control as part of massive long term weight loss, like myself. We just don't have circus like websites with our faces on it, selling crap.... so all the vegan nutjobs and gullible people end up thinking that low carb = "that diet where fat people justify eating bacon all the time".
Epistemological parsimony at its best.
One wonders why people like Jimmy and Amy can't bring themselves to do the same...just read the results coming in from the NWCR, ape the methods used, and duplicate the results.
In the age of information-overload, where sorting the reliable from the dodgy can take some discernment, I would have thought that the old mantra "success leaves clues" would have been better attended!
Cheers,
Harry
When I first blogged about heavy low carbers I cited a post by Jimmy Moore himself on the exact same topic! And I posted pics of him and Jared Fogle. You cannot apply different standards to people in the public eye advocating certain lifestyles and point out Dr. Oz getting polyps while ignoring any manner of maladies Dana Carpender has been diagnosed with for which she needs pharmaceutical assistance. Indeed she's one of the few LC'ers who is thinner these days because when she wrote a paleo cookbook she stuck to just those foods instead of the LC junk food, but more likely because weight loss is a known side effect of Wellbutrin.
So when Jared pudged back up a bit, he was the butt of many Subweigh (get it?! snicker) jokes and exposes by various tabloids and entertainment reporters. Now Jared and Jimmy are pretty comparable -- Jared is 6 years younger and lost his weight a little earlier in life, but he lost 65 pounds more than Jimmy and is an inch shorter. Jared at goal weighed 190 lbs, Jimmy has gotten to 215 twice since LLVLC. When Jared regained a bit, he "ballooned" to 231 lbs, meanwhile 230 lbs is Jimmy's official "after" weight. Jared kept his weight off for a decade before the regain problems he attributed to slipping back to old habits of chowing down on junk and dousing his salads with dressing (sound familiar?). In other words, his regain is not a rebuke of Subway or low fat, he didn't regain sticking to the low fat subs. Meanwhile, when you realize Jimmy has been 215, he has documented weighing almost 250 back in 2007 before Kimkins, he has struggled with regain for at least five of his eight years of LLVLC and -- here's the difference -- all the while adhered to his WOE.
So Oprah and Jared and Kirsty and all the rest get mocked routinely by low carbers -- let's not forget Tara Parker-Pope who was treated to a petition by Taubes and Attia for not wising up and losing the weight on low carb -- and skinny diet doctors routinely make fun of fat Americans eating low fat frozen yogurt. Nah ... no hate there. And the few thin (never fat) low carbers like Fred and Tom and Gary talk all the time about how much they eat. You have too in the past. So I don't think the reputation low carb has is undeserved or that one has to be a vegan nutjob or gullible to come away with that impression.
If there really are legions of long time successful low carb dieters out there why don't they do something about this? Do you think for one minute Jillian Michaels could sell stuff if she gained her weight back? Why do so many support these people? They support each other and ... judging from pictures from cruises and conferences and get-togethers, low carb is that diet you can eat bacon all day long and feel good about your obese self.
Millions of people have tried Atkins. You simply cannot use the excuse that Big Food, low fat diets, and the USDA are making and keeping people fat. Low carbers should at least be as thin as the public at large. Where oh where are all these skinny low carbers hiding? I get it. You're thin. You also lead an obsessive reclusive lifestyle in which you have 100% control over your home environment. Are there a thousand more like you out there?
So after that initial success what they should have done is asked themselves why they got fat in the first place and what they need to do to keep from getting fat again, and "Carbs" is the wrong answer (the easy answer is almost invariably the wrong answer). Obviously their consumption is far exceeding their output and though there will be short-term fluctuations in their weight, so long as they keep looking for the easy answer there will be no long-term solution.
In the science and medical field, we call that epidemiology!
I'm not counting other people's money. I'm talking to the discerning consumer. Take your average infomercial. Some people just buy stuff even if their common sense says it's too good to be true. And some things work, but on balance are still not worth having -- know what I mean? Folks if you like clean sneakers, get some Quick n Brite. It has a few other uses and works on SOME tough to clean laundry stains but on the whole is not worth the storage space. We bought a tub at a mall demo once -- e.g. not all that pricey and no shipping -- and would never buy another. Now Oxy Clean? That stuff rocks!
That was a bit of a tangent, but when someone is trying to sell me on an idea, I always take into consideration what they get out of me buying in. Thus far, I charge nothing so other than donations have no motive to stretch the truth here. If and when I do launch premium content, I expect consumers will hold me up to scrutiny. It doesn't mean I become a fibber, just that fame and fortune have been known to change people even if they weren't corrupted from the get-go. And for the umpty-billionth time, I have NO problem with people being compensated for their work. NONE.
So, Taubes (I know you didn't mention him but I'm famous for Taube$) had blown through a 3/4 million dollar book advance and is raking in bucks or at least lots and lots of perks for speaking engagements. Does that not impact his coming clean or changing his beliefs when presented with irrefutable evidence? My point about Lustig is that obesity is especially a problem in poor areas where the people drink lots of the soda he wants to tax into oblivion. He smugly expresses outrage and despair over the impending healthcare costs this "stable" of people will one day bring uponst him, yet he can't be bothered to give a shit about himself. And yet he HAS the means to have a private chef prepare all of his meals. So his eating like crap and pious attitude about how he's such a good boy about what really makes us fat while "raising awareness" (hype & scare mongering) about something OTHER people are doing/eating wrong is just sick. Disgusting and sick.
