You can't really base a valid scientific opinion on one man's reaction and self-experimentation, can you?

The NYTimes column doesn't endorse or even directly address the diet claims of Roberts, so you can hardly say that they've been "duped." They were talking about Roberts' approach of self-experimentation, and nothing else. Their own site gives both a good and bad view of Roberts, response to "is he a serious scientist" with both yes and no.

In your rush to proclaim the news that fructose and canola oil are bad, you've chosen the wrong springboard!

I haven't heard about this diet anywhere else but here but I think it's a supremely bad idea. I would hope that people would realize the consuming sugar water for weight loss is idiotic. Corn syrup is the worst sweetener you can use and it made by going unnatural things to corn. Fructose is similar and is not a good idea.

Canola oil I think is a good product. I use it. Cold pressed canola oil by Spectrum Naturals is fine, in my experience. I didn't notice any anti-canola oil sentiments here but maybe I missed it or it was elsewhere.

What is the worst oil is partially hydrogenated oil.

Here's a site that touches on these things by Consumer Avenger

I agree that one test case/subject is certainly not enough to draw any conclusions, but I can't help but be fascinated by this. How different would this be than sipping some soda a few times a day? I realize that most folks don't normally drink soda this way. I also realize that most folks consume way too much sugar. Just making a point. IMO, "highly dangerous" activities include biking w/o a helmet, smoking, etc., but not moderate consumption sugar. Then again, nothing like scare tactics to sell a few books/newspapers, etc.

I think that you misunderstood the article-- here it is quoted: "After a great deal of experimenting, he discovered two agents capable of tricking the set-point system. A few tablespoons of unflavored oil (he used canola or extra light olive oil), swallowed a few times a day between mealtimes, gave his body some calories but didn't trip the signal to stock up on more. Several ounces of sugar water (he used granulated fructose, which has a lower glycemic index than table sugar) produced the same effect." ( http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/11/magazine/11FREAK.html?pagewanted=2 )

So basically, the point was to ingest some calories that were essentially "unflavored"-- and extra light olive oil, which is not sugar, works just fine. And a little more research ( http://www.freakonomics.com/pdf/whatmakesfoodfattening.pdf ) into the original article reveals that the correct amount is about 140 kcals worth, which, as the bottle of olive oil in my cabinet reveals, is about 1 1/6 tablespoons of the stuff. Hardly a huge amount.

I'm not saying that this actually works -- I have no idea. But you're not responding to it with data, but rather with dogma - it CAN'T work, you say, because it contradicts everything that you believe in. If his triglycerides and LDL are high, then obviously that's a huge problem with his diet - but you don't know that. You're assuming it, because if they're not, and he's healthy, then your ideas must be flawed -- and that's not possible, is it?

Ms. Bennett, I have no doubt you mean well, but your post is so riddled with logical errors I am tempted to use it in my philosophy classes as a model of poor argumentation.

First off, it's clear that when you wrote your post you had not read any of Roberts' material that Levitt and Dubner link to, for if you had, you'd see how most of your criticisms are either baseless or just wrong.

(1) You call this a "fructose-laden diet." Roberts published results show that the fructose concentration he finally settled on was 90ml per day (later dropping to a maintenance dose of 45ml per day), which amounts to 6 tablespoons per day of fructose, about 360 calories total. Now if this is ALL Roberts encouraged people to eat, this would indeed be a "fructose-laden diet," but what he says is this: "The fructose-water results suggest that ingestion of a small fraction of one's daily calorie intake this way may substantially reduce the set point." By what logic does consuming a "a small fraction of one's daily calorie intake" via fructose entail that the resulting diet is "fructose-laden"? (Roberts' quote can be found at http://www.freakonomics.com/pdf/whatmakesfoodfattening.pdf. It appears on page 48).

(2) You cite the testimony of three experts, two of whose credentials are hard to trace. No matter - I'll focus wholly they say (or at least, what you attribute to them).

Jonny Bowden: "...Bowden cautions that looking at weight loss as a measure of a person's health is deceptive and misleading." -- Bravo to Mr. Bowden - he's absolutely right. Alas, this comment is totally irrelevant, since nowhere does Roberts say that weight loss = health. (Again, taking the time to read his work would have helped everyone here...)

Jonny Bowden: (a direct quote) "Every person who has ever tried to lose weight -- not to mention every clinician in the world -- know that sweetness triggers the desire for more food," he says. "After all, ever try to eat just one chocolate chip cookie?" -- Roberts clearly would agree that it's very hard to eat just one chocolate chip cookie; but he'd disagree that what makes it hard is the cookie's sweetness. Rather, he suggests it is because of the flavor-calorie association that is made (intense flavor coupled with fast digestion). As to Mr. Bowden's claim that "every clinician in the world - knows that sweetness triggers the desire for more food," here are a few of the studies (all cited by Roberts, all in refereed journals) that question the sugar-obesity linkage.

-- Ramirez, I. (1987c). When does sucrose increase appetite and adiposity? Appetite, 9, 1-19.
-- Gibson, S. A. (1996). Are high-fat, high-sugar foods and diets conducive to obesity? International Journal of Food Science and Nutrition, 47, 405-415.
-- Kratz, C. M., & Levitsky, D. A. (1979). Dietary obesity: Differential effects with self-selection and composite diet feeding techniques. Physiology & Behavior, 22, 245-249.
-- Sclafani, A. (1987). Carbohydrate-induced hyperphagia and obesity in the rat: Effects of saccharide type, form, and taste. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 11, 155-162.

Russ Bianchi, however, gets the prize for making the most outlandish comments of all. I actually have a colleague who participated in the Bataan Death march, and aside from being both a needlessly inflammatory and tasteless reference, it likewise tells us nothing about Roberts' views. Mr. Bianchi adds "I predict that, like runner Jim Fixx, who ate lots of fructose-containing sports bars, Roberts will drop dead of an unexplained heart attack." -- Now Mr. Fixx also had been a two pack a day smoker, had a family history of heart disease, ate poorly, and may have over-exercised. And fructose killed him?

