Print Topic - Archive

BTD Forums  /  Eat Right 4 Your Type  /  Definition of "Compliance"
Posted by: Carol the Dabbler, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 5:58am
Don posted this quote on another thread today:

Quoted Text

What is compliance?

  • If you are recovering from an illness or desire weight loss, then 80%-100% of your food choices should be highly beneficial.
  • If you are a healthy individual over the age of 55, 80% of foods should be beneficial.
  • If you are under 55 and healthy, 70% or more of your food choices should beneficial.
  • The remainder of your food choices should be neutral. Avoids should not be eaten.



The quote is from this site's FAQ's: http://www.dadamo.com/faq/smartfaq.cgi?answer=988813714&id=988813483.

This is a far cry from what I had thought was meant by the terms "compliance" or "70% compliant." How about the rest of you?

Posted by: KimonoKat, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 6:04am; Reply: 1
I think "compliance" can be what works best for you.  It may not be what's outlined by Dr. D, however, if it's working and you are feeling healthy, then, that's your compliance.

I would be considered 100% compliant to the basic diet of avoiding avoids.  I'm about 80-85% compliant to the Arthritis Health Library diet.  
Posted by: Drea, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 6:08am; Reply: 2
I was under the impression that "compliancy" had to do with whether you were avoiding avoids, not the level of eating beneficials to neutrals. Good to know what was intended, but I agree with KK. I have not been avoid free, but very close; especially since I finally got the low-down on Tier One/Tier Two.
Posted by: Carol the Dabbler, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 6:20am; Reply: 3
That's what I always thought, too -- that, for example, "70% compliant" meant you were eating 30% Avoids.

How does this jibe with Dr. D's advice in ER4YT, not to worry too much about eating what you're served at a friend's house?  And how in the sweet name of all that's holy could anyone ever eat in a restaurant?

Can anyone find any definition of "compliance" in LR4YT?

And here I thought I was doing so well, with my only Avoids being in some of my supplements, plus an occasional meal away from home ....  :'(

Posted by: ISA-MANUELA (Guest), Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 8:36am; Reply: 4
when I recognized that even now in the canadian healthbooks created by Dr. Pizzorno and M.Murray
*secretorstatus* is that important...then I am very happy to be now (without any cafť at this time)
that I am  98% compliant to the AB-nonnie-food....but what I am concerned now is, Peter wrote in LR4YT some little sentences about us the A2B nonnies.... and here I think I must be muchmore carefull
thers'a lot to learn and to discover....
My sister is also an AB and I think she is also a nonnie....but she eats similar to a vegetarian....but more because she  is convinced about this lifestyle...when I looked at her skin...sorry just awful but this is a
genetic  question because she is a psoriatic   .......lucky me that I came on board only one year later..... our little brother died with 7 months....::) :-/ 8)
Posted by: Dr. D, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 1:13pm; Reply: 5
I'm not a big fan of slapping kilometer markers on what constitutes doing the diet.  What works for you constitutes 'doing the diet.'

But sometimes you have to.

In designing a new study we are trying to work out what exactly constitutes 'following the diet.'

So far we have three categories to test subject:

1. 'Deal Breaker':  this category cannot be used in the study. Examples would be type A's on pork or some other red meat avoid or type O's on wheat. These people cannot be said to be doing the BTD at all; neither in action or spirit.

2. 'Reasonable Aherence': These are people who are getting beneficials and avoids in and out of their diet in a manner prescribed by the BTD, but not to a level considered 'High Compliance'. They may or may not be doing the appropriate exercise. These people can be used in the study, but probably need to be followed for at least 4-8 weeks for any analysis.

3. High Compliance': These people routinely (read daily) consume beneficials and so rarely consume avoids as to have it consitute an 'event' when it occurs. An 'event' represents and occurence of less than 4-5 times per week. They also perform the prescribed exercises and stress reduction techniques. These people can be tested for physiologic changes due to the BTD within 7-10 days.


People will keep food diaries and talk to a followup investigator every evening so as to ascertain their compliance.


Posted by: EquiPro, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 1:35pm; Reply: 6
Wow - for all of my foibles, I actually fall into the "high compliance" set.  I figured I'd fall into 2.  Just goes to show that it's not worth getting all over ones self when one has a diet "event"!
Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 2:39pm; Reply: 7
Bolded emphasis added for purposes of this post:

Quoted from admin
...3. High Compliance': These people routinely (read daily) consume beneficials and so rarely consume avoids as to have it consitute an 'event' when it occurs. An 'event' represents and occurence of less than 4-5 times per week...

Dr. D., did you mean less than 4 - 5 times per YEAR?  Or at least month?  Surely if someone is eating avoids (and even this gets tricky, because there are avoids and then there are AVOIDS, imho, but moving along...), as in, "biggies", up to 4 to 5 times per WEEK, that wouldn't be high compliance...would it?
Posted by: Suzanne, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 2:53pm; Reply: 8
Quoted from "Ask Doctor D'Adamo"
http://www.dadamo.com/bloggers/ask/archives/00000302.htm

"Generally 70-80% total compliance works well in most people (out of 10 food choices, 7-9 being neutral or beneficial choices)"

There is a conflict between the FAQ post and the Ask Doctor D'Adamo post regarding neutrals. †

As a healthy person nearing 55, I would find a diet of 80% beneficials and 20% neutrals to be too restrictive to be practical. However I am happy and content with my current diet of 98% beneficials and neutrals and only rare avoids.
Posted by: grey rabbit, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 2:58pm; Reply: 9
PT, I would think the 4 to 5 times per week might include something as small as the wrong kind of gelatin capsul on a suppliment? or something else as small. IMHO it would be nearly impossible to be 100% perfectly compliant, it would border on obsesive/compulsive behavior. I have also noticed that some avoids hit me like a brick, and others don't seem to bother me that much.
Posted by: Kristin, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 3:04pm; Reply: 10
I don't think a gelatin capsule would constitute an "event" though... and there are avoids that we consume with out our knowledge.

But I agree with PT... I think 4-5 times per week of big avoids consumption seems a bit over the top for how I relate to the BTD.
Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 3:08pm; Reply: 11
Quoted from samy
PT...I have also noticed that some avoids hit me like a brick, and others don't seem to bother me that much.

Oh, very true, I certainly eat some avoids pert near every day, frankly, but certain big ones I completely stay away from, such as wheat. †The ones I eat are either ones I deem "minor" (like maybe a spot of cinnamon here or a little cold-pressed safflower oil as an ingredient in a boxed butternut squash soup there) or ones that I find I can tolerate well (and who knows if ER4YG will bear me out on those). †I guess I was thinking that, if Dr. D. is talking about fair-to-middlin' major avoids, "less than 4 - 5 times weekly" seems like a potentially relatively large amount (if the person indeed had the given avoid up to 4 or 5 times per week) to be considered "high compliance", as that means having it/them almost every day of the week.

Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 3:11pm; Reply: 12
P.S.  I really like how, in the definition of #3, high compliance, it includes that the person would routinely consume beneficials, not just avoid avoids.  I know for myself, sometimes I get so focused on avoiding avoids, it is hard to remember to try to fit in some beneficials EVERY day, and that is certainly a very important aspect of BTD compliance, too!
Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 3:23pm; Reply: 13
P.P.S. †I wonder, when I was consuming those Kettle brand potato chips yet otherwise highly compliant, would I have been considered a Cat 1 "deal breaker", because, for me as an O nonnie and also as someone who clearly has an addictive response to them, the chips are a major avoid, even though perhaps for an O secretor without any addictive response, they are a Tier Two avoid? †Interestingly, I think an individual such as myself in that example would either be considered highly compliant or a deal breaker, but not somewhere in the middle because indeed I was highly compliant except for the pink elephant in the room, but what a deal-breaking pink elephant it was!

I think we can see, even just from this discussion, just what a complex issue/concept "compliance" truly is. †I am not saying it is necessarily something completely relative and subjective and varies from individual to individual based upon that specific individual's body, health, hardwiring and goals, but I am saying that, while there ARE objective, universal standards of what constitutes compliance, these are sort of impacted all around the edges by all these blasted variables, making doing any sort of study a very tricky thing to do. †It sounds like Dr. D. is going about it the right way and taking the complexities of the thing into consideration.

Then there is also the PORTION guideline aspect of the thing, which can also be ignored by an individual (trust me *lol*) in such a way that, even if said individual is being highly compliant in terms of avoiding avoids, s/he is still not going, necessarily, to reap the full benefits of the diet because, like in my case, I tend to go CRAZY on compliant grains (right now I'm on a rice cake bender, for example) and that is really (apparently, although I can't figure out what is going on with me right now--but that's another story) impacting my weight, as while I am doing so well on the diet AND exercise fronts now, I am GAINING weight (?)(&$#WTF?(*#&?).

Very sticky wicket, this compliance concept. †VERY multi-layered and complex.

* Regarding "compliance" as a quantitative/measurable entity being either subjective or objective, to quote a great teacher: †very often, an issue isn't "either/or", it is "both/and".
Posted by: EquiPro, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 3:32pm; Reply: 14
Well, if we eat 21 meals per week plus most people have at least 1 snack per day, that equals  28 consumptions of food per week minimum.  If we were to take eating an avoid "event" as, let's say, eating one oreo 4-5 times per week, that really isn't much in the avoid arena overall.  I don't think that an "event" would be eating a complete meal of pizza (O perspective here), meaning that 4-5 MEALS per week are avoids, but rather you eat a candy bar that has some corn syrup in it for a snack, or you go to Costco and can resist the sample of whatever.  

While we aren't talking vitamin capsules here or the errent ingredient in otherwise beneficial foods, we are talking what I think often happens in our lives.

About once a week, we go out for fast food (hamburgers) because my daughter loves them.  I sometimes get a salad with a beef patty on it, but more often, this is one of those "events".  I get a small hamburger, with cheese.  That means I'm getting some cheese, some mustard, some pickles and a small wheat bun.  I usually eat a few fries (but potatoes are not my thing, so I don't do much) and I'll have a sip or two of her shake.  Maybe once in a blue moon I'll get a shake too.

This is a meal full of avoids, BUT, it is part of our life and I enjoy it.  It is an event, and a big deal to my daughter.  I could eat better there, and sometimes I do, but in general, this is my life.

Do I do this more than once a week?  Rarely.  Most of our meals are eaten at home, and at home, there are no avoids.  I focus in on bennies at each meal, even when I eat out.  We don't eat out much, so this is sort of a non-issue.