Jimmy Moore? He wrote a sanctimonious blog about Body by Vi. Promised his readers he'd never try to sell them on crap he would never put in his body in a million years. But I'M a hater for pointing that out, and you have a problem with me pointing out his monetary motivations? He built his webpire that is supporting 2 people on his weight loss success. It's not success anymore by any measure even if his latest escapade takes him down to 230 again, however briefly. Just a little over two years ago Jimmy stepped on the scale and saw 248. After going paleo baybeeeeeeeeee, his reported high weight was 303. That's 55 pounds. Do you think the corner he has painted his fortunes into has nothing to do with this?
Speaking of which -- in 2010 and 2011, the cruises weren't even underway and the next year's plans were already being discussed. Now we're 2 month's past Cruisegate 2012 and not a peep. Oh, it's planned (http://www.lowcarbcruiseinfo.com/) ... Here's the speakers:
ROBB WOLF
JIMMY MOORE
DR. MARY VERNON
DR. JAY WORTMAM
DR. LARRY MCCLEARY
DR. CATE SHANAHAN
DR. DWIGHT LUNDELL
DR. ANDREAS EENFELDT & LCHF FRIENDS FROM SWEDEN
JACKIE EBERSTEIN – TRIBUTE TO DR. ROBERT C. ATKINS
DR. JAYSON & MIRA CALTON
DAVE ASPREY
JONATHAN BAILOR
PLUS, ANOTHER GREAT ROAST OF THE GUEST SPEAKERS BY TOM NAUGHTON!
Ms. Cleo here predicts Robb Wolf backs out. If he doesn't? Well, I will lose all faith in humanity. Why? Because Wolf has a good track record for his "brand" and work. I disagree with him on quite a bit, but he's *representing* and delivering. But if he lends his name to this freak show? It can only harm him.
THIS!
Anyone who thinks the "indignation" over taxpayer expense is unrelated to moral judgement should consider just how many fat people on food stamps have to stand in line next to each other clutching their coke in their hot little fists to come anywhere NEAR the dollar amount involved in sending my cousin to Cambridge [after Annapolis of course] on the taxpayer dime with full benefits, housing, and salary. Even that pales in comparison to any "conference" routinely attended by any given political figure. Fat poor people are unattractive and disliked so they are a useful distraction/scapegoat in furthering any political agenda.
When a doctor is whining that he's "too busy" to eat according to his own standards [that he'd happily enforce even involuntarily on the gen pop] despite all of his resources and options something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
I went LC too lose weight and all I got was this lousy XXL tee shirt.
It pains me to see people struggle and I've so been there. But this crew takes denial or something to whole new levels.
One question is does LC work long term? And the answer is for some people yes. Look at Robert Cameron (author of "The Drinking Man's Diet" who later became a famous photographer) or Wolfgan Lutz ("Life without Bread"). These two lived to 98 although I am not sure if they kept their supermodel silhouettes you looking for in others :)
But you can't legitimately say it doesn't work
Of course Jimmy capitalizes on this movement in spite that it does'nt work for him / can't do it right. Does it invalidate the LC premises? Let's say that 3 new hormones will be discovered tomorrow and Taubes will have to admit that it's not about insulin, but still his practical recommendations may be valid, right?
I can issue a book telling people that there are little harming elves in sugar and tiny ogres in vege oil so they better minimize consumption. And if the buyers follow my advice they can fare better than before, right?
But you will pick on me (not sure if this is an appropriate phrasal verb, sorry just in case) only when I am fat - as long as I am slim then it's OK? So I pointed that out because your contant mentioning monetary motives sounds to my ear like "look, he's fatter than I, why don't I earn as much? you can receive donations and even sell crap only if you're slimmer" :)
I think Jimmy's case is a "fat soul" inside who once overate on sugar and it was stupid but now overeats on fat and thinks it's a smart behavior.
I used to smoke and I quit. When I was smoking I thought "the bad thing about quitting is that I would never sit like this and have a smoke". After I quit, I realized it was actually a good thing that I don't have to waste time, money and health on this. Jimmy is probably at the stage when he sees the bad side of this - that he would never be stuffing himself full all day.
1 - eat breakfast
2 - eat moderately
3 - weight daily
4 - exercise an hour a day
The solution is not nearly as profitable as a magic pill.
Hundreds of well meaning people gave him advice, especially about the frankenfoods that were fueling his business but he would have none of it. Until the paleo winds blew in and he hitched his sail.
He is a hypocrit plain and simple. Stupid on nutrition but not ignorant -- the worst kind of stupid. And laughing all the way to the bank. I lack that gene to do that. If I ever monetize it will be by the usual rules of ethical commerce. Something Jimmy and the CarbStupid gang have no familiarity with apparently.
For example, I think Duriander's diet is more scammy than Jimmy's, probably works for short term in active under 30's.