Finally, you quote Russ again, saying: "Rather, Bianchi recommends that people trying to lose weight eat a calorie-reduced diet that includes dark green leafy vegetables, fresh fruit, healthy oils such as olive oil, fish, poultry, eggs, and limited whole grains, as well as exercising, not smoking, limiting or restricting alcohol, and eating no processed junk food and drinks, particularly those containing fructose or high fructose corn syrup." Based on my reading of his published and unpublished research on weight loss, there is NOTHING here that Roberts would disagree with. He goes to great lengths to explain how processed, junk food stimulates the flavor-calorie connection, and is likely a significant cause of weight gain. He does NOT recommend eating food with fructose or high fructose corn syrup, but only a small amount of fructose (or sucrose) in a tasteless form. It is again clear that your "research" into Roberts' work consisted of reading Dubner and Levitt's column, period. Do you think that's fair?

Dr. Havel (a UC Davis researcher) is quoted as saying that "...long-term consumption of diets high in fructose could lead to an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease." Does consuming 6 tablespoons of fructose a day count as a diet "high in fructose"? Perhaps, but unless we know, the value of this judgment is at best unclear. More to the point, most of Dr. Havel's work appears to be irrelevant to assessing Roberts' claims. Roberts emphasizes that unless the fructose is given in a tasteless form, between (never during) meals, the weight loss effect he cites won't occur. In none of Dr. Havel's research that I have found was the fructose given in this way.

There is no doubt that Roberts's views are controversial - but so have numerous other significant, paradigm-shifting advances in science. (Being controversial doesn't mean he's right - lots of controversial claims end up being dead wrong. But merely being controversial isn't enough to reject his view). As John Stuart Mill observed, great ideas often go through three phases: ridicule, discussion, and acceptance. Your post has a fair amount of ridicule: invoking the Batann Death march, suggesting he has a fructose-drinking "habit," even describing Dr. Roberts as an "obese" professor (in fact, at 5' 11" and 200 lbs., his BMI at the time he was 27.9, making him overweight rather than obese. I make this point to suggest that your use of "obese" wasn't intended to be clinical, just incendiary. )

Let me be clear - nothing I have said constitutes an endorsement of Dr. Roberts' research. My goal is merely to show how the arguments advanced by Ms. Bennett show us absolutely nothing about Dr. Roberts' viws. If this is indicative of what to expect in your upcoming book, I'll pass.

But the point is he's not saying to consume a diet high in fructose. Hello? The average american drinks 2 cans of pop a day. Put down the pop, and instead take in 2 similar doses of sucrose, but at particular times and without any flavor, and you might lose weight. I don't see the devil in that, particularly when you have people who are profoundly overweight.

I am a nurse, and a clinical researcher, and am working on my master's in public health. I'm no idiot. I read both of his full articles, and I'm interested enough to try 2 tablespoons a day of light olive oil just out of curiosity. If nothing else, it'll improve my lipid profile. I'll tell you in 2 or 3 weeks if it works.

I find Philosophydoc's commentary a sane and sober discussion on Robert's ideas. Ms. Bennett's knee-jerk reactions are almost comical in their predictability. What I am really curious to find is more constructive discussion on Robert's ideas and conclusions. For example:
1. Clarification of amounts between meals, timing, etc. Chug down a glass or sip over a period of time.
2. How about a framework for others to self-experiment following Robert's lead?
3. Anyone else experimenting with Robert's approach? Any results?

I've lost a half pound in 4 days. Hard to say if that means anything. This is my approach...
Eat a decent breakfast, wolf down 2 or 3 cups of coffee by 9am. Around 10:30 I take 2/3 of a tablespoon of light olive oil. Then I don't consume anything but water until at least noon when I eat lunch. And no chewing gum! Repeat the same process between lunch and dinner. You are supposed to wait at least an hour between food/flavor and oil.

I expected some stomach upset with the oil, but I haven't had a problem. I've also gotten over the gag factor of swallowing it. I think for me, just making myself stop snacking between meals would make me lose weight. The 100 calories of oil probably stave off the serious munchies between meals so I'm not feeling deprived at all. So far so good, I'll weigh in again later this week.

Connie - you are selling a book that directly disputes Seth Roberts research. Therefor, everything you say above is extremely suspect. Your whole argument is biased. I'm going to try Roberts' diet - using canola oil. How much harm can four tablespoons of canola oil per day do? I doubt very much at all. If it does me harm, I'll be the first to say 'you told me so.'

Bravo to the Philosophydoc for so clearly and succintly identifying the logic problems and outlandish comments in Ms. Bennett's article. I couldn't say it any better and I won't try.

I would have been interested to read a well-reasoned, fact-based response to the regime that Mr. Roberts developed. Unfortunately, vitriolic rants such as the above do not inform; they serve only to turn off readers and dash the writer's credibility.

I am so glad that the ridiculous scathing of the Freakonomics article examined above was not left unchecked by the reasonable and intelligent folks who've commented. The agenda of this blog is quite shamefully political and moronic in its criticisms.

While I commend you on adding your own research, your comments throw in quite a bit of carelessness that makes your comments look like emotional arguments and less than cooly delivered, tight research commentary.

There's a distinct difference between High Fructose Corn Syrup and Fructose. HFCS should be called high glucose corn syrup because that's the largest ingredient. You add above, "We found that consuming fructose-sweetened beverages with meals resulted in decreased secretion of insulin and reduced production of leptin, and both of these hormones help regulate food intake and body weight," Dr. Havel told me." Sounds exactly like what glucose would do. It's 100 on the Glycemic index, causes an onslaught of insulin to be produced, which, afer storing the excess as fat, then crashes sugar levels increases hunger, increases fat. You're mixing and matching which is what people do to make a point when making the point is more important than delivering just the facts.

I've lost 30 lbs already on the Shangi-La and am having my LDL's checked as we speak. You also say nothing about whether or not exercising helps mitigate the cholesterol increase.

I would want my test results to do the talking for me.

