Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers
WeightAdviser.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / August 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

calories per day

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
suz - 27 Apr 2004 14:10 GMT
Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
will tell you how many calories you have to cut per day, to say lose 10
pounds in 3 months.  The calculators also will tell you how many
calories your body needs to maintain the current weight.

All of the calculators said I needed around 1600 calories per day to
maintain my current weight, and estimated that I had to drop 400 per day
to lose 10 pounds in 3 months.  Since I exercise, I added 200 calories
back, so I need to drop 200 calories per day.

I figured that would be easy to do, but it wasn't.  I have felt like I
am starving to the point of having headaches.  Something is wrong here.

Yesterday, I was literally starving all day.  I ate:
coffee with milk and cream (100 calories)
2 fried eggs (150)
a quarter of a cantaloupe (50)
a piece of whole grain bread with a tablespoon of peanut butter (195)
popcorn as a snack (130)
another quarter of a cantaloupe (50)
3 ounces of beef brisket cooked with tomato sauce and wine (325)
some salad (?)
before bed, 2 pieces of wheat bread with melted cheddar cheese (300)

That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
STARVING and getting headaches?
~Deb~ - 27 Apr 2004 15:51 GMT
> Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
> pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
> STARVING and getting headaches?

I would think the headaches could be from consuming maybe too much sodium?
(ie; cheese, popcorn) and maybe the wine because of the alcohol in it.
I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and fish.
I would cut out any fried food and the peanut butter and cheese.
Maybe instead of cream in your coffee you could use some non-dairy creamer.
It also sounds like you need to add alot more fresh vegetables.
JMO of course.
Good luck!
Debby
188/125/?
suz - 27 Apr 2004 18:17 GMT
>>Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
>>pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> I would think the headaches could be from consuming maybe too much sodium?
> (ie; cheese, popcorn) and maybe the wine because of the alcohol in it.

Hm.  The popcorn had no salt (I made it myself), and the cheese was just
standard sharp cheddar, which I have eaten for years with no ill
effects.  The brisket did have wine in it, but that had been cooked for
hours and hours.  I am sure there was no "alcohol" left in there by the
time it was served. I have never had headaches from eating brisket
before, or even from having a glass of wine at dinner, which I did not
have yesterday.

> I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and fish.

Is there a reason for that specifically?  Is beef not good for dieters?
   (I use organic by the way.)

> I would cut out any fried food and the peanut butter and cheese.

Why?  Peanut butter is a great food, loaded with protein.  And what is
wrong with cheese.  I had a little more than an ounce--not really
excessive.  Does fried food cause headaches?  I have never gotten
headaches from fried eggs before.  It's not like I had french fries or
deep fried things.  It was just a couple of fried eggs!

My impression yesterday was that I was feeling incredibly hungry all
day, and that resulted in a headache.  It never occurred to me that
foods I have eaten all my life would suddenly cause headaches in smaller
amounts than I usually eat them.

> Maybe instead of cream in your coffee you could use some non-dairy creamer.

I appreciate your advice, but no thanks to that!  I will not pollute my
coffee or my body with chemicals when I can just have the real thing.
What I have in my coffee each day is a half cup of milk with a splash of
cream.

> It also sounds like you need to add alot more fresh vegetables.

I did have a large salad with the brisket at dinner, which had lots of
carrots, cucumber, lettuce, and sweet red pepper.  I just didn't figure
out the calories for that.

Adding fresh veggies is always a good idea, but I want to feel satisfied
and full, instead of starving and headachy.
J.J. Marie - 27 Apr 2004 18:53 GMT
Hark! I heard suz <suz@suz.com> say:

<big snip>

> Adding fresh veggies is always a good idea, but I want to feel satisfied
> and full, instead of starving and headachy.

This sounds a lot like a possible blood sugar problem -- do you
space your food intake evenly over the course of the day? Or perhaps
some other medical issue is at play. I strongly suggest that if this
continues to happen, you talk to a professional...

Signature

J.J. in WA State - 251/232/150
(Change COLD to HOT for e-mail)

suz - 27 Apr 2004 19:35 GMT
> Hark! I heard suz <suz@suz.com> say:
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> some other medical issue is at play. I strongly suggest that if this
> continues to happen, you talk to a professional...

I eat all through the day.  The starving feeling and the headache
started when I started "dieting" --reducing my calories by 200 calories
a day from the level the calculators said I needed to maintain my weight.

Ya know, perhaps the calculators were wrong.  I assumed that because I
have been at this weight for a long time that I must be eating around
1600 calories a day, because that is what the calculators say is a
maintenance amount.  Perhaps I have been eating a lot more than that and
am actually really hungry.  But how could the calculators be so off?
determined - 27 Apr 2004 21:47 GMT
> > Hark! I heard suz <suz@suz.com> say:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> maintenance amount.  Perhaps I have been eating a lot more than that and
> am actually really hungry.  But how could the calculators be so off?

Perhaps you could try tracking your food intake religiously for a couple
days at www.fitday.com.  Then you'd have a better idea how much you eat, and
maybe how much you were eating before.
Lictor - 27 Apr 2004 19:03 GMT
> > I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and fish.
>
> Is there a reason for that specifically?  Is beef not good for dieters?
>     (I use organic by the way.)

That's because some people get the idea that they should eat low fat meat.
They also get the idea that beef and pork are high fat. This all depends on
where the meat comes from. Tenderloin is pork, but it's also 3-5% fat. Beef
undercut is usually around 6% fat. Except for a few parts, beef is
reasonnably low fat anyway, especially if you don't eat the visible fat. On
the other hand, chicken drumstick is very high in fat, even without the
skin, as high as 20%. Same with some fish (salmon...).
determined - 27 Apr 2004 21:48 GMT
> > > I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and fish.
> >
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> the other hand, chicken drumstick is very high in fat, even without the
> skin, as high as 20%. Same with some fish (salmon...).