But if Duriander was running ads for lard, bacon and pemmican on his site I wouldn't be indignated or anything - I would appreciate his marketing skills and laugh at the situation ;)
But then the problem arose that he was gaining weight. What to do ... what to do? Of course it was all those hidden carbs in the junk foods the companies lied about. It wasn't the stick of butter he put on Purity bread pizza to make sure it wasn't too low fat, it was that Julian Bakery lied to him about their carb content. Same with Dreamfields. Anyone who looked at either label and didn't question the content is a fool. Period. Same with Kimmer's before and after shots. But Jimmy took his fans for a ride on that and Dreamfields and Julian Bakery. Oh but now he's Mr. N=1 and out to rid the world of Julian Bakery (I agree, it's a fraud ... but it ALWAYS HAS BEEN AND JIMMY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT). He's ready to lead the lynch mobs but gets pissed off at this "hater" for pointing out that he's got some of the spoils of the target garnered from the very lynch mob he's assembling.
I guess some people have less tolerance for this sort of thing. To each their own tho'.
As to Amy, I agree. She doesn't follow the diet most of the time, but that too is instructive. If a diet is unsustainable and trying to stick to it impossible for a large portion of the population -- it's not like she hasn't given it enough time, eh? -- then it IS the diet, not the individual. These people blame low fat for the obesity epidemic. It may be true that trying to "diet" contributes, but when Jimmy adhered to his version of LF he lost 170 lbs. High fat McD's did him in. Must be the fat addiction ;)
Eating disorders are highly effective weight loss and maintenance in some. They are highly effective in creating obesity in others. They are not always part of the equation but they are also ignored too often in these discussions.
'Avoid carbs; it'll help (people like) you regulate your appetite' isn't as sexy as selling colorful cookbooks with chapters and chapters of LC desserts and promising (implicitly or explicitly) that you can eat them ad lib because they have negligible carb content.
Not saying that successful LC'ers necessarily avoid processed foods (including homemade treats), but they definitely don't keep frantically pressing the lever for it a' la Jimmy Moore. But somehow, being able to keep pressing the lever (and receiving it) has come to be the attractive thing about LC--its appetite-regulating benefits have fallen by the wayside due to people's obsession with the presumed newfound ability for ad lib consumption.
v says: i am 47 and i had two over 8 pound babies at the age of 30 and 32 when its harder to get back into shape. my husband is supportive, but does not eat my way. i have rice and bread and peanut butter etc in the house all the time. but i don't crave it like i used to because of devany carb restriction. maintaining a 10% body weight loss since august 2009 with fluctuations of 2 or 3 pounds only. i use IF once a week when i do a little weight lifting and sprints. and i have a full time job as a teacher.
I "brag about all I eat" only if one has been brainwashed by neurotic dieters into thinking that adult women should eat 1400 calories per day, and brainwashed to believe that hunger is a mental illness/addiction. I suppose then, I do very much brag when I talk about losing weight on 1700, and maintianing around 1800, and frequently eating until I no longer feel hungry and feel quite full. I suppose if one thinks that normal eating involves being hungry and thinking about food all the time and being scared of tasty food and feeling gluttonous for eating 1600 calories, then I am quite the braggart.
I have NEVER made the nonsense claim that low carb diets allow you to pig out gluttonously, lose weight, and stay thin. I get fat pretty nicely if I eat 2000 calories or more every day. I will start getting fatter. AFter a week of eating over 2000 calories per day I can see the fat gain (as I am thin, even half a pound is visible in how I feel and how clothes fit).
My "bragging" has always been to thumb my nose at high carb calorie counters who support each other in starving and misery and brainwashing each other into thinking hunger is a mental disorder. This is not only psychologically unhealthy but stupid when a better way exists.
YOu have obviously never worked in a shift work/healthcare field if you think I have total control of my food. Nursing is synonymous with a few things: Crazy backstabbing bitches, not sleeping ever, drinking lots of caffeine, and eating shitty food 24/7. My coworkers love to order huge takeout meals and crap food and boxes of cake and sweets. The ironic thing is, I have maintained such fortitude with eating that I have ended up influencing THEM to eat less crap food. There is a noticable reduction of crap food eating at work on my shift, which I do think is because I don't eat it , and other people feel bad/fat if they eat the crap food when I'm around because I don't join in and they look at me as this beacon of thin judgement. If I am not around and other crap fooders are, the crap food will flow like water.
The interesting thing is on the rare occasions I do give in and eat crap food with the other crap fooders, I actually eat it and enjoy it...whereas the others around me make a point of not eating it as if to show off "ha I am eating less than she is, and she's thin!!!" Humans: so neurotic and crazy aren't they?
I would also argue that women in general have control over food as women usually cook for the family. When I moved out of my mother's house I did gain more control over my eating, but if I was the cook (matriarch) I would have always had control. My mother always tended to make low carbish meals, but not always, so it was easier when I moved away and made my own meals all the time.
But it is a favorite coping strategy of fat women to blame their husbands/children for "forcing" them to cook or buy junk food. Nonsense, excuses, etc. You let a 10 year old tell you what to buy and eat, really? Your nutrition choices are informed by someone watching spongebob squarepants? And if your husband insists on having pasta, he can cook it himself, I don't see why not.
And no, low carbers SHOULD NOT be as thin as the population on average, because obesity is an entrenched real biological disorder, which can only be improved or ideally controlled with a low carb eating program. Your argument makes as much sense as saying that haldol improves psychosis, so schizophrenics should be as sane as the normal population if they take haldol. LOL. This is the same logic as saying fat people should be as thin as normal people if they follow carb control.
