Eat . . . Pray . . . Eat . . . Love . . . Eat

I've had a problem this week . . . I've been insatiable.

It's a feeling that hits me about once a month, and when it does, I am overwhelmed by my desire for food. Over the past few years, I've become one of those people who gets full pretty quickly (even though I was never like that when I was younger), but when a bout of what I call "The Insatiables" hits, I can never seem to feel satisfied, not to mention full.

The result is that it feels like I eat all day long and simply cannot stop eating.

Don't get me wrong—I'm not a binge eater. I don't sit down and eat a whole pint of ice cream or a bag of chips. Or both. But during these monthly bouts of insatiability, I can slowly make my way through all of the food groups in one day. More than once.

This last round of insatiability started early on Monday and lasted through Tuesday night (thank God it's finally over), and I spent the first half of the week trying to figure out why I could no longer control my eating.

Was I upset about something? Was I falling back on the old feeding-my-emotions trick?

Those questions didn't lead me to an answer, but something else did . . . over the weekend (a time when I usually indulge), I had tried to make healthier choices. We ate light on Friday because we were going to the movies that night and didn't want to miss any of the film for bathroom breaks, and when we went out to dinner on Saturday, I intentionally ordered the lowest calorie item on the menu.

I think that's where things went off the rails because even after we finished dinner I still felt unsatisfied. Yes, I was full, but I wasn't sated.

The next day we went out for drinks with friends, and the beer made me too bloated to eat a real meal that night. Translation: I still didn't feel like I'd had much to eat that weekend.

Monday was when the sh*t hit the fan.

We were both struggling with our writing projects and, in order to cope, decided to indulge in some much needed comfort food: Skyline chili.

If you don't know, Skyline chili is served over pasta. Yes, pasta. With cheese. A single entree doesn't get much more decadent than that. Well, unless you add sour cream, which I have seen people do when they make it at home.

For some reason, every time I eat Skyline chili, I lose control of myself. It is so good that I feel I must go back for seconds and can't wait until I go to sleep that night so I can eat the leftovers the next day.

So this is how Monday and Tuesday went—eat some Skyline, have some more Skyline, and have even more Skyline on top of that.

It was like I was in a chili-eating contest.

And I was winning.

As cliched as it sounds, it was an unmitigated disaster, facilitated by the fact that Dave and I usually make enough food for four people, so we can eat it for two days (and thus avoid cooking two days in a row).

Thank God we ran out of Skyline on Tuesday night because, I swear on my mother-in-law's life, if there was Skyline in the house right now, I might not be able to stop myself from eating it.

So part of the problem was the Skyline.

But I believe the bigger problem was my meal on Saturday.

Dave and I try to eat out only once a week, and when we did that last weekend, I picked something that was healthy rather than indulgent, which is where I think I went wrong.

I always talk about how one of the reasons dieting doesn't work is because whenever we are denied something we want, we end up wanting it even more. (Remember how appealing beer was before you were twenty-one?) But sometimes I forget that even small changes in your diet can leave you craving the things you're trying to avoid.

That's what I believe happened to me this week—instead of having a greasy pizza or a nice fat juicy cheeseburger during my one meal out on Saturday night, I had vegetables and shrimp in a curry sauce.

Sure, it was delicious, but it was also light.

I've known for years that we NEED to indulge ourselves sometimes, so it's kind of embarrassing to admit that even I still make the mistake of denying myself that indulgence. I guess it makes me human if I have to remind myself not to take the healthy living thing too far sometimes.

The funny thing is that I know for sure that if I'd ordered the same meal last Saturday because I wanted it (rather than because it was healthy), I would have never had the problem I did after it was all over. I would have never had a raging case of The Insatiables.

As it turns out, my need to feel satisfied was simply psychological.

And now that I've figured that out, I just need to figure out what I can do the next time the psychological desire to eat chili for two days straight takes over every cell of my being.

Don't even think about Lunchables by guest blogger Emily Threlkeld

Guest blogger Emily Threlkeld continues telling us about the challenge she has given herself: cooking every single thing she eats for the entire month of February. This week she explains how she handles homemade lunches at work. (Also included are photos of Emily's actual lunches for a week!)

So before we get to the hardest part about this month—dinner, in case you were wondering, although breakfast comes in at a close second—let's do the fun part: lunch.

There is no place more depressing to have lunch than in the employee break room of a retail store. You're surrounded by lockers, cleaning supplies, vending machines, and, in the middle of winter, other people's coats hung over all the chairs. It's not pretty, and yet lunch is my favorite part of the day. Not just because it's half an hour of quiet away from the needs of all the couples I try to pick out housewares with, but because I have become an expert lunch packer. So much so that my co-workers, who usually bring a Lean Cuisine or the remains of last night's pizza, always want to know what I'm having.

When I first started working, I invested $25 in a lunchbox. It felt like an unreasonable sum to me at the time, but it was really just the equivalent of two or three lunches out. I wanted to pack my lunch mostly to save money. Also, because we have such a short lunch break, I didn't want to spend my lunch break running out to my car, ordering something, shoving it in my face, and rushing back to work.