I'm not as compliant as Suzanne (the blogger), or PT, BUT if I look at my food overall, it probably DOES fall into the highly compliant catogory on a week in, week out basis.

Personally, I've never thought that eating a gelatin capsule was going to throw a healthy person into ill-health.  I was crazed with that sort of compliance while I was a Vegan and it just fed into my own eating disorder.

Compared to many here, I am only mediumly complaint.  That's why I was happy to see Dr. Ds post, as it confirms that, even at my worst, I'm doing better than most.
Posted by: EquiPro, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 3:38pm; Reply: 15
One thing that I have found interesting and that I have really upped this year, is getting in the perscribed amount of bennie fruits and veggies and keeping that in the forefront of my brain.  Amazingly, if I really keep focussing in on getting in those portions, compliance becomes much easier because it is a LOT of food to eat AND it is hard to go on a bender when you're trying to get in all the fruits and veggies.

So, for me, compliance is very much about the recommended portions.  It is much easier for me to be non-compliant, when I am not thinking about how much food I have to get in, in terms of fruits and veggies.  That, alone, has upped my compliance tremendously.

I understand what PT is talking about, too.  One of the most dangerous foods for me to have in the house is cooked pasta, even if it is the completely compliant Tinyada rice pasta.  Actually, rice, itself, is a danger.  While both are neutrals, they are, indeed, my pink elephant.  I can really be quite compliant with it, only slighly going over the allowances, but it creates problems for me, so it is best left alone.  With cooked pasta in the house, that gets eaten FIRST with butter and nutritional yeast or whatever.  It makes keeping my focus nearly impossible, and I find myself full without having gotten in my veggies and fruits, so I end up ahead of my starch allowance and behind on fruits and veggies, all from just having a trigger food, albeit a compliant one, in the house.
Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 3:43pm; Reply: 16
Quoted from EquiPro
...If we were to take eating an avoid "event" as, let's say, eating one oreo 4-5 times per week, that really isn't much in the avoid arena overall. †I don't think that an "event" would be eating a complete meal of pizza (O perspective here), meaning that 4-5 MEALS per week are avoids, but rather you eat a candy bar that has some corn syrup in it for a snack, or you go to Costco and can't resist the sample of whatever.

Sorry, but imo, if someone is doing the exact things/examples in your quote above up to 4 to 5 times per week, that is not high compliance. †Just mho...

Edited to add: †In fact, imho, those are "deal breaker" examples because of the nature of the particular avoids listed* and the frequency.

Edited to add: †I mean, it's wheat, it's genetically-modified corn syrup, it is hydrogenated and transfats, it is artificial flavors and colors. †The BTD--while this is only rarely if ever explicitly stated in the books and other media--is a lot about purity--about whole, pure foods and quality foods--and those items above not only contain major O avoids like wheat and corn syrup, but are basically avoids for all by virtue of the fact that they are so junky/impure/faux food-like, that when they are in your system they basically make it virtually impossible for the BTD to do its job, as they are counteracting everything else you are doing. †So, again, if someone is ingesting such items up to 4 to 5 times per week, imo--and this is just my opinion, mind--I personally could not characterize their compliance level as "high".

Posted by: EquiPro, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 3:54pm; Reply: 17
Yea, well, that's why I was surprised by Dr. D's post and interested to find that I fall into "high compliance".

If we look, however, beyond avoids by taking in other things, too, then the 4-5 avoids per week makes more sense.

I am exercising HARD - often to fatigue - 6-7 days per week.
I am getting in all of my water each day
I am getting in the bennies and the neutrals and getting in a wide variety of foods

All of these things, together, would seem to make it easier to see that the 4-5 avoid events per week would still allow for high compliance, since the BTD is more than just which foods we should eat.
Posted by: Kristin, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 4:02pm; Reply: 18
I've always thought it interesting that the word "compliance" was chosen and used to describe following the BTD lifestyle... rather than a word like adherence, for example.

Compliance, in my mind, implys choice... is more fluid rather than rigid... perhaps allows for more gray area rather than a black and white.."you do it this way or you're not doing it" approach.
Posted by: Drea, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 4:03pm; Reply: 19
Quoted from admin

3. High Compliance: These people routinely (read daily) consume beneficials and so rarely consume avoids as to have it consitute an 'event' when it occurs. An 'event' represents and occurence of less than 4-5 times per week. They also perform the prescribed exercises and stress reduction techniques.

First thing I note about this statement is there isn't any mention of neutrals. If this is indeed the case, and it would be since it came from Dr. D himself, then I have fallen into category 3 since January. Perhaps 'fallen' isn't the right word...'chosen' would be more accurate.

I understand that there are avoids, and then there are AVOIDS, but the way I read Dr. D's statement, is that if a person consumes any avoid more than 4-5 times a week, then they have fallen out of High Compliance.

I have not only been consciously avoiding all avoids (yes, even those gelatin capsule but for the reason that gelatin itself grosses me out more than that it is an avoid), and choosing beneficials over neutrals wherever possible. I just find that eating only beneficials is just too hard. I tried it for about two weeks, but I don't think I could maintain it for any length of time, especially because I do eat out occasionally.
Posted by: Jane, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 4:08pm; Reply: 20
I think for years now I've been mostly just avoiding the avoids. †I don't spend hours planning my meals to make sure that I'm getting the right portions per week. †I NEVER knowingly have any wheat or corn but I do go out to eat at least once a week and who knows what's in some things that you get, even when you make a point of asking. †I eat too much compliant dairy and very occasionally some non-compliant dairy. †It doesn't bother me if it's not too much or too often. †I eat too many Pamela's and too much chocolate although I'm really trying to cut down. †I do eat a lot of salads and veggies (although probably not enough variety). †I love red meat. †I eat chicken (often chicken salad) because it's easy for lunches at work. †I need to get more strenuous exercise. †I ski most Saturdays but my knees are sore and stiff afterwards even though I wear neoprene braces. †It's tough to get old!

I think of myself as moderately compliant even though my grown kids and my friends and relatives think I'm some kind of health/food freak.
Jane
Posted by: Drea, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 4:13pm; Reply: 21
Quoted from Jane
I think of myself as moderately compliant even though my grown kids and my friends and relatives think I'm some kind of health/feed freak.
Jane

My friends say I eat "too healthy". Is there such a thing, I ask? I think it's because they haven't taken the time to try it for themselves to really KNOW the benefits.
Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 4:57pm; Reply: 22
Quoted from EquiPro
One thing that I have found interesting and that I have really upped this year, is getting in the perscribed amount of bennie fruits and veggies and keeping that in the forefront of my brain. †Amazingly, if I really keep focussing in on getting in those portions, compliance becomes much easier because it is a LOT of food to eat AND it is hard to go on a bender when you're trying to get in all the fruits and veggies.

That is a really excellent and important point, Equi!  That is why I like it so much and think it is great that, in Dr. D.'s working definition of high compliance, he includes "These people routinely (read daily) consume beneficials...", as compliance is indeed about what we DO consume, just as much as it is about what we DON'T consume.  Beneficials are crucial to fit in each day, and we just don't focus on this enough, at least I don't, I'm so busy avoiding avoids.  Also, as you point out, compliance with eating the amounts of what we ARE supposed to eat--such as and, it could be argued, ESPECIALLY fruits and vegetables--is crucial to supporting our own compliance in not eating what we shouldn't, because 1.) there simply isn't room, and 2. when we eat in balance, we are less likely to want to overeat too much of one thing (like grains), as we have had enough of something else (such as fruits).  I know for myself, when I am overeating grains as I am lately (ricke cakes), I am concurrently NOT eating enough fruits and, to a lesser extent, veggies.

Very good point, Rachel.  I think what is coming out in this discussion is that there are so many different aspects of compliance:  what we DO eat as well as what we DON'T, paying attention to the portion guidelines (d*mn!), not only in terms of not exceeding the recommended portions for any given thing, but making sure that we DO eat the minimum recommended portions of any given thing.  So, there are as many positive aspects of compliance (by "positive", I mean things like DO eat this and DO eat this amount of that) as there are negatives.  There are as many DO's as there are DON'T's, and sometimes we--I--forget to pay attention to the do's, which are so critical to aiding us in our overall compliance, balance and good results with the BTD.

Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 5:00pm; Reply: 23
Quoted from Kristin
I've always thought it interesting that the word "compliance" was chosen and used to describe following the BTD lifestyle... rather than a word like adherence, for example.

Compliance, in my mind, implys choice... is more fluid rather than rigid... perhaps allows for more gray area rather than a black and white.."you do it this way or you're not doing it" approach.

Actually, if I may be so bold, I believe (not sure, but believe) I was the first to choose that word, and I posted on the old board as to why I used and liked that word, basically for the reason you just stated! †I didn't like the idea that if you're not doing it PERFECTLY, you're not doing it; you are either on it, or off it! †I felt that was "reductionist", if you will, and didn't fit the BTD, which is a lifetime, sustainable way of life and, as such, doesn't imply perfection/failure, black/white, on/off, good/bad. †There are middles and shades of gray. †And it (the word "compliance") seems to have stuck! †Following a diet for a lifetime is a process, a journey, a daily series of choices. †I felt that the word "compliance", for me, allowed for that and for levels, shades of gray, etc. †It took perfection/failure out of the mix and made it about choices and individual customization. †I'm glad it has become the word of choice used to discuss following the BTD.

Edited to add: †mind you, that is all not to say that one can never be said to be OFF the diet, that there is no such thing. †In fact, using myself as an example, I've been on the BTD since 1997, with varying levels of compliance throughout, however, there was one period of time in there when I would actually say I was OFF the diet, as I intentionally choose to just totally abandon the diet. †I would not call that "low compliance", I would call that "deal breaker" *lol*, as in, off, gone, goodbye, not on the thaaang. †That was my choice. †However, the whole rest of the time, I have been "on" the diet (hey, "on the diet", wasn't that a great column?), even though--especially when I was a newbie pup, which, since I seem to have a slow learning curve on some things, was several YEARS after discovering the board and learning from y'all--I would sometimes struggle mightily with cravings and going on little binges, but I was trying and I would always struggle back and finally I learned how to keep myself on track or at least from completely jumping the rails, I'm grateful to say. †But it would have made me feel worse during those struggly moments, and more like a "failure" than I already did, had I thought with dismay "Oh, I'm completely OFF the diet!" †I like the word "compliance" because it meant that, even when I tripped and fell, I was still on the diet on some level, just having a rough patch.

