Happy Meals Are Bad, Twinkies Are Good: Welcome to the Food Wars

Or make them fat. Whatever.

How could something so happy - it's even got happy in the name! - cause so much angst? By now you've certainly heard about San Francisco banning the McDonald's Happy Meal. (Note: they actually just banned the toy from being included in meals that don't meet certain nutritional criteria but as a mother of four I can tell you that's pretty much the same thing.) You've probably also heard that a judge overturned the ban. The war on Happy Meals has grown pretty heated in the past couple of weeks and naturally, this battle has filtered down to the fitness blog world.

Last week, MizFit headed up Team Happy Meals (which, if you read her post, is not actually pro-junk food but rather pro-parental responsibility.) In the other corner, Workout Mommy started up Team Healthy Meals for all the reasons you'd expect. Would you rather be healthy or happy, people?! Me, I can't decide.

Against the ban: If you ban the Happy Meal toy kids can still get their fix (and parents their 30 minutes of playland-induced peace) by walking across the street to a variety of other establishments. There is no shortage of junk food or cheap, plastic, movie tie-in crap in this country.

Pro ban: my kids only want the Happy Meal for the toy. They will actually throw their chicken nuggets in the garbage. I know. (I circumvented this wasteful ritual by going to the thrift store and buying a huge bag of old Happy Meal toys for 1$ and then handing them out to the kids for various reasons like pooping in the potty rather than just in the general vicinity, sharing their gum with their brothers even if it was prechewed and sometimes just as a bribe to be quiet and let mommy poop on her potty and chew her own gum in peace.) So if you ban the toy my kids will never want the chicken nuggets or junior cheeseburger all on their own - yay!

Pro: I can't even remember the last time we went to McDonald's - we generally save the Golden Arches for long road trips where we stop every few hours to make an offering at the shrine of the man who invented the indoor playland, unsung hero that he is. So what do I care if they ban them or not?

Against: We have another long road trip in our future. Probably many. A free toy (even if I think it is the lamest thing ever) + a slide that smells like urine = toddler joy. God bless Ronald.

Pro: Maybe this is the kick in the pants fast food establishments needed to offer healthier choices for kids.

Against: They already do, people just don't buy them.

Against: Where does the legislation stop? We've talked before about the slippery slope of letting the government define what is and is not "healthy" food.

Pro: It's more of a gesture, a statement against childhood obesity, than anything else. We have to draw the line in the sand somewhere, right?

Against: Do we really want to make Happy Meals the forbidden fruit?

Against: Legislation targeted at fast food usually affects poor people disproportionally.

Against: It's the parent's job to decide what to feed their children and where to spend their money.

Pro: Perhaps this will spark some conversation about how to better educate parents and children about healthy eating.

Against: Children have to learn sometime how to make healthy choices and they're not going to learn that skill by having some junk food randomly banned. Less than healthy food abounds and it is okay to eat it sometimes, just not all the time.

Pro: So use this new law as a teaching tool!

Pro: This kind of food is addicting. Literally. Plus those things are so processed they don't even rot! So we need to do anything we can to keep it out of the hands of little bodies that are still forming neural pathways (unlike my brain which is shedding neurons by the second - every time I have to listen to the Animaniacs song another cell dies).

Against: So then this law is a piddly drop in the bucket - go big or go home! Hello, school lunches!

Against: Europe has tons of McDonald's (I know, I've seen them!) and Europeans are notoriously Not Fat.

Pro: Really? You know you've reached the end of the debate when someone throws in the everything-is-better-in-Europe argument.

ANYHOW. It's been a long day that started with the kids whining about having to eat whole-wheat chocolate zucchini muffins for breakfast (despite the name, they actually taste amazing) and ended with a fist fight that left two of them bloody and the baby screaming just because she figures why not, that's just what people do in our house. So help my poor addled brain decide.

Oh, and just in case your brain hasn't exploded yet, check out this new study from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (see - you already know it's going to be good because it's European!) that showed that obese children ate more whole grains, fruits, vegetables and lean meats than their slim counterparts. According to the researchers, it's not what you eat but rather how good you are at portion control. Twinkie diet anyone?? (Cliff notes version: Professor lost 27 pounds by eating mostly snack cakes. AND his blood pressure, cholesterol and triglycerides all went down.)

Are you in favor of legislation that would make junk food harder to buy? Does it make a difference if the food is intended for and marketed to, children? What do you make of the Norwegian study results? Did the Twinkie Diet blow your mind as much as it did mine?

Finding Your "Best" Weight

Cartoon Credit: The inimitable XKCD.

Woman #1, to me: Girl, you look good! Got rid of all that baby weight! But don't you lose anymore 'cause you're right on the edge of scary skinny, know what I mean?

Woman #2, also to me: Oh you are over that edge, eat a sandwich already!

Woman #3: Shut up! Charlotte, you look fine but definitely don't gain any weight!!

I'm not sure if every woman is the subject of such weight scrutiny or if this is further evidence of my magnetic ability to draw weird comments (probably both) but this conversation sent me on the crazy roller coaster from elation to worry to chagrin in the 15 seconds it took to say it. First I'm perfect, then I'm too thin and then I'm borderline too big? This is exactly what drove Goldilocks to start hiding her porridge under her napkin and taking excessively long hikes in the woods. Fairytale gone bad, my friends.

In an effort to settle the debate - because of course I can't trust my own opinion, I'm nuts remember? - I asked a fourth friend what she thought. Not even glancing at my figure, she gave me a sheepish smile and said, "You know me, no such thing as 'too thin'..." Which is when I realized that my weight is a Rorshach test for how other women feel about their bodies and how each person interprets our societal standards about beauty. I can't trust other people's opinions any more than I can trust my own and yet, just like Goldilocks can't stop sleeping in stranger's beds, I can't stop asking for other people's thoughts.

This question is on my mind because, as those of you who follow me on Twitter already know, my baby Jelly Bean turned one on Friday! (Incidentally the exact same day Heather Eats Almond Butter and her husband welcomed their sweet baby into the world - how cool is that?!) And lurking in the background of the joyous present-opening (why play with the toy when you can shred the wrapping paper?) and the naked cake rolling (her, not me, although I was tempted) that marked this huge milestone (Joy = no more SIDs risk!!) was the Weight Question.

There's a rule that is drilled into the mind of every expectant mother that she has until the baby's first birthday to peel off those baby pounds. After that you get no more free pass and people will resume judging you. Although with all the celebrity baby explosions lately, that free year has been whittled down to a free month. And to be honest, I did pretty well with it. By 9 months post-partum I had just two stubborn pounds hanging around. Then as if by magic (or by barfing my way through a ten-mile race), on her first birthday there I was at exactly my pre-pregnancy weight. Yay?

Here's the slippery slope: My pre-baby weight - three pounds = my "ideal" weight (picked arbitrarily in my head from looking at pictures). But I can guarantee you that once I hit my "ideal" weight then I'll want to lose just a few more pounds to have a safe buffer around that number. And usually by that point I'll want just a few more gone because even though I'll have visible ribs, a chest that makes xylophones weep in envy and collarbones that could take your eye out, my thighs will still have their fatty bits at the top and my hips will still have a little extra padding. (Dear Charlotte, your thighs are Siamese twins. They have never ever not touched. Separating them would be traumatizing. Stop trying - you are not meant to have legs that are widest at the knee.) And so it goes with never feeling good in my skin, with no weight ever being low enough.

I refuse to let that happen again. REFUSE.

I have been down that path to self-hatred more times than I can count. And I have learned that thin does not guarantee happiness. In fact, at my thinnest I was supremely unhappy because I was a) really hungry b) really worried about how to maintain that weight and c) still sure I was fat! But that leaves me with the question of where exactly then is my best, healthiest weight? Do I go by BMI? By what my husband says? My friends (see above, ahem)? My doctor? A website that calculates via a survey what weight other people find you most attractive at? (Yes those websites exist and no I'm not linking one because they are crazy making in the extreme.)