The problem is that I work in a shopping center. In less than one mile there is a great crepes place, a Chick-fil-a, Jason's Deli, a noodle place, and a fantastic Greek restaurant. There are probably even more awesome eateries that I don't know about. So if I was going to pack myself a lunch, it had to be good enough for me to resist temptation that surrounded me.

Here's the good news about making a lunch for yourself: No matter what memories you have of brown bagging it as a kid, you're a grown-up now. You know what you like.

I usually try to think of my main dish first. Some recent favorites include egg fried rice, curry chicken salad, stir fry, half a baked potato covered in cheese and bacon, and, because sometimes I'm in a hurry and don't feel like reinventing the wheel, a turkey sandwich.

Then I try to fill my lunchbox with fruits and vegetables, preferably fresh ones. Not only is this healthy, but it makes your lunch pretty to look at. Sometimes I even make myself a side salad.

Finally, make it nice. Pack a napkin, real cutlery. I usually throw in a piece of candy as a small treat. When I can, I throw something in the tiniest container in my lunch box. Sour cream, fruit dip. Partially because it's fun to interact with my food and partly because I love hearing, "Oh my God, she brought parmesan cheese to sprinkle on her pasta."

EMILY THRELKELD is a newlywed living in Raleigh, North Carolina. She's also a writer and a photographer who supports herself being a bridal consultant at Bed, Bath, & Beyond.

The February Challenge by guest blogger Emily Threlkeld

A good friend of mine—Emily Threlkeld—has decided to challenge herself to do something INSANE this month, and she will be blogging about it every week on I WILL NOT DIET. Read Emily's first post below to find out what that insane thing is.

As I type this post, there is a roasting pan full of a potato (thinly sliced) topped with an organic lemon (also thinly sliced), sea salt, pepper that I ground myself, and fresh dill sitting in my kitchen. In ten minutes I'll toss this all together, wait another ten minutes and then add two tilapia filets that I drove to Whole Foods to buy because the grocery store right by my house only had Chinese exports. I have nothing against China, I was just really hoping for fish that was in the same time zone as me.

(I realize how obnoxious that sounds, but I'm just doing my part to make the world a better place.)

But, on the other hand, last night I put off making dinner for so long that I didn't have any energy to deal with it anymore and just ended up eating grapes. I ate so many grapes that I gave myself a stomach ache. Later, around midnight when all the fructose wore off, I polished off the bottom of a bag of BBQ chips.

Yikes.

I'm not going to lie to you. Last night's "dinner" is a more accurate reflection of how I usually eat. It's just so easy to go out and get a burger or pizza or lo mein, or to stay in and snack on whatever will stave off my hunger until I can go to sleep.

But in the last six months, I've been trying to lose weight. My diet and exercise routines were so out of whack before then that just by walking a few times a week and trying to eat like something resembling a grown up, I’ve lost twenty pounds.

What’s interesting is that the more time I spent in the kitchen, the more weight I lost, and the better I felt. Not only that, but I started realizing just how expensive eating out was and just how little I could afford to do it.

So I decided to make a challenge to myself for February: I will eat no meal that isn't made in my own kitchen.*

Convenience food is okay, cooking from scratch is better, but absolutely no take-out, fast food, or even barista-made coffee.

I'm hoping this challenge will push me over to the good side of things. I'm hoping the extra pressure will motivate me to figure out a better way to do things, so I don't just cave every time I feel too tired to cook. I'm also hoping that I'll end the month a tiny bit thinner, a tiny bit richer, and a tiny bit healthier.

*Well, February minus one week when I'll be in Costa Rica. I have no idea what the food situation will be there.

EMILY THRELKELD is a newlywed living in Raleigh, North Carolina. She's also a writer and a photographer who supports herself being a bridal consultant at Bed, Bath, & Beyond.

Well, well, well, what do we have here?

For years I have been complaining about Weight Watchers not allowing their members to eat as much fruit as they want.

In my "What is a diet" post, I talk about how my mother-in-law used to eat only a half a banana because it was "too many points" to eat the whole thing and how absurd that seemed to me.

That's not a diet. That's The Idiot's Guide to Eating.

Under the old Weight Watchers' point system, “You could be holding an apple in one hand, which was two points, and you could be holding a 100-calorie snack pack of Oreos in the other hand, which was also two points."*, meaning eating an apple was seen as the same as eating a small bag of Oreos.

I'm sorry, but that's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Not to mention unhealthy.

Well, it looks like somebody was listening to my complaints because now—finally!—Weight Watchers has decided to let their members eat as much fruit and vegetables as they want. As The New York Times points out, "All fruits and most vegetables are [now] point-free."

Hurray!

As The Times explains, this is a huge change for the nearly two million devotees of the national dieting program who are used to counting every grape, banana, and pear: "Their world [has] been rocked . . . A 31-year-old teacher from Midtown Manhattan who had barely touched a banana in six years wanted to know if she could really consume them with impunity."

Yes, it's really true. You can now eat bananas until your stomach is full and your heart is content.

Guess I know what I'm getting my mother-in-law for Christmas.

Eat, eat, eat, and then eat some more

196 pounds

As much as I hate to admit it, classes started yesterday here at WKU, and that means I have to go back to a much more challenging schedule . . . getting up earlier than I want, showering every single day (can you imagine?!), squeezing in exercise whenever I can, and—most importantly—eating on the go.