The only folks I would say are totally OFF the diet are those who choose to be off the diet and also those who are really in denial about just the type, amount and frequency of avoids they are eating. †But that last category would have to be pretty blatent (even a little denial doesn't mean one is off the diet, it takes a whale of a lot of denial *lol*), like, if someone says "I'm highly compliant!" but then goes on to mention that, well, they do eat an entire bowl of wheat pasta every day, or they say that they have a Double Latte Frappe Chaka Khan Mocha Choca Ya Ya Da Da Deluxe Wing Ding Shimmy Shimmy Cocoa Bop Balooza Double Decker Whipped Cream Coffee Surprise from Starbucks every single day. †Even then, though, to me, they aren't exactly OFF the diet, just not as highly compliant as maybe they think they are. †You are on the BTD, in my book, if you are making an effort to be on the BTD. †However, imperfect, if you are trying, you are at least somewhat compliant. †High compliance, on the other hand, is a horse of a different color, and a horse that eschews Oreos, candy bars, Starbucks, potato chips (d*mn!), etc., pretty much entirely, but definitely more than up to 4 to 5 times per week.
Posted by: Serena (Guest), Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 6:19pm; Reply: 24
I will openly state/re-iterate, I do not avoid vinegar. I haven't found a vinegar free mustard, mayo, or salad dressing I like. And while I make my own dressing on occasion, lemon juice doesn't cut it. (Slowly finding a way to make it work with lime juice and cider vinegar, but that's another story)... But I LOVE my mustard and mayo (not willing to make mayo...). And I go a little overboard on my dairy allowance sometimes. And the grains. Working desperately to get down to the 6 servings a week... (I think I'm at 9 or 10 a week...) Still take my motto from finding nemo though... (Fish are friends not food)

I'll have fast food twice and or cheesecake once a month. I fight tooth and nail to stay out of all but one restaurant (Let's go to the make your own stirfry place or my place to cook- no where else...) If it has an avoid listed, I generally don't eat it. That includes the corn sugars, artificial sugars, non-compliant oils (safflower oil is in too many things *roll eyes*). I'll admit, if a fave food has pepper as the last ingredient, I'll probably eat it. And if I'm served pototoes, I'll eat some. Basically, I'm anal about 98% of the avoids, except when I feel like a treat. I don't really binge on anything- no rice cake benders for me ;)

I'd like to think I fall somewhere in between the reasonable adherance and high compliance (High adherance perhaps? ;)) Exercise is done, wheat is the devil (I like how O's eating wheat are dismissed- good call!! :)) I'd say at least 70% of the veggies I eat are bennie (darn those tomatoes and carrots...) Get my fruit, love my beef, eat my walnuts...

For the most part, I'm quite pleased with where I am.
Posted by: EquiPro, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 6:37pm; Reply: 25
Quoted from Edna

Double Latte Frappe Chaka Khan Mocha Choca Ya Ya Da Da Deluxe Wing Ding Shimmy Shimmy Cocoa Bop Balooza Double Decker Whipped Cream Coffee Surprise from Starbucks every single day.  


ROTFLMAO!!

I can't stand the fact that Starbucks can't deal with "small", "medium" and "large".  I go to SB about 4 times per year to have one of their Chi things and I'm the only idiot there trying to figure out how to order a "small".

OK - back to topic

Posted by: KimonoKat, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 6:41pm; Reply: 26
It's been pretty easy for me to avoid the avoids. †All I have to do is think about that day 12/17 where I couldn't get out of the car without pain, and had to have Mr. KK help me, just to go grocery shopping. †That will stay with me for a long time.

The place where I fall out of high compliance is in the exercise and de-stressing areas. †I can't really equate my 45 minute 2 mile walk (on the flats of Sherman Oaks) five times a week as "strenous" exercise for an O. †I'm just not willing to start climbing the hill sections yet. †Can you say: lazy and procrastinate in the same sentence? ;D

Posted by: Drea, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 6:54pm; Reply: 27
I finally learned my lesson with potatoes. I used to think that I wasn't even as smart as Pavlov's dog, but then, one day during my Christmas holiday, I ate those home fries (they came with my omelete without my asking for them - normally I ask for a fruit cup instead) and I would say within the hour, my hands and knees were stiff and swollen, and the food triggered the constipation to rear its ugly head. I keep reminding myself of how bad I felt after eating those potatoes every time I want some. Now, I can say I am as smart as Pavlov's dog.  :D
Posted by: Dr. D, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 7:15pm; Reply: 28
Peppermint, it is per week, minus the fact that you don't consume any of the 'deal breakers.'
Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 7:53pm; Reply: 29
Quoted from admin
Peppermint, it is per week, minus the fact that you don't consume any of the 'deal breakers.'

Wow, interesting, thanks for the clarification, it was very illuminating.  So, they (those in high compliance on the BTD by the study's working definition) aren't consuming up to 4 to 5 "biggies", i.e., major avoids per week.  If they are consuming any avoids at all, it is at most some MINOR (to perhaps medium) ones at a frequency of 0 times to at most 5 times per week.  I can totally agree with that.  The clarification was key, for me, because it all hinges on the majorness or minorness of the avoid, truly.  There truly are avoids and then AVOIDS.  You are saying that one can be at a very high compliance level and still not be GOD/perfect, still be consuming a minor avoid here and/or there, which is basically unavoidable.  Got it, understand it, and agree 100% with it.
Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 7:58pm; Reply: 30
P.S.  Now that I understand the definitions, I would say that my own compliance varies and can be anywhere between #3 (high) and #2 (reasonable adherence).  Good thing I finally gave up potato chips a while back, or I'm guessing that, despite all my best efforts going on concurrently, I'd have been in "deal breaker" status, as potato chips--even "designer" (pure) ones--for an O non are pretty much beyond the pale.  But I now have, finally, jettisoned those.  I'm somewhere in there ranging from #2 to #3, depending on when the surprise inspectors show up at my door.
Posted by: 1514 (Guest), Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 8:03pm; Reply: 31
Quoted from EquiPro
One thing that I have found interesting and that I have really upped this year, is getting in the perscribed amount of bennie fruits and veggies and keeping that in the forefront of my brain. †Amazingly, if I really keep focussing in on getting in those portions, compliance becomes much easier because it is a LOT of food to eat AND it is hard to go on a bender when you're trying to get in all the fruits and veggies...


YES! †While I'd avoided A secretor avoids for years, I recently realized we have both †A secretors *and* A non-secretors in my family and gotten more serious about the BTD. †I made a list of the food in each category that's beneficial for both A sec & non and contact (r) papered it to the cover of my shopping list notebook. †It's helped me make good decisions for my entire family. †:)

Quoted Text
So, for me, compliance is very much about the recommended portions. †It is much easier for me to be non-compliant, when I am not thinking about how much food I have to get in, in terms of fruits and veggies. †That, alone, has upped my compliance tremendously.


This is going to sound very *A* of me, but what can I say? †I'm an A. †;) †In an Excel file I made a chart with the days of the week across the top and recommended portions down the side. †Since the portion is 1 glass of lemon water that's in bold. †Since water recommendation is 2-3 glasses per day I have the first water listed in boldface and the second two waters in normal typeface. †I put weekly servings at the bottom of the page. †Each line is one food type (soya, legumes, etc) repeating horizonally according to frequency recommendations in bold and plain type.

I printed it out in vibrant yellow cardstock and the printer only charged me $1.00 to laminate it with their heaviest material. †I use kitchen magnets to keep it on my refrigerator door and cross out food eaten with a china marker (a.k.a. grease pencil.) †At the beginning of a new week I erase everything with a soft cloth. †It really helps me keep our diet in balance when planning meal planning and grocery shopping.

Since watching relative portions I've noticed a big jump in energy, increased mental clarity, and ability to focus and plan. †

I think most accountants and spreadsheet geeks must be As. †;)
Posted by: Dr. D, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 8:25pm; Reply: 32
Quoted from Edna

Wow, interesting, thanks for the clarification, it was very illuminating.  So, they (those in high compliance on the BTD by the study's working definition) aren't consuming up to 4 to 5 "biggies", i.e., major avoids per week.  If they are consuming any avoids at all, it is at most some MINOR (to perhaps medium) ones at a frequency of 0 times to at most 5 times per week.  I can totally agree with that.  The clarification was key, for me, because it all hinges on the majorness or minorness of the avoid, truly.  There truly are avoids and then AVOIDS.  You are saying that one can be at a very high compliance level and still not be GOD/perfect, still be consuming a minor avoid here and/or there, which is basically unavoidable.  Got it, understand it, and agree 100% with it.


Exactly. You can't be type O eating wheat and honestly say that you are BTD compliant. Now, having said that, remember we are trying (for the purpose of a study) to categorize if someone actually did 'enough' of the diet. Someone else might feel that this is too high of a bar to set, others (especially around here) may say that the bar is set too low.
Posted by: jayney-O (Guest), Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 8:26pm; Reply: 33
w ow, if I tally it up I really eat a lot of grains. beneficial, though. It could be called a bender, when I come home from work and spread almond butter or ghee (I've knocked that off due to cholesterol) on rye cracker....(knockabrot, all rye,) How many of these do I eat? Oh, a few. Then there's brkfst which calls for a pc of rye toast (100%)and dinner often contains rice. This all adds up to a lot more than 6 servings a week......
a fascinating thread, though....great to help us take a reality check.

avoids I eat: vinegar that may be in something....rarely, as I use cider vinegar and my Annies mustard uses it too.....ummm, umm, jalapenos could happen so rarely.
Posted by: Whimsical, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 8:54pm; Reply: 34
This is a great discussion, very interesting and great to have Dr. D's input too.  

I don't really worry about % compliance anymore, since I nearly never eat any avoids other than a bit of vinegar in otherwise compliant BBQ sauce.  This past month I have been focussing on increasing my veggie intake, particularly of bennies.  Equipro, you are bang on when you say that once you fill your meals with bennie veggies and fruit, there isn't room for avoids or overdoing things like grains anymore!  I pretty much ignore the portion guidelines - I measure nearly everything in handfuls, except meat, of which I eat whatever the unit is (burger, chicken breast, etc).  The frequencies, though, are very important and harder to nail down.  To stay within my scant grain "allowance" I pretty much have to pretend they don't exist!  I have trouble staying within the nut/seed frequencies, but working on that.

