Over that period I've tried all ways of cracking it - reducing calories, increasing fat, increasing protein, reducing protein, and in desperation decided I would embark on an anti-Candida diet - once I've got used to the idea of no dairy!
I've been keeping a daily record of my eating using Spark People, together with a record of my weight on the pig 2 twig forum but neither has produced any logical reasons for my virtual stall so far.
However, when I tried averages for the last four and a half months, a picture has begun to emerge which I thought I'd share. Remember though, this is totally unscientific, on a sample of one!
I have deliberately used large units to demonstrate quite small changes - for instance the weight range is only 10lb and the carbs are between 10g and 20g.
It's obvious from this that food affects weight, but how? The 'experts' tell us that it's all to do with calories in v calories out.
Hmmm... that's not very conclusive, is it? So, is it that evil stuff fat? After all, most of what I eat is saturated which in some eyes makes it the devil's food.
Again, it's not a perfect match. If it was so evil surely it would be more obvious?
It's claimed by some that too much protein is the culprit, but once again the graphs don't fit too well.
The carbs graph is the nearest to a perfect match, but it's still hard to believe that 20g of carbs a day instead of 10g is to blame totally.
I find it quite surprising that the time between cause and effect on all the graphs is so long. We normally assume that what we eat today affects our weight tomorrow, but it just does not seem to be the case, which means that short-term trials of a few weeks or months aren't very accurate.
Thanks for reading this, and I'd be really interested in any comments or observations you may have. 
No comments:
Post a Comment