To be honest, it's a recipe for disaster.

And, because of all the stress, I can't help but find myself longing for the quick fixes—fast food, hi-cal carryout, frozen pizza and other meals that come in a box.

But if I start eating like that, we all know what will happen—my body will retaliate, and the scale will go up, up, up, and up some more

No, I can't give into those very strong desires, and there are two ways I'm avoiding doing that.

The first way I'm overcoming my stress-fueled desire for junk food is a trick you can read all about in my "Nothing beats a home-cooked meal" post. Suffice it to say that when school is in session, Dave and I try to cook all of our meals for the work week over the weekend. We have to be at school Monday through Thursday this semester, so we each cook one meal on Sunday and make enough that those two meals will last us four days.

The second way I avoid junk food when I'm this is busy is by making sure that I eat healthy snacks all day long--a snack between breakfast and lunch, another between lunch and dinner, and then sometimes a little one later in the evening.

These snacks don't have to take much preparation either—anyone can put a piece of cheese and and an apple in a bag or grab a container of yogurt—but I love making gourmet snacks so they are even more appealing. Last night I spent ten minutes making homemade salsa (tomatoes, red pepper, jalapeno pepper, onion, lime, and red vinegar), and I ate a half-cup of that this afternoon with a few tortilla chips this afternoon. (The homemade salsa makes store-bought salsa taste about as appealing as motor oil.)

I've also been known to repeatedly make cottage cheese dip to eat with raw vegetables like red pepper, cucumber, and carrots. (If you're interested, the cottage cheese dip—modified from Moosewood—is made by simply blending cottage cheese, feta, dill, and green onion.)

The result of eating little snacks like these all day—about every two hours—is that you'll never really feel hungry and, therefore, find it much easier to avoid unhealthy temptations. I put this theory into practice today, and by the time I left school, I didn't have any desire to pig out, which is usually the case with me after a long day at work.

By no means am I the first person to advocate this technique—we've all heard of it before—but it really does work. And it's especially effective when you're dealing with an unusual amount of on-the-job stress and fatigue.

Step #1: Like yourself a.k.a. what makes me different from everybody else

196 pounds

I realized the other day that there are some basic things I have yet to say on this blog, so I'm going to try to say them over the next few weeks.

When I started this blog, I began by slowly outlining my belief system and the ways which we can all lose weight without dieting. But I only got through five of those steps (which are are still included below right—scroll WAY down—under the title, "How to Lose Weight without Dieting"), but I need to get back to those steps and finish them.

Tonight I want to start filling in those gaps by addressing a question that has been posed to me lately: how is this blog—and my approach—different than any other program that proposes a change in lifestyle?

1) First of all, I want to say that in many ways my approach is NOT drastically different than any weight loss program that advocates lifestyle change. The way to lose weight and keep it off is by making a lifelong commitment to being healthy—yes, that includes exercising and eating healthy foods, but it also means doing those things in moderation AND giving into indulgence from time to time.

2) But, more importantly, the number one thing I advocate on this blog is accepting ourselves the way we are. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I believe we have to like the way we look before we can even begin to be healthy and/or lose weight. And that's what makes this blog and my approach different from everyone else out there.

Because I believe that most "healthy living" programs are predicated on the belief that if people find themselves unattractive, they will want to change their lives, they will want to diet.

And I just don't buy it.

(On top of that, I think it's an ugly kind of fear-mongering.)

I believe, instead, that only people who truly like themselves can make that change.

So if you haven't yet figured out what you like about the way you look, it's time for you to do us all a favor: put on your favorite outfit, go look in the mirror, and find something to like.

I know that if you look hard enough, you can do it.

You are what you eat

196 pounds

There is only one official month of summer left, and as a result, I'm noticing that there is less and less food in my CSA basket each week.

If you don't know, CSA stands for "community shared agriculture," and members of a CSA "invest" in a local organic farm every spring and then get "shares" of the farm's produce every week during the season—for us, that means from May to November. The cost for our CSA is $400 for six months if you pay all of it up front, which works out to be a little more than $15 a week. Not a bad deal for a good-sized basket of organic produce.

In May the basket which holds our share is pretty light—filled about halfway—but by June its overflowing with the best vegetables and fruit I've ever eaten in my life. At that point, there is usually too much to fit in one basket, and we have to carry watermelons under our arms like footballs from the pick-up spot. We get everything from beets to blueberries, and we love it all.

But now we're in a slow period. Most of the summer produce has been harvested, and as we wait for the fall harvest to come in, our baskets are again only half-full. And when our share arrived tonight, I thought about the fact that even half-full, the CSA is still an amazing deal.

And this makes me wonder—if it's such a good deal, why is it so hard to get other people to join? We've told all of our friends about it, but we only know five people who are doing the CSA with us this year.

Some people complain about the fact that we don't know what we'll get every week, but for us, that's half the fun. The first time we got beets last year, we had no idea what to do with them. By now we know that there is nothing better than tangy beet risotto or warm roasted beets on top of a bed of mixed greens and goat cheese.

Still, most people we know don't seem interested, which makes me marvel at our inability to adapt.