When I was complaining about my "last three pounds" (I know, first-world country problem) to Gym Buddy Allison she pointed out, "How cool is it that you lost all your baby weight without dieting??" And the Intuitive Eating lightbulb clicked on. She's right. For the first time, eating whatever my body needs (not necessarily whatever it wants), I've lost my pregnancy weight without craziness. That's a freaking coup. (For reference, after the last two babies were born I ended up in eating disorder treatment.) And that's also my answer: if I trust my body enough to tell me when it's hungry and when it's full then I also have to trust it enough to tell me when it is at a healthy sustainable weight - whether or not that is the magic number in my head. That is a very scary thought for me. How will I know it when I hit it? What range should I expect for normal fluctuations? How do I quiet the crazy thoughts that tell me it's just not enough? And yet I'm 100% committed to making this work because these past few months I've come to enjoy an ease and, dare I say it?, JOY around food. I'm not giving that up. Even if it means hanging on to a few "extra" pounds.

Please help me out - tell me how you know when you are at your "best" weight! How have you learned to trust yourself? Anyone else get caught in that slippery slope of "just a couple more pounds and then I'll be perfect"?? What do you say when people comment about your weight?

Working in an Office or Working at Home: Which is Better For Your Waistline?

Has there ever been a better-named snack than this one? Why do we not have these in the US?? I need some crunky nudity!

"What smells like... salsa?" My coworker at the computer lab (told you I was a born nerd!) looked around until his eyes settled on me, eating lunch tucked into my cubicle. "What is that thing?" he screeched as if he'd caught me gorging on rat innards. This of course caused all my coworkers to come popping out of their cubes like a life-size game of whack-a-mole.

"It's a red pepper," I replied simply. Due to time constraints I hadn't bothered to cut it up and was just eating it whole, like an apple. The moles retreated.

"I thought peppers were just green. They come in red?" he asked, clearly flustered.

"And yellow and orange. Sometimes purple."

"And you just eat it?"

"I just eat it." Ah the days when fresh produce was newsworthy!

I was a lot skinnier in college. This is not unique to me of course - chalk it up to the nuclear metabolisms of youth. For me, however, I think a lot of it had to do with the fact that I was never home. For one thing I had a roommate who was being stalked by debt collectors who insisted on yelling at any female who answered the phone but it also helped that I was as neurotic as they come using every hour not in class or working to study.

Ignoring for a moment the periods where I was actively eating disordered, it seemed to be easier to control what I ate when I wasn't around my kitchen all the time. (Note: it was also much easier to be eating disordered in college.) I'm the planning queen so while office mates were hitting the vending machines for a meal of chewy Runts and diet Dew, I was pulling out my tupperware of salad with sliced pears and cheese crumbles. I hardly ever snacked and I only ate when I was really hungry. (Sometimes really really hungry - I was a terrible meal skipper).

All of which is a far cry from my life now where, thanks to demanding little people, snacks are on the agenda about every waking hour. There is always food on the table, the counters, the floor, and in my baby's neck rolls. (Note to new moms: make sure to lift up your little darling's chin when you bathe him or her. Tons of gunk gets stuck down there and since babies have no necks, you never see it. I learned this the hard way when I found black specks all over my baby's neck. I was sure he had fleas and rushed him to the doctor's. Turns out they were Oreo cookie crumbs. From me. That I'd eaten while I was nursing him. Don't be me.) ANYHOW, as much as I'd like to say that I never eat the PB&J crusts or the soggy nub of a cheese stick, I totally do. In addition to all the visible food, since I do all the shopping our cupboards are filled with food that I love to eat. So when I get writer's block or just hit with a block (happens more than you'd think), it's all too easy to de-stress standing in front of the freezer with a fork and a pint of ice cream. The last issue is how much of my life I spend cooking - I've already 'fessed up to cooking about 20 out of 21 meals a week - and when I cook, I taste. Sometimes I taste so much I have "tasted" an entire meal before even sitting down with my family.

But while I do impart a glossy sheen to my pre-child work days (I could wear a cute top with a skirt and heels without anyone asking me why I'm dressed up so fancy and then bursting into tears because that usually means I'm going somewhere without my entourage of minis.) I do remember the pitfalls of the office diet. Many of my working friends, and quite a few of you in the comments section of my last Intuitive Eating post, reminded me how hard it is to eat healthily at work. Between the client dinners and the office doughnuts and the face cake for everyone's birthdays, the office can be a minefield of temptation. Not to mention the lack of kitchen facilities for fresh food prep and storage, the overtime and the lunch hours that slowly turn into lunch minutes between meetings.

So! Which is better - working in an office or working at home? Cue the mompetition! Second only to the "does this make me look fat" conversation, the career vs. stay-at-home argument is generally a guaranteed way to end up with hurt feelings, strained friendships and possibly a stiletto heel in your eye. Thankfully for me, I'm only talking about which is better for your waistline, not the cosmic implications of where you choose to raise your Special Ovarian Deliveries. (You will notice that I use the phrase "working" in both descriptions because having done both I will tell you that it's hard work no matter which venue you choose to do it in. You may also note that I choose to refrain from limiting the fun to one gender- um, dudes can totally wear stilettos too. Lots of Daddies work at home these days.) The research says that people are more likely to overeat when they are stressed out and their cortisol levels rise so perhaps it's just a question of who stresses you out more - your kids or your boss?

There are advantages and disadvantages to both but I'm going to vote that for me, being in a different zip code than my refrigerator really quells my predilection for mindless grazing. What's your vote? Do you do better with your eating at home or at work? At home - what are your tips to keep from grazing? At work - what are your tricks for avoiding the candy jar? And - anyone else eat ice cream with a fork? I cannot use a spoon; it just feels wrong!

Intuitive Eating Dilemma: How To Eat What Your Body Wants

Intuitive Eating is a roller coaster. I'm not going to lie to you. In concept - eat what your body wants, it knows you best - it's elegantly simple. In practice it's, well, as messy as the stretching mats of ill repute right after our high-intensity bootcamp class finishes our 100 push-ups. (Seriously, we did over 100 push-ups today. My name is sore. My middle name is stupid.) I've been officially following Intuitive Eating principles for 4.5 months now and in addition to losing a few pounds, I've dialed the crazy down from a padded-room Mel Gibson to a lovably kooky Sharon Osborne. I'm aiming for a sassy and serene Kate Winslet. (Anyone else measure their mental health against the celebrity scale of insanity? Anyone??)

I cannot emphasize enough how life-changing this mental shift has been for me. It's the freedom to walk into a party with a buffet and not feel trapped between my desire to shovel in all the forbidden goodies and my panicky need to hide in another room for the whole party so I won't shovel in all the forbidden goodies. It's the freedom to go to a restaurant without checking the menu online first. It's the freedom to skip over all the diet tips in magazines because the majority of them make no sense to me any more. Why should I drink 16 ounces of water before every meal to "trick my body" into feeling full when I already know, without tricks, what full feels like? Indeed, I no longer hide treats from myself (did that ever work anyhow?) and ended up giving away half a bag of Godiva chocolates because I just didn't like them. I know.

So now that we've had the sunshine-and-roses portion of our program let's move on to the down and dirty. It's not like the above paragraph all the time. Maybe not even most of the time. I wish it was. But I get tired, cranky, PMS-y, bored and all the other foibles of our imperfect natures. (True story: One day I ate half a bag of butterscotch chips out of frustration that I couldn't get "If I Die Young" out of my head. Stupid catchy song - I dare you not to sing it for the rest of the day. And if that's not the worst reason ever to eat, I don't know what is.) And so my weight loss hasn't been picture perfect either. This is the real reason it's taken me so long to write this post. Despite numerous e-mails from you guys asking for an Intuitive Eating update, I've been afraid to write about it. The abbreviated version:

Good news: I finally hit my pre-pregnancy weight!
Bad news: for one day - the next day the scale jumped 2 pounds and hasn't come down since.
Good news: It didn't bother me as much as it would have six months ago!
Bad news: It still really bothered me.
Good news: I can still fit in 90% of my clothes!
Bad news: I still can't fit in 10% of my cute clothes.
Good news: I didn't cry in my closet!
Bad news: it still ruined my day.

All of which is to say I an not, in any way, the poster girl for Intuitive Eating (I'll leave that role to Geneen Roth and Ms. Oprah). So take the following advice with a grain of salt.

I got two interesting e-mails about IE recently and I think they sum up the main struggle most of us have with this program - knowing what our body wants versus what our mind wants.