Look, if you think Seth is leaving out some facts and that you're right, just rely on facts and don't add the garbage that confuses the issue.

Coca Cola has 39 grams of sugar. That's 39 grams of HFCS, meaning at least 19 grams of glucose. Why not mention how that compares not to what Seth took his first day, but what he stabalized at. Also, if Seth is only eating whole foods outside of that, how does that compare to the average american diet for fructose intake. How about adding info on how many transfats the average american eats because those also raise LDL's horribly. Paint a broader picture and that might really motivate people to adjust their entire diet. After all, isn't that what you're trying to do, get people to eat in a manner that would be more healthy?

So don't use Fructose - USE XYLOTOL - a "sugar" made from birch trees & corn cobs. It has a very low glycemic index to the point of being able to be used by diabetics. It is actually healthy for you by reducing mouth bacteria and is being used in toothpaste & gum.

Does any one know about Estee sweetener or similar fructose products that are supposed to be natural? These products are supposed to be a "natural" fructose, but are also recommended for diabetics. I think that finding a non-flavored fructose that is deemed "healthful" would be key to making sure the fructose element of the Shangri-La plan is not dangerous to a user's health? I myself cannot consume 6 TBLSP of sugar a day, even if it;s in water. that just sounds unhealthy.

Apparently the general concept may help people lose weight. Supposedly it would be safer to use grade B pure maple syrup (because it causes you to be more alkaline) for the fructose and extra virgin olive oil for the canola oil. I would like to hear some expert opinions on the safeness/dangers of this.

Addition to blog entry #15

Just received my lipid panel results back. Want to know just how incorrect you are. I was doing close to 8 tablespoons a day in about 2 liters of water. Here you go:

Cholesterol 191 (less than 200 is healthy)
Triglycerides 46 (less than 150 is healthy!)
VLDL Cholestersol 9 (between 5-35 healthy)
LDL Cholesterol 113 (less than 130 is healthy)
HDL Cholesterol 69 (greater than 40 is healthy)
Cholesterol/HDL Ratio 2.8 (less than 4.4 is healthy)

Any comments?

I lost 10 lbs. on the fructose water diet. Sugar water works almost as well. Have checked it with a nutritionist, have had my blood work checked (my triglycerides are fine) and find that the fructose water, having no flavor, has a different (perceived) effect on my appetite and blood sugar than eating "real food" with sugar and flavor. I am a person who never eats sugar and was highly skeptical that this diet would work... but it does. It's pretyt obvious that the amount of fructose I eat each day isn't enough to cause the dire "hell on earth" promised here. (20 tsps or 300 calories' worth) I am highly skeptical of Ms. Bennett, or anyone whose opinions alternate with "As I say in my book..." and whose writing is so vitriolic and emotional. Why not try it, talk to those who have, look at what data there is? or don't... the rest of us will lose weight and get on with our lives.

I've had similar positive effects in my life, I've lost 47 pounds in five months. It was well worth experimenting.

One thing I'd note is that this diet is extremely easy and cheap.

You can use either sugar (which you probably have around the house) or olive oil (extra light) -- or you can buy five dollars worth of it at SAMS or COSTCO, which will last you five or six months.

In five months I've lost 47 pounds (as of this morning) on the method (it is more of a method than a diet).

Try one disciplined week of the diet. Drink three tablespoons of sugar in a cup of water every morning at ten o'clock (with no other food or flavors, including mints, diet drinks or chewing tobacco) from 9:00 to 11:00 and two tablespoons of olive oil at 2:30 (with the same no food or flavors from 1:00 to 4:00) and see what has happened after a week.

If it works, keep it up for another week.

It isn't as if it costs much money, takes much time or is that difficult to try.

Simple enough to try it and see what happens.

I just find the whole article funny, considering that there are four mentions of Atkins in ads on the page. How ironic is it that Atkins has been called "crazy", "bad nutrition" and downright "deadly". Now, someone making money from the Atkins lifestyle is using the same arguments against a new idea!

"Rather, Bianchi recommends that people trying to lose weight eat a calorie-reduced diet that includes dark green leafy vegetables, fresh fruit, healthy oils such as olive oil, fish, poultry, eggs, and limited whole grains . . . BLAH BLAH BLAH . . ."

WHY didn't I think of that??? Perhaps Mr. Bianchi would recommend the way for cocaine addicts to cure their addiction is to stop using cocaine? 100% effective, but here's my response: No. Can. Do.

These platitudes by weight loss "experts" (i.e., people who've never had a weight problem in their lives) are so tiresome. I have no idea whether the Shangri La diet works. But when are the diet experts going to figure out that people are either physiologically, chemically, emotionally, or for some other reason or perceived "character flaw" fundamentally unable to follow their simplistic "just eat healthy" advice. In fact their advice is counter-productive, because it leads to nothing but guilt and feelings of inadequacy -- both emotions likely to trigger binge eating.

Since you didn't attack the tablespoon of extra-light olive oil option, are we to assume that it's harmless?

This article misses the point, and totally fixates on the sugar angle, and how fructose is bad. First off, you don't need to use fructose - it can be table sugar. But, the original idea was to use Olive Oil. The sugar was simply an optional substitute. The diet is all about consuming "tasteless" calories in the form of olive oil twice a day (with an optional replacement of sugar water), in the middle of a two hour period where otherwise you drink only water. This tricks your body into not making a connection to the calorie intake with the taste of food. Which fuels the rest of the diet's theory.

This article has a quote about "sweetness triggers the desire for more food". Hmm, they must have missed the part how it was found that the sweetness of sugar in water alone doesn't do that. It's the complex flavor in sweetened foods that does. Don't tell me that drinking a tablespoon of sugar water quickly rinsed down is going to cause cravings like the taste of a cookie would (along with the intense aftertaste, etc.)

