I think the healthy version of SAD and the paleo diet have more similarities than differences. These pop nutritionists are most likely avoiding white flour, sugar, processed foods, and probably eat tons of salmon (the CW food of the gods) so have a somewhat decent o3:o6 ratio.

It's much easier to stay lean when not previously metabolically damaged then it is to reverse metabolic damage and lean out. Chances are these healthy looking CW people started becoming health conscious (avoiding white flour, sugar, processed foods, alcohol, smoking, and getting exercise) before they had a chance to damage themselves - i.e. at a younger age.

And Danielle, from what I saw of those AHS pics, you look great!

Because eating unhealthy food doesn't necessarily make you look bad. Especially in a world of cosmetics, like on a talk show where they have makeup people to make them look less witch-like.

Let's stop pretending that most women look good without their makeup. It just ain't true. There are exceptions, though. But let's also stop pretending that physical appearance is an air-tight marker for health. Gweneth Paltrow's osteopenia comes to mind.

Uh, now I feel dirty having to talk about this BS.

When I cut them open I see what they have done. It takes time to show up on the facade.....but rest assured it's coming.

Tolerated is not optimal... I lost a lot of my weight on a typical SAD CW diet. It works. It is not optimal for healthy and longevity, but you can look good. As I lost weight, I learned more and more about nutrition and ended up at Paleo. Most people don't do the research though.

Remember, there's lots of individual differences and some people (a small fraction, I'd say) can tolerate eating complete crap and still look good. If you can eat crap that sounds nutritious and you look good while doing it, chances are you'll become a TV nutritionist. The 100 or so other people who eat like she says will be fat and a fat nutritionist won't make it on TV. So there's selection bias that you're seeing too. Only the pretty ones make it on TV.

All depends on their particular equation. Some of the ones you speak of might spend an hour running a day and eat a low-fat diet. You can't really get fat doing that (can't get healthy either). One thing I've observed is that a lot of naturally lean people also happen to skip breakfast due to time constraints or whatever. They end up with built-in IF-ing, continual insulin sensitivity even in the presence of considerable fructose intake, and lower daily energy intake due to one meal being completely missing.

Some are much less sensitive to fructose, don't have downregulated striatal dopamine D2 receptors so they don't become addicted to hyperpalatable food etc. There are countless variables.

The grass is always greener and their adiposity or leanness is irrelevant for your goals unless you somehow actually catalog every variable and analyze it, otherwise they're just misleading anecdotes.

After I started Paleo, I dropped about 10-12 pounds and then my weight platueu out and wouldn't budge no matter how much cycling I did. Then I started working out with kettlebells and it seems to be the magic bullet! My weight is dropping slowly and steadily now and I feel great. I'm using the Skogg System. So far so good....

I think the fact that they look good is why they aren't looking beyond CW. Anyone who doesn't look good following that approach is going to shut up or look elsewhere. Therefore, alternative approaches have a disadvantage, in that the people who follow them are going to tend to look worse, at least at first. It's like observing that a large proportion of people who eat LC diets are fat. Well, yeah, that's why they eat that way.

In a sense, different nutritional theories provide filters. Those for whom a particular approach works tend to think that it must be the right answer, and that anyone for whom it failed must be doing it wrong. Those people for whom it failed, on the other hand, will usually start looking for something else. This can sometimes leave the group who stick with an approach to consist almost only of successful people, giving a skewed perspective if you don't know about the rate of attrition.

Also remember, for every hot little thing that makes it onto the Today show with "nutritional credentials," there are probably 1000 overweight, SAD eating nutritionists they would never put on TV. Kinda like everyone knows smoking is bad for you, and doctors and nurses see it first hand every day, but check the smoking area outside of your local hospital. Those guys aren't on the Today show either.

The reason childhood obesity is just a tragedy is that if you get fat that young, it's going to be awful hard to lose weight. I've seen that in my own family. I got fat briefly and lost it quickly. The folks in my family who were fat when they were 7 or for many years have had a much harder slog.

That said, there are some success stories for low-fat vegan diets. I think we should try to learn from them and see what we can copy. I would note that diet's like Joel Fuhrman's literally force you to eat so much leafy greens that you can't eat anything else.

Maybe they are hammering themselves with cardio. Slaves to the machines! Push I wonder if they are hungry ALL the time.

The reason why they look so hot has little to do with food quality and more to do with reduced caloric intake. They are basically fighting a battle every day to limit the amount of calories they eat. They must meticulously count EVERYTHING, especially carbs. Since they are deprived of saturated fats and often micronutrients they must fight hunger constantly.

You could reduce your caloric intake on Paleo, increase your physical activity to the point of pain and probably lose weight but you will stress yourself out doing it. Nobody will want to be around you because you will be acting nasty. When we are depleted of vital nutrients, we become meaner because we are emotionally imbalanced.

I bet that girl is the biggest pain in the ass to any man that dares step into her life.

F' that.

Edit:

Danielle, check you this nugget:

How old is Joy Bauer? .....She looks bad.

I was watching the nutrition "expert" on the Today Show....she looks horrible, her face is bone and wrinkles.... I found an article that says she is only 46?!! Huh??!! She needs to gain a few pounds I'd say. If that is what you get from following her advice, I'll pass. Comments?

I just looked at her now. Gross. She looks like she's starving...because she IS.

Two words: PLASTIC SURGERY!

It's so rampant and commoditized nowadays. High-quality liposuction in Tijuana costs less than an annual gym membership. I'd bet that most "pretty" CW pushers on TV have had their moments under a knife.

Anyway, I'll add to the chorus here and say that you're a beauty, Danielle!