Reader L writes, "How do you get past emotional eating? Do you have any tricks that get you through those moment when you "need" to eat an entire batch of cookies? And I mean literally, an entire batch! Its gotten really out of hand lately and though I feel like i have squared with the emotional causes, the pull to down large amounts of treats is really strong. Likely some of that is because sugar is like crack to me so maybe I should detox and go without for a while just to get it out of my system to reduce cravings, but with winter and its drearyness on its way , I am worried I will be diabetic by spring if I dont get a handle on this. Any thoughts?"

Reader C writes, "How did you decide what to eat? Did you eat anything and everything? Maybe I'm making this more difficult than possible but I just don't know. Maybe I should find a nutritionist or therapist with experience with IE. Who knows?"

My first suggestion would be to read Geneen Roth's books Breaking Free From Emotional Eating and When You Eat at the Refrigerator, Pull Up a Chair. (I know people love Women, Food and God right now and while it is an excellent read it isn't much of a how-to manual. These two books are.) She says it so much better than I can.

Second, I want you to know that it is difficult trying to figure out the difference between true bodily hunger and a craving. At the beginning it's very difficult. The first two weeks were agonizing for me as I questioned every.single.bite. But it gets easier! I thought that I'd so messed up my internal cues with decades of dieting that I'd never be able to know when my body was hungry and what it wants. But you know what? For the most part, I can now. And if I can learn to do it, you totally can learn to do it too!

Third: sometimes it's easier to know what you don't want than what you do and sometimes you can only learn that lesson after you eat too much and feel like crap. A couple of weeks ago I made biscuits (white flour, butter, sugar - the real, non-healthified version) and for whatever reason ate nearly the whole batch of dough. First I got the carb-rush euphoria. Then I got hit with a tidal wave of exhaustion, headaches, self-recrimination and, of course, guilt. But now I know. Healthy food makes my body feel happier, more energetic, and more calm. There's a world of difference between "knowing" that a food is bad for you and forcing yourself to avoid it and knowing that you can eat it if you want but you will have to deal with the inevitable sugar crash afterward. The end result may be the same (not eating the whole batch of biscuit dough) but the motivations are so opposite that it's the difference between diet rebellion/feelings of deprivation and taking gentle care of your body.

Fourth, a note on sugar: I still think the white granulated stuff is as addictive as the other white powder. I know I feel better when I don't eat sugar. And yet I still decide sometimes to take the accompanying icky feelings just to get that sugar high for a few moments. The idea of a sugar detox is a good one in theory. I think if you can do it without feeling deprived then you probably will find it helpful in managing your cravings. However, if you force yourself you're only going to end up face down in a plate of coconut cream pie at the end. Me, I can't go cold turkey for very long without feeling seriously pissy so my compromise (that I will emphasize works for me and may not necessarily be the solution for you) is to have a little bit every day. My only caveat is that it has to be what I really want to eat. No nibbling out of the bag of chocolate chips every time I walk past and pretending that I'm not really eating them because "it's just 1 chip". If I'm going to have a treat it's going to be coconut sorbet served in a bowl with hardshell fudge topping and I'm going to sit there and do nothing but enjoy it. (Ideally. Feel free to reference the butterscotch chips, biscuit dough above.)

How would you answer L & C? Do you have ways of knowing the difference between "mind hunger" and "body hunger"? What is your philosophy when it comes to sugar? Which celebrity are you as crazy as?

How To Truly Enjoy Your Food

As demonstrated by Jelly Bean. Little Sister looooves her blueberries! Now if only I could learn to eat with such glee - although I daresay I couldn't get away with taking my shirt off and rolling in it like she does. Ah, the privileges of youth! (Not that you asked but as I feel like she's sort of the blog baby, I feel inclined to share. She is crawling now! She does the funniest little one-knee and one-foot scootch. If she goes far enough it makes her turn in a circle, which always confuses her. And amuses me. Her favorite destination is - of course - the toilet. Walking, and the official intro into toddler-dom is just around the corner! Can you believe it's been 11 months??)

With no further adieu, the winner of the Pop Chips giveaway is:

keyalus who said...

I welcome all snacks - salty and sweet - depending on my mood!

E-mail me your details and I'll hook you up with your prize!

Should You be Able to Buy Soda on Food Stamps?

At first blush the proposed ban in New York City on using food stamps to buy soda seemed like an excellent idea to me. I haven't drank a soda in years. I haven't missed it either - while ice cream is the monkey on my back, for whatever reason soda was a piece of cake (har!) to give up. Thanks to McD's introducing milk into their Happy Meals, my kids only drink soda at the odd birthday party or when Grandma sneaks it to them. Even my husband knows better than to bring it into the house (although I do know where his private stash of bottled rootbeer is). Soda is, and I'm guessing about 99% of people will agree with me, not healthy.

And then a pundit on NPR posed the question, "First trans fats, then soda - what next?" What next, indeed. One man's healthy is another man's horrible. Once you get beyond the basic no-nos of Twinkies and diet Coke, the phrase "health food" becomes a Rorshach test of people's deepest beliefs. Don't believe me? Put a militant vegan and a paleo adherent in the same room. Very quickly there will be no more talk of actual foodstuffs but a whole lot of epithets, judgments, research studies and moralizing getting thrown around. I've seen some of the nicest, sweetest people completely lose their nut when their dietary habits are called into question.

A food philosophy - diet is so gauche! - is the new religion. Telling people how you found Jesus in the paint on your ceiling is the surest way to get yourself blackballed from all future parties but go on a 30-minute explanation of how you have been shooting up pregnant-lady urine to lose weight and everyone is all ears. Catechism over canapes is boring but critiquing what's in the canapes? It's practically an Olympic event.

So who gets to make the rules about what's healthy? Up until now it's been a pretty personal decision. You decide for yourself and while you may evangelize, other people still have the right to ignore you and snarf their gas station food. But once you introduce legislation - whether it be in the form of an added tax (like the one proposed for soda last year), a healthy rating sticker applied to foods (a la broccoli is a 10 and white bread is a 1), or a subsidy for certain farmers - then somebody, somewhere is going to have to make the call on what's "good" and what's "bad." This could get as sticky as a push-pop on a hot day.

Besides the obvious hot spots of meat and processed sugar, consider something as simple as the tomato. Totally good for you right? It has all that lycopene that's so good for your prostate! (Not that I have a prostate but I've heard they're handy.) And yet it's also classified as a nightshade which, along with potatoes, peppers and eggplants, are considered toxic by many health gurus. Toxic? Tomatoes?! While this is just one example of the confusion over the definition of "healthy" - and before I scare you off spaghetti sauce for the rest of your life, check out this more nuanced discussion of the nightshade issue in this great article from Mark's Daily Apple - many more abound.

I'm on the fence, however, regarding the current pending legislation proposed by Mayor Bloomberg which would forbid food stamp recipients from using the stamps to purchase soda and other sugary drinks. On one hand, soda is bad for you and lower-income people have a higher risk of obesity already. Not to mention that the idea is hardly novel: having worked a stint as a cashier in a grocery store, I'm well aware that food stamps already have some limitations - you can't buy alcohol, tobacco or paper goods. Fair enough, right? But you also can't purchase "prepared food that is designed to be eaten in the store" (so no green salad from the deli) nor can you get vitamins, including pre-natals. On the other hand, soda is hardly harmful on the scale of alcohol or tobacco (although I can feel some people's fingers itching to argue this point with me right now - bring it on in the comments!) and if you're going to ban soda for it's high content of sugar and/or high fructose corn syrup (the Freddie Kruger of sweeteners, that is if he wore one of those corn hats you get at the State Fair) then you probably ought to ban things like candy, barbecue sauce and - oh, yes - sports drinks. One serving of regular Gatorade has 29.5 grams of sugar.

In an online poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal, out of 1200 respondents 73.8% supported the pending ban. Apparently the will of the voting public has been spoken (although, of course, that can't be said for sure until an actual vote takes place). I wonder if it would be different though if the ban on sugary sodas were to be extended to all citizens, and not just those on the welfare end?