Regardless, stop fixating on the sugar thing for a second. Let's talk Olive Oil. It is a well known fact that Olive Oil is good for you. It's mono-saturated fat is easy for the body to break down. And other goodies in the green stuff have been shown to increase elasticity in arteries, which can reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke. It's a staple of the "Mediterranean Diet". In the Mediterranean food pyramid, it recommends 2 tablespoons of Olive Oil daily (normally used in food). People should replace as much butter (saturated fat), and even worse, margarine (trans fat) with Olive Oil as you can.

Note that "Extra Virgin Olive Oil" is the only "good for you" Olive Oil. The ones labeled "Extra Light" as suggested to use by the diet is actually processed and refined 'left-overs' zapped of their extra healthy qualities. The reason it is suggested for the diet is simply because it is nearly tasteless. Extra Virgin Olive Oil on the other hand is what they call "first pressed" (the oils from the first pressing of the olive.) However it's fully flavored, which kinda messes up this diet concept.

But wait! Just hold your nose when you take Extra Virgin Olive Oil, chase it with water, and you'll never taste a thing.

Sugar water? Sure. Granulated Fructose? Why not... if you just can't handle the Olive Oil. Hey, just skip that fructose corn-syrup enriched Cola you were already gonna drink!

Anyone tried using fish oil in capsules
as the tasteless cals? The oil has a strong flavor,
but the capsules are tasteless.

Cheers, Channa

As far as i can see, not having read the book, one is supposed to consume 1 tablespoon of (regular) suger either dissolved in water or just on its own, or 1 tablespoon of extra-light olive oil in the middle of that 2 hour drink-only-water period. I see nothing wrong with consuming either of those, neither of them being particularly unhealthy in the quantities suggested. There was no mention of Fructose or Canola oil. I got my information from the URL above, apologies if the book says otherwise, though i still see nothing wrong with trying this "diet" with ELOO or dissolved suger in water.

What a wonderful critique of Roberts' book! It's almost as though you read a single NY Times article and extrapolated the whole theory from that alone!

I highly recommend you READ Roberts' book prior to critiquing it. That's just poor journalism and it does you no favors.

While Roberts suggests that fructose can achieve the weight loss he writes about, he actually recommends olive oil or table sugar. Both of these foods are fairly healthy (if high calorie, but that's the point of using them).

Mind you, I don't profess to know if this "diet" works or not, but all it intends to do is lower your craving for food. Once you've done that, eating healthily and exercising is under your own control. A laudable goal that supports any dieter.

Well, I've lost going on 53 pounds with the diet, I'd say it works. The olive oil wasn't bad, I'm using grapeseed oil now, which is great.

Remember, it is only 240 calories. That's a granola bar, the amount of calories in a salad's dressing. a candy bar or a couple of cokes or a large glass of orange juice. For those losing less weight, it is more like 120 calories.

You can visit my blog and

read what I eat. It is easy to eat a healthy total balance. My overall diet is a little light on fats, actually, but I do ok.

What is it about nutritional medicine that so loans itself to dogma on one end of the spectrum and kookery on the other? Is it complexity? The difficulty of devising proper scientific studies? Well, whatever. Do you ever get the feeling when people say "there is no easy answer" to a problem, that they desperately don't want there to be one and would, in fact, argue forcefully against one if it turned up?

I concede the general kookiness of this diet concept, but I fail to see the harm. Especially with the olive oil option. My intuition tells me that, if it works, Roberts probably hasn't correctly identified the reasons why (he's a psychologist, after all). But if it works and it does no harm, who cares why?

I've tried it for several days and I certainly think my appetite is lessened, but I'm a sucker for placebo effect.

I wonder what Dr. (Mr.? Mrs.?) Bennet would say to a person who, for the past 17 years, has adhered to a calorie and fat (and more recently sugar)- restricted diet of whole grains, fruits, vegetables and lean meats, and who has exercised intensively 5+ days a week, but who has never received the promised "metabolism boost" or decreased appetite, and who now is so hungry every evening at bedtime that she feels she will be unable to sleep if she doesn't eat something? I am all for self-discipline and responsible living, but I would like to level the playing field so that my body is not fighting my attempts at weight loss and weight management, tooth-and-nail, every inch of the way. For all its potential nutritional deficiencies, hunger management is the one thing this "diet" can offer me that the "eat right and excercise" school cannot.

I would guess by the lack of comments from Ms. Bennet that she cannot back some of her claims against this diet and that after further investigation, she has decided to let her initial ideas go. It is unfortuhnate becuase I think a debate on the real merits or lack of merits on the diet in question would be valuable.

Help! It is not working and I was so hopeful. After 6 days of adding 21/2 Tablespoons to my diet I have gained 2 lbs. Last night my appetite had not diminished a bit. I am so discouraged and I was so hopeful. Can I affect my set point. I would be grateful for and encouragement or experience that can convince me to continue. Thank You.

Darlene, are you using the sugar water or the olive oil? I'm guessing the latter works better; fat is the only thing that affects satiety when fed directly into the intestine. It's a little hard to chug the stuff until you get the hang of it, and you get a bad case of Greasy Lips, but it does seem to be working for me.

S. Weasel,
Thanks for your reply. I have been using the designated olive oil. Last night I switched to sugar water. I have decided to try one more week. Have you been successful and How long did it take to acquire a lower appetite? Thanks again.

My appetite diminished within a couple of days of taking the olive oil twice a day. It's been a little less than a week and I've lost (as near as I can tell with the usual daily fluctuations) a little more than a pound.

However, it's worth noting that I'm in the middle of a bunch of painful and intrusive dental work, so I didn't need much help losing interest in food. And I *think* this is a real effect I'm seeing, but I'm awfully suggestible.

Good luck to you.

Just read the story of someone who went two weeks before they started to feel any effect from the diet.

But they were close to the correct BMI. What they wanted was to crave food less. Interesting.

Well, I've tried the sugar water for 5-6 days now and am sorry to report that I have experienced no change in appetite, and whatever weight I might have lost was likely due to my usual regime (see post #31). Stephen M's comments (#37) are encouraging, though, and I haven't tried the oil yet. I shudder to think, though, that in addition to not losing weight, I might also be putting on weight from the extra 300 calories per day of pure sugar (I haven't weighed myself - I don't own a scale. But my pants have not become any looser.) Maybe I'll try it another day or two; the thought of taking in 30g of pure fat per day sounds even worse, but I guess I'll try that before giving up altogether.