I have always found the "red flags" list in LR4YT useful in identifying those "deal breakers".  I don't have my book with me right now, but these are my own "Big 5" deal breakers:

Wheat
Potatoes
Corn
Dairy (any and all are bad news for me)
Sugar (nonnies only)

I know that wheat and potatoes are both on that "red flag" list, but I'm not sure of the others.  Knowing these red flags (along with my own reactions to avoids!) REALLY helped me get off the potatoes.  RED FLAG!!!  DO NOT EAT!!!  :)
Posted by: Cheryl_O_Blogger, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 9:30pm; Reply: 35
Quoted from jayney-O
w ow, if I tally it up I really eat a lot of grains. beneficial, though. It could be called a bender, when I come home from work and spread almond butter or ghee (I've knocked that off due to cholesterol) on rye cracker....(knockabrot, all rye,) How many of these do I eat? Oh, a few. Then there's brkfst which calls for a pc of rye toast (100%)and dinner often contains rice. This all adds up to a lot more than 6 servings a week......
a fascinating thread, though....great to help us take a reality check.

avoids I eat: vinegar that may be in something....rarely, as I use cider vinegar and my Annies mustard uses it too.....ummm, umm, jalapenos could happen so rarely.


A local news station did a story with a tagline, stop worrying so much about your beer belly, it's the bread belly that will get you.
Posted by: jsgrierson (Guest), Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 9:42pm; Reply: 36
Quoted from admin


Exactly. You can't be type O eating wheat and honestly say that you are BTD compliant. Now, having said that, remember we are trying (for the purpose of a study) to categorize if someone actually did 'enough' of the diet. Someone else might feel that this is too high of a bar to set, others (especially around here) may say that the bar is set too low.


Into the mix comes the question of whether I am doing Tier 1 or Tier 2 compliance.
Since yesterday's discussion on another thread (see Sante's blog) I have decided to graduate myself to Tier 1. (Three years on the BTD food and exercise plan at Tier 2 95% compliance) and I have never looked and felt better though the hypothyrodism readings have not altered- still on medication).
So I shall now describe myself as an A1 Secretor, 99% compliant on the Tier 1. Where does that fit into the study?

My graduation treat will be a small homemade pizza with organic tomatoes, peppers (Yay) and mozzarella.
Jenny :D
Posted by: jayney-O (Guest), Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 9:51pm; Reply: 37
right on, Cheryl. J.
Posted by: 794 (Guest), Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 10:32pm; Reply: 38
Too me all neutrals are avoids.  I stick to the beneficials and that is where I'm happiest.
Posted by: OSuzanna, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 10:36pm; Reply: 39
What an interesting thread! The reminder of grain limitations for Os chilled my blood! WA-a-a-aah! :'( :'(
KimonoKat -If I walked as much as you do, I'd be dang proud of myself! I'm DREAMING of getting in 3 walks per week (only 1 so far), then improving from there. Just the fact that I WANT to exercise is a HUGE †improvement over my former condition. I brought a stairclimber thingie when I moved back from New York, and I LOVE it, but it's been in my sister's barn for 7 years, now, and stinks too much of mice, to which I'm very allergic.(aside from that, my pets consider mice a Beneficial!!) PS, KK, peeked @ yer website, faboo, girl, future customer here!
I eat way too much rice stuff, I think, but lately I've noticed I'm not missing grains with a meal if I get enough meat & veg or fruit!
Recalling how SICK I've been til starting BTD fulltime keeps me eating daily, frequent bennies and avoiding wheat, corn and dairy like the plague. And that's just the short list.
Today I will start my Food&Consequences Journal in earnest. One of the things I want to discover is how compliant I'm being. I think I've been extremely compliant except for the exercise....off for a walk, now, kiddies! :D
Posted by: KimonoKat, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 10:47pm; Reply: 40
:big wavy smilie guy here!:

Quoted Text
Today I will start my Food&Consequences Journal in earnest.


For a short time, I did a daily story/post on my little crime forum about what I ate, and how I fixed it.  I put links to the different products of Dr. D's that I had with my meals.  I wrote about my meal planning, cooking and eating like a story for others to enjoy.  It really made me be more conscious about being compliant because I enjoyed sharing how I followed the BTD with others.
Posted by: OSuzanna, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 10:53pm; Reply: 41
byronyvaughn - I LIKE your organizing. I may be an O, but it appeals to me bigtime (Virgo).
Equipro - eating out with your daughter like that is what I consider a Quality Of Life issue, and I think you're doing the right thing, especially being able to opt for a more beneficial version of a meal. It's not like you're going somewhere you CAN'T get anything good.
Posted by: OSuzanna, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 10:55pm; Reply: 42
KK  ;D
Posted by: Kristin, Tuesday, March 21, 2006, 11:46pm; Reply: 43
Quoted from Edna

Actually, if I may be so bold, I believe (not sure, but believe) I was the first to choose that word, and I posted on the old board as to why I used and liked that word, basically for the reason you just stated! †I didn't like the idea that if you're not doing it PERFECTLY, you're not doing it; you are either on it, or off it!



Of course it was you!!... I should have known...  ;D

:K)

Posted by: dddddan (Guest), Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 3:17am; Reply: 44
Quoted from Serena
I will openly state/re-iterate, I do not avoid vinegar. I haven't found a vinegar free mustard, mayo, or salad dressing I like. And while I make my own dressing on occasion, lemon juice doesn't cut it.


Hey, sorry, this has nothing to do with the rest of the discussion, but if you're a secretor, then apple cider vinegar is neutral eh?
i was pleasantly surprised to see that too, you can't emulsify a dressing properly without vinegar!
Posted by: Victoria, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 3:25am; Reply: 45
This is a great thread.  There's always room for refining the way we choose to live and eat and exercise, and it's also an ever-changing lifestyle.  In the beginning, it may be enough just to eliminate the avoids, so we don't die young!!

Then we begin to notice that we're living on neutrals, so we start to up the beneficials.
Later we may notice that we're eating no vegetables to speak of, so we make our meals more well-balanced.
Then we look at the frequencies, and  whoa!  Finding out we've way overdone or underdone a particular food group!
Somewhere along the way, we get our secretor status, and everything begins to come into focus.

What fun!  :-)
Posted by: Laura P, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 3:46am; Reply: 46
The frequency and portions is what I have a problem with though, if I was an O no problemo, but there are so many things I can't eat, and I can't live on fruits and veggies alone, it is a problem for me..........I feel stuck
Posted by: Victoria, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 4:00am; Reply: 47
Hi Laura,
It great to hear from you!  I hope you are doing well (besides feeling stuck, that is).

As you know, I understand what you are up against.  Sometimes, I feel that if I eat 100% compliant with the frequencies, I would starve to death.  (Or be hungry all the time!)  I've been working on it, really.  And I am making progress.  It's back to those golldarn baby steps, every time.
Posted by: OSuzanna, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 4:35am; Reply: 48
Okay, just fell off pedestal. Thud. :( :-/
I was investigating a funky smell in the fridge tonight when I ended up cleaning it up alot. In the process, found old Ben&Jerry's carton w/1/2 inch in bottom, maybe 1/4 to 1/3 cup total. In the spirit of the cleaning binge, finished off last night's (compliant homemade) banana bread w/the ice cream, and now have a pain in my gut I haven't had since I started BTDing fulltime. Okay, I consider my knuckles rapped! Point taken! Not to mention there will be zits 3-4 days from now! Sheesh. :P ::)
The good news is the house is 99 & 44/100% avoid-free. :B
Posted by: Carol the Dabbler, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 4:44am; Reply: 49
Boy, you post a new thread and then can't get back to it for 24 hours, and look what happens!

Dr. D and Suzanne, THANKS for the clarifications!  That quote from the "Ask Dr. D" column was what I had been thinking of as "compliance" -- basically, avoiding the Avoids.  And the new study's three categories give me a very usable yardstick.

NOTE:  It sure sounds like the FAQ's need to be modified!  They say that "compliance" means eating 70-100% Beneficials, which, as Suzanne points out, conflicts mightily with the aforementioned clarifications.  The existing FAQ might motivate a few A Virgos ;) but I suspect it's mostly scaring people off.  (Assuming that they've read it, which I, mercifully, had not until last night.)

So, how am I doing?  Not bad, apparently.  I eat Bennies every day (grapefruit, turkey or canned salmon, various veggies, etc.), along with Neutrals.  My regular daily walks have been on hold due to winter weather -- and now that it's finally spring, I have a cold! -- but I'm eager to get back out.

My main source of Avoids is my supplements, many of which are available only in gelatin capsules.  I am gradually cutting back as my health improves.  And there's the once-a-month meeting of our vegetarian group, where every dish in the pitch-in supper (except mine, of course) is cleverly designed to contain at least one Avoid.

So I'd peg myself at a solid Category Two-and-a-Half.

Kristin -- your "current fave bumper sticker:  Carpe maŮana" -- love it!

Posted by: KimonoKat, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 5:49am; Reply: 50
Quoted Text
Okay, just fell off pedestal. Thud.


I know what that feels like.  I fell off the pedistal and was off of it for almost two years.  (Having your half your house torn up for that long with a procrastinating husband will drive anyone to eat avoids on daily basis!)  But that day I couldn't walk without pain was a real deal breaker.  I never want to go back there.  It was my "hitting bottom" so to speak.

Posted by: Dr. D, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 12:19pm; Reply: 51
Quoted Text
Actually, if I may be so bold, I believe (not sure, but believe) I was the first to choose that word, and I posted on the old board as to why I used and liked that word, basically for the reason you just stated!  I didn't like the idea that if you're not doing it PERFECTLY, you're not doing it; you are either on it, or off it!


Why not, it's yours! BTW, if I may be so bold, I think I actually coined the phrase 'Integrative Medicine' in the 1970's  when I was part of the student team at Bastyr College that was helping to design the clinical curriculum. Now everyone uses it, including Medscape, which unveiled its new 'Integrative Medicine' section on its website, featuring, of course, an article by Stephen Barrett stating that the whole concept was bogus, and a link to new research indicating the chocolate milk appeared to be effective as a post exercise recovery drink.

Strange what the conventional world often considers 'alternative' to be.
Posted by: Peppermint Twist, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 2:03pm; Reply: 52
Quoted from admin
Why not, it's yours! BTW, if I may be so bold, I think I actually coined the phrase 'Integrative Medicine' in the 1970's †when I was part of the student team at Bastyr College that was helping to design the clinical curriculum...