What's your take: should people on food stamps be banned from using them to buy soda? Would you support a tax on "unhealthy" foods? And - the important question of the day - what do you call it - soda, pop, soda pop, or Coke?

Are Carbohydrates The #1 Health Menace? [Good Calories Bad Calories]

Sparkly vampires that don't die in sunlight and fall in love with inarticulate teenage girls, zombies eating brains with grapefruit spoons and their pinkies out (or off?) with Elizabeth Bennett, hapless-yet-cunning teens battling to the death in a reality show that makes Jersey Shore look like The Christian Ladies Aid Society - these are the types of books that keep most people up at night. Me? I've been up for a week now reading the gripping tales of The Fat-Cholesterol Hypothesis and The Carbohydrate Hypothesis spun by Gary Taubes in his game-changing tome Good Calories Bad Calories. Kinda like the Bible and Moby Dick, lots of people will talk about this book but very few of them have actually read it.

Not that I blame them. It's 576 densely worded pages of research paper hell. And I used to be a Graduate Assistant that was paid to write research papers so I know that of which I speak. I'm going to be honest: I read most of it. Skimmed the rest. Fell asleep and drooled all over the "Conservation of Energy" chapter. Was just like college but without all the PowerPoint atrocities.

Good thing for all of us, Taubes includes a four word summary - a dietary rebus, if you will - on the front cover. Take this handy quiz:

Like the old woman/young woman illusion, what you see is all about your perspective. In this picture, is the piece of bread the "good calories" and the butter the "bad calories" or vice versa? For years, as any of you who lived through the nineties (check yes if you ever included "grrrl" in a description of yourself!) can attest, fat - especially saturated animal fats like butter - was the devil in the Devil's food cake. Even today, the American Heart Association recommends no more than 7% of your daily calories come from saturated fats and no more than 25-35 % from any fat. Most of us are well versed in the "good fats" and "bad fats" doctrine. It is, as Taubes takes the first 4 chapters to point out, the conventional wisdom. (I can't complain too much though because it was during this introduction that I got to meet a delightful 18th century Brit named Banting who lost so much weight on a low-carb diet that he went on a pamphlet-strewn publicity tour that puts Atkins to shame. Banting is like Jared the Subway Guy dressed like Marie Osmond on Nutrisystem and with an evangelical spirit that's half Kirstie Allie and half Richard Simmons. I love him.)

According to Taubes, everything you "know" about diet and nutrition is wrong. He backs up this assertion with very (very very) detailed analyses of all the research ever done on the subject, branching into a conspiracy theory about scientists suppressing evidence and changing study results that I would have found laughably ludicrous had I not worked in academic research for so many years and found out first hand what sharks professors on tenure track can be. But I digress. Here's a summary - you're welcome - of the myths busted by Taubes:

1. Eating fat makes you fat.
2. High cholesterol is bad and the best predictor of heart disease.
3. Cholesterol should be lowered at all costs.
4. The best way to lower triglycerides and cholesterol is through cutting out dietary fats, especially saturated animal fats.
5. That Western illness like cancer, diabetes, dementia and heart disease are inevitable if you live long enough.

Basically, Taubes postulates that the surest and best way to help people not only lose weight but also live the longest, healthiest lives possible is to eat lots of fat (all kinds) and protein but cut out carbohydrates. He especially blames sugar for societal ills - no shocker there - but also includes "good" carbohydrates like fruit and whole grains. Not only do carbohydrates not provide good nutrition in the form of energy, says he, but also have the deleterious effects of leaching vitamins and weakening the body in other ways. For those of you who are familiar with Atkins or with the Paleo/Primal diets, Taubes' book is scripture. For the rest of us, these assertions fly in the face of everything we have been taught about good nutrition.

Honesty, Part Two: He makes a very compelling case. Taubes is a highly acclaimed science writer and this background is evident in his meticulous review of every study out there. He not only tackles famous studies, like the Nurses' Health Study, The Seven Countries Study and Ancel Keys' starvation studies, but he includes every minor paper, even previously unpublished ones. About halfway through the book I wanted to throw my hands up and just accept whatever he said as true because he was clearly willing to do a lot more studying than I am on the subject.

And the science is catching up to him on some points. Recent papers have come out breaking the supposed link between dietary cholesterol and heart disease (yay, we can eat eggs AND their yolks again!). Saturated fats are getting lots more good press - indeed I have had a very positive experience adding more fats of all kinds to my diet. The problem for me is when he starts dissing my beloved whole grains and fruit. No matter his comprehensive body of research stating otherwise, I do better and feel better when I eat a diet that includes those two things. That's why I flunked out of the Primal Blueprint. Twice. (Of course, new science is also contradicting him.)

It is at this point in the story my brain kicks into full-on Crazy. Maybe I'm wrong! Maybe I'm just in denial. Was my mid-afternoon crash the result of my Tabata workout or the whole grain bread I wrapped around my tuna? Maybe I SHOULD try low-carb again! If I don't, I could die a horrible death of diabetes, heart disease or cancer! Or all three at the same time!

The only thing that stopped me from dumping my oatmeal down the disposal that very second was remembering how well my current Intuitive Eating Experiment is going. I'm happy. I'm healthy. I'm 2 pounds away from my pre-pregnancy weight and 5 from my "happy" weight (not to be confused with my ideal weight, also known as the weight I should never weigh again because even though I thought it was ideal it was really too low and I looked sick and didn't menstruate and was kind of a witch so yeah.) In a fit of reason - I'm not possessed of those nearly as often as I ought to be - I e-mailed my dear friend Dr. Jon who, also being British and therefore super cool, gave me a different perspective on Taubes, writing,

"Based on all my years of experience, I'm a great believer in moderation when it comes to diet . People lose sight of certain primary physiological facts and become obsessed with Super Foods, antioxidants, detox diets and supplements . To take some examples, a low fat diet isn't healthy because the body needs both saturated and unsaturated fats to maintain its health, LDL cholesterol is vital to well being, and reduced salt intake can literally kill anybody who works out heavily . That's the major difficulty with laying down rigid guidelines - they don't work for everybody and can actually do major harm .

A while back we talked about the Okinawan diet and I told you that the preliminary results indicate that that population's longevity and general good health seems to be both genetic and influenced by a more restricted diet and reduced intake . It is a relatively low-fat diet too, but too much must not be read into that . The Chinese diet is less restricted and pretty high in fats of all descriptions, and the typical French diet is enough to make a dietitian's eyes water . Yet all three countries have a far lower incidence of heart disease than the USA, Canada and the UK - just a thought, but maybe speaking English is the causative factor ???? :)

What you are doing these days, returning to intuitive eating and trusting your body to tell you what it needs, is the sanest and healthiest way to live . Logically, the human body has developed over the last couple of hundred thousand years and evolved the ability to signal its requirements . The plethora of mad ideas out there is truly mind-boggling . We have one particular "guru" over here who you should really have a look at . Her name is Gillian McKeith, aka the Poo Lady (if you have a look, you'll understand why - she's obsessed with it) . Amongst her insane ideas is that chlorophyll "helps to oxygenate the blood" by swallowing it !!! If you remember your highschool biology, chlorophyll is what makes plants green and uses light to photosynthesise carbon dioxide into carbon for the plant to grow, releasing the oxygen into the atmosphere as a byproduct . The only way I could imagine obtaining oxygen from chlorophyll in the gut would be by sticking a searchlight up the unfortunate soul's butt - and then what ??? The gut does NOT have gills !"

So, the take-away message from all this, is that diet books give me way more nightmares than vampires, zombies and teen-death-match-reality-shows combined. (You know it's only a matter of time before someone writes that book!) Actually, what I learned is that I still want to turn to other people - experts, by golly! - to tell me what to do with my body rather than just listening to what it says. There's a fine line here between learning enough to interpret your body's signals and going so far as to substitute everyone else's judgment for your own. Please don't misunderstand me - I'm not calling Taubes a quack and there was much of value in the book, especially on fats and their chemical mechanisms in the body, (and his chapter on paradoxes in the literature will blow your mind) but his recommendations on whole carbs and fruits just doesn't sit well with me. Lots of people live long, healthy lives on a variety of diets. You have the Okinawans with their super-low-fat diet. Then you have the Masai whose traditional diet of meat, whole milk and blood (yes, really) is about 70% fat. And these are two of the longest-lived peoples on the planet! But you know what I bet they have in common? They don't spend a lot of time reading diet books.

