|
||||||||||||||||||
 |
From: John C (66-173-211-137.serial.cavtel.net)
In Reply to: What's your Mcdougall and/or Fuhrman E2L experience? posted by chewy on February 9, 2005 at 5:05 am:
I have McDougalled for 7 years...lost a combined total of 400 pounds...I know about the E2L program and at various points in my years of McDougalling, I have switched to a very similar approach as E2L (without knowing about the program), where I are very, very, very little grains, and decreased my starches, and did eat almost all veges, especially green leafy, cruciferous, etc. And this is my experienced verdicts: I am very active and like to excercise. When I eat too low amounts of grains and starches, I do not have the endurance and energy for excercise as I do eating my normal McDougall way. Yes, I still can excercise as much as I want, but its not near as good and pleasant and it could and should be. Now for those who dont excercise much, perhaps they feel more energy doing E2L, and thats fine I suppose. But I would mention this-Since the human body is designed to move, and excercise, and burn energy, absolutely undeniable, if one program helps promote that lifestyle better, than to me thats unquestionably the way to go. If program A works best for the *average, typical* semi-active person...and program B works best for the *average, typical* ACTIVE person, then I submit that program B is still best, generally, for EVERYONE. However when it comes to strict weightloss...if that is your number 1 goal, then the E2L program definitely has an advantage. You will loose more weight (at first) on the E2L. I cannot deny that. But a Catch-22 situation will be brewing, in my opinion, because if weightloss is your goal, you MUST make excercise a top priority...and if you do that, you will feel much better and have more energy on a program much more liberal with whole grains and starches, like McDougall.
|