Whoa, man, that phrase is everywhere now!  You can't turn around without seeing a "Center for Integrative Medicine".  Of course, none of 'em in Florida contain naturopaths, as that is not recognized here ( :'( >:(), but that's another topic.  And none of 'em are covered by my insurance, I'm sure (although how would one really know, as they no longer issue a hard-copy benefits book anymore, that is apparently very last milenium, so you go to their internet site and it says in the fine print "check your benefits book for specific information on your plan".   ??)  Anyway, I'm digressing left and right.  Point is:  "Integrative Medicine" is definitely a phrase that has been picked up by that elusive 100th monkey and distributed into the mainstream vernacular.  Dr. D. strikes again!
:D

Posted by: grey rabbit, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 3:52pm; Reply: 53
One of the reasons this way of eatting makes so much sense to me is the fact that I really like the highly beneficals and for the most part the avoids are unappealing to me. Eat pork? gag me, not that I have anything against pigs, they are cute, just not for dinner please. Whereas sushi or sashimi makes my mouth water just thinking about it, love that clean fresh taste of salmon. This board has been wonderfully helpful in keeping things on track. Is there anywhere a list of the "deal breakers"? I had (loaned it out) ER4YT and I have the encyclopidia.
Posted by: mikendomsmum, Wednesday, March 22, 2006, 4:23pm; Reply: 54
Quoted from admin


In designing a new study we are trying to work out what exactly constitutes 'following the diet.'





How do you find your study subjects?  
Posted by: Lloyd, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 1:37am; Reply: 55
Quoted from admin

2. 'Reasonable Aherence': These are people who are getting beneficials and avoids in and out of their diet in a manner prescribed by the BTD, but not to a level considered 'High Compliance'. They may or may not be doing the appropriate exercise. These people can be used in the study, but probably need to be followed for at least 4-8 weeks for any analysis.

3. High Compliance': These people routinely (read daily) consume beneficials and so rarely consume avoids as to have it consitute an 'event' when it occurs. An 'event' represents and occurence of less than 4-5 times per week. They also perform the prescribed exercises and stress reduction techniques. These people can be tested for physiologic changes due to the BTD within 7-10 days.




By these definitions I am probably in category 3. There were numerous pysiological changes during my first 6 weeks on the BTD when I was either Cat 1 or Cat 2. Since reaching Cat 3 any changes would have to be measured with blood tests or other examinations that are strictly quantitative.
Posted by: mikendomsmum, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 4:04am; Reply: 56
I'm mostly a 3 but I have to admit....
a couple of days I've been a 2 and maybe even a 1!  It was the lemon meringue pie!  I promise I won't bake another one, even though I have at least 10 pounds of lemons in my fridge!  The juice is going to be SALAD DRESSING, NOT LEMON MERINGUE PIE.  Ok, maybe if I say that 100 times....
Posted by: Drea, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 4:31am; Reply: 57
You can juice all the lemons that you currently have, then freeze the juice for later...put the juice into an ice cube tray (in the freezer), then when they are frozen, put them into a ziploc bag to use when you want the juice...or you could just keep the juice in the fridge (what I do).

I'm looking at ways to keep the lemon zest for future use. Oftentimes if I don't juice my lemons right away, one or more of them get moldy and then the mold spreads...sometimes I find a recipe that calls for lemon zest, but I don't have any fresh on hand...
Posted by: Carol the Dabbler, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 4:35am; Reply: 58
Mikendomsmum -- Not that you should be eating lemon-meringue pie every day, but your recipe needs a little tweaking, that's all.

You're an O secretor, so lemons are Neutral for you, which is a good start!  You can eat honey, which goes really well with lemons, so replace the sugar in the recipe with honey.  Just remember to account for the extra liquid somehow.  If the recipe calls for cornstarch, use arrowroot instead.  I've read that rice starch works really well, if you can find it (it's apparently sold in Asian markets).

Does that take care of the filling?  You might want to test-drive that much of the recipe by itself, and just serve it in little dessert dishes.  Once you're satisfied with the filling, you can move on to the crust.

Spelt is Neutral for you.  For this sort of thing, you might want to use white spelt flour, though I would be tempted to use whole-grain.  If you know of a good crust recipe that calls for oil instead of shortening, you can use canola oil and you're all set.

Otherwise, you can make Jill's Spelt-and-Olive-Oil crust.  Went looking for it, and (after doing mighty battle with the Recibase search function) finally found ta-daaa! Jill's Lemon Meringue Pie (followed by Jill's Spelt Pie Crust).  Just search on Jill, and those will (I hope) be the second and third recipes that come up.  Good heavens -- the pie-filling recipe calls for sugar!  I knew it was a Neutral for A secretors, but never noticed it's a Neutral for all secretors.  (I bet honey would taste better anyhow.)
Posted by: Serena (Guest), Thursday, March 23, 2006, 4:35am; Reply: 59
I made a compliant lemon meringue before... loooooong time ago. Just subbed out the avoids...
Posted by: mikendomsmum, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 2:36pm; Reply: 60
Well, I only do lemon meringue pie once a year.  My friend gives me bags and bags of lemons from her tree so I make her one as a "thank you".  It's her favorite.  This year I made one for dh and kids (and me). The rest of the lemons get zested, juiced and all that goes into the freezer.  It only lasts about 3 months, though.  I make Caesar and Canlis salad, at least I used to, twice a week, at least, and go through that lemon juice pretty fast.  I have the second bag of lemons here now so it's time to get juicing!  The trees here in Tucson are jam-packed with lemons this year.  It's funny because the grapefruit and oranges didn't do too well.  
Thanks for finding the compliant LMP!  I'm going to try that out in a couple of weeks.
Posted by: Cheryl_O_Blogger, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 6:29pm; Reply: 61
To confuse things more consider the relaxed, moderate and focused versions of the diet presented in this newsletter:

http://www.dadamo.com/napharm/newsletter/1-6.pdf

According to this one can consider oneself "doing the diet" by just adding some of the beneficials.
Posted by: Dr. D, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 6:41pm; Reply: 62
Quoted Text
Someone else might feel that this is too high of a bar to set, others (especially around here) may say that the bar is set too low.


Hi Cheryl,

Doing any part of the BTD is 'technically' doing the BTD. It may not be what I need in a study, or what you need to get better, but it is still acting in a somewhat informed manner than average.

NAP structured their levels of compliance as such because people were constantly asking them if it was permissible to use the supplements and not do the BTD, and if they did, would they be effective?

Yep, a lot of folks like the NAP quality, and originality of the formulas, but are not interested at all in changing their diets.
Posted by: Don, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 6:46pm; Reply: 63
Quoted from admin
Yep, a lot of folks like the NAP quality, and originality of the formulas, but are not interested at all in changing their diets.

The fact that a lot of people are not interested in changing their diets does not surprise me.

::)

Posted by: Cheryl_O_Blogger, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 6:52pm; Reply: 64
Thanks,
I know that when I first started the diet, I mainly upped the red meat and cut back on wheat and corn.  It was enough for me to see some dramatic improvements.  As I go along I want more, and the natural progression has been toward more compliance.  I think many of us have found that you have to find the level of compliance that works for you.
Posted by: Lola, Thursday, March 23, 2006, 6:55pm; Reply: 65
those not following the diet, also do not register in the forums, either! )

but at least they 'shop right for sups''!!!.......not bad.....
Posted by: slyparrot, Friday, March 31, 2006, 12:15pm; Reply: 66
Eating an avoid more than once (maybe twice) a week ruins it for me (too sensitive).  Full compliance is the way to go.  My ratios are individualized due to my malabsorption/digestion problems.  Exercise is very extreme at work (audio engineer) so I don't have to make any extra efforts there unless work slows down, then I hit the gym!  
Posted by: Ribbit, Tuesday, May 9, 2006, 11:15pm; Reply: 67
On the topic of vinegar, I don't know how it is for an O, but for an A, we tend to be somewhat acidic in our muscles----if I understand it right----which is compounded by eating certain acids.  For me, I know now that when I have even the least amount of vinegar, my legs hurt like I've run a marathon, and I come down with bacterial overgrowth (not yeast, like I thought for many years) that wouldn't be polite to discuss.  I combat it by regularly taking Nature's Way Chlorofresh liquid chlorophyll to make my muscles more alkaline.  I don't hurt anymore.  

I used to crave--CRAVE--vinegar.  As a teenager, I'd dump apple cider vinegar all over everything I ate.  After BTD, and after the cravings went away (which took a while), it hasn't been a big deal.  I think sometimes when we continue to occasionally eat an avoid, especially one we know we have a craving or a weakness for, we do ourselves a disservice by continuing to indulge.  If we can get it completely out of our diets, and can ignore the cravings long enough for them to go away (which will ONLY happen if we are dilligent), then our bodies will heal and we won't have to deal with it anymore.  Think of avoids this way...okay, not avoids--AVOIDS...We crave them for a reason.  We know wheat (for example) is evil.  But we want it.  We think about it.  We dream about it.  We have a mental love affair with it.  We turn it over and over in our minds and can't wait till we can have it again.  We cannot resist.  Why?  It's not because it tastes good.  Common error, I believe, to think that we crave something because we like the taste of it.  [After giving up wheat and milk years ago, I ate pizza once, which I had been good about avoiding for a long time.  I was disappointed to find that it wasn't nearly as good as I remembered it being.]  We know from Dr. D (and experience, if we are entirely honest with ourselves and analyze our responses carefully) that we have >>immune responses<< to these avoids.  Which means that when we have a craving for wheat, it's not the taste or texture of the bread so much as it is that feeling we all know so well after we eat a loaf and a half (because we can't stop at one slice, CAN WE?).  Read up on gluten allergies and you will find that gluten in certain people can cause a response somewhat like being doped up on morphine.  It really is a physical addiction that must be broken, and once you are free from it, the cravings eventually go away, IF YOU NEVER GIVE IN.  Most of the foods we are allergic to do not produce this morphine-like effect, but they are just as insidious. You produce antibodies to the foods you are alergic to, and these induce histamine production. When you eat an AVOID that you have an immune response to, you use up the antibodies for that allergen/food, hystamine production drops, and you feel better (the craving goes away) TEMPORARILY.  Sooner or later, the antibodies will be replenished, histamine count will rise, and you begin feeling bad again. It's a crazy cycle that can only be broken by strictly avoiding it until you no longer have those cravings.   Just think how much better you would feel if you didn't have cravings at all to deal with (though they are fun at the moment you fulfill them).  We will regret eating an avoid or an AVOID either tomorrow (sitting on the potty all day, or being depressed or tired, or whatever the response is) or ten years from now (when we develop cancer.)  The purpose of the diet is not to make martyrs of us or make a religion out of it (oh no, I sinned and must confess!  I was BAD [although that may be a little fun])....but to 1. help us feel our best now and 2. avoid many of the diseases that our blood types and genes predispose us to.

