>> "No form of vinegar changes body pH or has any effect on toxins. The body's natural processes, mediated largely through the liver and kidneys, eliminate waste products and toxic substances." It's as if you are still rejecting the efficacy of Cinchona bark for treating malaria because the Amazonian Indians haven't discovered the formula for the quinine it contains. Instead, they say that the bark of the Cinchona tree contains the spirit of the God Xohopichulato, which destroys the evil spirit that causes malaria. If you want to rest in your beliefs that there is no Xohopichulato and therefore Cinchona cannot help with malaria, fine. Just don't pretend it is science. It is arrogant ethnocentrism, not scientific empiricism. Your arguments are based on an arbitrary and artificial definition of the word 'toxin'. You are ignoring the fact that ordinary substances can build up to toxic levels under many conditions - for example, glucose can build up to toxic levels when there is insulin resistance. In such a case, anything that reduces insulin resistance or lowers glucose levels would in fact be a 'detoxification' process. Likewise, immune hormones like the interferons and interleukins are necessary under certain conditions, but at higher doses (ie when there is infection or chronic inflammation) they often cause side effects that range from unpleasant to lethal. In SARS, H5N1 bird flu, and other killer influenzas, the body's immune system destroys the body. Immune hormones that might sometimes be beneficial are produced at toxic levels. This is quite different from your idea of metabolic toxins that are normally handled by the kidneys and liver. The short chain fatty acids present in vinegar (acetate, proprionate, butyrate) have been repeatedly shown to lower inflammatory cytokines (which have been implicated as a contributor to migraines). These simple compounds also affect levels of leptin, adiponectin and other compounds that regulate glucose, and there is research implicating this in the pathogenesis of migraines. You have stooped to pseudoscience by refusing to look at the evidence that vinegar can dramatically change certain chemicals in the body. You seem to take comfort in linguistic tautologies about 'toxins' that have little bearing on the underlying facts of the matter. Here is a link that might be useful: Glucose, Adiponectin, Immune Hormones and Migraine.

lydia -- the 100+ food Elisa test sounds very interesting. I may give that a try, eventually. I'm convinced that I have quite a few food allergies. I used to throw up when I was given white milk as a child. Never drank any once my mother figured out the cause. Except in elementary school when I was forced by a teacher and I threw up. Funny how I was able to drink chocolate milk, though. I read later (as an adult) that in fact the chocolate in chocolate milk reduces the allergic reaction. Anyway, regarding food allergies, I know I'm sensitive to wheat though I'm not a celiac. I am also sensitive to dairy. (Ask me why I can't give up my goatsmilk yoghurt, this is the last frontier for me, hope to give it up eventually.) I subscribed to the test at http://www.enterolab.com/ which is where I got the results about wheat and dairly. The test was expensive. I think over $300.00. Glad I did it though. Sounds like the Elisa test may give you the same results plus some. This food allergy thing is tricky, I think. One of our dogs now it seems has food allergies. I asked the vet to test and she said that testing for food allergies is not very reliable (for dogs). I wonder if this is true for humans? A food elimination diet was the only thing she could recommend plus eating only a particular type of dog food that was "engineered to have a small enough molecule size so it doesn't trigger the allergic reactions" (her words). I was amazed and am wondering if raw food has "smaller molecules" than cooked food, HA, HA. Perhaps moite's methods that she got from her doctor about measuring her pulse rate may be the best way. I'm going the simple route with this raw food diet (for now) because it meets many other needs also. I had a great day yesterday. I went the whole day without the "wave of tiredness" that comes over me every day after lunch. I hope it wasn't an anomaly. Bad news is that with the raw food diet, there is a "detox phase" initially where some claim that you are ridding your system of toxins. The detox phase can produce acne which is what I just got yesterday. I haven't had a pimple on my face for many years but I have two now. Oh well. If my energy level stays good, I'll have to add that as one more reason why I'm glad I found this diet. I was craving cooked food day before yesterday but managed to get by without it. Hopefully those days will get less in number. This was kind of like craving a cigarette after quitting, as I remember it many years ago. Keep us posted about your food allergies. I'm becoming more and more convinced that for some of us, they are literally killing us or are reducing our quality of life (for some of us) to a very very large extent producing chronic problems and diseases that mainstream medicine doesn't have a clue. In my case, I definitely feel like I've become a guinea pig for trying out different "cures". I'm hoping that raw food will by my answer. I realize that because there is no definite proof, I could be wrong on this but as my DH says, it's gotta be better than being so overweight and hungry all the time. We were killing ourselves eating cooked food so how could this be any worse.

Congratulations on your weight-loss, and thank you for sharing your success in 2008. After 10 years foward to today, April 2018, do you still keep the 50 lbs. off? I'm 3 lb. over regular BMI, and I find it's a daily-battle to go under my BMI at age 56. In the summer I can easily go under normal-body-mass index (down to 118 lb), but in the winter, I usually gain 5 lbs in my cold zone 5a. I find that having a buddy to journal & be accountable to really helps me to cut down the amount of food. If anyone interested, please message me, thanks.

You all bring up great points. This is a totally voluntary weight loss challenge – informal invitations are emailed out to 3 departments comprised of about 80 people. It is not officially sanctioned by the company, but not discouraged. We have had various versions of the challenge the last 4 years, and we have found out some things that work, and some that definitely do not – regarding participation. 1st, we needed a $20.00 motivation fee and prizes. Most will not stay involved if they have nothing monetary to lose or gain. Giving it to charity did not work - got the same participation drop out rate as not having a motivation fee. Winner-take-all caused some to drop out if they knew one person was really successful – so then we had 1st, 2nd, & 3rd prizes at the end (splitting the motivation fee proportionally 1/2, 1/3, 1/6.) Furthermore, to sweeten the pot, we had an anonymous donor grant a $5 weekly bonus to the person who lost the best percentage each week. That way, you may not win one of the top three, but you could win a couple of weekly bonuses. Surprisingly, the finalist winners rarely won most of the weekly bonuses, because they were the slow and steady losers, not the quick up and down ones. 2nd, having journals, counting steps, recording exercise minutes or any other form of “measurements” did not work. There were lots of hard feelings about them – some accusations of “fudging” or being too personal. Some people were WAY too competitive – and that also caused hard feelings. We had people chose to lose the way they wished by reducing calories, increasing exercise, or both. We have only one person officially record weights, so no else would know anybody else’s actual weight. We just announce the top finalist’s losses – not current weight. 3rd, we found 4-6 weeks to be too short of a time, and some ladies did silly things to win. 12 weeks was too long and we had a lot of dropouts. 8-10 weeks seems to be the sweet spot time wise – too long for “crash dieters” and short enough not to “burn out”. Now we try to have a 10 week diet challenge, then a 6 week maintenance challenge before another 10 week weight loss challenge. (The maintenance challenge is to kick in $20 and you get double back if you do not gain anything in 6 weeks – normally held over a holiday season.) 4th, we haven’t had many men compete, so that has not been a big problem (of them losing faster). Since we have a wide range of weights (135 – 340), we have tried various versions of % loss or total loss. Last time it was the weekly % bonuses coupled with prizes for the top three total weight lost. This time the main organizers wanted it to be total percentage for the final three prizes. I think this does favor the thinner ones, but I was just asking all your opinions in the hopes to fine tune this continuing completion in the future. Personally, I have lost 35 pounds last year in several of the competitions -- and I hope to do more in the next one. They do keep me motivated. Thanks for your thoughts.