No wait: only a naturally thin fool would suggest long term control of obesity is "easy".
-Judy from ALC forums. Lost 124 pounds and now weighs about 150 and kept it off for years, in spite of the fact she is postmenopausal. She eats a low carb diet with cal control, like me. She does not exercise regularly but walks every day, also like me.
-Stargazey lost a ton of weight and I believe weighs about 130ish now, and has been maintaining for years. FYI, she is a PhD in insulin receptor signalling and has a scientific/analytical approach to weight loss and maintenance She eats similarly to myself, very low carb. She isn't as active online anymore but used to post to my blog and has her own blog.
-v/vmary is maintaining a weight loss with low carb dieting too, and also frequently posts on my blog.
These are just a handful of people in a sea of others.
FYI, as a member of the NWCR, the questionnaire has changed over the years to reflect the fact that more and more weight maintainers are controlling carbs. Isn't that interesting, gee I wonder why.
If we extend weight loss success stories to those who are in denial about the importance of carbohydrate, or people who incidentally go lower carb (e.g. Baldwin cutting sugar) but all the same depend on low carb eating to control weight, then the successes are even greater.
I personally believe that weight lose isn't everything and I'm sure many will agree with this. You can lose weight on many different diets, weight watchers, vegan, paleo, low carb, zero carb, zone, gluten free etc. In the end it comes back to what evelyn (I think) is alluding to. Weight lose does not = health. Even more so, people report all types of symptoms disappearing on any of the above mentioned diets only to have them return after a certain amount of years even when weight lose is maintained. Diets weaken us and bring about metabolic damage for some (if not most)
Put a person like me, a earlier 20's male at 150lbs roughly 5' 11" with hardly any body fat on doctor Eades Protein power regimen or LC Paleo because you believe it's "healthy" and you have a sure fire recipe for diet induced hypothyroidism...not superior health or increased longevity from avoiding spiking insulin.
Just my two cents, as it's people like Evelyn who keep us "sane" with all this nutritional non sense that gets tossed around. A LC paleo diet bottomed out my metabolism and it took a ALOT of taco bell and slurpees to bring my body temperature and thyroid function back up once I stopped believing that carbohydrates were going to hinder my muscle gains and lead to insulin resistance.
But it is a favorite coping strategy of fat women to blame their husbands/children for "forcing" them to cook or buy junk food. Nonsense, excuses, etc. You let a 10 year old tell you what to buy and eat, really? Your nutrition choices are informed by someone watching spongebob squarepants? And if your husband insists on having pasta, he can cook it himself, I don't see why not."
Spoken like a true singleton :)
Functional marriages are interdependent relationships not independent relationships in which people who coexist also have sex. Part of the interdependence manifests in negotiating division of labor. So if [for example] the woman is responsible as you say for making the food...she is also responsible for making food that is mutually agreed upon rather than taking a "what's yours is ours and what's mine is mine" stance that only respects the priorities and preferences of ONE person as valid while considering the priorities and preferences of the other person as optional. Aside from being more than just a little abusive it's guaranteed to result in resentment.
If you stop to think about it this is really true in just about every scenario including career...after all functional jobs involve clear lines of demarcation re whose job is what, how long, and with what parameters. It would be nothing but chaos and deterioration if that weren't the case as people spent more time power struggling than working productively. You wouldn't want to have to get into an argument with every CNA over every bedpan because no one recognizes their area of operation or every oncoming nurse over just exactly when your shift ended, spouses don't want to get into an argument over every meal that "you" cooked...using money "they" earned. Without recognizing the dynamics of that relationship no matter how you set up the division of labor you are just trading one set of complications for another and the outcomes will be the same regardless.
Problem is that most people are given a "model" for independence that frankly doesn't work and when they realize that the draconian measures they have idealized will cost them the relationship they don't have a plan "B" other than move their position to the "lose" end of the equation they had planned for their spouse who wasn't cooperating. Poetic justice maybe. :)
As for the nursing environment I completely agree *especially* in regard specifically to nursing homes where most people who are there aren't happy about it or happy in general. The job is low demand [relatively speaking] low reward [by almost any measure] and chalk full of employees who are semi-functional at best. It is not a fertile ground for success.
Yes, Jimmy is in denial and in major excuse-maker mode, however his guests provide interesting information, even if I don't agree. Amy's blog I have only read on occasion, she doesn't seem to be in denial, she just doesn't have the strength to stay on track. But both of their sites give good information, even if they are not the best examples of what they extoll. Which is something I am guessing they have in common with this blog.
You give some great scientific information, in between your high school name calling antics, but I don't see any wonderful photos showing a fit, vibrant, healthy person. So, I take your information for what its worth.
A funny thing, I found your site through paleo diet news, which you eviscerated for re-publishing your information, yet you have copyrighted photos leading this post... but I digress,
There are examples of healthy low carb living out there, the gentleman who helped me is one of them; I'm sure that if you applied a positive approach instead of the vitriolic, demeaning approach you choose, you would find them and maybe even get in shape yourself.
As regards this "scumbag" (as Howard Harkness called me on Jimmy's blog) and copyrights, these people need to get a clue. PDN is still skirting on the edge of copyright and fair use issues and if I were Stephan Guyenet or Mark Sisson, I'd get them taken down. Cripps gets paid for his "articles" which are nothing more than large excerpts with stuff like I agree and whattayou think and visit my website. That site is not much better than the rip-off artists who scour feeds (which is why I no longer do full post feeds) and publish them without attribution.
