 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / WeightWatchers / May 2005INTL wk 8 / GEC wk 9 - Laura
INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions Down is down I always say but this is ridiculous. I guess that I am in the middle of another plateau. Dang they are frustrating. Despite what you-know-who says I actually think that I am eating too little and have forced myself into starvation mode. I had already increased my exercise last week without any impact. This has happened before and hopefully I can break the plateau before I gain any weight. I spent some time today figuring out the calories for last weeks journal. I discovered that the points ranged from 18 to 24 (flex target is 23) and the calories ranged from 1000 to 1500. According to one site, my BMR is at around 1900. Having more than a 500 calorie deficit can't be good. I have decided to switch from Core to Flex for a couple of weeks. Maybe adding some variety and extra points will help break this thing. I will try and eat mostly core foods to avoid bringing the cravings back. Tonight we had chinese take out. I ate light but enjoyed the non core items that I haven't been able to have. I am also hoping that the Core experiance will keep my eating under control. I just need to make sure that the junk foods I like don't creep back into my menus like they did last summer. On a positive note, my measurements have been sucessfully shrinking. Comparing my November and January Curves measurement I lost 5.5 pounds and 4.5 inches. So I guess one other reason for the plateau is my body is catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats always a good thing.  Signature~Laura~ 245.6/176.8/145 WW 4/21/03 178.6/176.8/170 INTL > INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 > GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > forced myself into starvation mode. I had already increased my exercise last > week without any impact. $$ Starvation mode is everyone's excuse to eat "more," or for why they didn't lose weight. No one went into these starvation modes in the past. If you eat more you will GAIN unless you exercise more (or dump fluid if you're a woman). > This has happened before and hopefully I can break the plateau before I gain > any weight. I spent some time today figuring out the calories for last weeks > journal. I discovered that the points ranged from 18 to 24 (flex target is > 23) and the calories ranged from 1000 to 1500. According to one site, my BMR > is at around 1900. Having more than a 500 calorie deficit can't be good. $$ Ask anyone who was lost in the woods for a week or two how they lost as much as 7+ lbs in a week. > I have decided to switch from Core to Flex for a couple of weeks. Maybe > adding some variety and extra points will help break this thing. I will try [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > keep my eating under control. I just need to make sure that the junk foods I > like don't creep back into my menus like they did last summer. $$ Don't buy them at the store. Don't keep them in your house. It works! :-) You can't eat them if they're not there. > On a positive note, my measurements have been sucessfully shrinking. > Comparing my November and January Curves measurement I lost 5.5 pounds and > 4.5 inches. So I guess one other reason for the plateau is my body is > catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats > always a good thing. $$ Keep going... it keeps you moving. How about doing some walking? > ~Laura~ > 245.6/176.8/145 WW 4/21/03 > 178.6/176.8/170 INTL > SignatureWysong Age 60. Height 5'6" Starting date: 1/8/05 171/ 166 / 140 lb ========================================== >> INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 >> GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > If you eat more you will GAIN unless you exercise more (or dump fluid if > you're a woman). Sorry Wysong, but the body *does* go into starvation mode if you eat too little, so weight loss slows and can temporarily stop - it's a biological thing our bodies have developed over the millenia to help us survive famines - admittedly we in the western world don't have too many of those now, but our biology is still built to help us that way - even though in our decadent times of plenty, it seems like a hindrance. It's a b*gg*r to keep the motivation going through it. You can deny it, but it does happen. If it's never happened to you, count yourself lucky ;-) Cheers, helen s > >> INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 > >> GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > If you eat more you will GAIN unless you exercise more (or dump fluid if > > you're a woman). ============================================= > Sorry Wysong, but the body *does* go into starvation mode if you eat too > little, so weight loss slows and can temporarily stop - it's a biological > thing our bodies have developed over the millenia to help us survive > famines - ## Odd then how people who are lost and those in the concentration camps never went into starvation mode. Those on strict 1000 calorie diets and under a Dr's care all LOSE weight, etc. Your metabolism will slow but you will either start to burn your fat or you will die. Your body is not designed to *stop burning your fat* when you start to starve. If it did that, you would soon die. admittedly we in the western world don't have too many of those > now, but our biology is still built to help us that way - even though in our > decadent times of plenty, it seems like a hindrance. ## Your body is designed to BURN your fat stores in times of famine and not let you die *fat* of starvation. :-) Ever see an person who died of starvation who was still obese? They're all near skeletal by the time death comes to them..... after every gram of fat (and most protein) is used as energy. It's a b*gg*r to keep > the motivation going through it. You can deny it, but it does happen. If > it's never happened to you, count yourself lucky ;-) ## It hasn't happened to anyone I know.... SignatureWysong Age 60. Height 5'6" Starting date: 1/8/05 171/ 166 / 140 lb ========================================== > X-No-Archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > designed to *stop burning your fat* when you start to starve. If it did > that, you would soon die. *Excuse me*???? So Godwin's Law comes into play this soon. Apart from those who were hauled off to the gas chambers to die as soon as they went into the camps, how do you think people survived? Their metabolisms slowed so they didn't starve quite so quickly. You don't seem to understand the concept of famine mode - the metabolism slows so rate of weight loss is slowed - temporarily stalled in some cases - but keep on a starvation diet for a long time and yes, you will be reduced to skin and bone. Your choice of example, Wysong is tacky :-( > admittedly we in the western world don't have too many of those >> now, but our biology is still built to help us that way - even though in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > used > as energy. See above - get your head around the concept of metabolism slowing - no one here is suggesting that if you starve long term you die a fat person. If you think that, you aree simply failing, deliberately or otherwise of grasping the concept of a sllowing metabolism. > It's a b*gg*r to keep >> the motivation going through it. You can deny it, but it does happen. If >> it's never happened to you, count yourself lucky ;-) > > ## It hasn't happened to anyone I know.... > > X-No-Archive: yes > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > *Excuse me*???? So Godwin's Law comes into play this soon. ## What do you mean by soon? Soon to one person is not soon to another. > Apart from those who were hauled off to the gas chambers to die as soon as > they went into the camps, how do you think people survived? ## They burned off their fat tissue, then their muscle and internal organs,... then they died. Their > metabolisms slowed so they didn't starve quite so quickly. ## No one said their metab's didn't slow down,... that doesn't last long. Then the fat burning begins. The more active they were the faster the fat burn. That's no secret. You don't seem to > understand the concept of famine mode - the metabolism slows so rate of > weight loss is slowed - ## Of course I understand it. You don't seem to understand that only lasts a short time - then the fat loss begins. temporarily stalled in some cases - but keep on a > starvation diet for a long time and yes, you will be reduced to skin and > bone. Your choice of example, Wysong is tacky :-( ## Who said anything about a "starvation" diet? You failed to address those who closely follow normal diets and lose nothing! > > ## Your body is designed to BURN your fat stores in times of famine and > > not [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > used > > as energy. > See above - get your head around the concept of metabolism slowing - ## Get YOUR head around the concept that weight loss begins as soon as caloric intake is drastically cut. What other choice do some people have who do not lose on normal diets? no one > here is suggesting that if you starve long term you die a fat person. If you > think that, you aree simply failing, deliberately or otherwise of grasping > the concept of a sllowing metabolism. ## And YOU are failing to grasp the fact that we're designed to burn our fat stores when caloric intake is withheld. Do a little test and cut your calories to something like 800 to 900 a day, get at least some exercise - and see what happens after a week or two. It's well known that the obese who are hospitalized and fed such low calorie fare ALL LOSE WEIGHT - where's this starvation mode? They have enough of this information on TV all the time! SignatureWysong Age 60. Height 5'6" Starting date: 1/8/05 171/ 166 / 140 lb ========================================== > X-No-Archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > ## What do you mean by soon? Soon to one person is not soon to another. I think you need to google Godwin's Law... *plonk* > I think you need to google Godwin's Law... > > *plonk* =============== I think YOU need to face reality and stop making excuses..... SignatureWysong Age 60. Height 5'6" Starting date: 1/8/05 171/ 166 / 140 lb ========================================== > ## They burned off their fat tissue, then their muscle and internal > organs,... then they died. Sorry, have to leap in here. This is biologically *wrong*. In fact, when you go into "starvation mode", you burn off muscle tissue before you start burning off fat stores. Surprisingly enough, the body's utilisation of fat stores during starvation only increases slightly when compared to the increase in usage of muscle tissue. Google "gluconeogenesis" and "proteolysis" and the "starvation response" for more details. And try not to pretend to be a biologist while you're at it. SignatureJulie. 