What are your thoughts on carbohydrates - all good, only the whole kind, or as little as possible and no grains? How much fat do you normally eat? Any of you read Good Calories Bad Calories? Do you always look for experts or research to tell you what to do, like I do??

The Slow Metabolism: Fact or Myth [Research Porn!]

"Jumpstart YOUR metabolism with a wheaties breakfast!" Eating cereal boosts your metabolism! It must be true - it's right there on the box! PS> Where is their mother?!

I'm doing everything right and it's not working! If you have ever thought the aforementioned - usually cried in paroxysms of grief after an unfortunate run-in with the Scale of Self Destruction - then you have inevitably wondered Maybe I have a slow metabolism. (Right after you have wondered if your Body Bugg got hit by lightning without your knowledge and/or if your personal trainer secretly hates people.)

The Set-Point Theory
One of the most hotly debated theories in the study of human metabolism is whether or not people have a baseline or set point, as measured by weight, that is programmed for each individual body and to which the body strives to maintain. Proponents say this is evidence as to why people have such a miserable time sustaining weight loss over time but opponents say if the baseline theory were true then nobody would ever maintain long-term weight loss and some do. On one hand, lending credence to the set point theory, people tend to weigh similarly to those they are genetically related to (even if they weren't raised by them, as seen in identical-twins-traumatized-by-separation-at-birth studies). On the other hand, NY Times science writer Gina Kolata's whole book Rethinking Thin is based on science saying the opposite. Plus they have Jared the Subway Guy and, well, you can't argue with sandwiches.

The science in this area is still emerging but several studies shed additional light on this. Here's the Spark Notes version:

1. Calorie deficits work. You cut enough calories and you will lose weight. However, the devil, as he is wont to be, is in the details. As anyone who has ever tried to create a calorie deficit can tell you, it isn't as easy as calories in, calories out. New research shows that the percentage of deficit taken, the starting point of both body weight and body fat, and the macronutrient ratios in the diet all influence the rate and the way in which weight comes off when you cut calories.

2. The key to maintaining a weight loss is "balancing your energy." Researchers have shown that people who have lost a lot of weight often overestimate the number of calories they need to maintain their new lower weight and therefore overeat, regaining their weight. When asked, the people reported that they were eating only enough to maintain but when examined by researchers they were eating more than reported. (Not that I blame them, that's just human nature!)

3. People who have lost weight have similar resting metabolic rates as their weight-maintaining peers. Your RMR is how many calories your body burns while just surviving and seems to adjust in relation to your weight. This refutes the oft-repeated statement - and the set point theory - that overweight people have slower metabolisms, even after weight loss.

4. No two metabolisms are the same. It's this last point that is the real kicker. While each person's metabolism may react to different environments (starvation, overfeeding) in a proscribed manner, factors like hormones, body fat percentage, diet composition and, yes, gender, can greatly influence it. If you've ever had a roommate who can eat 6 packages of peanut butter cups a day and still stay a size zero (like I did - egads, you should have tried living with her!) while you eat salmon and broccoli every night and can barely maintain a "normal" BMI, then you will know what I'm talking about.

Our metabolisms may not have set points but they sure have enough outside factors working on them to befuddle even the most determined dieter. I remember the first time this truism bit me in the butt. When I first embarked on my health-nut journey (that started out all about the health and ended up all about the nutty) my extra weight came off fairly easily. Yes I had to watch what I ate and exercise but it worked. I lost weight steadily. And then I hit a plateau. All my diet evangelism flew right out the window when confronted with the "But I'm doing everything right by golly!!" paradox.

Other than struggling over the next couple of years to lose a measly few pounds, I didn't get much insight into this until The Great Over-Training Debacle of 2008. During this time, I had my metabolism thoroughly tested - both in the doctor's office (they ran tests on my thyroid and my hormones and even my baby maker - which thankfully was unoccupied at that time) and in the gym via hydrostatic weighing and the Darth Vader-on-a-treadmill metabolic testing. Their conclusion? I need 1242 calories a day to go about my daily life. I still remember the professor's face when he gave me the news, his look daring me to complain. Which I did. Vociferously! "That's IT?!" I shrieked (politely - I'm a very considerate shrieker.) "That's all I get to eat? That's not even a whole meal at T.G.I.Fridays! I'll never get another Blizzard again! I HAVE THE SLOWEST METABOLISM EVER!!!"

To which he replied, every bit the scientist he was, "It's not slow. It's efficient. Your body works perfectly well and is extremely healthy with only half the energy requirements of the average man." While he was waxing eloquent about my body being a Prius in a world of Hummers, I was trying to come to grips with the fact that at Superbowl Parties there would be nothing super in a bowl for me. I could have one chip with a dollop of hummus while everyone else got Chicago-style pizza.

And then I said it. The phrase every parent hates most: "It's not fair."

"Of course it's not," he replied simply. "It never is."

This idea of "deserving" more food has been a real struggle for me as I've progressed with Geneen Roth's Intuitive Eating program. In the past I've focused endlessly on how to "stoke my metabolic fires" "become a fat-burning machine" and "rev up my engine" so that I could eat whatever I wanted with impunity. So every time I feel my body get full after just a few bites, my mind stomps its foot and cries, "It's not fair! This food is yummy and I earned it! Everyone else gets to keep eating it! I want to keep eating it too! What if they eat it all and there's none left for me?!" For whatever reason, talking back to that voice is very difficult for me. Sure I'll survive the Apocalypse (party with the 'roaches!) but that's small comfort when everyone else is snarfing Concession Obsession with abandon.

But the other night I had a breakthrough. There isn't any point in trying to either speed up or slow down my metabolism. Like Andrew said so many years ago, "Why would I want to fix my metabolism? It's not broken." My metabolism may be slow(er) than most but it works great keeping my body running. And you know what? I DO get to eat whatever I want with impunity. I just have to get my wants in line with my needs. When I eat what my body wants (not what my mind wants - that's different), I don't feel restricted or left out or unhappy. I just feel good. Even if that means I only eat four bites of a homemade brownie.

My husband's fallen in love with this reality show "Out of the Wild: the Alaska Experiment" where they dropped a bunch of city slickers with no survival skills into the middle of Alaska, gave them a map and told them to make their own way out. On one episode, the biggest and toughest of the men faints from lack of food (seriously, the people who signed up for this show make Survivor contestants look sane) and the voiceover explains flatly that "muscle is expensive" and that women are "better at conserving body mass on less food." Like the professor said, we're efficient. Long live the women!

Do you think your metabolism is slow or fast or just normal? Does it matter to you? Do you feel like your body has a set point it wants to stay at? How do you deal with the "It's not fair, everyone else gets to double-fist artichoke dip while I'm stuck with crudités?" voices?? (PS> Did you see I got the é to work?? I did it! Wheeee!!!!)

Can Exercise Hurt Your Breast Milk? [A Study in Mother Guilt]

A mother's love - they say that nothing is more powerful. (At least if you believe Harry Potter, which of course I do. I'm a sucker for green eyes.) So if this is true then I know the second most powerful force on the planet: A mother's guilt.

Whether they hand it to you as you exit the hospital, a neat little package of the shame you carry for sending your precious infant to the nursery to spend his first night on the planet alone amongst the bright lights and loud noises or whether you don't discover the little box hidden like a pipe bomb under the baby seat that you realize you've installed incorrectly and yet have been using it to tote your fragile baby around for months, it is an inevitability. It hits you like a knife to the stomach twisting your innards as your mind races to all the what-could-haves and thank-God-it-didn'ts as you repeat the Happiest Baby on the Block like so many nursery rhyme Hail Marys in an effort to prevent the worst by imagining all incarnations of it. Once the guilt has finished consuming you from the gut upward in its fiendish flames, it settles in quietly, rock-like, deep inside your person. Some mothers carry their neutron-star guilt in their stomachs perpetually churning with acid, others in their heads in the migraine spot right behind their eyes, but I, I carry mine in my heart. With every beat of my own I can feel the pulse, like an echo, of the hearts of each of my children. From their utmost beginning their hearts have beat inside me - how could I not still be swayed by their rhythm?

