The No S Diet is really Simple
If you're wary of fad diets, as I am, it's sometimes a struggle to find something that works well, but is easy to do. Granted, many would say eating plenty of veggies, lowering fats and eating less in general would take care of things, but sometimes you want a system. The simplest "system" I've found so far? The No S Diet.What is it? Simplicity itself: no Snacks, no Sweets and no Seconds. Sounds pretty harsh, huh? Well the savior is: except (sometimes) on days that begin with an 'S.' That includes the weekend, and Special days like holidays. As someone who fought the 'blocks' in the Zone for way too long, I can appreciate the utterly simplistic approach.
And if dieting doesn't get you in the shape you like, there's always the Shovel Glove (another creation by the author).
.jpg)
Rebecca Romijn feels like a beached whale
Fiber - are you getting enough?_thumbnail.jpg)
Obama - after election, he hit the gym
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
9-01-2006 @ 8:05PM
TheLoseWeightDiet said...
The only problem I have with this diet (and others like it) is that if a person does in fact lose weight using it, it really can't be considered anything more than pure luck and coincidence. But, this is the case with every diet that isn't structured around calorie intake.
The "No S" idea is simple and catchy and for the most part an all around healthy way to eat, but while weight loss would be possible, it would be far from guaranteed.
On the other hand, your body needs X number of calories to remain at the weight it's currently at. Eat more than X calories and you gain weight. Eat less and you lose. This is a scientific fact. Really, how much more simple can it be?
Reply
9-01-2006 @ 8:53PM
Victor Agreda, Jr. said...
That's correct. However, No S takes the bookkeeping out of the equation. The average U.S. citizen won't (or can't) do the bookkeeping. Maybe this should have been a "one small step," as for any real health benefit, obviously it isn't so simple... Or difficult! This, in my opinion, is a step in the right direction. Imagine if every American just did the 3 things I mentioned. Wouldn't that stem some rise in the obese population?
There are simple bookkeeping systems though. I found Weight Watchers to be surprisingly simple, and easy to maintain once you've lost the weight. That's not just my experience, but thousands of people. And WW has been around long enough to qualify as a non-fad diet. The Zone has a lot of science behind it (and the microchemistry aspects fascinate me), but the bookkeeping is a nightmare.
Reply
9-01-2006 @ 9:46PM
TheLoseWeightDiet said...
It's definitely a step in the right direction. If every American did the 3 things you mentioned it certainly would be a huge improvement. But I mean, to me, I don't see the point in doing anything that isn't solely based on the one thing that actually needs to be done... which is calorie control.
I agree with you though, the average U.S. citizen won't do the bookkeeping. But just the same, the average U.S. citizen won't NOT stop having seconds, or eating sweets, or eating snacks. The average U.S. citizen just won't do the things they should do diet-wise, period. However, when the non-average U.S. citizen finally decides to do the opposite, they might as well just go straight to the source, which to me (and most qualified experts) really can't be anything other than calorie controlled diet.
And I too like WW. It's my favorite of all the commercial diets for the reasons I mentioned above, although they call "point" control. Their whole point system may have the only easy bookkeeping method 10-15 years ago, but today the bookkeeping of calorie intake is even easier. There are literally thousands of web sites providing calorie/protein/fat/carb content of foods, not to mention sites like Fitday.com, which really is a free bookkeeping system in itself.
In all honesty, all it actually takes is about 10 minutes a day on a site like Fitday to accurately track everything. And, over time, most people will find they are able to rely less on Fitday and more on their own instincts and knowledge.
But of course, this is just my opinion.
Reply
9-06-2006 @ 1:11PM
Phil said...
Simple yes, but most nutrition plans (aka diets) will tell you that snacks between the big-three meals are a *good thing*, not bad. They keep you from being ravenously hungry during meals, plus your body doesn't go into "starvation mode" and start hoarding calories. So I have a snack bar at 11:30 and 4:30 and it helps keep things level.
Unfortunately, I also drink 2 Cokes a day (not diet). [sigh]
Reply