Why are we all so afraid of the old standy, eat less, excercise more? Eat more vegtables, eat less sweets? I tell you, these scientists or whatever they want to call themselves come out with these diets that make our bodies seem like f-ing mystery machines, and we start to think that all kinds of complicated things need to take place before they function properly. It's double-speak, plain and simple. And it works every time.

I dunno. Why do some people accuse others of being "afraid" of the old idea whenever they are presented with a new idea?

To anyone who's interested - as mixing and sipping the sugar water has become tedious, and I still can't quite take drinking straight oil, I tried mixing the oil with water. I know, the two don't really mix, but if you put the oil and a cup or so of water in a sealed container and shake it up, it stays "mixed" (like oil and vinegar salad dressing) long enough to get it down, without the gag reflex, without adding taste, and without having to sip it for 30 minutes like the sugar water. Others have probably thought of this as well; just wanted to share it in case anyone else might find it helpful.

I still haven't noticed any drastic effects, except for perhaps being merely hungry when I might otherwise be ravenous. For now I take this to mean that my set point is still several pounds above my weight, and is dropping only slowly. I have also noticed a new sudden, "overnight" weight gain (water, maybe?) on the weekends, when I take my usual 1 1/2-day hiatus from my weekly diet restrictions. I don't binge; I simply allow myself to be full and eat what I feel like eating. I wonder if anyone else has had a similar experience?

I have been on the Shangri-La Diet & it is working great. Before you become a critic you should try it yourself. I lost 4 lbs. in 2 days & have continued with a steady weight loss.

I normally eat anything & everything it's hard to stop me well this diet has stopped me. I am making much healthier choices. You think a diet that has you consuming 1-3 TBS a day is bad for your health? Before this diet I would eat breakfast, lunch, dinner & snack all day. I would consume ice cream with whipped cream, chocolate sauce, marshmallow on a daily basis! Now I eat breakfast, lunch & dinner & don't even want junk food anymore.

And you don't have to have sugar there is an oil option which the italians have consumed for years.

It has saved my life & made me much happier!

A book with science and healthy eating habits behind it is The Fat Fallacy, by neurophysiologist Will Clower. Look at the French. They aren't fat -- because they eat portions one-half to one-fifth the size of ours. I don't diet -- I just eat reasonble (non-American) portions of steak, oil-drenched vegetables, fish, chicken, and desert. Yes, desert. I eat ice cream every single day. But, it takes me almost a week to go through a pint. And I eat a square of chocolate if I don't have ice cream. A square. Maybe two. It takes me weeks to go through a Lindt chocolate bar. But, everything I eat is fine food; organic vegetables, grass-fed beef. Then again, if you don't eat like a beached whale, food is cheaper. Oh yeah, and I eat a bit of bread -- half a donut in the morning. Half. Because that's all I'm hungry for. And I excercise moderately. And I'm thin as a rail. Or thinner. Without ever, ever dieting.

Make that dessert. I guess the ice cream kills my spelling.

I actually bought the book. I read it. I did what it says. Spend the money. It's less than $12.00. I've lost 6 lbs in about 3 weeks, which I had not done in several years. As an addictions specialist I was intrigued with the idea that there is an appetite triggering mechanism that flies under our radar because it does not stimulate one of the 5 senses. I was aware of such processes which have the ability to trigger alcohol and cocaine use but not food. I have been taking 2 tablespoons of extra light olive oil in the afternoon with one hour of no flavored anything for one hour before and one hour after. No green tea, no toothpaste, no chewing gum. Water is permissible. I find that the two tablespoons of white sugar dissolved in hot water, as the book suggests, slows down my ingestion of the water. This keeps the pancreas from causing an insulin spike. For me not doing that made me tired and sometimes hungry after taking it. Now I take the sugar water before bedtime and it seems to eliminate the night junk binging I was doing. I've had good effect so far with using a combination of oil and sugar each day. As for justifying the 'dangerous' oil and sugar diet, this is only 360 calories. It's not laden anything. One regular soda has 120 calories. I'm only ingesting 90. I've never heard anyone suggest I was taking my life in my hands by using two tablespoons of olive oil if I was putting them on a salad. It seemed silly to me. I will continue this regimen for a couple of months and get my blood tested. I'll let you know how it comes out.

I think it's working...I've been on the oil exclusively for over a week now and I've noticed a distinct change in my appetite. Food is no longer at the forefront of my thoughts. And I believe I have lost some weight.

I have a BMI of 29 and have been trying to exercise and change my food cravings for years and years, with little permanent success.
I have just started experimenting with this approach by using the lite olive oil method and I have #1 stop drinking alcohol #2 stop craving chocolate #3 been able to walk past candy and goodies and not even been tempted...

This alone is a miracle to me. I have lost 1/2 lb in 2 days.. so far... ohmygod... it appears to be working.

I"m fascinated by this, and want to explore it's effects on other cravings as well. It's Friday and I started this Tuesday, I haven't weighed this week so I can't tell you if that's changed [but I feel notbloated, which is a wonderful, different feeling].

My hunger/appetite are seriously affected. I have always [for the last 10 years anyway] dealt with constant munchies, unable to tell the difference between hunger and craving. Since Tuesday, I've eaten 3 meals a day [probably half the volume at each meal than what I've been used to eating] at the end of that time I'm full. And I don't crave sugar, which I always have at the end of most meals. No snacking, no munching, no grazing. I'm ready for the meal at meal time, I WANT it, but ya know, I could probably comfortably do without it. Perhaps I'll try that next week a time or two.

But the other, delightful, bizarre thing, is that I"m not craving alcohol. At night I have a beer or a half a beer, but no more. I DON'T WANT MORE. THAT is unusual for me.