Now, the pic here was attributed and a screenshot on the free free internet. It wasn't used on a commercial site or anything of the sort, though that would only be an issue if it were specifically used for profit. To give a classic extreme example, Chrissy Hinds can't stand Rush Limbaugh's arse, and their politics are about as night and day as you can get. Yet he's been using her Ohio rift as his bumper music for forever. Now Jimmy has posted another one in his 2012 Pictures post along with a shitload more he has not attributed. He's in possible jeopardy and should be more careful, especially since his is a commercial enterprise. I used to teach distance learning which involves a lot of fuzzy areas in terms of what content you can include in a course that is "for profit". I have a very firm grasp on Fair Use law. I'm in no danger of even coming close to violating it.
v says: every marriage is unique- the better the couple can negotiate to get more of what is important to them, the better the marriage. i've been married since 94. i let my husband indulge in all sorts of hobbies that would drive other women crazy because i know i have to pick my battles. my husband decorates our house via goodwill. he bought a snake. he bought a doberman that disrupted my sleep for years. he bought a parrot that drove us notes with its squawking for a year before even he couldn't stand it. i help him with his fruit carving hobby (search chefchang on youtube- his chinese dragon watermelon has gotten over 65,000 hits last time i checked). but for what's important to me- i won't compromise. no chinese style corporal punishment for my children. no making them stay in the house all day and study. no doing the nasty unless i am really in the mood, etc. and food is an area that is important to me- so he supports me on that. i compromise in that i would love to buy grass fed meat, but that's a no go for him. ok- i cn deal with that. he's a chinese cook. so he can prepare his own chinese food no problem. food is one thing we don't fight about.
Every marriage [and person] is unique and so people will delegate and divide as best suits them however what you are describing is a system of mutual sacrifice and habitual compromise RATHER than negotiation. There are no circumstances under which I am willing to accept independent behavior that only acknowledges my existence, preferences, and needs as an afterthought nor would my spouse accept that from me.
Seriously, did ITW just brag about bragging?
Carbsane, just keep doing what you've been doing, please. If you're impressed that v succeeded at weight loss maintenance by low carbing while working and being physically fit, then you'll be doubly motivated to go on the raw vegan diet - which is what Venus Williams follows. And she wins at Wimbledon, too! (Hmm, as an athlete, doesn't she have some cachet?)
'I'm sure that if you applied a positive approach instead of the vitriolic, demeaning approach you choose, you would find them and maybe even get in shape yourself.'
You apologized to sfm, who also wrote, 'You give some great scientific information, in between your high school name calling antics, but I don't see any wonderful photos showing a fit, vibrant, healthy person. So, I take your information for what its worth.'
I DO catch a faint whiff of high school here - you know, do I look better than you? Is your butt bigger than mine? And like high school, there's not much information-taking here. Ah, high school days.
I wasn't blaming my hubs. It's just a matter that he does, can, and has to eat a whole lot more than me. He does not do well skipping meals where I do just fine if I'm just not hungry.
SPOT on comments bentley.
More later gang ...
Most women I know have to work full time jobs, as well as primarily raise the children. It is bullshit if you are also cooking for him and catering to his food requests like a restaurant.
Regarding bentley's argument...just because lots of women are continuing to live as if it is the 1950s, except they are also stupidly working on top of that, doesn't mean this way of living is a good idea or fair. I know many nurses and most CNAs (From underdeveloped countries) who do exactly this; they work a full time job, except they also raise the children and cook a meal every night for their husband. It's kind of funny if you think about it. The practice of women cooking for their husbands was a way of showing appreciation and respect for the man of the house who worked all day... but now we have women working even harder rushing home to cook for a man who has been lounging around because he got home earlier. LOLOLOL.
The fact women live like this only makes it common, it doesn't make it smart or right. Sort of how in dieting most people just try to count calories and brainwash themselves into thinking hunger is a mental illness, as I said. A better way is to control blood sugar and maximize energy production via that.
Similarly if you are working like a dog and your husband is actually around more, it's time to tell your husband he needs to pitch in and help cook a few meals.
But hey, I fully accept that I don't know what I'm talking about, even though this seems like total common sense and rejecting exploition etc.
You are making my point exactly and somehow you seem not to have noticed. Women are not the only people on the planet who can be and are exploited.
You used the example that women frequently ARE the person who prepares the food as the reason why they should have complete control over that variable. I pointed out the flaw in that perception which has a lot to do with failing to distinguish between children and adult spouses as well as the interdependent nature of that relationship.
You also mentioned the disproportionate level of responsibility common to a lot of women who work outside the home AND have families however it has nothing to do with being a 50's housewife [who never existed even in the 50's] and everything to do with not knowing how to successfully negotiate so that both people are satisfied with the outcomes.
The "common sense" argument *is* the trap for most couples who are asking the other person to settle for less than they need. It's an emotionally manipulative appeal to "reason" ie "Here's the reason you should suck it up and do things the way I want them done even when it makes you unhappy or resentful or sick or depressed".