We all know that organic food is the best thing we can eat—the only problem is that it's expensive, a problem easily solved by joining a CSA. As I said in my last post, scientists have now proven that chemicals and pesticides make us gain weight, so I'm not sure why anyone would pass up the opportunity to get pesticide-free produce for such a cut rate.

And I've witnessed a similar problem with locally grown, grass-fed beef.

A friend of ours—who is also in the CSA—decided to raise his own steer a few years back. We would go over to his house for dinner parties and cookouts and see the handsome animal in his backyard, feasting on acres of gorgeous Kentucky grass and flirting with the neighbor's cattle. After a few years, it was time for the steer to deliver on his promise of providing our friend—and many others (since it was too much for one person to eat)—with a winter's worth of beef. Our friend invited a group of us over for one of the first meals, and I was surprised to see that another friend of ours—a meat-eater, in fact—turned his nose up at the offering.

"I don't eat anything I've met," he said, but I didn't get it.

This was a person I knew had eaten frozen dinners for lunch—meals with mystery meat and dehydrated vegetables—but he was unwilling to eat locally raised, grass-fed beef?

Was I missing something?

The problem is that we don't like to think about where our food comes from. We just like it to appear on our plates—in edible form—like magic. (That might be why eating out is so appealing.) But the truth is that juicy hamburger you cooked on the grill last 4th of July came from a cow. And, unfortunately, it probably didn't come from a local cow or a cow who eats grass and it almost certainly didn't have as long and happy a life as our friend's cow.

The same could be said about our CSA produce. Yes, sometimes the corn shows up with a few worms, and more often than not, the carrots are always dirty. That's because corn grows in a field, and carrots come out of the ground. And once we realize that, maybe we won't be so obsessed with our food looking so neat and clean. Because, in the end, that neat, clean package of ground beef and that beautiful winter tomato probably come with chemicals and fillers that will make you feel pretty dirty in the long run.

The way we're meant to be

198 pounds
In the August issue of Glamour magazine, there's a wonderful article by Dr. Julie Holland called "The Cave-Woman's Guide to Good Health."

One of the article's main tenets is that we all need to "eat real food."

As Holland explains, "Women aren't meant to be bone thin, as many of my patients strive to be. So don't kill yourself trying to get there. Plus, guys are drawn to your body at its most natural. Some brain scans suggest that men go gaga over curves, which, after all, signify fertility."

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Rebuffed at the buffet

192 pounds

Recently I was at a social gathering that included a plentiful buffet of snack food—decadent cheeses, fine breads, gourmet meats, tasty guacamole, salty tortilla chips, and much more. I was standing near this table of goodies when one of my friends saw me and said something like this: “It must be nice not to have to worry about dieting! You can eat whatever you want.”

There is some question about whether my friend meant this comment literally or not, but I do sometimes feel like people don’t completely understand my “will not diet” approach.

Not dieting does not mean that I can eat whatever I want.

I really wish it did!

What it does mean is that I don’t go on “diets,” and if you’ve read my “What is a diet?” post, you know that I define a diet as something that requires us to change our eating habits for a set period of time. Some people would call these fad diets or unhealthy diets. I just call them crazy ways to make you less healthy in the long run (even though they might help you drop a few pounds in the short run).

Famous fad diets include the Atkins diet, the Zone diet, the Cabbage Soup diet, the Grapefruit Diet, the Thousand-Calories-a-Day diet, etc. I also consider it a diet when people give up something—like sweets or flour—for a set period of time.

Basically, for me, a diet is anything that means that you can’t eat as you normally would.

And this brings me to my approach.

No, I don’t diet in the way I’ve defined above. But that doesn’t mean that I don’t watch what I eat. My goal is to eat healthy all the time, but don’t let the word “healthy” fool you. For me, eating “healthy” is as much of a mental approach as it is physical one. It includes having plenty of fruits, vegetables, and lean meats as well as a moderate amount of carbs, dairy, and dark chocolate in my daily diet, but it also includes eating cheeseburgers, sodas, and sinful desserts from time to time. And that’s because I believe that indulgence is an important part of living a healthy lifestyle. If we don’t give into our desire for high-calorie, fatty foods from time to time, I believe that desire will only grow, causing us to actually eat more of the bad stuff than if we simply allowed ourselves those indulgences now and then.

For me, “now and then” means limiting my indulgences to about twice a week. In other words, I let myself go a little crazy about two times every week.

Usually that happens on the weekend, but last week that meant splitting a large Buffalo chicken pizza with my husband on Thursday while we spent the day grading at Greener Groundz and going out for a high-calorie Mexican dinner with some girlfriends on Friday night.

Because I knew I was going to have those two big meals, I didn’t allow myself to eat whatever I wanted at that snack buffet I mentioned earlier. If I had, I promise you that I would have had a much bigger plate of cheese, meat, and bread than I did.

No, unfortunately, even the “will not diet” girl cannot eat whatever she wants.

Childhood Obesity, Part I: Rethinking baby fat

191 pounds

During the State of the Union address last night, President Obama announced that Michelle Obama is going to lead a new American initiative to fight childhood obesity. I was obviously thrilled to hear this since, like most of us, I'm concerned about the fact that more and more Americans are becoming obese these days, especially children.