A couple years ago I tried Topamax, after reading about it's effects on weight, cravings and diet. To my surprise at that time I also stopped wanting to drink. I'd get halfway through a glass of wine and I would just be DONE. But the Topamax had side effects that were intolerable to me, like numbness in my extremities and word finding problems, so I stopped and went back to my usual state of free floating cravings.

The Topamax taught me that there is something definitely neurotransmitter related that cause and fire my cravings. What fascinates me about this is that the small amount of sugar I ingest [I"m using 1 TBS in water twice a day, more was too sweet and I thought I was hungrier] seems to have the same effect on MY BRAIN as the potent anti-epileptic drug. What is going on here????

The original article/blog written by Ms Bennet was an unresearched crock. Open your mind and air it out dear. The brain and bodies are enormous mysteries. Explore and enjoy!

The book also mentions using regular sugar instead of fructose or (not and) oils. Atkins, South Beach, Sonoma diets, etc. certainly would have no problem with the oil! It seems silly to make drinking a couple of tablespoons of sugar water or oil daily, equivalent to injecting cancer into your body's cells. A bit of sugar or olive oil will certainly be healthier then a Twinkie or all the other sludge we put in our systems daily. This reminds me of when my daughter had gone through open heart surgery, and after was almost hysterical over the bandaid on her heel where they had done a stick for blood work. I was so glad she obsessed over the bandaid so she would not get hysterical about all the tubes and IVs stuck in her. Maybe somtimes we focus on the little things so we don't have to focus on the really scary things that are simply out of our control. This seems like focusing on the little things.

I found the idea of the sugar water/oil intriguing. I have been overweight all my life. I have a metabolic disorder and it has always been difficult for me to maintain a healthy weight, despite the fact that I am a fitness intstructor and work out for 14+ hours per week.
I bought the book one week ago and started the "diet" immediately. I tried the sugar water at first. I found it difficult to take and it did not work for me. The next day I switched to the ELOO. I found that the ELOO had some taste, so I switched to the canola oil on the third day. I started seeing some results the first day I took the canola oil - I was feeling fuller and not thinking about food all day. I keep track of my calorie intake and found that my intake of calories dropped from an average of 2400 per day to 1700 per day without any perceived effort. WOW! I dropped 1 lb in 4 days, and my clothes already fit looser. Yesterday I noticed that the canola oil actually had a flavour to it, almost like mayonnaise. I checked the label and found that it contains citric acid. I switched to pure canola oil today. I found that I felt full all day. My calorie intake for the entire day was 1375, including the oil! I felt hungry at times, but had no desire to eat. This is very unusual for me. I also found that for me oil works best when taken between breakfast and lunch (at least one hour away from any food or even brushing my teeth). I would recommend for those of you that have had no results to definitely try all options and to also try different times of day. For example, the oil did not work as well on the days I took it first thing in the morning or just before bed.

Has anyone had the ELOO not work for him/her? I started out using grapeseed oil (as Stephen M. had suggested) in case this diet wouldn't work at all for me, so I wouldn't get stuck with a bottle of ELOO, which I never cook with. The grapeseed oil seemed to be really working, so I switched to the cheaper ELOO, but noticed a tapering of its effects after a few days. Yesterday - my fourth day on ELOO - I had munchie cravings approaching my "pre-Shangri-La" levels, and promptly switched back the grapeseed oil.

The only other cause of this I can think of is that I've been using plastic bottles and cups for mixing the oil with water, and more of the oil may cling to the sides with plastic than with glass, so that I'm not getting as much oil.

I'm going to stay on the grapeseed oil for a couple more days to get back on track and then try the ELOO again, mixed in a glass jar this time. This is wierd...if anyone has an explanation for me, I'm all ears.

I am about to try the diet and love chewing gum,Trident sugarless. Do I have to cut out the gum or can I wait a little while after? I am doing the oil. It's just easier for my routine, work and all. Can someone let me know their thoughts on this? thanx.

Timo, you can have the gum, but if you want the oil to work you can't have anything with taste for an hour before or after you take it. Even if the gum is sugarless and has no calories, supposedly your brain would still associate the taste of the gum with the calorie intake from the oil. Enjoy your gum or whatever else you want, but you must have that two-hour window, twice per day, of nothing but the oil and nothing with taste. I hope this makes sense. The book explains all this in further depth. Good luck!

I have been using sugar water (table sugar) for 6 weeks and have lost 11 pounds (5-6 the 1st week and then 1 pound a week after that). It completely erased my food cravings and hunger - I now eat when I feel I ought too, not because I am "starving". I use 3tbs with a tall glass of water in the morning (1 hour after coffee, 1+ hours before any food) and another in the afternoon. It has worked well for me (and way too long to be a placebo effect).
I note that I enjoy food when I do eat, and I tend to want healthier foods for some reason.
As to sugar, I have had my blood tested, with no ill signs of any kind (my bad cholesterol is down a bit (I have no cholesterol problems anyway), but that may be from eating healthier).
As to Fructose (what started this blog entry), I think Seth Roberts used fructose because of lower glycemic index (absorbed more slowly), but I use sucrose because Fructose has known issues. Note that sugar water does not taste good, it is just sweet. You do not want to drink more than you are supposed to. It is not candy! It has no "flavor" like citrus or chocolate to make it good. You can use oil instead of course.
But, I also want to say that the nutritional researchers and nutritionists seem to have a serious problem - they jump to conclusions all the time. I admit that nutrition science is hard since foods interact with each other and you cannot control most other aspects of an animal (that could affect things). But, this jumping to conclusions has only made most people ignore nutritional researchers, as so much that they have concluded has later proven to be wrong. Having some worries is reasonable, but outright condemning something is just bad science.

Well, my "Monday munchies" appear to be just about Monday in general. I stayed on the grapeseed oil until I used it up, but still had munchie cravings after the weekend. Maybe it's just the stress of starting a new week. But the regular ol' ELOO seems to be holding me. I served myself dinner tonight, then looked at my plate and put some back because I knew it would be too much. Even after eating what was left I felt stuffed. False alarm, I suppose, but this one is a relief.