As for a vinegar-free mustard, mix 1 tsp. dry mustard with just enough water to make a paste.  Spread it thinly, because it's very spicy (which is really great for those of us who can't have hot peppers and wish we could).  I make it fresh every time I need it.  My husband adds horseradish powder to his mustard (obtained at our local international farmers' market).  A yummy turmeric sauce can be made the same way, to be spread on the top of turkey meatloaf in place of anything tomatoey.

In my opinion, perhaps Dr. D can get away with eating avoids that often because he's been on it so many years the avoids don't bother him much.  I don't know.
Posted by: 182 (Guest), Thursday, June 14, 2007, 9:34pm; Reply: 68
Serena, I been using at times something called Vegannaise. It's made without eggs, and they use Apple Cider vinegar in it and Grapeseed Oil which is high in Antioxidants. I actually need to get another jar since I am out.
Posted by: Alia Vo, Thursday, June 14, 2007, 10:56pm; Reply: 69
Quoted from outdoordrea
You can juice all the lemons that you currently have, then freeze the juice for later...put the juice into an ice cube tray (in the freezer), then when they are frozen, put them into a ziploc bag to use when you want the juice...or you could just keep the juice in the fridge (what I do).


This is a great tip for using an abundance of fresh lemons, Drea.

Freshly squeezed lemon juice has an unsurpassable taste when utilized in the morning warm lemon water drink recommended for blood type A's in ER4YT and LR4YT.

Alia
Posted by: Lola, Friday, June 15, 2007, 2:29am; Reply: 70
Ribbit,
great post!
Posted by: pipnjohn, Friday, June 15, 2007, 2:46am; Reply: 71
We, Pip and I, were growing old unsuccessfully as we entered our sixties and realised we had to change something in order to get a more satisfactory result.

Eventually we found the BTD. (ER4Y Type) Eureka!

For me the target was to get my quota (share) of life and as many bonus years as I could.

100 healthy years has been achieved by others, why not me!

That is, three score years and ten, 70yrs for males, plus 30 bonus years!

That is the target! (female equivalent for Pip)

Being "compliant" for us is following the BTD in order to achieve that goal!

High compliance, on Dr D's list! (we consume avoids with confidence when we have to)

We are now growing old much more successfully because, we have an quantifiable target to aim for.

Ours is not a perfect world and you have to approach life like a boxer and trade risk of being hit against your own skill in avoiding being hit and still being able to "win the fight".

We don't seem to get things like common colds etc, we feel pretty good, we can walk seven kilometers in give or take one hour and we weigh about 80 and 68 kg respectively.

That is what we gauge our compliance to the BTD on and what our bodies tell us.

I will be 68yrs old in October this year. (Pip 64 in July) †Thank you Dr D and you guys too. † :K) †Cheers John.
Posted by: Lola, Friday, June 15, 2007, 3:06am; Reply: 72
way to go!!
Posted by: shells, Friday, June 15, 2007, 10:48am; Reply: 73
Good on you, Pip & John .... lovely to hear  :D
Posted by: mikeo, Saturday, June 16, 2007, 9:44pm; Reply: 74
4 times per week week could mean having 4 avoids at once

like an O having a burger on a wheat bun, with pickles, side french fires with ketchup which is one meal out of 21 for the week. Being compliant the rest of the week would net a 95.23% compliance.
Posted by: Drea, Sunday, June 17, 2007, 5:32pm; Reply: 75
Quoted from mikeo
4 times per week week could mean having 4 avoids at once

like an O having a burger on a wheat bun, with pickles, side french fires with ketchup which is one meal out of 21 for the week. Being compliant the rest of the week would net a 95.23% compliance.


Hope that O has some Deflect!
Posted by: 182 (Guest), Thursday, July 5, 2007, 3:43pm; Reply: 76
For a week and a half I was 100% compliant, but I didn't do the exercises or relaxation things because I can't afford yoga and tai chi classes. But I GAINED 6 lbs in those 10 days. So I compliance does not always work. And in my case, it gets me really depressed.
Posted by: Lola, Thursday, July 5, 2007, 3:53pm; Reply: 77
healing is a long process.........stay in track and fine tune according to your individuality.
Posted by: ABJoe, Thursday, July 5, 2007, 8:57pm; Reply: 78
Quoted from ArwenLegolas
For a week and a half I was 100% compliant, but I didn't do the exercises or relaxation things because I can't afford yoga and tai chi classes. But I GAINED 6 lbs in those 10 days. So I compliance does not always work. And in my case, it gets me really depressed.

A week and a half of compliance is not an adequate test... ;)  It took me three weeks with no corn to reduce the concentration in the body enough to stop the constant headache.   ::)  

Initially, I too gained weight.  In studying the situation, I determined that the reason I gained weight initially when eating beneficial foods was that they were foods that the body could use for food, and since it stores food when it has had very little, it immediately stored any excess until food came in regularly enough for the body to realize that it didn't have to be in starvation mode.  After about two months, the weight started to melt away (about 30 lbs {15%} in 2 months)...  Now it has been cycling in about a 10 lb range that is comfortable for about a year.

You need to do exercise, even if you walk for an hour focussing on walking correctly this will have quite a large benefit.

Posted by: Lola, Thursday, July 5, 2007, 9:19pm; Reply: 79
Joe,
thanks for sharing your personal results following btd!
great job!
Posted by: 182 (Guest), Thursday, July 5, 2007, 10:45pm; Reply: 80
Thank you very much Joe.  I was just concerned that something was wrong, because I gained 37 lbs since September of 2005 on a strictly vegetarian diet and there were so many things like beans in here and rice and eating a cup of uncooked rice a serving was just a lot of food and it reminded me of the weight I had gained on this kind of diet.
Posted by: jayneeo, Thursday, July 5, 2007, 11:06pm; Reply: 81
that cup of uncooked rice has come up a few times...??? perhaps there is a mistake ......? that would be more like 3 c. rice, cooked.....how would that be used?
Posted by: Lola, Friday, July 6, 2007, 12:02am; Reply: 82
it is 1 cup cooked...........
Posted by: jayneeo, Friday, July 6, 2007, 10:23pm; Reply: 83
better...
Posted by: BHealthy, Tuesday, September 25, 2012, 9:57pm; Reply: 84
Quoted Text

From this site's FAQ's: http://www.dadamo.com/faq/smartfaq.cgi?answer=988813714&id=988813483
    
What is compliance?
  • If you are recovering from an illness or desire weight loss, then 80%-100% of your food choices should be highly beneficial.
  • If you are a healthy individual over the age of 55, 80% of foods should be beneficial.
  • If you are under 55 and healthy, 70% or more of your food choices should beneficial.
  • The remainder of your food choices should be neutral. Avoids should not be eaten.


Quoted from Dr. D
What works for you constitutes 'doing the diet.'

In designing a new study we are trying to work out what exactly constitutes 'following the diet.'

So far we have three categories to test subject:

1. 'Deal Breaker':  this category cannot be used in the study. Examples would be type A's on pork or some other red meat avoid or type O's on wheat. These people cannot be said to be doing the BTD at all; neither in action or spirit.

2. 'Reasonable Aherence': These are people who are getting beneficials and avoids in and out of their diet in a manner prescribed by the BTD, but not to a level considered 'High Compliance'. They may or may not be doing the appropriate exercise. These people can be used in the study, but probably need to be followed for at least 4-8 weeks for any analysis.

3. 'High Compliance': These people routinely (read daily) consume beneficials and so rarely consume avoids as to have it consitute an 'event' when it occurs. An 'event' represents and occurence of less than 4-5 times per week. They also perform the prescribed exercises and stress reduction techniques. These people can be tested for physiologic changes due to the BTD within 7-10 days.

When 'compliance' refers to 'consuming beneficials' does it refer to eating that percentage of your total foods (by weight) from the beneficial/diamond column?

Or, does it mean that you consume 80% of the foods listed in that column?

For instance, I consume 98% of my foods from the beneficial/diamond column but I pretty much eat the same things over and over.  Of the 70 foods listed as 'diamonds', I only eat maybe 25 of them.  Of the 200 superfoods, I only eat 15.  I worry that I'm not eating enough different foods to be compliant but eating more of them would be a real chore.  I also don't eat any grains, not even beneficial ones, and very few fruits.

Is there a minimum number, not a percentage, of beneficials that need to be consumed?  Would a Hunter who lives exclusively on beef, cod, eggs, olive oil, asparagus, broccoli, kale and walnuts, all of which are diamonds, be compliant?  This would be so easy for me....  

What are the deal breakers for each type?  

Is pork a deal breaker for everyone?
Is dairy a deal breaker for everyone?

Would an acceptable avoid 'event' be something like using leeks in my stock or cinnamon in my curry both of which are pretty essential for authentic flavor?
Posted by: Lloyd, Tuesday, September 25, 2012, 10:28pm; Reply: 85
Quoted from BHealthy


When 'compliance' refers to 'consuming beneficials' does it refer to eating that percentage of your total foods (by weight) from the beneficial/diamond column?

Or, does it mean that you consume 80% of the foods listed in that column?


What are the deal breakers for each type?  

Is pork a deal breaker for everyone?
Is dairy a deal breaker for everyone?

Would an acceptable avoid 'event' be something like using leeks in my stock or cinnamon in my curry both of which are pretty essential for authentic flavor?


I interpret it as 80% of my intake. How you measure is probably less important than striving for your chosen compliance level.

The dealbreakers will be the foods listed for each type in LR4YT as the worst foods for that type. Wheat is the first listed for O's.

If you choose to use an avoid, you choose to use an avoid. Count it against compliance. I'm aware of some O non's that get cinnamon as a neutral due to family/personal health history.

Posted by: chrissyA, Tuesday, September 25, 2012, 10:42pm; Reply: 86
Hi BHealthy - Unfortunately Dr. D hasn't gotten too much more specific than in the quotes you show. Depending on one's interpretation, there can certainly be quite a lot of wiggle room.

For example, I intrepret 80% beneficial foods as being 80% of my total number of servings, by recommended serving size. Not by weight, because 6oz of beef could be one serving, but 6oz of ghee clearly is not.