Michelle Obama has already emphasized the importance of eating locally grown, organic food—an issue near and dear to my heart—by planting the first organic garden on the grounds of the White House, and this new initiative jibes perfectly with the message of the garden, which is that we all need to be eating more meals that we cook at home—meals made from whole foods—rather than relying so much on processed and fast foods.

I imagine her initiative will also focus on exercise as well, an issue that's also important. According to USA Today, the initiative will work "to provide more nutritious food in schools, allow more opportunities for kids to be physically active and give more communities access to affordable, healthful food."

But what concerns me is that eating well and exercising isn't necessarily enough to combat the rising rate of obesity in our country. Yes, these are essentially the same tips I advocate on this blog, but my blog is read by a small group of people whereas people around the world listen to First Lady Michelle Obama.

And the problem with implying that obesity is only the result of bad behavior is that scientists are now starting to find out there may be more to it. It may actually be chemicals that are making our children obese at a much higher rate than say that of our grandparents' generation.

The real evidence of this lies with babies.

Babies don't eat too much or exercise too little. In fact, babies generally eat the same amount, especially if they're being nursed and can only consume the milk their mothers provide. Which is why it's strange that more babies—even babies who only get their calories from their nursing mothers—are now suffering from obesity too.

According to Newsweek's 2009 expose on this issue, "In 2006 scientists at the Harvard School of Public Health reported that the prevalence of obesity in infants under 6 months had risen 73 percent since 1980. 'This epidemic of obese 6-month-olds,' as endocrinologist Robert Lustig of the University of California, San Francisco, calls it, poses a problem for conventional explanations of the fattening of America. 'Since they're eating only formula or breast milk, and never exactly got a lot of exercise, the obvious explanations for obesity don't work for babies,' he points out. 'You have to look beyond the obvious.'"

And when they looked beyond the obvious, what scientists found was that chemicals might be the thing making babies fatter. According to laboratory studies, chemicals make mice fatter by reprogramming their metabolism, and the same might be happening with babies . . . or any of us.

In fact, "In 2005 scientists in Spain reported that the more pesticides children were exposed to as fetuses, the greater their risk of being overweight as toddlers. And last January scientists in Belgium found that children exposed to higher levels of PCBs and DDE (the breakdown product of the pesticide DDT) before birth were fatter than those exposed to lower levels. Neither study proves causation, but they 'support the findings in experimental animals [and] show a link between exposure to environmental chemicals … and the development of obesity.'"

And that might be why some people under the age of fifty in our society have become obese even though they don't necessarily eat more or exercise less than anyone else.

Does this mean we should all give up trying to be lean, mean fighting machines?

Of course not.

In fact, if like me you weren't overweight as a child, scientists believe it's unlikely that you were affected by chemicals in this way.

Meaning that healthy eating and exercise is still the answer for most of us.

But it also means that we have to re-shape our ideas about obesity in this country. And we have to understand that there are now two reasons—chemicals and genetics—why you shouldn't judge the person who needs a larger seat in the movie theatre, doctor's office, or classroom.

(And don't try to pretend that you don't judge that person because I know you do. The sad fact is that we all do.)

So I applaud Michelle Obama for taking on this incredibly important issue, but I also urge her to look beyond the obvious culprits of diet and exercise and to push scientists to find a way to reverse the effects of these chemicals rather than simply telling overweight kids they need to exercise more and eat less.

Don't cut the cheese

190 pounds

Great news for all of you cheese lovers . . .

According to The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, "women who ate an ounce of full fat cheese every day gained fewer pounds over time than those who didn't."*

Yes, I said full-fat cheese.

Not low-fat cheese, not part-skim cheese, not nonfat cheese. But full-fat cheese.

I've always hated low-fat and nonfat foods—especially cheese—so this announcement makes me particularly happy.

Obviously, one of the things that bugs me about reduced fat foods is the fact that they never taste as good as the original food. From my point of view, it's better to eat half as much of something in its original full-fat version than it is to eat any of the reduced-fat stuff.

Not only do I hate the way it tastes. I also hate it on principle.

It even bothers me when other people eat low-fat or low-cal food substitutes. I feel as if they are depriving themselves of something real, something authentic, and as I've said before, I believe that when we deny ourselves something we desire, it only makes us eat more in the long run. Because, let's face it, eating reduced-fat or reduced-calorie items doesn't usually satisfy our cravings. Low-fat pizza? No thanks.

And as it turns out, research has shown that low-fat or low-cal foods give us the false sense that we can eat as much as we want, thereby canceling the benefits they provide.

But the truth is that full-fat cheese is not only satisfying, it also helps us lose weight because it increases our metabolism.* And, as we all know, cheese is a wonderful source of calcium as well.

So next time you find yourself eyeing the reduced-fat cheddar in the dairy section of your grocery story, do yourself a favor and go for the real thing.

I promise you won't regret it.

Are you still with me???