While we are on the subject of exploitation....lol. I forgot to mention one other variable other than lack of negotiation skills. It isn't uncommon for people to delegate themselves into a position of primary responsibility because they want CONTROL. Yep, the exploited can actually be the exploiter/abuser/manipulator if you look beneath the surface into the murky depths...complicated stuff huh?
From another perspective...there are a goodly number of men who are more or less being held hostage to a marriage contract that is permitting them considerably less sex than they need and want because there isn't a viable/ethical alternative whose consequences they can accept. Is that man being exploited and used? Even abused?
We [as a society] are quick to throw misanthropic judgement at men as though they were some malicious alien life form who should and must be put into their place rather than human beings to be treated with care and dignity.
I am one of those people that doesn't do well on skipping meals. For some reason if I skip or go long stretches without eating I start to feel sickly. My energy just drops and I crash, sometimes I'll even get headaches or light headed. I don't know why that is and don't think it has to do with my weight, thin or fat I have always been that way.
I think it's good that people like Stephanie Ruper are speaking up on how fasting really just doesn't work for some women, but I think the perspective is rather limited. There ARE guys who don't do well with fasting. And there ARE women with (naturally) low bf% who do just fine. And there ARE women with (naturally) low bf% who DON'T do fine on it, but NOT because of their low bf%.
There isn't enough scientifically-minded conversation on this topic, which is why we're left with explanations like 'adrenal exhaustion', which aren't exactly amenable to practical solutions.
Who said it's not?
I maintain around 110 not using any particular program although I think most have at least some useful nuggets to be gleaned if you're willing to wade hip deep through the muck to get to the meat...downside being that the philosophy and pseudoscience often renders even the potentially useful damaging irl.
I don't think it's a good thing if a wife ignores the sexual needs of her husband, but this wouldn't be exploitation, more a case of neglect and selfishness. Exploitation is an active form of abuse, whereas neglect is more passive "who gives a shit" absence of concern or care. An example of female exploitation might be a stay at home wife who ran up her husbands credit cards.
Your description of men reminds me of a mentally handicapped adult. LOL. "care and dignity" is how I might describe my nursing home residents. I don't throw malicious judgement at men, I just think women are pretty much brainwashed into tolerating all sorts of shitty archaic behavior from men. It's part and parcel of the socialization of women to serve men and forfeit their own life to a servile role to a nuclear family, I guess. I wouldn't mind cooking meals and cleaning the house and doing all domestic work if I didn't have to work full time...but when both men and women are working full time I FAIL TO SEE why men should be getting their meals cooked for them as if they had a live in maid or a mommy.
I understand your point about amicable reciprocity but most of the women I know in this situation have tried and their husbands are the one guilty of this "lack of care"; they think they are entitled to a servant, and most of the women approaching the issue already feel a bit uneasy about it (as they have been brainwashed by their culture into thinking it is their duty).
I wasn't getting at what you're talking about which is very far from the reality of any of the families I know. You need to get out more Wooo.
I don't know why it is that some people need to eat regularly and others don't. It took me a while to adjust to hubby needing to eat "now" sometimes. Me? Even if I get hungry, it passes and I can eat later if I'm out and about or in class or whatnot. But I have no doubt some of my overeating over the years was because I would often eat when he did. Plain and simple. And if anyone thinks you're going to have even 2 people in a house and each one is going to cook for themselves what they want to eat, when they want to eat it, you're kidding yourself. Don't get me started on sleeping patterns and different work schedules, etc.
If you eat real foods, LC isn't all that hard to do with a non-LC family unless you crave carbs all the time. There are certainly enough women AND men about the net who have a hard time being LC because the food is just in their house. I've never had that problem, so if we cook and I'm eating LC I have meat & veggies and we make a side starch for the hubs. Instant mashed potatoes are a great option -- they don't go bad, they nuke up in 2 min.
This blog is not about my weight or what I eat or what I tell others to eat. It's about separating fact from fiction about low carb so others can make informed choices for themselves. Unfortunately part of that has to be to expose fraud when I come across it. I feel that's a moral obligation.
People generally become famous in their field for being successful. And if they fail, the rest of the field weeds them out. Except, apparently, in the low carb community that supports failed leaders. It's like taking advice from an accountant that just filed for bankruptcy. Only if someone doesn't look too closely they don't know it because it's not front/center on their blogs. I don't think I would recognize Dana in a crowd from her photo. As "open" as these two (and others are) they are very deceitful in using way outdated and/or carefully posed avatars.
I looked ... there are VERY few, and that's not how it should be on the internet. Jimmy got famous for losing 180 lbs and he kept it mostly off for a couple of years. Still, he was not a normal size -- the smallest waist size he got to was 42".
Jimmy Moore tried to destroy me after that podcast. He misrepresented me in the show notes, read a different lead in, and put used words like taunter. I have the comments he's since scrubbed from his site -- you want antagonism? Then he hucked it up with Gary to portray me as some sort of crazy person. Sorry bub. He gets good podcast guests, but more and more it's hard to get much from them because his biases pervade. I'd rather listen to Kresser interview Masterjohn.
But speaking of podcasts, have you read Amy's mea culpa? Then go listen to her on Jimmy's Low Carb Conversations. Better yet, listen to this podcast with someone who was obviously unaware of Amy's "success": http://healthymindfitbody.com/2009/12/18/14-living-low-carb-with-guest-amy-dungan/
Realize that she started the 6 week cure in September of that year and took off some 35 lbs to the weight she was at on the 2010 cruise. That she has yo-yo'd all her low carb life. I'm sorry, "poor choices" doesn't cut it.
