Today paulkimelman posted this:
I reached my target weight and have easily held it for >4 months now. I dropped the amount of oil to 1 Tbs from 2, but otherwise it is the same. Many people have been shocked more by the fact that I have effortlessly held the weight than that I lost it (23 pounds in 4-1/2 months). I do note that it is now effortless, as I do not worry about food at all (I eat what I want and when I want, except in the 2 hour window). Sometimes when I am snacking on almonds, I think I really should cut back, but it does not affect my weight, so I am learning to stop worrying. One interesting thing I have found in maintenance is about a 3 pound variance. What is nice, is that when it jumps up 2 pounds, I do not do anything different, as I know it will be down the next day. The other is that I know that if I have a few drinks of alcohol, my weight will be up 1 to 2 pounds the next day (1 if I drink enough water, 2 if I do not). But, again, it just drops off by the next day. I think it is simply retention of water. The calmness of not worrying about what the scale says has been a great feeling. At some point, I may shoot for losing another 6-7 pounds (I am at the top end of normal BMI, and this would take me to the low end). As you can guess, I have got a lot of people started on this diet, most have been successful (so far). So, for anyone who is not sure, I can report that I have been fully successful on this.
I now return to regular blogging…
It stuns me that people who criticise the diet never take into account that it’s known to change your perception of food in such a way as to make you want to eat less. When I see suggestions of “someone should use the oil but keep everything else the same”, the suggesters never seem to understand that with the oil, dieters don’t *want* to keep things the same.
Scientists spend too much effort on trying to prove everything objectively and exhaustively, which is very useful when you’re trying to find the behaviour of gas or model “dark matter”. Self-experimenters are much more interested in subjective experience, and when studying individuals (who are complex and unpredictable), it’s impossible to produce infallible proof.
(I think I was trying to get at a slightly more profound difference between the two than I expressed above, but I’m sure I’ll figure out how to say it eventually.)
The only way the mainstream science will accept SLD or self-experimentation is through sheer numbers — at least, as far as I can see. Reports like the above are always good, because every new story makes it harder and harder to say “it might be an expectation factor”, “it’s because they’ve been posting on a message board” or “it might be because the person is becoming more aware of their eating habits” in response. Good work.