196 pounds

As I mentioned in my discussion of the recent Time magazine story on exercise, my grandfather had a massive stroke Friday, August 7th and died a few days later on Monday, August 10th. As soon as we heard about the stroke, Dave and I got in the car and headed for Ohio, where we spent Grandpa's last three days, staying until we had to leave in order to get back to Kentucky to teach our last few days of summer school. Hours after we left for Kentucky, Grandpa died, so as soon as we were finished with our classes on Thursday morning, we got back in the car and returned to Ohio for the viewing and funeral, a trip that was extended with side trips we had to make to Indianapolis and Cincinnati on the way home.

When all was said and done, we were on the road for three days, home for the next three, and then on the road again for five more days, meaning we were traveling eight of those eleven days. It was obviously exhausting, and I can't remember the last time I felt so happy to come home.

The day before Grandpa's stroke, I weighed 194 pounds, and the day before that, I'd bottomed out at 193—a full ten pounds less than where I started back in March. Since I hit 193 on a Wednesday, I didn't get to post that number with my blog. I also knew full well that the first time you hit a low number like that, you're bound to go back up the next day and fluctuate numerous more times before that low number becomes a reality. So I didn't make a big deal out of it on the blog—though I was happy to mention it in passing.

But now that I'm back from the trip, I find that my weight is back up to 196 pounds.

Sigh.

I don't spend a lot of time talking or complaining about the numbers on the scale because, as I've said before, one of the goals of this blog is to demystify those numbers, to send the message that the numbers don't matter as much as how we feel about ourselves and how healthy we are.

On the other hand, I also started this blog to document my weight loss. So when I have to admit to the world that I weigh 196 pounds almost five full months after I started trying to lose weight, I feel more than a little bit frustrated. I guess in some ways I feel like I'm letting you all down.

I don't want to send the message that my only goal is to lose weight because it's not. And I definitely don't want anyone to think that I believe that losing weight has to happen on a timetable because I believe that's one of the worst things we can do to ourselves. In fact, for years, I've believed that as long as the numbers on the scale are going down—even if its only by one pound a year—instead of up and the doctor says I'm healthy, then I'm doing well.

At the same time, I have to admit that I first hit 196 pounds back in April, only weeks after I started trying to lose weight, which makes me feel like I haven't accomplished anything in months. And if this is frustrating to me, I imagine it must also be frustrating to the people who tune in merely to see how many pounds I've lost.

(Mom, are you listening?)

Seriously, if you read any of the weight loss columns in women's magazines—or, God forbid, watch shows like The Biggest Loser—you're used to seeing the pounds drop pretty quickly. And if you're disappointed by how long it's taking me to get back to a healthy weight, I apologize.

But at the same time, I don't want you to give up on me. I want you all to believe me when I say I know my plan will work. It's worked in the past, and it will work again. Yes, I've had some setbacks this summer—first with my knee injury, and then with my grandfather. We all have setbacks (that's how I gained 27 pounds in the 18 months before I started this blog), and I don't want to use them as an excuse, but I do want to acknowledge them.

And maybe that's all I—or any of us—can do: acknowledge that sometimes the unexpected happens, and we can't blame ourselves if we are forced to backtrack a little when dealing with the unexpected.

A few years ago, my friend Al, who's a psychologist, listened to me flagellating myself for eating far too much after a long day at work, and he wisely pointed out that if I beat myself up for making a mistake, then I'm only causing myself more misery. Better to let mistakes go than to rehash them, Al said, and it was this advice that eventually led to my belief that we must allow ourselves indulgences from time to time.

Obviously, the important thing is to keep going, keep improving. During those eight days I was on the road, I only exercised twice, and I ate a lot more crap than normal—visits to Skyline Chili, Graeter's Ice Cream, and Frisch's Big Boy come to mind. But I've been home for three full days now, and it took me two of those days to get back to the person I want to be: a person who eats delicious home-cooked meals, a person who gets plenty of rest, and a person who exercises like a kid let loose in the schoolyard. I'll keep doing this until the next setback comes, and maybe, just maybe, in the meantime the numbers will prove that not dieting really can help people lose weight.

I believe. Do you?

Nothing beats a home-cooked meal

195 pounds

So now that we can all agree that processed foods are the devil’s handiwork, what can we do about it?

1) Shop on the outside of the grocery store and stay away from anything boxed, canned, or frozen.

2) Buy more locally raised produce, eggs, and meat.

3) Cook at home more and eat out less.

Numbers one and two are not that hard to do if you set your mind to it, but number three is obviously more difficult for many of us, especially if both you and your partner work.

But I learned a wonderful trick this past year that makes it much easier to cook and eat at home.

Unlike most English professors, Karen, the chair of my department, has to go to campus five days a week and work long, tiring days. Her husband Kevin also has a job that requires him to be away from home all day long every day of the week. In that way, they are like most Americans. (Trust me, I know how lucky I am to be able to work at home two or three days a week.) And they are also like most Americans in that by the time they get home, they have little or no energy left for cooking. (A problem that is, of course, exacerbated if you also have children on top of a full-time job.)

But Karen and Kevin are foodies—they love food but they want their food to be fresh, natural, healthy, and usually homemade. In order to stay healthy and eat well, Karen and Kevin cook all of their food on Sundays. They each make one big meal on Sunday, and then stretch that one meal out for three days. So if Karen makes moussaka and Kevin makes steak, they’ll eat the steak for the first three nights of the week and the moussaka for the next three nights.