I have been using this method for almost a month. I have lost about 12 lbs (6 lbs 1st week, then 2 lbs a week). I switch between fructose or table sugar in water (3 tbsp in 1 L) and Canola or Extra Light Olive Oil. My appetite has noticably dropped. I had to stop the day of my anniversary so my wife and I could enjoy a full meal. I am adding 350 calories in sugar water and/or oil and eating at least 800 calories less per day. Seems like a good trade. My biggest problem is that I am a "muncher" and I get "bored mouth." I now chew gum or drink herbal tea rather than graze all day at work. My meals are often paid for by my company and now I can't finish 1 serving and I bring the rest home, where I used to get seconds. My blood pressure has dropped 10(top)/5 (bottom). I'm getting my bloodwork done in a few months and we'll see where my HDL/LDL/lipids are. Will it work for anyone else? No idea. Will it continue to work? No idea. Is it easier than Atkins, South Beach, and Weight Watchers, which I've tried, YES. Do I eat healther? YES. When on Atkins, I lived on cheeseburgers (no bun) and bacon, is that healthier than replacing 800 calories a day with sugar water? You decide.

Well, I'm at about 63 pounds lost on the diet right now. I'd say it works. Blood pressure was down to 106 over 80 when I gave blood Saturday.

The great thing is that I, and my friends and family who have taken up the diet, and half the people at church, all feel differently about food. That is almost as neat as losing weight.

As for the diet, you can always try it first, with things that you have around the house, and then, if it works for you, buy the book.

I bought the book and have followed it for 5 weeks now. I have only used the extra light olive oil. It started to work the very first time I tried it by suppressing my appetite and cravings for carbs and sweets. The first week I could not believe I lost 5 pounds effortlessly. I had to remind myself it was time to eat and I found myself so inspired by the weight loss, that I automatically began to eat healthier, smaller portions. I would say I eat half of what I used to eat. I did find that on the weekends when I altered my patterns, I didn't lose as much or I would be in a stalled pattern where nothing was happening for a few days. To me this was more proof that the oil really does work and without it - the cravings would return. On Mondays - I would go right back to my regular plan and healthy eating and all was well again. I did find that the weight loss slowed up at one month and I began to get discouraged. I read that this can happen and it has to do with adjusting the set point so I just continued with it and at 5 weeks started to lose again. I have a thyroid problem anyway so my metabolism is different to begin with. Previously I could only take in about 1000 calories a day and I would have to work out every day to lose weight. Some days I do take in very few calories but they are healthy ones and I take a multi-vitamin just to be on the safe side. Ocassionally I still indulge in treats or fast food but I don't crave it and could easily give it up if I wanted to. It has now been 5 weeks and I have lost a total of 11 pounds. I am very happy about this! The best thing of all - even if I had not lost a single pound - I feel free now from my cravings. This must be what it feels like to have a normal, healthy attitude about food! Eating to live, not living to eat!

Just wanted to add this - the olive oil has somehow made my nails grow stronger and longer and my skin feels very smooth and soft. I have always used olive oil as a beauty product in the past but I had never drank it straight like I do now. It makes a great exfoliant if you mix it with sugar and scrub your skin with it. Gently use it on your face too. Work it into your nails to soften your cuticles and you can put it in your hair and let it stay on there for awhile before you shampoo. Makes a great conditioner.
I also wanted to add that I get a nice cold glass of water ready when I take the oil. I drink some water first then chug down the oil and immediately drink more water. The most important thing I do is to blot my lips with a paper towel after so I don't have those oily lips. After a few weeks of this you get the hang of it and it's easy and no problem.

Summer, almost everyone finds that the olive oil has that side effect.

A lot of people drink some water and then swirl the oil and water together in a mix and quick drink that, washing it down with more water. It makes the oil slide over without feeling it.

I'm at 67 pounds lost, so there ;)

I've lost 65 pounds on this diet. A group of friends and relatives are having great success as well. The proof is in the pudding - or fructose in this case. Many people that are practicing this diet, along with myself have tried every diet known to man. I ask you critics: What's more dangerous - a little fructose, or obesity and all the health problems associated with obesity?

Congrats Dianna.

I just had a thought... people keep mentioning the french being thin. Well I had a school trip there once and stayed with a french family. Before dinner they would give you a sugar cube. When I went home I told everyone that the french eat sugar cubes before dinner to increase there appetite. However thinking back I realised I did not eat that much at all that night, The sugar ruined my appetite - plus my mum said I lost weight and I hadn't even been trying. I did eat quite a bit of food that was strange to me. So maybe his theory does hold up. I am trying the diet - just to see what happens. Trying to get the ELOO to be tasteless is quite hard. I too do the oil shaking thing - I think it is better if you chace it down with water too, before you get any hint of an after taste. Let you know what happens. Good luck everyone, lets pray this is it.

I've been trying this diet for 3 days and the lack of appetite has just kicked in. It's remarkable; so much so that it got me wondering if anyone's thought about the ethical concerns about promoring this as a diet?

I can't help but think about all the desparate teenagers trying be thin who will use this as a tool to promote an unhealthy body image. I think Mr. Robert's ideas are quite brilliant and dare I say, revolutionary, I'm just concerned that there needs to be more of a discussion about the emotional issues that relate to weight. Any thoughts?

I've been on it for a while and it is really easy to starve yourself on this diet. Maybe too easy. Plus there isn't much which says whether the weight loss percentage is more muscle or fat. Is the answer to weight loss really starvation by appetite suppressants? Even if I'm not hungry, is my body breaking down muscle because it thinks I'm starving - or will it burn fat? I am pretty worried. It's also easy for anorexics to reach their ideal body image using this diet through starvation means.

San, I'm lifting weights, so I'm very aware of losing muscle mass, or would be, because it would mean that I wasn't improving. So far, I've had continuous improvement in the weights I'm lifting since I started SLD.

But then, I focus my eating around making sure I get enough protein. But that is an important consideration. I got started on protien shakes, not for the appetite suppresion smoothie that most people use them for, but because I was worried about the amount of protien I was getting.