I shall tell you all the facts. There aren't many, it won't take long. Indeed, on the grand scale of parental mistakes this one is perhaps minor. But it is the thing that it represents that so wounds me: my ability to hurt my children even while doing my best to protect them. But I am ahead of myself.

Anyone who has had a baby, seen a baby, read about a baby or just happens to have breasts will know what a contentious topic breast feeding is. Breast is best! The zeal imbued into this cannot be overstated. It's healthier for both mom and baby - it is a magic elixir that prevents health problems now and in the future! Plus, it's free. And yet, knowing this as all of us breast-endowed women (and most men too, I'd wager) do, how is that the vast majority do not breast feed? Or if they do, they don't do it for long?

I'll tell you why. It's hard. It may be a natural process but it sure doesn't come naturally. At least it didn't for me. Nobody told me how much it would hurt - like rug burns with the scabs getting ripped off every 2-3 hours around the clock - until the baby's suckling finally turned my nipples into pencil erasers. Nobody told me of the yeast infections passed back and forth like some insane game of hot potato but where the winner gets their mouth painted purple with gentian violet. Nobody told me of the stage where infants turn piranha and, literally, bite the one that feeds them. Nobody warned me of the nursing strikes, the engorgement, the clogged ducts, the cumbersome nursing bras, the mastitis, the banning of all medicine except worthless Tylenol, the double pump milking machine that is so similar to the ones they use on cows that you can't help but moo, the spontaneous public let downs at the mere thought of my baby's cry. (On an airplane, wetting a stranger's head no less! The only thing that could have made that flight more perfect was if my last name were Joad.)

I don't tell you this to discourage you from ever nursing but rather, having been through all of this multiple times, to explain to you why nursing means so much to me. I have fought so hard to do this simplest of things. To be the mother who can feed her baby.

But now for the facts I promised you. The Jelly Bean was born hale and hearty at 8 1/2 pounds, by far my smallest baby but fairly large as babies in general go. She took to nursing right away and at first all seemed to go well. She was back up to her birth weight by two weeks, just as expected. She pooped and peed like a champ. But along about 3 months, something changed. She stopped gaining weight. The doctor wasn't overly concerned. "Bring her back in a month for another weigh-in." I did. But at that check-up and every check-up that has followed, her weight percentile has continued to drop. Eventually the doctor suggested a lactation consultant who in turn suggested a number things of which I all tried. While she still didn't gain any weight, I comforted myself that she was meeting all of her milestones and seemed happy and healthy in every other measurable way.

And then she weaned herself. Or perhaps my milk gave out. I think the problem might have started with my breasts. I began to notice her fussing when it came time to nurse and despite her frantic sucking, the milk would not let down. Eventually she stopped trying to suck all together, straight-arming me and crying whenever I laid her down to nurse. I, always stubborn, refused to let the nursing go. I went for days trying to keep feeding her only to continue to be rejected. Finally, after a particularly teary session on both our parts, I gave up and made her a bottle of formula. She didn't like that either. At my wit's end, I called the beleaguered pediatrician again who said I either had to get her nurse again or to take the formula and it had to be done now. My milk was finished. I enticed her to drink the bottle by adding a sprinkling of Strawberry Quik powder to it (desperate times call for artificially flavored measures!).

I am happy to say that Jelly Bean loves her formula now (and we no longer have to spike it with Quik to get her to drink it). I am also happy to report that in the few weeks she's been on formula her weight bounced up to the appropriate percentile quite quickly. All's well that ends well. Right?

Those are the facts. Now for the questions. Was my milk compromised because of my obsession with losing the baby weight? Was her failure to gain weight due to my early and intense return to exercise? Or because of my very restrictive diet? It was during those middle months of my being a no-wheat, no-dairy calorie-counting vegetarian that she lost the most ground. Was my tumble into sane eating too late? The question that haunts me: Did I sacrifice my daughter's health on the altar of my own vanity?

My guilt may be misplaced. There are other explanations, other narratives I could tell for this story. (At the very least, the process of weaning has called down a hellstorm of hormones that alone could account for my angst.) And yet the guilt gnaws at me. I carry their very lives in my hands - how could it not?

If you're a mom - how did nursing go for you? Were you able to nurse and exercise with no problems? If you aren't a mom, what do you have irrational guilt about? Or are you one of those rare women (whom I envy) that is impervious to guilt?

Eating Fat Does Not Make You Fat

Confession #1: Today I stopped and bought my boys t-shirts at a garage sale to wear because I haven't had time to do laundry for two weeks now and everything they own has been worn twice. (Once right side out and once inside out - for the latter, I just tell everyone they dressed themselves. I don't add that I told them to dress themselves that way.)

I hang my motherly head in shame. But that is nowhere near as shocking as my next confession. If Charlotte-from-10-years-ago knew what I was about to confess, she'd have had me committed then and spared me this horror. In fact, the only reason I will even admit to this in black and white is because the other day Gym Buddy Allison 'fessed up to doing it - and liking it - too. So here goes...

Confession #2: I eat beef fat.

Not only do I eat it but I love it. I crave it. You know all that white stuff all around the edges of a steak? The stuff that everyone from Dr. Oz to Dr. Phil (to Dr. Oprah-spawn) tells you to trim off? Well, I eat it.

My road to debauchery started out innocently enough with a simple cow (don't all roads to debauchery start with a cow? No??). Gym Buddy Krista was talking up her favorite local beef farmer and since I started Geneen Roth's guidelines, as I explained before, I've stopped being vegetarian in favor of eating what my body - not my mind - says it wants. So I signed up for one of those grass-fed-and-finished, antibiotic-free, hormone-free, organic, kissed-by-angels bovines.

Upon retrieving the dead carcass from the super friendly farmer (any local peeps who want his info, I'm happy to pass it along! Poor man hasn't discovered the Internet yet and has no website but he raises awesome livestock so we'll forgive him.) I learned two important things. First, cows are insanely huge animals. My Bessie was 920 pounds. The smallest portion he'd sell me was 1/4 - those of you good at math (update: this group will not include me as in the original version of this post my cow and cow quarters didn't even remotely add up. I blame the tireds.) will realize that left me with 230 pounds of animal - so thank heavens Gym Buddy Megan split it with me. Second, Mr. Farmer informed me that while fat from traditionally farmed cows (read: cows fed with grain) is terrible for you, fat from grass-pastured cows is fan-freakin'-tastic with a huge ratio of those Omega-3 fatty acids health nuts are always crowing about.

Me being me, I couldn't just take some farmer's word for it, even if he is the coolest farmer I have ever met (which is only because I've never officially met the Bag Lady) so I checked out the research. And you know what? He's right. Mark Sisson of Mark's Daily Apple gives a better breakdown of all the current research and arguments than I could so check out his article "The Definitive Guide to Saturated Fat" for all the nitty gritty. Say what you will about The Primal Blueprint (and heaven knows I've said plenty!) but that man does his homework. For too long we've been conditioned to believe that adage about Good Fats and Bad Fats. Turns out all naturally sourced fats are good fats. Even saturated ones like coconut oil, heavy cream and, yes, animal fat (as long as it isn't conventionally farmed). The only bad fats are those man-made monstrosities like trans-fats and interesterified fats.

While I've embraced the "good fats" a la avocado, nuts and olive oil for several years now, I'm brand new to the saturated fat love fest. Reader Deb asked me what this looks like in real life for me. For a couple of weeks I tried to eat 50% or more of my calories from fat but after jumping on the Geneen Roth train (and quit counting calories) I still eat a lot of fat but I think probably more like 40%, depending on the day. The upshot of this mini-experiment is that eating lots of fat keeps me satiated longer and helps reduce my cravings for sugar (because while it turns out saturated fats aren't correlated with coronary heart disease like we all thought, sugar sure is!) Consider me a convert! I love my real whipped cream.

I still don't like bacon though.

What are your feelings about saturated fats? Do you ever eat the fat on your steaks or chops? Anyone else just hate bacon? And if you want to tell me about the time you bought new clothes/dishes/underwear rather than clean the ones you have, that might make me feel better;)

Plateau Busting 101

Manscaping your nipple hair to attach to your nostril hair won't help you lose weight butI admire his willingness to change things up! Also, I think this dude shaved a swatch down the top of his head. That might be my fave part.

