I feel certain that EVERY diet works for somebody, but NO diet works for everybody;  and, that NO “Way-of-Eating”, “Diet”, “Non-Diet” or “LifeStyle” will provide MAGICAL CHANGE.

Here in Maintenance, my own diet/lifestyle is to experiment with a variety of different ways-of-eating-or-not-eating to see what works best for me personally… meaning, eating-or-not-eating in a way that I can enjoy my life, ….or at the very least, will allow me to tolerate my life …. while keeping my weight within a BMI range of “normal”.

I sometimes experiment with Low Carb, Paleo, or Ketogenic Diets, (as well as many others), but, up to this current date, I’ve not yet found any one of them to be an ongoing, sustainable way-of-eating for me personally.   However, while no diet is "magic", every diet seems to work some of the time, for some people.

The author of the article below is a Calories-In/Calories-Out, Fitness guy, an anti-low-carb, big-time-advocate of: Exercise/Physical Activity, while eating a Moderate, “Balanced Diet” of "Primarily Whole Foods".  Up through this present date, I’ve found counting calories with minimal exercise to be the most sustainable way for me to personally deal with losing weight and maintaining weight-loss, and I haven’t found James Fell’s specific diet and exercise recommendations to be workable for ME.

The article below says some interesting things about Dieting as a Religion, in an amusing way.  Although the author frames this issue from an anti-Low-Carb point of view, there are many things about the author's  own "way-of-thinking, or personal truths"  that I disagree with.  One thing that I’ve consistently observed is that Diet Zealotry is NOT limited to any one specific type of diet, but, instead, seems to exist within EVERY type of “Diet, Non-Diet, Way-of-Eating, or Lifestyle Change”.

LOW CARB & PALEO DIETING ZEALOTRY
                               by James Fell  @ Bodyforwife.com

Some believe Dr. Atkins was the greatest thing since sliced bacon. I am not one such idolizer.

Perhaps Gary Taubes will issue a fatwa, proclaiming me an infidel and demanding I be publicly pulverized with frozen steaks for daring to question the validity of the Lord Atkins bestowed prophecy.

Or maybe I’ll just get some hate mail.

Some low carbers love to defend their faith, and there are many interesting parallels between low carb and paleo dieting and religious zealotry, but first I wish to provide a brief explanation about my opinions on religion.

I am friends with and related to some devout religious people. In my experience, people of faith are often the kindest, most giving and decent folk I’ve met. I think much ...

I believe that this is not a one-size-fits-all world, and that every diet doesn't work for everyone, but every diet works for someone.

That said, I'll admit that I have my own personal biases and prejudices. I've written about them here and there in various articles here on DietHobby, and you can find them in the Archives section. 

Personally, I'm strongly opposed to the concept of Intuive Eating as a means to lose weight or maintain weight-loss. I've read many books about it. I've attended seminars on it.I've experimented with it. I've spent a great deal of time observing others who try it out.

My conclusion is that ... for anyone who has a long-term problem with obesity ...Intiutive Eating as a weight-loss or maintenance of weight-loss diet is simply "wishful thinking", and it almost never works.

I am a great believer in using a computer software program to daily track one's food intake ... forever. I've written a very great deal about that, and although my own personal favorite is DietPower, any such software program that you can learn and use will work well. 

I've experimented quite a lot with various low-carb diets, and with alternate day eating, and I frequently incorporate elements of those plans into my own eating plans. 

One Diet that I am quite taken with, is the No S Diet.  While I do not follow it myself, I have incorporated many of its concepts. It is a simple plan, and its theme of moderation is a sound one.  Although it is ineffective for many, as a stand-alone-diet, It can be a behavior base for many other diets, and with a few modifications can become an excellent plan for almost everyone. 

The book, The No S Diet is simple, well-written, and quite excellent. I've read it many times, and have purchased copies for friends. You can find an extensive review of it here.

Here is a recent testimonial from a long-time user of the No "S" diet.  

I'm nervous and excited about finally writing this because I love No S so much and want to sing it to the high heavens, and not after just the honeymoon phase of success. At age 58 and two years, this marriage is going to last! 

I can’t be a source of hope for anyone who is trying to get into the low end of his/her BMI range, but there are others who can. However, No S HAS SAVED MY EATING LIFE AND MY SANITY AROUND FOOD. In 2 years, I’ve gone from 185 to 161 (13% of my weight) and am still losing. Not the huge drops some have, but I had some setbacks, and yet I’m stronger now than ever...

Good food,
Bad food,
and
Subversive
Food Combining.

By Michelle
May 9, 2016 @  fatnutritionist.com 

The idea that there are universally “good” foods and “bad” foods is an old one, ancient even. There are traces of it in Leviticus, though the way the concept was used then is perhaps different from how we use it now.

Given what we know about clinical nutrition, that sometimes a startling mix of foods can be used to help people in certain disease states — more ice cream and gravy for someone undergoing cancer treatment, less protein and fewer vegetables for someone with kidney disease — and since dividing your risk among a wide variety of different foods can help hedge your health bets, the idea that there are universally good or bad foods doesn’t hold up well under scrutiny.

I take it more as evidence of black-or-white thinking — a hallmark of diet culture — which is almost always false.

The words themselves, good and bad, imply a moral dynamic to food that I just don’t think belongs there. Sure, food can be literally bad if it’s spoiled or contaminated with botulism. But even if you eat this kind of bad food and get sick from it, we don’t generally assume that you now have become a bad and contaminated person.

We just think you’re sick, send soup, and wait for you to get better.

Getting food poisoning doesn’t stain your character or reputation, even if you are literally contaminated by a bacteria that a food has transmitted to you. There’s an implicit understanding that the body is self-cleansing and will get the pollution, the infection, out of its system over time. And though you might be averse to eating a food that made you sick in the future, due to stomach-churning associations, you probably won’t assume it is a universally bad food eaten only by bad people.

We do, however, make this assumption about moral contamination, that (morally) bad foods
(which are coincidentally usually high-calorie, presumably “fattening” foods) are eaten
by bad, gluttonous, ignorant, irresponsible, and usually low-class (and coincidentally fat) people.

And we try to avoid those foods, we claim, out of concern for our health.
But, in practice, it appears to be much more about avoiding that moral stain.

Even if there are foods that, in isolation, don’t produce ideal health outcomes for most people, does the idea that these foods are uniquely bad while other foods are uniquely good actua...