What she and Jimmy are doing is no better than Kimmer.
You raise an excellent point. The VLC thing seems to work very well with middle aged men for some reason, mostly with those who were never quite overweight to begin with. What I'm noticing is that there's like a 3-year "wall" where things decline. I didn't follow Kurt Harris much "back when", so I don't know if he went into much detail why he ditched the VLC, but I imagine he started not feeling quite so hot. Nikoley mentioned he was perhaps depressed. In any case I look at all of these men and -- speaking of exuding vitality Ms. sexyfemalemuscle -- the Phinney, Volek, Feinman (OMG I have a pic of him and his crooked slumped over stance that is frightening), Hahn, Taubes, Eades, -- do ANY of these guys exude vitality? Sisson talks ketosis and high fat, but he seems to eat enough carbs and not particularly low protein ... it's been posited he uses HRT, which BTW is what Jimmy is now doing to rescue his low T @ age 40.
So you raise a good point on why this lifestyle should even be considered by someone like you. A healthy young male. This is outta my wheelhouse, but perhaps we can put our heads together for a guest or cross post on this topic.
There are too many younger male paleo/lc types who hit that wall and think they're not going LC enough. Nope!
As for me, I think I will take a pass on this site. Your anger and negative energy rubs off and I commented back in kind, for which I apolgoize.
I know there are people who thrive off of this type of vitriol, and I was one of them, but not any longer. I'm very sorry I took the time to comment, but I do appreicate you taking the time to answer.
How can I know if I find your magic guru if I don't know who he is? You wish to send me on a goose chase. Then you think whatever I do here is keeping me from finding the one and true solution, and somehow the truth about the science is altered by my weight one iota. Think on that -- I could weigh 800 lbs or 100 lbs and it doesn't change human metabolism and the science and the gimmickry. Then you diss my pictures. All the while we have no evidences from you -- but I somehow missed your success story I guess.
All because I call frauds frauds ... both of which are the epitome of unhealth. Buh bye!
For women who have been free agents since birth who *probably* didn't run out and marry the biggest laziest most worthless slob they could find the problem usually is inability to negotiate and even mistakes negotiation for things like common sense or as you say amicable reciprocity [which is still sacrifice based ie agreeing that I win here and you win there/since I do this you do that].
Looking for "fair" is futile, arbitrary, childish, and encourages people to focus on all of the wrong pieces of the equation unless they have a goal of spinning their wheels in an agitated funk for the indefinite future.
If Evelyn were only to put a POSITIVE energy out into the universe that guru would fall at her feet, zero work involved.
he (or she or it[0]) must have missed the "attempted discussion-ending tactic" post
[0] this would mean troll
Anyone who is going anywhere near anything diet related is ass deep in behavioral psychology [and alligators?] already usually in the hands of amateurs who bear no personal accountability for the outcomes of their highly psychologically charged conditioning doctrine. People will even defend outright untruths. "So what if it's easily falsified by even a casual awareness of biology....SOME people will eat fewer doughnuts and be helped if they believe that doughnuts are infected with gene altering nano tech that will inflate their fat mass as part of a gov't conspiracy! So what if it also made them a paranoid orthorexic and fractured several relevant relationships. Less doughnuts!"
I've never felt that Jimmy was a good spokesperson for low-carb living, but he is a relentless self-promoter. Don't know much about Amy.
Au contraire! I think low-carb maintainers are very vocal. There are not a lot of them but they are vocal. They usually mention weight and dress size and report their lipid results, too!
I felt absolutely fine most of the time. In retrospect, I had some problems with orthostatic hypotension after a big workout that resolved when no longer on VLC, but the only reason actually I quit VLC was because I was losing weight in an unwanted fashion when doing lots of physical labor. Then, suspecting that it was not necessary (versus actually harmful) to eat VLC long term, I raised my carb intake while staying on a primarily whole foods diet to see if I would gain all the fat back. I didn't, and 2 years later I am still at the same weight right where I want to be. Still eating about 25-40% carbs but mostly as potatoes rice,vegetables and fruit.
FWIW I have also monitored my TSH, and free T4 and T3 over many years and it has shown no changes with altered carb intake.
Maybe its in my head. Either that or maybe I am just not fat adapted. Time to go back to my meals of cooking bacon and eggs in coconut oil. NOT!!:P
Why don't people like you hold Jimmy's feet to the fire? If there are all these folks out there, stand up and represent and show the hypocritical profiteers the curb! It shouldn't have to be me.
I understand about people drifting through, but that's my point. There are people successfully maintaining on low-carb who have demanding lives without much time to post and blog.
http://livinlavidalocarb.blogspot.com.au/2006/07/have-you-met-last-atkins-dieter-yet.htm
From above link:
"Kristn's main focus right now has been on her exercise routine and increasing her consumption of whole organic foods rather than the man-made, processed foods, including the ones that are supposedly low-carb."
"It doesn't make sense, does it Kristn? I have run into the same thing with people despite that fact I've kept my 180-pound weight loss on the Atkins diet off for nearly two years! It's mind-boggling, really. You would think people would be thrilled to hear you have found a permanent and healthy way to maintain your weight, but they are so sorely misinformed. That's one of the reasons I started blogging and I'm glad to have your voice added to the debate of ideas over diet and health."
