Letter from Jess Meyers

On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 03:11:16 GMT, Richard Lamb
wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:

So you are saying that our genetics have changed dramatically in the
last 40 years? I don't buy it. Our rate of obesity has increased
dramatically in the lat 40 years, but I don't think we've mutated all
that much genetically. Then again, I'm not a geneticist... :-)

Matt

That's not quite correct - at least according to my doctor.
They call it Factor-X diabetes.

I have hardly any genetic risk for diabetes, but have developed
Type-1 anyway.

type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease.
the beta cells in the pancreas are a type of secreting nerve cell
different from those around them. the immune system occasionally gets
it wrong and removes them.

in australia type 1 means no pilots licence but in the usa you have
about 250 pilots who manage the problem in flight so well through
continual monitoring that they have their licences.

amazing to see that after the hoover fiasco.

Stealth Pilot

Darrel Toepfer wrote:


McDonalds of course, was unhappy with the film.

You have to be a clown, to eat at McDonald's...

Eat at Burger King instead.

I practice a low carb lifestyle. As long as I skip the fries, drink,
and bun, I can eat as many whoppers as I can afford - and still lose
weight. Soda is OK as long as its Diet Rite. Diet Rite is the only
mainstream soda that is carb free AND aspartame free.

Low carb has kicked the traditional (low cal/low fat) folks in the
butt.

Dennis.

Dennis Hawkins
n4mwd AT amsat DOT org (humans know what to do)

"A RECESSION is when you know somebody who is out of work.
A DEPRESSION is when YOU are out of work.
A RECOVERY is when all the H-1B's are out of work."

To find out what an H-1B is and how Congress is using
them to put Americans out of work, visit the following
web site and click on the "Exporting America" CNN news
video: http://zazona.com/ShameH1B/MediaClips.htm

Richard Lamb wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:

So you are saying that our genetics have changed dramatically in the
last 40 years? I don't buy it. Our rate of obesity has increased
dramatically in the lat 40 years, but I don't think we've mutated all
that much genetically. Then again, I'm not a geneticist... :-)

Matt


That's not quite correct - at least according to my doctor.
They call it Factor-X diabetes.

I have hardly any genetic risk for diabetes, but have developed
Type-1 anyway.

The cause is generally explained as the massive amount of sugar
and alcohol that have been introduced into our diets since about
1940 or so.

The doctor prescribed an oral med (Metformin HCL, in my case) and
over the first year I shed 50 pounds with very little change in diet
or activity. I'm now 196 pounds, which is not too bad at 6'3.

If you are overweight (and by media reports, most of us are seriously
so), might be wise to get screened for Diabetes.

Especially if your diet has included a lot of soda or alcohol...


Richard

I don't understand your point. You say I'm not correct, but then what
you say pretty much supports what I said, that it isn't genetics that is
to blame for our obesity problem in America.


Matt

wrote:

On Thu, 08 Jul 2004 19:18:27 -0500, "Matthew P. Cummings"
wrote:


Watch the people around you the next time you eat out. I'll bet you see
them overeat by a HUGE amount. Go to KFC, Hardee's, McDonals, etc. and
watch. You'll see the majority of people consume over 1000 calories at
one sitting, imagine them doing the same for 2 more meals. Now you'll see
why eating is why we're overweight as a nation.


In the film "Supersize me", director Morgan Spurlock spends just one
month eating at McDonalds *ONLY*, to see what would happen. He got
this bright idea after listening to McDonalds tout their food as being
healthy.

Doctors he consulted thought that he could not damage himself in only
30 days, they were nearly mistaken. The stipulations were that he
would have to accept the suggestion to "supersize" the meal or portion
of the meal if suggested by the counter attendant, and try every
single item on the menu at some point.

Here's a blurb from a review: "Spurlock starts out the picture of
health, a strapping 6-foot-2 and 185 pounds. Three doctors and a
nutritionist, who reappear throughout, examine him and attest to his
well being. But within a few days he's vomiting out of the window of
his car. And it's downhill from there. Spurlock's body goes through a
general deterioration that surprises even his doctors in its rapidity.
(His girlfriend, a vegan chef, is beside herself.) Gaining weight is
just the outward sign: His liver becomes toxic, his cholesterol
skyrockets, his libido sags, he gets headaches and becomes depressed."

After 30 days, he had gained 25 lbs and was suffering from abnormal
liver functions. He had to detox on a strict Vegan diet to loose the
weight and regain normal liver functions. While he was eating at
McDonalds only, he was consuming 5,000 calories a day, or more. By
the end of the month, he'd consumed as many calories as most
nutritionists recommend people eat in 8 years.

McDonalds of course, was unhappy with the film.

Corky Scott

Sorry, Corky, but I don't buy this story even though I've read about it
before. I have no idea what else this guy may have done during the
month, but it is clear he was out to make Micky D look bad so he may
have been taking all sorts of drugs to make him have the problems he
had. And 5,000 calories a day for 30 days is 150,000 calories according
to my calculator. Eight years is 2,920 days, not counting leap years.
150,000 calories over 8 years is 51.4 calories per day. I don't want
any association with any nutritionist who would recommend that!

