While circumstances may have slowed the pace of our posting for a time, they cannot stanch the flow of MEDICAL PROGRESSS!
Therefore we bring unto you the gift of LINKS!
We are all doomed. See: Pimp My Snack (I can’t believe this site is not by an American!)
The Shangri-La Diet book goes on sale TODAY: The SHangri-La Diet by Seth Roberts
Don’t put staples in your ear to lose weight!
Add comment April 25th, 2006
For the last few months, I’ve been looking at both the No-S Diet and the Shangri-La Diet. I find that they compliment each other well. I’m actually doing both at the same time.
Over at the No-S forums, I’ve been discussing the Shangri-La plan. The No-Sers are skeptical to say the least. Although No-S has been working for me much better since adding in the Shangri-La Diet, I still feel somewhat absurd defending it because it sounds so - silly.
Even so, I will not be disuaded, as I am enjoying this diet combo far more than anything other than the Atkins plan, which I rate equal in effectiveness so far.
I had this humorous exchange with another No-S dieter:
Jan-Tz: This sounds both unappetizing, unhealthy, and unnatural. Are you actually doing this on a daily basis?
Mister Tut: Yes. I’m the Morgan Spurlock of dieting.
Read More on the No-S Diet:
2 comments April 11th, 2006
Seth Roberts, whose Shangri-La Diet
Random Interviewer: How did a psychologist get involved in weight loss theory?
Seth Roberts: I had been lecturing to my introductory psychology class about weight control. My lecture contained some unconventional, science-based advice on how to lose weight – advice I had gleaned from reading many research papers. So when I wanted to lose some weight myself, I thought a good first step would be to see if that advice actually worked. It turned out that it did work. That little bit of success got me started. I began to wonder what else the experts didn’t know. And I realized I might find out by studying myself.
RI: You write that much of what we’ve been told by experts about weight loss is “doughnut truth”—that is, there’s a major hole in it. What would you say is the biggest misconception that sabotages weight loss?
SR: The biggest misconception is this: To lose weight you must try to eat less. That is so close to what people want to hear – they want to hear that the idea is false – that it’s almost embarrassing to say. But it is the biggest misconception. The reason that obesity has been such a difficult problem, so intractable, is that the standard ideas about what causes obesity are so wrong. Imagine trying to get out of a room with a closed door if you don’t know what a doorknob is. It’s really difficult. That’s the situation we’ve been in. Whereas if you know how a doorknob works, it’s easy to get out of the room. The correct idea about weight loss is that to lose weight you must eat more of certain foods – foods that lower your set point. When you do that, weight loss is easy. It’s easy to eat more.
RI: You say that associative learning plays a critical role in weight control. Can you explain that in lay terms?
SR: Associative learning is what Pavlov studied. Associative learning is learning to associate two events, like a bell and food. At the heart of my theory of weight control is the idea that we associate flavors with calories. If we eat something with calories, its flavor becomes associated with calories. The most obvious change when a flavor becomes associated with calories is that it tastes better. I think most people can remember their first sip of wine. It didn’t taste very good. As you drink wine again and again, it tastes better and better. This happens because the flavor of wine becomes better associated with calories. When I buy a new flavor of jam, it tastes better and better as I get towards the bottom of the jar. That’s the obvious effect of a flavor-calorie association: the flavor tastes better. A not so obvious effect is that the food becomes more fattening.
RI: According to your theory, the Shangri-La Diet works because it lowers the body “set point”. What does that mean?
SR: Your set point is the weight your body wants you to be. It’s like the temperature to which a thermostat is set. If your weight goes below your set point, you become hungry. Your weight control system is trying to push your weight up to your set point. It becomes hard to resist eating and gaining weight. If your set point is 150 pounds, you will probably weigh close to 150 pounds. One way to think about it is to think that the Shangri-La Diet lowers the weight at which you will become hungry. If your set point is 150 pounds you will become hungry if you go below that weight. If you weigh 150 pounds and your set point is lowered to 140 you’ll be a lot less hungry that usual until your weight goes down to 140 pounds – your new set point. That’s how the Shangri-La Diet causes weight loss without hunger. Because it removes hunger until you have lost weight.
RI: Why did you use your own body to test your weight loss ideas? What did you do?
SR: I wanted to lose weight. Also, it was a hundred times easier than doing an experiment where other people tried my weight loss ideas. Over ten years, I tried about a dozen different new ways of losing weight. I tried drinking vinegar. I tried eating very bland food. I tried standing a lot. I think I tried chewing lots of gum. The ways that worked were drinking lots of water, eating lots of sushi, eating less-processed food, eating food with a low glycemic index, and drinking sugar water. Drinking sugar water worked much much better than the other methods.
RI: The Shangri-La Diet is based on science that most obesity researchers are unaware of. How is that possible?