Jimmy Moore, 2006
Most telling in my experience is that I've been dieting for most of my life and yet, I have NEVER met a low-carb dieter who was successful at weight loss beyond the initial drop in weight.
Online, yes, in the low-carb forums and message boards. In the flesh, no. I have met a lot of Weight Watchers in everyday life. And there are tons of former low-carb dieters in those meetings! The successful weight loss I've seen is in dieters who eat everything, looking at total calories, and 'watch what they eat.'
The most dramatic example of weight loss in the past 20 years was a fellow overweight mom who lost over 100 pounds eating mainly carbs, very little protein and fat.
Sue--no time to blog, but I am starting to post online again. I almost forgot that Jimmy plugged my blog:). I do have thyroid issues and was diagnosed hypothyroid a year ago. I have had symptoms since my 20s (long before low-carb) and have a family history of hypothyroid. Low-carb may be a contributing factor, but I've come to believe that living in a weigh-reduced state means that you have to make adjustments for hormone disregulation. In a weigh-reduced state your body is fighting to regain weight every moment. If that means I have to supplement thyroid hormone then I'm okay with that. I lost the weight and maintained the weight loss without thyroid hormone and have only recently received the correct dosage. It's helped immensely with symptoms I've suffered with for 25 years.
eulerandothers--I know lots of failed WW people IRL. I think there are lots of failed dieters in the world, LC, LF, etc. It's hard to lose weight and maintain. Your are fighting against your body and that's not easy.
I'm not saying that LC is the be-all, end-all for weight loss and maintenance. But for some people it does work. It was the only thing that ever worked long-term for me. I am grateful every day that I am no longer 257 pounds and that I have been able to maintain for so long.
My point was that when someone loses weight, it is always a source of congratulations and comment. The person is always asked how they lost weight. It's no secret. That's how I know about how those 100 pounds were lost by another mother. She didn't even put a name to her diet, because maybe it doesn't have a name. However, it worked for her and it was all carbs.
What I said was that I have never met a low-carber in the flesh. Everyone has lost weight, and many have lost weight with Atkins, for example (I certainly did). But keeping it off? I've lived in the city and outside the city - I have met a lot of people. Since most Americans have been on or are on a diet, you'd think there would be better odds that at least one would stumble across my path, from among acquaintances and friends.
I agree it's hard to lose weight and maintain. Atkins has been around for several decades. After a surge in popularity, there just wasn't enough sustainability (diet success) and it receded, a milestone being the bankruptcy of Atkins' nutrition company.
So, for a diet that's been around THAT long, and with a variety of disguises, it's strange but true that I have never met a low-carber who lost weight, stayed on the diet, and kept the weight off.
Very few people are dramatic in body-change as that high-carb dieter I knew. And WW meetings always have people who've lost around 50 pounds and upwards, but I didn't know them 'when'. When it comes to numbers, I would estimate the WW maintainers to be far more numerous, and from adherence to the program, their diets are more balanced.
They are grateful every day, I'm sure, too. I don't know if this is rumor or fact, but all the people who work at WW, weighing participants, doing paperwork, working 'behind the counter,' are required to be WW 'losers who have maintained.'
People are always dieting or have been on a diet, it seems. They look to success stories. There haven't been any in the flesh that turn out to be low-carb, not from my experience, and it has nothing to do with volunteering information, but more to do with answering the question, 'So, how did you do that?'
If I DO know people who have lost 100 pounds, which I do (and in one case, about 170 pounds lost, and verified because she was a WW), and they did not low-carb, that tells me something, too - mainly about the low-carb 'science' and bloggers. For the science, there's pubmed. For the carb-sane, there's Carbsane.
And yes I got lots of attention when I first lost weight, but after a while it really isn't a topic of conversation any more. Your friends who've lost 100 pounds and kept it off probably don't start up conversations with new acquaintances talking about their weight loss.
I think we've debated this to death. You've never met anyone who lost weight via low-carb. I have several friends and family members who did. We obviously run in different circles.
That time frame takes into account 'people who used to be fat but no longer talk about it.' Of course, those people are everywhere. They may have lost weight on ANY diet. The woman who lost 170 pounds at WW certainly had her life changed, and she STILL crossed my path because WW meetings have many success stories. I wouldn't have known her weight loss if I just met her on the street.
I'm realizing that the one huge advantage of WW meetings is the personal witnessing, not comments on blogs or forums. The other: verification and the electronic record-keeping.
To clarify: I've known many, many people who lost weight via low-carb. I said that. Everyone, it seems, has tried it, among many other diets in and out of vogue. But never anyone who stayed on it. And never anyone who lost that much weight on a low-carb diet. That's why I am skeptical of the 'many low carb maintainers' claim.
I don't think it's just low-carb that effects thyroid. All seriously weight-reduced people have hormone disregulation starting with leptin. That's part of the reason why it's virtually impossible for people to maintain weight loss without heroic measures. The statistics are appalling for maintenance with any type of weight loss. Weight-reduced people are not the same as never fat people.
Post a Comment
Comment Moderation is ON ... I will NOT be routinely reviewing or publishing comments at this time..