― roger adultery (roger adultery), Sunday, 28 September 2003 03:50 (twenty-two years ago)
― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Sunday, 28 September 2003 04:02 (twenty-two years ago)
― Trayce (trayce), Sunday, 28 September 2003 06:11 (twenty-two years ago)
― donna (donna), Sunday, 28 September 2003 06:19 (twenty-two years ago)
The Atkin's diet was designed for very very VERY fat people, and should only be followed by same.
― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Sunday, 28 September 2003 07:12 (twenty-two years ago)
Honestly, I'm a meat-eater, and I can't think of anything more disgusting and faddish than that stupid diet.
It's such a cliche but nobody ever cares; the only way to effectively lose weight is REALLY exercise, like FOR REAL, and DON'T OVEREAT.
― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Sunday, 28 September 2003 08:13 (twenty-two years ago)
― Trayce (trayce), Sunday, 28 September 2003 08:20 (twenty-two years ago)
The Zone diet is similar but a bit easier to follow.
― Mike Hanle y (mike), Sunday, 28 September 2003 08:44 (twenty-two years ago)
Anyway. I must say that for my anti-Atkins bleating I have to admit that from it, being more aware of carbs (and having been around a diabetic) I did become aware that a carb-heavy diet tended to mess with my ebergy levels. I'd eat, eg, fish and chips for lunch and be starving and low-blood-sugar-shaky by 4pm. I now try and eat less starch and more meat/veg as a balance and have noticed it works. However in my case, I am interested in diet for energy levels, not weight loss.
― Trayce (trayce), Sunday, 28 September 2003 08:53 (twenty-two years ago)
― Mike Hanle y (mike), Sunday, 28 September 2003 09:00 (twenty-two years ago)
you got a bit of a cold there trayce?
― the surface noise (electricsound), Sunday, 28 September 2003 09:41 (twenty-two years ago)
― Trayce (trayce), Sunday, 28 September 2003 09:44 (twenty-two years ago)