93.5/73.6/74 (WW)/72 (Personal) kg 205.7/161.9/162.8 (WW)/158 (Personal) lb Here's our FAQ: http://www.didian.com/asdww/ and welcome notice: http://www.geocities.com/welcomenotice/index.html > > ## They burned off their fat tissue, then their muscle and internal > > organs,... then they died. > > Sorry, have to leap in here. This is biologically *wrong*. ======================= OK then, all the pictures of people who died of starvation/anorexia were really blobs of *FAT* attached to muscle-free bone - all muscle gone, nothing but FAT tissue left. Please provide pictures. Googled them and didn't see one picture of a blob of fat that was a person who died of starvation or was near death from starvation. Maybe you should Google anorexia and starvation. Remember Karen Carpenter? First she lost her normal body fat and became quite thin, then very, very thin, finally emaciated and wasted (lots of muscle loss) - and then she died. No one said there is *NO* muscle loss while fat is being burned. SignatureWysong Age 60. Height 5'6" Starting date: 1/8/05 171/ 166 / 140 lb ========================================== Enough is enough....Let's just call this discussion over. > Googled them and didn't see one picture of a blob of fat that was a person > who died of starvation or was near death from starvation. Maybe you should > Google anorexia and starvation. Remember Karen Carpenter? First she lost > her normal body fat and became quite thin, then very, very thin, finally > emaciated and wasted (lots of muscle loss) - and then she died. No one said > there is *NO* muscle loss while fat is being burned. LOL, Lee > > ## They burned off their fat tissue, then their muscle and internal > > organs,... then they died. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Here's our FAQ: http://www.didian.com/asdww/ and welcome notice: > http://www.geocities.com/welcomenotice/index.html > INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 > GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > last > week without any impact. It's entirely possible you can eat too little - the body goes into starvation mode and slows. Sometimes you need to kick start it with a combination of eating more (healthy stuff, of course) and upping the activity level. > This has happened before and hopefully I can break the plateau before I > gain [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > BMR > is at around 1900. Having more than a 500 calorie deficit can't be good. I'm expecting to plateau anytime soon. If I don't it'll be the first time! Cheers, helen s > I have decided to switch from Core to Flex for a couple of weeks. Maybe > adding some variety and extra points will help break this thing. I will [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats > always a good thing. > > INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 > > GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > combination of eating more (healthy stuff, of course) and upping the > activity level. I have already upped the activity level some but that is an area that I can work on too. I am going to try and keep an eye on my points this week to make sure that I eat at least my target. That is something that I was not really doing while on core. > > This has happened before and hopefully I can break the plateau before I > > gain [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I'm expecting to plateau anytime soon. If I don't it'll be the first time! I went through on during the fall 0f 2003 so I was kind of expecting one again. I just have to shake things up a bit like I did last time. one thing my leader did say is that your body wants to plateau on the way down were you were stabilized for a bit on the way up, so think how long you were at the plateau weight on the way up she says a week for each month is common, Lee > > > INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 > > > GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > I went through on during the fall 0f 2003 so I was kind of expecting one > again. I just have to shake things up a bit like I did last time. >INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 >GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >23) and the calories ranged from 1000 to 1500. According to one site, my BMR >is at around 1900. Having more than a 500 calorie deficit can't be good. >On a positive note, my measurements have been sucessfully shrinking. >Comparing my November and January Curves measurement I lost 5.5 pounds and >4.5 inches. So I guess one other reason for the plateau is my body is >catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats >always a good thing. Laura, Someone else recently posted some good stuff on this. Long term dietting causes metabolic slow down, and it can be significant. The way to get round this is to eat at maintenance for a couple of weeks. Even if you gain a couple of pounds it doesn't matter overall. Then start again OP. An alternative is a couple of days on fairly high calories 2000-3000, then get back OP. Google on 'refeed' if you want to find out more. Is it the Wendy Plan that says to vary points, and has a free day every week? That may be onto the same thing. As a guide, take your temperature first thing in the AM, it should be around 98.6. Every degree under that represents about 10% slowdown of metabolic rate. If your waking temperature is low it's time to change things around a bit. Weight loss rarely happens in a linear fashion. It's usually a stepwise thing. But you are right. If nothing has happened for a month it's time to review stuff and maybe try a different tack. Ray Signature2002 1.8i eternal red > >INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 > >GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > stepwise thing. But you are right. If nothing has happened for a month > it's time to review stuff and maybe try a different tack. Thanks Ray. I like your idea of taking my temp