As far as only eating a variety of 25 of your "diamond" foods, in my experience that's very normal. Most people have quite a limited variety of foods that they eat as staples. As long as you're eating from most of the catagories, you're going to be fine. Even though you don't eat much fruit, it looks as though you eat an acceptable amount of veg to be getting your vitamins and needed nutrients from them. I don't eat red meat or poultry, and exceptionally little fish and eggs, but I consume generous amounts of veg proteins, so I feel it balances out.

I can't help as far as the "deal breakers" are concerned...

But "avoids" specifically "should not be eaten". Obviously, you've been consuming avoids all of your life, so an avoid food isn't going to kill you, but it will hinder the healing and preventative capabilities of the diet as a whole. Avoids should be chosen judiciously and with discretion. As far as I've seen, there isn't any one specific "right" answer. The right answer for you is determined by how you feel about it.  :)
Posted by: ABJoe, Tuesday, September 25, 2012, 11:18pm; Reply: 87
Quoted from BHealthy
When 'compliance' refers to 'consuming beneficials' does it refer to eating that percentage of your total foods (by weight) from the beneficial/diamond column?

I determine this to mean by serving...  

Quoted from BHealthy
Or, does it mean that you consume 80% of the foods listed in that column?  I worry that I'm not eating enough different foods to be compliant but eating more of them would be a real chore.  I also don't eat any grains, not even beneficial ones, and very few fruits.
I get as much variety as the body needs...  Most of the time, I can use a rather limited number of foods and cycle between them, but once in a while, I need to add something that hasn't been in my diet recently.  My body tells me when it isn't happy, but I know many people don't have the same ability...  Just remember that there are more foods to choose from in case you get cravings, etc. later and wonder what it could be.  It may be a need for greater variety...

Quoted from BHealthy
Is pork a deal breaker for everyone?  I assume, "Yes"
Is dairy a deal breaker for everyone?  Many people get some dairy - so "No."

Would an acceptable avoid 'event' be something like using leeks in my stock or cinnamon in my curry both of which are pretty essential for authentic flavor?

I think some other onion would work OK in a stock and there may be other spices that would replace cinnamon in the curry without making too big of a flavor difference.  We all have to make our own justifications, etc. based on where we are in our health path...

I personally choose to not each avoids if I am home.  

If I am at a restaurant, I choose as compliantly as possible (including substitions, etc.) realizing that sauces or spices may have avoids.  I do attempt to avoid anything that may have a corn additive.

If I am a guest in someone's home, I may eat a very small amount of an even a major avoid to avoid embarrassing the host, but this has never been a frequent happening, so I consider these "events" and know I have to deal with the pain...
Posted by: Dianne, Wednesday, September 26, 2012, 12:07am; Reply: 88
Quoted from ABJoe


If I am a guest in someone's home, I may eat a very small amount of an even a major avoid to avoid embarrassing the host, but this has never been a frequent happening, so I consider these "events" and know I have to deal with the pain...


It has been about 3 months since I've accidentally ingested wheat. I was pleasantly surprised before this period that one time I had ingested some and I promptly took 4 Deflect and that saved me from much pain and suffering. I always make sure to carry 8 Deflect as well as Intrinsia at all times. I've been taking 4 Intrinsia daily, throughout the day, as well as 2 Polyflora and this has had tremendous results for the pain that I would experience in my colon and stomach. Intrinsia is worth it's weight in gold!!!  So perhaps taking your GTD type specific deflect under such circumstances would be of benefit for you also. :)
Posted by: ABJoe, Wednesday, September 26, 2012, 2:02am; Reply: 89
I take Deflect in these cases, as well...  It helps, but never catches all of it  - and I must be really sensitive to these things.
Posted by: PCUK-Positive, Saturday, November 30, 2013, 5:35pm; Reply: 90
Great thread bumped up
Posted by: BluesSinger, Saturday, November 30, 2013, 9:48pm; Reply: 91
Gosh.. I am definitely falling into the good compliancy category.  But I've been wondering about servings per week compliancy.  Sometimes one week I may eat more poultry then my Swami suggests, (like this week because of Thanksgiving), and some weeks more beef than suggested.  I try to get fish in 6 days like it suggests but I may be doing more poultry and beef than what is suggested.  I love beef and tend to eat more of it than anything except fish.  Plus some weeks I certainly eat more eggs than the suggested serving of 8 or the suggested serving of 1 tsp of ghee 3 times a week!!!   :-/  I'm not into many bean products and cheese doesn't sit well with me so I do those very rarely.  When I make a soup or stew I'm always using some kind of meat or fish protein product along with a lot of veggies.  

I hope this is not hurting my compliance or my body!  I have my Swami set at "normal' portions even though I want to continue to loose weight.  I did that because I'm a recovering compulsive overeater and anything that spells deprivation or hunger can trigger my disease.  

I do indulge in a black dot every day - NON GMO plain Soy Milk by West Soy.  I have it in my tea.  And approx. once a month I have an avoid - Tomato Sauce in some dish I make.  

Other than that, any avoids or black dots I ingest will only be from outside social events like at an eating establishment or at someone's house for dinner and than I work to do the best I can and DO NOT EAT THE WHEAT OR CORN OR DAIRY products.    I will sometimes eat hash browns when we are out or have a bite or two of my husbands but that's it.  The truth is I always suffer afterwards even when I try to do good.    I do have Deflect on order and hope it helps in these situations.

As far as Neutrals I just enjoy both columns fully.. Neutrals and Beneficials.  I don't worry about getting too many Neutrals vs. Beneficials as I am always more concentrated on the Beneficials anyway.

My main concern right now is the amount of servings I am eating of the different proteins I mentioned above.  
Posted by: san j, Saturday, November 30, 2013, 10:15pm; Reply: 92
Dr. D'Adamo here defines what constitutes sufficient "High Compliance" as to qualify someone to be a "test subject". He clearly opens by distinguishing "doing the diet" from such Controlled Experiment qualifying.

Quoted from Dr. D
I'm not a big fan of slapping kilometer markers on what constitutes doing the diet.  What works for you constitutes 'doing the diet.'

But sometimes you have to.

In designing a new study we are trying to work out what exactly constitutes 'following the diet.'

So far we have three categories to test subject:

1. 'Deal Breaker':  this category cannot be used in the study. Examples would be type A's on pork or some other red meat avoid or type O's on wheat. These people cannot be said to be doing the BTD at all; neither in action or spirit.

2. 'Reasonable Aherence': These are people who are getting beneficials and avoids in and out of their diet in a manner prescribed by the BTD, but not to a level considered 'High Compliance'. They may or may not be doing the appropriate exercise. These people can be used in the study, but probably need to be followed for at least 4-8 weeks for any analysis.

3. High Compliance': These people routinely (read daily) consume beneficials and so rarely consume avoids as to have it consitute an 'event' when it occurs. An 'event' represents and occurence of less than 4-5 times per week. They also perform the prescribed exercises and stress reduction techniques. These people can be tested for physiologic changes due to the BTD within 7-10 days.


People will keep food diaries and talk to a followup investigator every evening so as to ascertain their compliance.

(emphases mine)
The good doctor is saying that those of you who "talk to a followup investigator every evening" are expected to "slap kilometer markers on what constitutes doing the diet".
Other than that, those who temperamentally feel the need to maintain Test Subject conditions, i.e., "as-if" they were thus reporting for examination, may comply with their personal consciences.  :)

Posted by: Lloyd, Sunday, December 1, 2013, 12:05am; Reply: 93
Quoted from san j
Dr. D'Adamo here defines what constitutes sufficient "High Compliance" as to qualify someone to be a "test subject". He clearly opens by distinguishing "doing the diet" from such Controlled Experiment qualifying.


(emphases mine)
The good doctor is saying that those of you who "talk to a followup investigator every evening" are expected to "slap kilometer markers on what constitutes doing the diet".
Other than that, those who temperamentally feel the need to maintain Test Subject conditions, i.e., "as-if" they were thus reporting for examination, may comply with their personal consciences.  :)



And of course, the final disclaimer is that "your mileage may vary".

There will always be some who need higher compliance and some who don't need as much. A basically healthy person might "get away with" little to no compliance for a very long time. Those in excellent health have far less to gain by using the diet.

Saying in any way, shape, or form that someone does not need a level of compliance is no better than saying someone must follow a level of compliance.
Posted by: Victoria, Sunday, December 1, 2013, 12:55am; Reply: 94
Quoted from Lloyd


And of course, the final disclaimer is that "your mileage may vary".

There will always be some who need higher compliance and some who don't need as much. A basically healthy person might "get away with" little to no compliance for a very long time. Those in excellent health have far less to gain by using the diet.

Saying in any way, shape, or form that someone does not need a level of compliance is no better than saying someone must follow a level of compliance.

Thank you - well said.

There are those of us who follow the highest level of compliancy because we love being free from chronic conditions that we have struggled with for a lifetime.  It has nothing to to with conscience.  ;)
Posted by: BluesSinger, Sunday, December 1, 2013, 2:31am; Reply: 95
Quoted from Lloyd


And of course, the final disclaimer is that "your mileage may vary".

There will always be some who need higher compliance and some who don't need as much. A basically healthy person might "get away with" little to no compliance for a very long time. Those in excellent health have far less to gain by using the diet.

Saying in any way, shape, or form that someone does not need a level of compliance is no better than saying someone must follow a level of compliance.


I don't know Lloyd.. if I am reading you right that people in excellent health have far less to gain by using the diet, I beg to differ.  Young people can get away with eating bad for years and then suddenly all those years of bad eating begin to appear in disease form.  I wish I had grown up with this way of eating and been as compliant as possible my entire life.  They I wouldn't be suffering and working so hard to heal at 55.  

I feel 'everyone' whether in excellent health of not have an immense amount to gain by following the diet for as long as they can and being as compliant as they can.
Posted by: ABJoe, Sunday, December 1, 2013, 4:47am; Reply: 96
Quoted from BluesSinger
... if I am reading you right that people in excellent health have far less to gain by using the diet, I beg to differ.  Young people can get away with eating bad for years and then suddenly all those years of bad eating begin to appear in disease form.

If someone is truly healthy, they will handle the avoid foods better than someone who is sick, traumatized, or severely stressed.  Once unhealthy, the diet needs to be far more avoid free than for a healthy person.  This is what is meant by "Your mileage may vary."
Posted by: BluesSinger, Sunday, December 1, 2013, 5:40am; Reply: 97
Quoted from ABJoe

If someone is truly healthy, they will handle the avoid foods better than someone who is sick, traumatized, or severely stressed.  Once unhealthy, the diet needs to be far more avoid free than for a healthy person.  This is what is meant by "Your mileage may vary."


this really shocks me as I thought that Avoids were dangerous and damaging no matter how healthy or unhealthy one was!   ??)
Posted by: Lola, Sunday, December 1, 2013, 6:03am; Reply: 98
I meet many very sick people, who are no way willing to compromise.