Once I learned about Karen and Kevin’s routine, I was so impressed that I decided that Dave and I should give it a try.

Because we can sometimes work at home a few days a week, we don’t have to make everything on Sunday the way Karen and Kevin do. Instead we take turns cooking and follow Karen and Kevin’s model of making meals that will last us more than one night a week—one of us cooks on Sunday, we eat that meal Sunday and Monday, and then the other one of us cooks on Tuesday, making a meal that lasts the next two days. On Thursday, the person who cooked on Sunday cooks again, and we eat that meal Thursday and Friday. (And we usually eat out on Saturday.)

Sometimes we stretch the meals out longer, but even if we only have to cook every other night, we always notice how much of a relief it is when half of the time we don’t have to exert any effort for a delicious home-cooked meal. And since we take turns, that means each of us only cooks one or two days a week, which seems doable even for the busiest couples. If we plan it right, we almost never have to cook on an especially long and exhausting day. This is, of course, important since we are all more likely to eat out or eat unhealthy food when we are tired.

Another benefit of this system is that we eat less. If we know that a meal has to last two—or three—nights, we’re much less likely to get a big plate of seconds, a huge benefit for two people who really like their food.

This may seem like an obvious solution to the problem of not having time to cook, and in many ways it is, but until we heard about Karen and Kevin’s routine, it had never occurred to us to do make such a simple change.

It seems fitting that today to end with a recent quote from Michael Pollan, author of In Defense of Food and The Omnivore's Dilemma: “You want Americans to eat less? I have the diet for you. It’s short, and it’s simple. Here’s my diet plan: Cook it yourself. That’s it. Eat anything you want—just as long as you’re willing to cook it yourself.”

Everybody wins!

195 pounds
Well, that's not entirely true. The winner of the Noodles & Company gift card giveaway is Paul Dracon.

His answer—to the question If you’ve never been to Noodles & Company, what dish would you most like to try there and why?—was:

"Japanese pan noodles, so that the waiter will know which table the Godzilla noises are coming from. I'll get my check faster. Besides, it's fun to pretend that your plate is Tokyo and that the shiitake slices are really terrified civilians who are struggling to escape, as the last chunk of ginger narrates like Raymond Burr."

Pretty inventive, if I do say so myself.

But we all win in the sense that we all get to keep eating pasta and other carbs. In fact, not only do we get to eat them, we should eat them. We just have to eat them the right way.

And for the rules on how to do that, I'd like to defer to someone who's more of an expert than me: Christine Avanti, author of Skinny Chicks Don't Eat Salads (a book I'm anxious to get my hands on) and nutritionist on Dancing with the Stars. Here's what Avanti says about how we should all eat carbs. . .

1. Combine carbs with a protein.

Combining a protein with a carb not only fills you up, but it lowers the overall glycemic index (the GI, a popular way to measure the speed that carbs enter the bloodstream in the form of glucose or blood sugar). According to David Ludwig, M.D. of Harvard Medical School, high GI meals are like newspaper in your fireplace, quick to flare up and burn out, while low GI meals are more like slow-burning logs. This one trick, if used consistently, can influence your weight loss plan more than any other eating tip.

Example: Pasta with a meaty tomato sauce.*

2. Eat carbs more often!

While the conventional approach to dieting teaches you how to omit meals, the smarter approach is to make sure you do not miss meals. And it gets better. Eating a carb-protein meal 4 times per day rather than 3 helps keep blood sugar levels stabilized. This keeps the metabolism firing and energy levels high. Research has demonstrated that regulating blood sugar levels regulates hormonal secretions which results in optimal fat burning. Not only this, but carbs secretions which results in optimal fat burning. Not only this, but carbs must be present in the system for the chemical process of fat-burning to work.

Note: For portion sizes and many more details, check out Christine's book.*

3. Eat carbs at every meal.

Believe it or not, this is a healthier approach because you will stabilize blood sugar and prevent the urge to binge later. Skipping carbs at a meal almost always leads you to make up for it later; usually in the form of late-night cookies. This is because the brain needs the glucose from carbs for fuel and if it doesn't get more within 4 or 5 hours, your body has no choice but to break down lean body tissues (like muscles) for fuel.

Example of what not to eat: salad with grilled chicken—too low on carbs! Much better to eat a grilled chicken burger with a side of fruit.*

4. Eat carbs late at night.

Yes, this is just as important as the rest of your meals. And go ahead and eat dinner even if it is late. Starving yourself or skipping meals slows the metabolism and let's face it—it isn't fun to starve! To keep the metabolism humming and the fat burning, eat a full meal including carbs even in the late evening. Just be sure to eat a healthy protein-carb combo, and if it is really late, you might want to cut the meal in half.

5. Don't overdo it at one time.

Your body isn't a cash register. It doesn't add up your total at the end of the day. It only cares how much you eat at a single meal. If you eat one entire large deep-dish pizza, your body converts the carb overload to fat storage. However if you only eat two light slices now and two slices for dinner 4 hours later, you won't overload the bloodstream with glucose at one time, thus you will keep your fat-burning going. So keep each meal a reasonable size and spread your carbs evenly over all the meals in the day.