each morning. I know my metabolism has always been slow but I have not checked to see where my temp is in about 15 years. I'll have to reread the wendie plan. I think during one of my good losing times I was eating dinner out as my "free" night. Usually at the chinese buffet. We have not been doing that in a while due to lack of $$. So my High point day has not existed in a while. I'll have to get out my old journals and see what worked then. If your measurements are shrinking there is nothing wrong with what you are doing. Measurements are a more accurate indication of weight loss than the scale - because so many other things come into play. I wish WW would introduce a tape measure component to the class, but I guess too many people would be horrified at the thought. Don't stress over this - when you get right down to it - you're the only one who knows the number on the scale - but everybody can see your visibly shrinking body. Lynne Highest Weight - 308 WW Start Weight this time around Dec 29/04 - 222.4 Weight this week - 218 Goal - 150 (Subject to change) "Change doesn't happen while you're sitting around." >INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 >GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats >always a good thing. > If your measurements are shrinking there is nothing wrong with what > you are doing. Measurements are a more accurate indication of weight [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > knows the number on the scale - but everybody can see your visibly > shrinking body. The leader at the meeting I attend has done just that. She even did where you just use a length of string - knotted appropriately to show the decreasing measurements over time if you can't face an actual tape measure. Cheers, helen s > If your measurements are shrinking there is nothing wrong with what > you are doing. Measurements are a more accurate indication of weight [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > knows the number on the scale - but everybody can see your visibly > shrinking body. Thanks Lynne. I think the ONLY thing that is keeping me sane in this plateau is the fact that my measurements are going down at an amazing rate. Otherwise I think I would be going bonkers. Down is down and it is not ridiculous - just not as much as you'd like. Tweak as you say. Core helped you lose bigger for a while and maybe it was just the change in food groups. So maybe Flex will shake it up again. And no matter, reading the thread on Plateau's - you 'ain't' blowing it by staying where you are since you are also NOT GOING BACK TO WHERE YOU WERE. >INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 >GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats >always a good thing. Thanks Fred. I will never let myself go back to where I was. I've come too far to turn back now. I am finding that I still leaning towards core foods which is a good thing. Maybe I just need to increase my amounts a little bit so that I am eating the required 22-24 points per day. I had cut back on my breakfasts and switched to the puffed wheat. I'll switch back to my prefered shredded wheat and oatmeal. Still core but higher in fiber and points. I'll review my journals from October/November when I was losing nicely. Maybe something will popup as to what else I have changed. I almost feel like something went haywire along the way related to my going to mom's for 2 weeks in December. That's when this all started. It may also be related to lower activity since I am not working right now and I am sitting in front of the computer more than before. I'm going to work on cleaning out the basement this week so that should help raise the activity level quite a bit. Maybe that's the real problem and not my food. > Down is down and it is not ridiculous - just not as much as you'd > like. [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > >catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats > >always a good thing. >Thanks Fred. I will never let myself go back to where I was. I've come too >far to turn back now. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >that should help raise the activity level quite a bit. Maybe that's the real >problem and not my food. If your activity level has dropped due to not working, that could explain things. It does not take much of a change in routine (what the body was doing before) for it to be reflected in food intake NEEDS. I mentioned that at my meeting this week. Someone was AS USUAL moaning about Maintenance. I chimed in that there is no exact number. You get a cold or have meetings or whatever and slow down for a week, you need to reduce the calories. Heaven forbid you twist and ankle and walk less, you have to reduce. You quit your job and move a bit less, that could be 100 calories per day. You have a birthday, vacation, Xmas, whatever, well, guess what - you are either UP or you have to really cut back the rest of that period. I don't think that many people really cut back as much as we all assume when they have to rebalance what they did last week or the week before. Good luck (and ignore, you know who) >> Down is down and it is not ridiculous - just not as much as you'd >> like. [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] >> >catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats >> >always a good thing. > >Thanks Fred. I will never let myself go back to where I was. I've come too > >far to turn back now. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > many people really cut back as much as we all assume when they have to > rebalance what they did last week or the week before. I am going to kick butt in the basement this week. That should bring the activity level up a tad. Tonight was not good in the calorie department. Not horrendous but not good. We went to Red Lobster to celebrate our anniversary. I ordered the Rainbow trout, small baked potato and brocolli. I split the whole thing to bring home for lunch. We did make the mistake of ordering an appetiser of nacho chips with shrimp and lobster sauce. I probably had too many of those. It was a nice dinner. > Good luck (and ignore, you know who) So far so good. I think we all should ignore her. There is no "not good" when it comes to celebrating an anniversary. And furthermore, it does not sound like anything was untoward. And HAPPY ANNIVERSARY. >> >Thanks Fred. I will never let myself go back to where I was. I've come >too [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > >So far so good. I think we all should ignore her. Thank you. > There is no "not good" when it comes to celebrating an anniversary. > And furthermore, it does not sound like anything was untoward. [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > > > >So far so good. I think we all should ignore her. Happy Anniversary. My downfall at Red Lobster is the biscuits. I love those so much, I could just eat them and skip the dinner completely. Debbie >> >Thanks Fred. I will never let myself go back to where I was. I've come > too [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > > So far so good. I think we all should ignore her. > Happy Anniversary. Thank you. > My downfall at Red Lobster is the biscuits. I love those so much, I could > just eat them and skip the dinner completely. I only had a half a biscuit. It was enough to satisfy me. My downfall was the shrimp and lobster nachos. Yummy. I was impressed with their Lighthouse menu. All low fat dishes. I've never tried trout before and was pleasantly surprised with it. DH says he likes trout too so we may actually have found a fish that we both like. He likes white fishes and I like the fishier ones (salmon, swordfish, tuna, blues). Trout seems to be somewhere in the middle. The only complaint I have about the meal is that someone over seasoned the steamed brocolli. I'll rinse the serving that I brought home before I nuke it for lunch. I don't think that > many people really cut back as much as we all assume when they have to > rebalance what they did last week or the week before. ======================== What happened to keeping journals? I think too many people stop keeping a journal and stop using their measuring cups.... SignatureWysong Age 60. Height 5'6" Starting date: 1/8/05 171/ 166 / 140 lb ========================================== > What happened to keeping journals? I think too many people stop keeping a > journal and stop using their measuring cups.... There is truth in that, Wysong. Just a pity you can't acknowledge that slowing metabolism and a period of plateauing can also be true. helen s > > What happened to keeping journals? I think too many people stop keeping a > > journal and stop using their measuring cups.... > > There is truth in that, Wysong. $ My step daughter was losing 2 lbs a week on WW - until she thought she could measure "by eye." Surprise! She lost nothing that week and is back to her measuring cups and scale. Her and her husband are losing well on WW. Both are active 24 year olds. I heard others at the meetings (when I went in 2001) say the same thing. > Just a pity you can't acknowledge that slowing metabolism and a period of > plateauing can also be true. $ Pity those who hit these plateaus and don't do something to change it. I wasted 2+ years on a plateau before I made a change. SignatureWysong Age 60. Height 5'6" Starting date: 1/8/05 171/ 166 / 140 lb ========================================== > I am not working right now and I am sitting in front of the computer more > than before. I'm going to work on cleaning out the basement this week so > that should help raise the activity level quite a bit. Maybe that's the real > problem and not my food. ======================= Get out and WALK for 30 minutes! Go to a Mall and walk for an hour. SignatureWysong Age 60. Height 5'6" Starting date: 1/8/05 171/ 166 / 140 lb ========================================== I know it's a bit depressing when you have small losses, but at least it's a loss - so Congratulations, Laura. Elaine >INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 >GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >always a good thing. > Thanks Elaine. I'm just hoping I can get the scale moving again. > I know it's a bit depressing when you have small losses, but at least > it's a loss - so Congratulations, Laura. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > >catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats > >always a good thing. You've had lots of good suggestions here Laura, so I'll just wish you good luck! SignatureBrenda 209/195/155 > INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 > GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats > always a good thing. Thanks Brenda. Yes I have lots to think about this week. > You've had lots of good suggestions here Laura, so I'll just wish you > good luck! [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > catching up for the lost inches. Curves seems to be paying off so thats > > always a good thing. not eating enough is always a problem for me, Lee > INTL week 8: down 0.2 to 176.8 > GEC week 9: 5 curves sessions [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > 245.6/176.8/145 WW 4/21/03 > 178.6/176.8/170 INTL |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.