SR: The Shangri-La diet is based on a theory that depends on research on how animals learn. Most obesity researchers consider this topic irrelevant to understanding obesity. This is actually pretty common in science, that an accurate understanding of this or that turns out to come from an unexpected place. The most famous example is genetics. The key discovery was made by a monk – Gregor Mendel. Most biologists were unaware of his work for many years.
RI: Why is the Shangri-La Diet so different than other diets?
SR: It is based on quite different ideas. My background is I the study of animal learning. Because of this background, I know a great deal about associative learning – it is the main topic in the study of animal learning. And understanding associative learning turns out to be crucial for understanding weight control. Few weight-control researchers and doctors know much about associative learning. They would never think of the theory I came up with. The theory led to the diet.
RI: You say that “ditto” foods are the main cause of obesity today. What are they and how do they cause obesity?
SR: Ditto foods are foods that taste exactly the same each time you eat them. For example most packaged foods, fast food, a Starbucks Mocha Grande, homemade cake from a mix and granola from the bulk section of the supermarket. These foods have replaced homemade food in our diet. And homemade foods vary more in flavor from one time to the next than ditto foods. For example, meatloaf you buy from a deli will taste more similar from one time to the next than the meatloaf you make yourself from scratch (not using a mix). When a food’s flavor is exactly the same each time, eating the food repeatedly will produce a much stronger flavor-calorie association than repeatedly eating a similar food whose flavor varies a lot. So ditto foods produce much stronger flavor-calorie associations than similar homemade foods.
RI: What effect has the Internet had on this diet?
SR: After it was written about in a Freakonomics column in the New York Times, someone started a log with a comments section in which people could report their success or failure with the diet (annhendricksshangrila.blogspot.com). There were eventually many postings and they gave me a better idea of what does and doesn’t work. Mostly peopled succeeded; that was very encouraging. I was pleased to see my ideas had a kind of life of their own – people could use them to lose weight just by reading them. This hadn’t happened before everyone who had tried my diet, I had it personally explained to them. The New York Times article happened because a friend of mine, a professor at Columbia, mentioned a paper about my diet in his blog. This was noticed by someone who had a blog with a bigger readership (Marginal Revolution). He wrote about my paper and that’s how it came to the attention of the Freakonomics guys.
RI: How can I tell what my set point is?
SR: For most people, their set point is close to their weight. If you are hungry all the time, your set point is above your weight. If you have little appetite, get full very quickly, or never feel hungry, your set point is below your weight.
RI: You write that sprinkling cinnamon on pizza will make it less fattening. Why?
SR: Cinnamon makes the pizza taste less familiar. My theory says that food becomes more fattening as it becomes more familiar. A Chicago doctor did an experiment where people added flavors to all of the foods. The flavors they added changed every month. They lost quite a bit of weight. So it’s not just theory, there’s evidence, too.
RI: What makes this diet not a fad diet?
SR: It’s based on accurate ideas about weight control. The truth doesn’t go in and out of fashion. I like to think the Shangri-La diet will slowly be rendered unnecessary by changes in how we eat – so that no one gets fat in the first place. I think real prevention of obesity is coming but I’m not sure what form it will take. One possibility is that people will be careful to avoid ditto foods. Anyone can do this; you just have to randomly flavor your food. Or never buy the same food twice. Another possibility is that food companies will stop making ditto foods. They will make foods that intentionally vary in flavor. Real prevention of obesity won’t be based on getting lots of exercise. In the 1950’s, 50 years ago, Americans were much thinner than now. They got less exercise, too. They weren’t in good shape. They weren’t eating a low-fat diet. They weren’t eating a low-carb diet. They were much thinner because they ate much less ditto food.
6 comments April 7th, 2006
The folks at Penguin got the advance review copy of The Shangri-La Diet to us on Monday. It’s not a huge volume, but it will take time to read and digest. They also included a helpful stock interview with author Seth Roberts, which we would run, but frankly I would have to type it all in, and I’m not about to do that.
Perhaps we need an intern.
Stay Tuned…
1 comment March 30th, 2006
Last Friday I recieved an email from Seth Roberts’ personal assistant. Apparently since Health-Hack.com was one of the earliest media outlets to leap on the Shangri-La diet after Seth discussed it in the Freakonomics Blog last year, we’ve officially been Noticed.
The off-the-cuff article I wrote on the diet last year really took off after Google listed it as the #2 search result on the topic (not anymore, sadly). It is the most commented article in our history, and the one we’ve had to revise the most times as well.
Now, as the publication date looms, it seems we have been chosen as one of the media outlets to get a pre-release copy of the book. We are very excited to read the details and share our findings . Particularly, since much of what has been published about the Shangri-La Diet so far has been speculation, it will be fun to see if we got it right and to correct any inaccuracies reported in the past.
History has shown that this particular diet is of much interest to our readers. I suspect that is because its link to the Freakonomics Blog has earned it its Geek Bona Fides. So stay tuned.