*Examples in italic are courtesy of Sarah Fuss's Yahoo Fresh Picks Blog.

Bring on the carbs

195 pounds
It's no doubt that we're all aware how popular low-carb diets have become over the past ten or fifteen years, but while I was visiting my parents earlier this month, I was astounded when I realized how much our national obsession with carbs has messed up the way we eat.

You might not yet have heard of Noodles & Company, but it's a wonderful new chain restaurant that has started opening in major metropolitan areas around the country. I say that it's wonderful because, from my way of thinking, any resturaunt that celebrates noodles and is located in a made-up land called "Noodleville" earns a special place in my heart.

But it's not just the noodles I love; it's the affordable prices and the wide variety of options. You see, even though Noodles & Company has higher calorie options—such as Macaroni & Cheese, Buttered Noodles, or Mushroom Stroganoff—it also offers healthier meals such as Bangkok Curry (pictured above), Penne Rosa, and Japanese Pan Noodles. According to the Noodles & Company website, "two-thirds of its dishes are less than 500 calories and one third are 10 grams of fat or less" and "Health magazine named Noodles & Company one of America's Healthiest Fast-Food restaurants in 2008 and 2009."

Because of all this, I wrongly assumed that my parents would be happy to eat there one night during our recent visit. After all, they were the ones who had first introduced us to this new chain the year before.

But as soon as I mentioned the word, "noodle," my dad began to balk. At first, I wasn't sure if he didn't like the food anymore or if he simply wanted something different, but later he made it clear that he didn't want to eat pasta of any kind because he was worried about getting too many carbs.

For the record, The International Food Information Council explains that "As the main energy source for the body, carbohydrates are an important part of a healthful diet" and recommends that we "get the majority of our daily calories from carbohydrates—about 45 to 65 percent of daily caloric intake." Also, UCLA dietitian Dana Ellis explains that carbs are a good source of fiber and "your body actually needs carbohydrates to function at its optimal level" because they help feed "your muscles and cells, allowing you to sustain an active life-style."

Despite this, my dad was adamant about not having any pasta that night. So rather than go out to Noodles & Company for dinner, we compromised and got carry-out—the rest of us ordered noodles while my dad asked us to pick him up an order of Sweet & Spicy Asian Chicken from Wendy's, which is located right across the street from Noodleville. I assumed that what he wanted was some kind of Asian salad, so I happily took his order and headed out the door. But when I arrived at Wendy's, I found out that, in reality, what he had asked us to get him was an order of fried boneless chicken wings served in an Asian-style sweet and sour sauce. Fried chicken wings? Made with processed chicken? This was his healthy alternative to pasta???

It didn't take long for me to put two and two together. My dad believed that since the Asian wings are a meat dish and the Noodles & Company offerings are primarily made with pasta, he was being healthier by going with the meat. Immediately, I questioned this logic, and as soon as I had a chance, I looked up the facts to find out for sure.

As it turns out, Wendy's Sweet & Spicy Asian Chicken is much worse for you than the large order of Bangkok Curry noodles my mother and I got from Noodles & Company.* In fact, though the large Bankgok Curry noodles (at 600 calories and 71 grams of carbs) have about the same amount of calories and carbs as the Wendy's boneless wings (at 550 calories and 67 carbs), the wings have more than three times the amount of sodium. That's right, three times!!! That's because Wendy's boneless wings contain more than 2500 grams of sodium! That's 100-1000 more grams of sodium than the range recommended per day by the Mayo Clinic!

And adding insult to injury was the lack of satisfaction my dad got out of his "healthier" meal. When we all finally sat down at the table, his small pile of meat looked pretty pathetic next to our huge bowls of pasta, meat, and veggies. Honestly, I felt guilty that night, having so much food in front of me that I couldn't even finish it all while my dad picked sadly through his tiny wings like a homeless man eating something he had found in the trash. To make matters worse, it wasn't an hour later that he claimed to be hungry again whereas the rest of us felt satisfied all night.

I told my dad about what I had learned the next day, but I don't know if he processed what I was telling him. The bottom line is that we all need carbs. They're good for us. And if we don't eat them, we may temporarily lose a few pounds, but in the long run, it's not worth it.

And, in truth, we all need sodium too. According to the Mayo Clinic, our bodies "need some sodium to function properly" because it "helps maintain the right balance of fluids in [our bodies], helps trasmit nerve impulses, influences the contraction and relaxation of muscles," and prevents your kidneys from hoarding sodium, the latter of which would unfortunately make your heart work harder and increases pressure in your arteries. But that doesn't mean we don't have to be careful about how much sodium is in our diet because most of us get too much. And the real problem is processed foods. In fact, 77% of the sodium we eat comes from "prepared or processed foods" like the Wendy's boneless wings.

Since that night I've noticed that the advertisements for Wendy's Asian Sweet & Spicy Chicken are everywhere—they can be seen on television and on billboards. Heck, they even pop up when I check my email. And every time I see one of those ads, all I can think is, no wonder our country has a problem with obesity. No wonder.

*I am not trying to assert that Noodles & Company offers meals that are healthier than a home-cooked meal, but I am trying to point out that some things we think are healthy (like my Dad's boneless wings) are not and that we all need to re-examine why we choose some foods over others.