Sprained ankles. Broken bones. Gym Hottie rejection. Stolen spots. The occupied state of the "lucky" treadmill. Pistol whipped by a resistance band. A personal trainer with cold calipers and cold fingers. All the TVs locked onto The Hallmark Channel during a Nicholas Sparks cry-a-thon. Discovering the protein powder mixed in your water bottle is actually infant formula. There are many reasons for tears in the gym and I've seen my fair share of them. (Okay, that last one was me. (Fine, all of them were me. Shut up.)) But the number one reason I've seen people of both genders collapse in hysterics can be summed up by one word:

Plateau. duh-duh-duh!

Enter from stage left (gym studio left?) my gorgeous, leggy, thin, blond friend. While she recently had a great deal of success losing some poundage, she was not quite yet to her goal and yet her weight loss had stagnated. This, in spite of continuing with her healthy eating and exercise habits. Nothing, my friends, sucks worse than doing "everything right" and have it not work anymore. I wrote a detailed - and rather witty, if I do say so myself - post on plateaus and how to deal with them back in January. (Really go read that one first.) That one deals with all touchy-feely weepy aspects of the Dieter's Nightmare. (And you thought it was those awful Weight Watcher "cakes" that appear twice their real size on the outside of the box and taste just like the inside of the box. If the box was spread with chocolate-colored grout.) The basic gist is that we've all been there. Some of us are still there. It royally stinks.

But my friend wanted more detail about point #4, "Change it up." (Well, actually she just wanted to borrow my Jillian Michaels book Master Your Metabolism but I can't find it - I loaned that sucker to somebody, if you know who you are can I please have it back? K thx! - so I offered her my advice as a sorry second.) There are a ton of variables to try changing to see if you can kickstart your metabolism back into high octane burn. Here are a few suggestions to try and a few not to try:

Try It!
1. Interval training. The science really supports this one. Intervals done right are very painful (you're training at 90% or more of your maximum ability) but they are short. As with most exercise, more is not better (hgh, human growth hormone, works while you rest, remember?) but do try working in a couple of interval workouts a week. 20 minutes max is all you need. And don't tack them on to another workout. Seriously. Because then you won't be able to give those intervals your all. Bored of treadmill sprints (or they give you shin splints)? Try bike sprints. Or rowing sprints. Or, heaven help you because you will barf, swimming sprints.

2. Mess around with your macronutrient ratios. Recent research has shown that eating fat and protein for breakfast can give you a metabolic boost that will help you burn fat throughout the day and help you stay full longer. I'm not saying cut out healthy carbs all together, just don't fear the fat! And don't mess around with that Smart Balance stuff - go for the full fat butter, coconut oil, olive oil, heavy cream and whole eggs. For instance, my go-to breakfast these days are my (by way of Deb, Allie, Heather and half the fit-o-sphere) protein pancakes topped with a tablespoon of coconut oil or two tablespoons of heavy cream.

3. Try a new type of exercise. Always do step class? Try martial arts. Die-hard runner? Try boot camp. There are more ways to exercise than even I can blog about (not that I'm not trying, mind you) and change is good. It shocks your body and will make you sore in places you didn't know you could be sore!

4. Cut back on your cardio. For many of us, the instinct to just do more - more classes, more miles, more laps - is strong. If some is good, more is better right? Not so with exercise. And you know that I speak from experience here. Too much cardio actually teaches your body to store fat, can increase your hunger or just convince you that since you ran 10 miles you can eat whatever you want, goldanggit. Many of the leanest people I know (holla, MizFit!) do minimal cardio and focus mainly on the weights. I'm not telling you not to do cardio - you can have my endorphin rush when you pry it out of my cold dead fingers, er, neurons - just to resist the impulse to do more of it. If you want to run a marathon to prove to yourself you can do it or because you love to run or because racing gives you a thrill or even just because you think the finisher's tee is adorable then you should totally do it! But if you are running a marathon because you think it will make you lose 10 pounds, rethink that.

5. Lift heavy stuff. If you haven't started lifting weights, do it. Not just because adding muscle will increase your resting metabolism (not by a ton, but every little bit helps) or because muscle takes up less space than fat but because it is good for you in so many ways. Increased bone mass. Stronger heart. Fewer varicose veins (unless you squat too heavy and then you can get hemorrhoids but that's another post). Increased confidence. And if you already lift weights, change it up: try lifting heavy with few reps, or light with many reps. Try doing supersets. Lots and lots of different programs out there.

6. Eat more calories. This may sound counterintuitive but I think by now we've all heard about how our metabolisms will head off into the Siberia of starvation mode if it thinks it's not being sufficiently fed. Cutting back on your calories only helps you lose weight to a point. You may actually need to eat a bit more. How to tell? Do you feel tired, lethargic and/or more cold than usual? Have you lost your sex drive? Losing your hair? Brittle or strangely ridged nails?

7. Get your metabolism tested. If you have health insurance and this isn't too costly, this can be a good thing to do if nothing else is working. Get your thyroid tested (especially if you are pregnant, recently were pregnant, are lactating or are female and over 50). Get your vitamin and hormone levels checked. It can't hurt and who knows - it might turn up a health issue you need to know about!

Maybe
1. Calorie counting. For me this one is a loaded weapon but the truth is that it takes you an hour to burn 500 calories but it only takes you five minutes to eat a Cinnabon. It's much easier to watch what you eat than to change your exercise. If you are trying to break through a plateau it can be useful to track your calories for a while to help you be honest with yourself about what and how much you are really eating. It can also help you see patterns (like, say, if you hit a plateau at a certain time of the month every month.). But if you decide to do this one, do it with care and kindness. Too many of us have sacrificed our well being and mental health on the (un)holy altar of FitDay.

2. Cleanses. I've never done one of these. While I do fast for 24 hours once a month for religious reasons (I'm a Mormon), I've never tried a fasting or juice or any other "cleanse." I have friends that swear by them. I remain dubious. If you do one, drop me a line (or write a comment) and tell me about your experience with these!

Don't Do It
1. Pills. Just remember this: if they actually worked, every one would buy them and we'd all be thin. They don't work and they prey on your hope and your pocketbook.
2. Extreme diets. Sure you'll drop pounds but you'll drop so much more than that too. This is how eating disorders are born.
3. Over-exercise. Learn from me. Please. If there is any silver lining to having gone to treatment twice for exercise addiction, it is that perhaps I can spare some of you a similar fate.
4. Tapeworms. Um, ew.

I know I didn't hit everything - what suggestions do you have for busting through a weight loss plateau? What have you tried that has worked? What have you tried that hasn't?

I Eat Everything!

Okay, so there's one thing I wouldn't eat. Any food that requires a c-section to eat is off my list.

Dining with me is an experience. And often it's not one conducive to gastronomic pleasure. I've admitted in the past to a multitude of eating sins including, but not limited to, looking up calorie counts on my phone during the meal, saying said calorie counts aloud, driving a waitress to the brink of madness with the complexity of my special order and then refusing to eat more than one bite of said meal when it was brought to me. I've sat hungry through beautiful Easter banquets. And then chewed and spit a bag of sugar free jelly beans in the parking lot of the convenience store where I bought them. I've self-righteously turned down homemade, once-in-a-lifetime English Trifle. And then cried as I made myself run an extra mile the next day for "insurance" against future once-in-a-lifetime English Trifles. My disordered eating started at twelve and had become so ingrained over the years that I honestly had no hope of ever eating like a normal person (those exist, right?).

And then Geneen Roth happened.

The past few months have been nothing short of a miracle. I blogged about my budding confidence in the program and in myself a few weeks ago and it has only gotten better since then. I know that I risk ruining all my new-found success in writing it on the Internet but I'm going to go out on a limb and just say it: I Eat Everything!