On a final note, if there is significant interest in Health-Hack.com hosting a Shangri-La Diet forum, we will consider doing that. If that appeals to you, either email us using the link at the top of the page, or comment below.
Thanks!
1 comment March 13th, 2006
I’ll have an announcement soon about the forthcoming Shangri-La Diet book by Seth Roberts. Please stay tuned!
Add comment March 10th, 2006
Well, Yesterday, thanks to Good Morning America mentioning the Shangri-La diet, we had our second biggest day ever, even scoring more hits than our first Slashdot Effect!
I’m glad this happened after we stripped down the code for the site, because we’re already on thin ice with our host (as previously discussed). So please look around, comment, feel free to purchase any goodies that strike your fancy, or consider making a donation if so inclined (hey- we’re not proud!)
Welcome to the family of HHDC readers and members. Please visit often!
-Kevin
Add comment November 15th, 2005
*Update: Now the Shangri-La Diet is now available from Amazon.
Don’t look for a book - there isn’t one (yet)* - but self-researcher/subject Seth Roberts has sprung his test findings on the world through a recent NYT article, as well as by guest-blogging last week at the Freakonomics Blog (mentioned here a few days ago).
Roberts spent the last 25-or-so years (since college) experimenting on himself to find the diet that would work best for him- not by trying different commercial diets, but by testing the effects of different foods on his metabolism. The results have led him to the theory that the desire to eat more food than one needs is actually stimulated by an abundance of flavorful foods. He views this as a hangover from the abundance/famine cycles early man lived through prior to the development of agriculture.
The plan he developed around this theory has had the result that by eating a certain amount of bland foods (both caloric like olive oil or a weak solution of sucrose water each day and non-caloric, like water) in addition to whatever else he wants to eat, he has lost 40 pounds and maintained the loss.
Quote from Seth Roberts bio page at the UC Berkeley Dept of Psychology:
“… I am testing a theory of weight control that assumes that the setpoint of the system that regulates a person’s body fat is sensitive to how strongly the tastes in that person’s diet are associated with calories. These associations are due to Pavlovian conditioning. The stronger the associations, the higher the setpoint; the higher the setpoint, the more body fat the brain tries to maintain. This theory explains a diverse set of facts, including why people in rich countries are generally much fatter than people in poor countries; why smoking, water, and bland food cause weight loss; why the fat content of your diet actually has only a small effect on your weight, contrary to what you may have been told; why popular foods such as hamburgers, soft drinks, and pizza always combine strong tastes and “quick calories” (sources of calories that are quickly digested).
Quote from the NYT:
“During an era of scarcity - an era when the next meal depended on a successful hunt, not a successful phone call to Hunan Garden - this set-point system was vital. It allowed you to spend down your fat savings when food was scarce and make deposits when food was plentiful. Roberts was convinced that this system was accompanied by a powerful signaling mechanism: whenever you ate a food that was flavorful (which correlated with a time of abundance) and familiar (which indicated that you had eaten this food before and benefited from it), your body demanded that you bank as many of those calories as possible.
Roberts understood that these signals were learned associations - as dependable as Pavlov’s bell - that once upon a time served humankind well. Today, however, at least in places with constant opportunities to eat, these signals can lead to a big, fat problem: rampant overeating.”
Quote from Freakonomics Blog (discussing the Shangri-La Diet):
“…I used to drink carefully measured amounts of fructose water or extra-light olive oil — amounts containing about 100-300 calories per day. Now I measure nothing. I am sure however that my total caloric intake from what I will call unusual foods has not changed. The unusual foods currently consist of canola oil, sucrose water (much more convenient than fructose water), and most days a raw egg, swallowed quickly, as the Italians do. Ah, food taboos. I repeat: I am not recommending this (or anything else). I got the idea from a friend of mine; a raw egg swallowed quickly is a relatively diverse source of calories without taste. Perhaps she got the idea from the Italian custom. I have only been swallowing raw eggs for a few months and overall am beginning to think they are more trouble than they are worth. The child in me wishes there were more opportunities to bring it up in conversation…”
Read More:
Does the Truth Lie Within? [New York Times- free registration or BugMeNot required"
Seth Roberts|Associate Professor|Research Interests [UC Berkely Psych dept.]
Dietary Non-Advice [Freakonomics Blog]
Freakonomics
Technorati Tags: diet, seth roberts, shangri-la, canola oil, olive oil, sugar water
20 comments September 23rd, 2005
© Copyright 2008 Health-Hack Dot Com and Disc of Light Publishing Group.
All original content covered under a Creative Commons license.
Contact Kevin 'Mister Tut' Kennedy-Spaien at webmeister at health-hack dot com
Blix Theme by Sebastian Schmieg. Icons by Kevin Potts . Powered by WordPress . Log in . Admin .
Sitemap