They much rather get a pill, then stop eating whatever is making them sick.

Posted by: Lloyd, Sunday, December 1, 2013, 1:40pm; Reply: 99
Quoted from BluesSinger


this really shocks me as I thought that Avoids were dangerous and damaging no matter how healthy or unhealthy one was!   ??)


The healthy tend to be better able to cope with the damages that avoids cause.

From a GTD standpoint, the design of the diet is more geared towards specific methylation and other effects that cumulatively create issues. Here too however, a healthy person is one who is better able to repair those effects, perhaps because their biological machinery is more efficient or perhaps for other reasons.

And to address your comments from another perspective:

No  matter how healthy someone is, excesses of "avoids" will ultimately lead to degradation of the system and reduced health. It's just back to the same thing from a different view. Some people can handle more excesses than others.  :)

Posted by: BluesSinger, Sunday, December 1, 2013, 3:58pm; Reply: 100
Quoted from Lloyd



And to address your comments from another perspective:

No  matter how healthy someone is, excesses of "avoids" will ultimately lead to degradation of the system and reduced health. It's just back to the same thing from a different view. Some people can handle more excesses than others.  :)



Before they crash into one or more disease processes some of which might be permanent.  I'd rather have been safe than sorry - but I wasn't.  I came  into my compliance late in the game.  I can only stay as true as possible now and hope for continued system cleanup.    :-/
Posted by: ruthiegirl, Monday, December 2, 2013, 9:55pm; Reply: 101
The guidelines quoted from Dr D were for the express purpose of designing a study.

Individuals taking control of their own health can decide for themselves how compliant they want or need to be. I know that I certainly cannot have avoid foods as often as 4-5 times  a week; 4-5 times a YEAR is more like it, and I know I'll suffer when I do!

My kids, meanwhile, have a lot more wiggle room with their diets, because they started at such young ages, before too much damage could set in. If Hannah wants to have HFCS laden beverages once a week, I'm not going to stop her. I know she's eating well the rest of the time since I prepare her food.

She may well be able to continue that level of compliance her whole life. Meanwhile, I was getting sick from 2 ounces a day of pineapple juice with added vitamin C, since the C was most likely corn-derived.
Posted by: Lloyd, Monday, December 2, 2013, 10:56pm; Reply: 102
Quoted from ruthiegirl
The guidelines quoted from Dr D were for the express purpose of designing a study.


To take it one step further, the study was theoretically designed to show improvements in health over a pre-specified period of time.

Someone who is starting the diet can look at those proposed guidelines to get an idea of just what the commitment is to expect some kind of return for the effort. Naturally, individual results will vary, but it does suggest that higher levels of compliance result in much faster improvement than lower levels (which may not result in improvement at all).

Once someone is on the diet they should have an idea whether it is working for them and if they may want to adjust their own compliance levels.

However, for someone starting the diet, it is important to know that in general a higher level of compliance will see much faster results.

Don't disregard the information just because its a "study design".

Posted by: san j, Monday, December 9, 2013, 5:09am; Reply: 103
Quoted from Lloyd
(1)There will always be some who need higher compliance and some who don't need as much. (2) A basically healthy person might "get away with" little to no compliance for a very long time. (3)Those in excellent health have far less to gain by using the diet.

(4)Saying in any way, shape, or form that someone does not need a level of compliance is no better than saying someone must follow a level of compliance.

Hi, Lloyd.
I agree with (1) - Bingo! - and said as much.
As for (2), the same could be said for someone in less-than-perfect health who doesn't have as strong a tracking/monitoring temperament as someone else. I'm saying that we have to satisfy our own comfort/happiness zone, too.
(3): Of the many millions who've bought Dr. D'Adamo's books, we don't know what percent are in basically good health, but I'd venture to guess it's fairly high. What one calls "basically good", however, might differ, but I didn't see Eat Right 4 Your Type, the huge bestseller, marketed in 1996-97 as a treatment plan for serious illnesses. Many were attracted to it, as was I, precisely to tweak, understand, and maintain excellent health.
(4) I don't understand the statement, let alone know anyone who is saying that.  ??)
People do what they feel comfortable doing. And that's a Good Thing, in my opinion - another Individuality point.
Personal comfort is, in fact, part of health.   ;)
I think Dr. D'Adamo was nodding to that when he wrote (and I quoted him, but you left that out of your quote of me):
Quoted from Dr. D'Adamo
I'm not a big fan of slapping kilometer markers on what constitutes doing the diet.  What works for you constitutes 'doing the diet'.

I agree with him.  :)
Posted by: Lloyd, Monday, December 9, 2013, 1:36pm; Reply: 104
Quoted from san j

Hi, Lloyd.
I agree with (1) - Bingo! - and said as much.


Good, because that is the point of everything said.

If you don't follow or agree with whatever else was said then we will just have to remain in disagreement.

When Dr. says that whatever works is following the diet (as a crude paraphrase) it also implies that they should be doing enough to make the diet work. One could, by your definition, feel good about having read parts of the book and feel that doing one or two small parts of it is doing the diet, even if it is not working. I know firsthand that that does not work from my own diet experience.

You chose to comment only one part of the text, following is a later quote from this thread which explains that line of thinking better:

Quoted Text
To take it one step further, the study was theoretically designed to show improvements in health over a pre-specified period of time.

Someone who is starting the diet can look at those proposed guidelines to get an idea of just what the commitment is to expect some kind of return for the effort. Naturally, individual results will vary, but it does suggest that higher levels of compliance result in much faster improvement than lower levels (which may not result in improvement at all).

Once someone is on the diet they should have an idea whether it is working for them and if they may want to adjust their own compliance levels.

However, for someone starting the diet, it is important to know that in general a higher level of compliance will see much faster results.




Posted by: san j, Tuesday, December 10, 2013, 12:46am; Reply: 105
Not everyone is looking for "results" or, let's say, not everyone agrees what "results" are.
Someone may be seeking a diet that can rid him of lifelong postnasal drip or diverticular symptoms, and the BTD may help him achieve that. That's a result.
Someone looking for a diet that will cure cancer, rabies, a broken arm, or muscular dystrophy may be seeking results he can't achieve. However, the diet may be helping to prevent things he'll never know he won't have.  :) In which case, again, he cannot cite "results".

The sentence you put in bold type:
"...for someone starting the diet, it is important to know that in general a higher level of compliance will see much faster results" was not chosen by me for the plain reason that it doesn't relate to my point: viz., that some of us started this diet in excellent health and were not looking for "much faster results" when we became supporters of this work. I would venture to guess that most people sit down to a meal without thinking "results".

Lloyd: Perhaps what you're saying is that people on a result-quest via a diet are likely to be more compliance-minded than others, and that certainly stands to reason. Their expectations are exact and high, and their willingness to place this work at the center of their daily consciousness is likewise. On the other hand, folks simply in the market for guidelines and who find Peter D'Adamo's work compelling and interesting and helpful in maintaining good health are less likely to be so.

IMO, among the many millions who use the BTD, there's much greater variance in compliance and the need therefor than there is on the Forum. Periodically I remind the community of that, and it meets with resistance. For my part, I value diversity on this matter and would like visitors to feel free to participate here without necessarily considering themselves candidates for the sort of controlled study Dr. D'Adamo was explaining in the material quoted.
Posted by: Lloyd, Tuesday, December 10, 2013, 2:21am; Reply: 106
Quoted from san j

Lloyd: Perhaps what you're saying is that people on a result-quest via a diet are likely to be more compliance-minded than others, and that certainly stands to reason. Their expectations are exact and high, and their willingness to place this work at the center of their daily consciousness is likewise. On the other hand, folks simply in the market for guidelines and who find Peter D'Adamo's work compelling and interesting and helpful in maintaining good health are less likely to be so.


I frankly don't know anyone who changed diet unless they are looking for something (this ignores things like changing a diet to save money, or because Italian food is really cool now, of course).

Whether it is to lose weight, be healthier or solve one or more specific issues there is going to be some accommodation (compliance) from their previous standard. If the general goal is to "eat healthier" (in the market for guidelines) then it's still the same accommodation - but it also means they may choose to be more lax in the accommodation (compliance).

Changing the semantics to make one group somehow be able to do better without trying harder just because they are into it for "compelling or interesting reasons" does not change the fact that they have to make some accommodation to what they previously did. That is a compliance level, which as we know, tends to work better or faster when certain "minimum accommodation levels" are reached.

Beyond that, anyone can do as they please. I think the most important thing is that the diet works best when enough accommodation is made - no matter what the reason for doing the diet. Choosing how much accommodation you actually want to make is a separate issue from how much or what type accommodation it actually takes to achieve a result.

"...for someone starting the diet, it is important to know that in general a higher level of compliance will see much faster results"

You may not have been looking for "much faster results" but you still made accommodations. And if you aren't looking for results it would be silly to not eat something you would like to eat just because the diet says to avoid it, correct?

Repeating myself for the last time - anyone can do what they please.

Posted by: yaeli, Tuesday, December 10, 2013, 4:44am; Reply: 107
One consideration which too often goes unperceived, is that when one starts a journey one chooses to go, one is simply unable see the tremendous benefits that are waiting for him. Ignoring this tempts people to act upon comfort and laziness, and abandon treasures they kind of dream of. The ultimate thing one can rely on is intuition, gut feelings, keeping attentive, keeping an open eye, open ear, open heart.
Posted by: yvonneb, Tuesday, December 10, 2013, 7:29pm; Reply: 108
Firstly...I'm doing SWAMI.

As my health changes, so do my needs and some foods keep changing from Avoid to Neutral or from Neutral to Beneficial.

My non-compliance comes from forgetting which list I'm currently on, so I am not getting into a sweat, but this threat makes me revisit my SWAMI presto to check on some things  ;)

Might be an idea to keep a list handy... ;D
Posted by: Spring, Wednesday, December 11, 2013, 1:14am; Reply: 109
Quoted from Dr. D

1. 'Deal Breaker':  this category cannot be used in the study. Examples would be type A's on pork or some other red meat avoid or type O's on wheat. These people cannot be said to be doing the BTD at all; neither in action or spirit.

Yikes! I should think not!

Print page generated: Monday, September 22, 2014, 6:19pm