You are right, San, that it is easy to just starve yourself on this diet because of the way the appetite just goes away and your set point drops. I've lost over seventy pounds (don't worry for me, I'm planning to stop at 160 pounds and I'm 5'5") and have been watching it the whole way.

The process works, so well it can scare you. But, if you pay attention, you will be ok.

I eat a good blend of eggs, non-fat yogurt, etc. and get enough protein, though I ended up taking vitamins as well in order to get all of my nutrition.

I am about to start the diet, and i do not know how. I am 5' 8" and i have 253 pounds. So I need to loose more than 60 pounds. It feels to me like a huge mountain which I have to climb . Need some help how to start and how to keep it up. Any tricks?

I'm a little late checking back, but I started at 240+ and lost about 72 pounds before I started my gentle glide to a stop.

I've put my collection of "best practices" here

I WAS JUST WONDERING IF ANYONE HAD TRIED COCONUT OIL AS YOU USED TO HEAR A LOT ABOUT LOSING WEIGHT WITH IT AND THAT IT HAD A LOT OF HEALTH BENEFITS TOO AS DOES THE OLIVE OIL. I'M ALL OUT OF GOOD OLIVE OIL RIGHT NOW AND ONLY HAVE A SOYBEAN/OLIVE OIL BLEND AND SOME COCONUT OIL ON HAND AND MY TWO YOUNGEST KIDS, 1 AND 3, ARE DOWN WITH A COLD, SO, TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING AROUND HERE TO GIVE IT A SHOT TOO WITHOUT GOING TO THE STORE AND THE OIL JUST SOUNDS HEALTHIER AFTER READING THE RECENT ARTICLE ON THE SHANGRILA DIET IN THE 10/3/06 WOMAN'S WORLD MAGAZINE...THANKS AGAIN FOR ANY SUGGESTIONS...

Just started the oil a week ago, and it is amazing how eazy it is to get full, I mean the really full feeling, without a big binge. I have already lost five lbs.

I've had great success on the diet using EVOO. The problem is it is hard at work (I'm a teacher) to take my mid-morning tablespoon. I was thinking about trying fish oil so it could be in capsule form--does anyone know if this will work, or if it has any negative concerns?

Going on week 4 on the eloo, and it is still working, down 12 lbs, only 96 to go,,. Has anyone been on this method for an extended period of time? Keep thinking that it is just a phase, the no hunger thing, and it will soon pass, but am sure going to enjoy the ride while it lasts.
Found a neat site that will let you keep track the food you do eat, and it breaks it down into nutrition plus calorie content, it is fun to use. nutritiondata.com is the name of it, and you can keep a running total if you wish.

This article totally misses the point. Fructose and canola oil were only chosen because they are practically flavorless and they have calories. Any means of ingesting calories without experiencing flavors will do the trick, which is weakening the association between calories and flavor. This 'diet' is not based on nutrition or physiology in any way. It is based on Pavlovian conditioning and the actual foods that are used are irrelevant so long as they don't condition you to associate the calories with a flavor. I am looking into some sort of tube so that I could ingest a perfectly healthy puree of some sort.

seriously, what are you saying? Of all the dangerous food habits of people you choose to attack people who choose to have a bit of fructose water?????
Why not attack something a bit more harmful? Like trans fats? KFC? MacDonalds? or any of the other massive food chains slowly killing basically the whole world. Compared to them a few spoonfuls of sugar nothing at all.

I agree with you that fructose is very damaging to the body, but how is drinking sugar water with two or three tablespoons of sugar any different than having a coca cola or fruit juice with added high fructose corn syrup? Those beverages have never been said to be life-threatening. And EVOO is extremely healthy. Just take a look at WHFoods.com!

When I saw Skinny Water at my local Super Target, I was skeptical and decided to research it myself. I must admit, I am a natural skeptic. I saw a lot of bad press about the water, which dates to about a year or so ago. I've read the opinions, but decided to try it anyways. They couldn't be even more wrong! Both flavors taste great, and they actually work! Yes, I've tried plain water with a tad bit of lemon juice -and it works as well, but for only 45 mins with me. But when I tried the Skinny Water, I wasn't hungry for 4 hours on average. This can't be the same exact product as all the nasty reviews indicates. Most of the comments in blogs are on average from a year ago. I am sure that this is a re-formulation, and have noticed that Jana isn't the company pushing the water. Big difference! I checked out their website at www.skinnywater.com, and don't see all of the conflicting information on it. I for one wil tell others about this product, because it DOES work and it tastes great. Just because the product has a stupid name, doesn't mean that that the product is a sham. I came across the water while I was at Target, who apparently launched the water on June 10th. Target is a respectable organization, and their legal department would've torn the research to shreds and not carry it if it was a sham. I'm not sure where all the research is coming from, because when you go to www.skinnywater.com, it's a fun, playful, encouraging site.

If you wanna try water with an all-natural appetite suppressant and a spash of fruit, visit: www.skinnywater.com -I've lost 10 lbs in two weeks with this stuff!

Connie you can only be commended for taking up this important topic. After being diagnosed for fructose mal-digestion I was forced exactly on the diet you describe. The result was almost a pound per week weight loss for a while while having a lot more energy. Researching the medical journal articles (the ones that are freely available) I came to the exactly same conclusions.

It is mind-boggling how many diet products are sold today in supermarkets which are "enhanced" with fructose in one way or another. The root cause is the sad calorie counting - fructose contains more sweetness per calorie than table sugar (breaks down to glucose/fructose) or pure glucose which is better digestible (but is a problem for diabetics). So normal sugar - which is bad enough - is replaced by something worse.

People needing to loose weight are mislead by those ready made "diet" or "sugar reduced" or "low calorie" products and others may even be forced by lack of results into unhealthy eat behaviors including anorexia.

A simple glance at the forums on Seth's site will show you that 1) the diet works and 2) most people now use olive oil. So this post is reactionary, wrong and fairly useless.

Olive oil is so disgusting!
I tried drinking it with water right now and almost got sick -_-