This story just doesn't pass the smell test. I ate almost exclusively
at McDonalds for three months when I was in college back in the 70s and
had to spend a semester in a motel with no cooking facilities. I didn't
gain a bit of weight and had no health problems at all.


Matt

Darrel Toepfer wrote:

wrote:

In the film "Supersize me", director Morgan Spurlock spends just one
month eating at McDonalds *ONLY*, to see what would happen. He got
this bright idea after listening to McDonalds tout their food as being
healthy.

Doctors he consulted thought that he could not damage himself in only
30 days, they were nearly mistaken. The stipulations were that he
would have to accept the suggestion to "supersize" the meal or portion
of the meal if suggested by the counter attendant, and try every
single item on the menu at some point.

Here's a blurb from a review: "Spurlock starts out the picture of
health, a strapping 6-foot-2 and 185 pounds. Three doctors and a
nutritionist, who reappear throughout, examine him and attest to his
well being. But within a few days he's vomiting out of the window of
his car. And it's downhill from there. Spurlock's body goes through a
general deterioration that surprises even his doctors in its rapidity.
(His girlfriend, a vegan chef, is beside herself.) Gaining weight is
just the outward sign: His liver becomes toxic, his cholesterol
skyrockets, his libido sags, he gets headaches and becomes depressed."

After 30 days, he had gained 25 lbs and was suffering from abnormal
liver functions. He had to detox on a strict Vegan diet to loose the
weight and regain normal liver functions. While he was eating at
McDonalds only, he was consuming 5,000 calories a day, or more. By
the end of the month, he'd consumed as many calories as most
nutritionists recommend people eat in 8 years.

McDonalds of course, was unhappy with the film.


You have to be a clown, to eat at McDonald's...

And you have to be an idiot to believe the above story, especially the
part about eating eight YEARS worth of calories in 30 days.


Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

You have to be a clown, to eat at McDonald's...

And you have to be an idiot to believe the above story, especially the
part about eating eight YEARS worth of calories in 30 days.

CLOWN - McDonald's.... Get it? Guess not...

Darrel Toepfer wrote:
Matt Whiting wrote:

You have to be a clown, to eat at McDonald's...


And you have to be an idiot to believe the above story, especially the
part about eating eight YEARS worth of calories in 30 days.


CLOWN - McDonald's.... Get it? Guess not...

Uh, yes, I got it ... and was launching from it. :-) Get it?

Matt

Matt Whiting wrote:

Richard Lamb wrote:

Matt Whiting wrote:

So you are saying that our genetics have changed dramatically in the
last 40 years? I don't buy it. Our rate of obesity has increased
dramatically in the lat 40 years, but I don't think we've mutated all
that much genetically. Then again, I'm not a geneticist... :-)

Matt


That's not quite correct - at least according to my doctor.
They call it Factor-X diabetes.

I have hardly any genetic risk for diabetes, but have developed
Type-1 anyway.

The cause is generally explained as the massive amount of sugar
and alcohol that have been introduced into our diets since about
1940 or so.

The doctor prescribed an oral med (Metformin HCL, in my case) and
over the first year I shed 50 pounds with very little change in diet
or activity. I'm now 196 pounds, which is not too bad at 6'3.

If you are overweight (and by media reports, most of us are seriously
so), might be wise to get screened for Diabetes.

Especially if your diet has included a lot of soda or alcohol...


Richard

I don't understand your point. You say I'm not correct, but then what
you say pretty much supports what I said, that it isn't genetics that is
to blame for our obesity problem in America.

Matt

Sorry Matt.

I was just saying that I thought genetics have _not_ changed.
But I see that was your point as well.

Richard

"Stealth Pilot" wrote


in australia type 1 means no pilots licence but in the usa you have
about 250 pilots who manage the problem in flight so well through
continual monitoring that they have their licences.

amazing to see that after the hoover fiasco.

Stealth Pilot

I have a niece that has type one. It is amazing, the advances that have
been made. She has a pump that lets a controlled constant dose of insulin
into her body, then before every meal, she checks her blood, then calculates
what she will be eating, takes into account where her sugar level was, then
programs the pump to release just the amount needed for the meal. She is
almost always right on the right blood sugar level.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.716 / Virus Database: 472 - Release Date: 7/5/2004

On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 21:12:59 +0000, n4mwd.dont.spam.me wrote:

Low carb has kicked the traditional (low cal/low fat) folks in the
butt.

Actually it hasn't. I saw on TV where they did a small study and had one
group go on the low carb diet and another on low fat. The low carb group
initially lost weight faster, but then hit a point where they slowed down
so much so that the low fat group caught up with them.

At the end of the study, the low carb group as a whole gained back most of
their weight, the low fat group gained much less. Both groups regained
weight.

My theory and my doctors is that the best diet is the one where you eat
the correct amount of calories from the proper food groups and not do
these fancy name diets.

In the time I lost 45 lbs, the guy at work on the Atkins diet has lost
around 20 lbs. We both cheat a bit now and then, but my caloric intake is
closer to normal than his, so I lost more weight faster than he did, but
still slow enough to make my doc happy. You don't want to lose it too
fast for some reason. I don't know why, my doctor just said don't lose it
too fast and gave me guidelines.