I came to an important realization about a month ago, as I sat one day at lunch eating my carefully prepared food in an undistracting environment and listening to my body's hunger cues. (For those of you uninitiated into the Geneen Roth school of food guidelines, the thought process goes something like this: "How full am I? If I'm a four or less I should eat. If I'm a 6 or more I should stop. Am I a five? What does that mean? Now that I've eaten a few more bites, I might be a five and a half. Or perhaps a five and three-quarters. If I burp soundly can I subtract a few points? Does water count? Since when did hunger require calculus?!") I realized that much of my eating behavior is driven by fear. I'll avoid eating when I'm hungry because I'm afraid that I'll eat the whole world, that I'll be so hungry I'll never stop or because I'm afraid admitting hunger is a sign of weakness or because what I'm really hungry for I won't allow myself to eat. I'll eat when I'm not hungry because I'm afraid that there won't be food I will allow myself to eat wherever I'm going later or because it tastes so good I'm afraid there won't be more or because I'm eating something I'm not "supposed" to eat and I'm afraid I'll never get to eat it again or because somebody made me something special.

Most of my mental energy has been devoted to dispelling those totally irrational fears. And the key to unlocking my fear has been - are you ready for the Awwww Moment? - to be gentle with myself. I talk to myself as if I were speaking to one of my beloved children. (Which at the moment is only 3 of them - the 3-year-old is driving me nuts. Kidding. Mostly.) When I feel panicky about getting hungry, I kindly tell myself, "It's okay to eat. Everyone gets hungry. Feeding your body is not failure, it's nurturing." When I feel scared that I'll be hungry later, I tell myself, "I'll take care of you. You can eat if you need to. I will find you some food." It sounds so simple (or crazy - I am very chatty with myself apparently) but it has been so healing for me.

And one of the biggest things that I tell myself is that I eat everything. For so many many years I've had an immense number of food rules. I was vegetarian*. Then vegan. Then a gluten- and soy-free vegan. At various points in my life I've eschewed carbs, dairy, protein, the entire nightshade family (don't ask), sugar, grains, anything white and many other foods too numerous to detail. Heck, I had so many restrictions they made a television show about it! I've driven friends, family and waitstaff crazy with my insane food restrictions. There was always something I didn't eat. Not anymore. Now I eat everything.

It's been a weird transition, I'm not going to lie. One of Geneen Roth's guidelines is to eat what your body wants. (Note: this is not the same as eating what your mind wants. Your mind will tell you it wants to eat an entire bag of Reese's peanut butter cups. But your body knows it will feel sick if you do that. Sometimes your body really does want a peanut butter cup but often your body wants a salad or some meat or an apple. Misunderstanding this distinction was one of the major reasons Intuitive Eating didn't work for me the first time I tried it.) I was afraid that I'd so messed up my body's signals that it wouldn't tell me what it wanted to eat (or that it would seek revenge for all I'd put it through and tell me it wanted nothing but Rocky Mountain Oysters) but I think it is safe to say after 3 months of doing this that my body definitely does let me know what it needs. And I don't panic about eating whatever that is because I know that I will only eat when I'm hungry (usually) and that I can stop eating when I'm full. And my body tells me when it is hungry and when it is full!

And it works. It's amazing to me that something so simple actually works! For two months I maintained my weight within a half a pound - a feat so astounding that I'm still in awe at my body's ability to regulate itself so well. And then this last month I've lost 2.5 pounds. Without doing anything major or scary. Without crying in my closet. Without mentally screaming vitriol at myself. Without punishing myself with more food restrictions. Without doing anything at all, really.

What is even more amazing is that since my weight has become so stable, a lot of my desire to over-exercise is diminishing. It used to be that I'd gain two or three pounds in a day, panic, and then do a really punishing workout the next day, lose two or three pounds, celebrate, eat salted popcorn and then go back up the weight roller coaster the next day. I was constantly in the mindset of needing to "earn my food." If I didn't, for some reason, get a workout in then I didn't eat. But being gentle with myself and allowing myself to eat when I'm hungry - regardless of if I've exercised or not - has made all the difference.

I'm not perfect. While my food issues are slowly but very surely fading to the background, I'm still tied to my scale. I still look in the mirror and wish fervently I were ten pounds thinner. I still am drawn to diet books like a Kardashian sister to the letter K. But for the first time I'm really hopeful that I can conquer those things too.

I ate linguine with cream sauce. I can do anything.

Do you ever make decisions about food based on fear? Are you good at differentiating what your body wants versus what your mind wants?

*I am not saying that all people who are vegan or vegetarian or whatever are practicing disordered eating. Just that in my case it was.

Oprah Stole My Moment: Intuitive Eating Works For Both of Us

This pretty much sums up my life - except the boogers are generally from someone else's nose.

Oprah beat me to it. As if it isn't bad enough that the woman rules all media outlets, now she has stolen my own epiphany right out from under me! It was my very own "A-Ha" moment! Oh wait... that is hers too. Crap. This whole time I've been thinking that I discovered Geneen Roth all on my own (read: a zillion e-mails from you guys recommending her finally sunk in) when lo and behold the Queen of Everything not only already read and loves Geneen but Oprah also started her own Experiment based on the books.

According to June's issue of O magazine (which I'm just getting around to reading because I'm way too cheap to subscribe to it and I found an old copy at the gym), Oprah has given up dieting and is working on eating intuitively. Just like me! Thankfully it is going swimmingly for the both of us. Hence, I will share my epiphany with Oprah. I'm big like that.

The Truth: I feel like I've been let out of jail.

Rereading my farewell post from a month ago, I'm struck now how depressing it was. I didn't see it at the time because it was just the place that I was in. I'd come to a crossroads: either I was going to spend the rest of my life trying to willpower myself through every new diet/exercise regime that comes along and then crying in my closet when I inevitably failed or I could just... give it up. Just eat and be happy.

It shouldn't be that simple but it is.

I'm delirious with relief and happiness and, honestly, a little nervous that this euphoria won't last. This past month has been so freeing. I worked hard (and it is hard work, at least at first) to stay focused while I ate and to pay attention to what my body was telling me and it works. I'm not broken after all! And if I'm not then I can say with confidence that you are not either.

Here's the proof: two solid months of eating following Geneen's food "guidelines" and my weight (yes, I'm still weighing myself - baby steps, people!) has remained within 1/2 pound the entire time. For a girl that is used to going up and down 3 or more pounds in a single week, this is huge for me. I ate peanut butter cookies for dinner (the recipe: 1 egg, 1 c peanut butter, 1 c sugar. Bake at 350 for 8 min. Do it. You will thank me.) and my weight stayed the same! I had salmon on salad with dressing and didn't resent it for not being the peanut butter cookies and my weight stayed the same! I ate beef ribs. White bread. Homemade strawberry ice cream. And my weight stayed the same. What this all means is that my body does in fact know how to run itself.

While I do still wish that the weight I have stabilized at is about 7 pounds lighter, I have finally come to accept that what I need to work on fixing is not my weight but my head. I can't say that everything is all fixed in my brain - decades of dieting programming will take time to unlearn - but for the first time in a really long time I am hopeful that this will not be the thing that defines me.

The result of all this has been a remarkable freeing of my soul. All the energy, both mental and physical, that I've been devoting to remembering food plans, research, calories and so forth I've been able to devote to other pursuits. I just finished reading 21 books in 21 days and not a single one was a diet book! I play the piano for an hour a day! I meditate, pray, do yoga and snuggle the Jelly Bean on a much more frequent basis! (Did you know Jelly Bean gets pit sweat? She does and it even stinks! I don't know why that cracks me up but I adore that about her. She's already so like her mama!) I finally signed up to take that aerial dancing/circus class I've been dreaming about for so long! And a power yoga class in a real yoga studio! And a dinner cruise with my hot husband!

I had to share this with you guys because you have been so integral in my progress. You have no idea how much each of your comments/blog posts/e-mails/texts/FB messages/tweets and so forth have meant to me. You all have had me in tears (beautiful, happy, cleansing tears) and then in hysterical laughter so many times, just when I needed it. I am so blessed. And so very grateful! I love you!!

So now that I've exceeded my monthly quotient for inappropriate exclamation marks, I will leave you with this:

Get your underage teen bikini pics, hot off the presses!! Seriously, I blogged about the Kendall Jenner (of Kardashian notoriety) scandal for HuffPo - check out how I work Lindsay Lohan into it! (You cannot write a pop culture article these days without referencing Lindsay Lohan. It's like in the rule book and everything.)