However, beef brisket is a much higher fat cut of meat.
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 03:21 GMT
>> > > I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and
>> > > fish.
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> However, beef brisket is a much higher fat cut of meat.

According to my little book, 4 oz of brisket is 40 grams of
fat, 15g saturated.
determined - 28 Apr 2004 03:36 GMT
> >> > > I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and
> >> > > fish.
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> According to my little book, 4 oz of brisket is 40 grams of
> fat, 15g saturated.

hmm.  Even more than I thought...
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:09 GMT
>>>>>I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and
>>>>>fish.
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> According to my little book, 4 oz of brisket is 40 grams of
> fat, 15g saturated.

OUCH!
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 17:14 GMT
>>>>>>I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and
>>>>>>fish.
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
>
> OUCH!

Yeah. I love brisket too.  I used to get it at Red, Hot and
Blue in Cary, NC. (I wish we'd get one here.) Then one day I
looked it up.  I don't think I've had it since.
Lictor - 28 Apr 2004 19:14 GMT
> Yeah. I love brisket too.  I used to get it at Red, Hot and
> Blue in Cary, NC. (I wish we'd get one here.) Then one day I
> looked it up.  I don't think I've had it since.

Though 40% of fat is not that bad, when you compare it to stuff like
cheese... If eaten in low amount as part of an overwise low cal meal (green
veggies, no bread, no dessert...), I guess that would be fine. Anyway,
that's something I would not be afraid of eating if I actually liked high
fat meat (which I don't).
suz - 28 Apr 2004 19:49 GMT
>>>>>>>I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and
>>>>>>>fish.
[quoted text clipped - 34 lines]
> Blue in Cary, NC. (I wish we'd get one here.) Then one day I
> looked it up.  I don't think I've had it since.

I don't eat it much--just on certain holidays, and then some goes into
the freezer, where I discovered it on Monday evening!

I generally cook a brisket one day, and then put it in the fridge
overnight.  The next day, I take off all the fat that has solidified at
the surface, and then cook some more, before serving.  Would that help
with the fat content?
OceanView - 29 Apr 2004 23:20 GMT
>>>>>>>>I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and
>>>>>>>>fish.
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
> more, before serving.  Would that help with the fat
> content?

Yes, it would!  Sort of like skimming gravy.  I wish I had the
discipline to freeze it.  St Patricks day I had a large hunk
of corned beef, and too much of it too fast.
suz - 27 Apr 2004 22:03 GMT
>>>I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and fish.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> the other hand, chicken drumstick is very high in fat, even without the
> skin, as high as 20%. Same with some fish (salmon...).

I was under the impression that it is really the total number of
calories per day that counts, so does it really matter if I choose beef
one night or a chicken drumstick the next, as long as I stay within my
calories?
determined - 27 Apr 2004 22:11 GMT
> >>>I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and fish.
> >>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> one night or a chicken drumstick the next, as long as I stay within my
> calories?

No, not really.  The point is to get the most bang for your buck so to
speak.  You could lose weight on doughnuts, as long as you stayed within
your calories, but you'd be starving, and you'd feel like sh.t.  If you eat
leaner meat, you eat less calories.  So you can use those extra calories to
eat something more filling...
Lictor - 28 Apr 2004 08:05 GMT
> No, not really.  The point is to get the most bang for your buck so to
> speak.  You could lose weight on doughnuts, as long as you stayed within
> your calories, but you'd be starving, and you'd feel like sh.t.  If you eat
> leaner meat, you eat less calories.  So you can use those extra calories to
> eat something more filling...

In my experience, volume is not really more filling than dense food. I have
actually been dieting on some non diet food (chocolate, cheese, French
fries, pizza...) as an experiment, by doing single food lunch for four days.
The days I did French fries, my 1pm lunch did last me until my 8pm dinner,
so I would say it was pretty filling. Same with chocolate, 3.5oz of
chocolate is not a large volume, but it nevertheless did the trick until
early evening. Fats seem to bring pretty good long term satiety (though they
don't feel that good at instant satiety to me, I often had hunger pop off a
few minutes *after* the meal, maybe because it's hard to eat slowly a very
small amount of food). In all these cases, the overall calorie intake for
the day was probably reasonnable, since my weight loss stood on track during
these weeks.
~Deb~ - 28 Apr 2004 22:45 GMT
> > >>>I would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and fish.
> > >>
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> leaner meat, you eat less calories.  So you can use those extra calories to
> eat something more filling...

Exactly!
~Deb~ - 27 Apr 2004 21:41 GMT
> >>Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
> >>pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
>
> Hm.  The popcorn had no salt (I made it myself),

Oh, then that's okay, I thought it had salt on it...:)

> and the cheese was just
> standard sharp cheddar, which I have eaten for years with no ill
> effects.

Hmmm, no idea then.

>  The brisket did have wine in it, but that had been cooked for
> hours and hours.  I am sure there was no "alcohol" left in there by the
> time it was served.

Couldn't be that then...

> I have never had headaches from eating brisket
> before, or even from having a glass of wine at dinner, which I did not
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Is there a reason for that specifically?  Is beef not good for dieters?
>     (I use organic by the way.)

I have always heard that cutting out red meat is what a dieter should do to
lose weight, but I could be wrong, maybe there are new guidelines..

> > I would cut out any fried food and the peanut butter and cheese.
>
> Why?  Peanut butter is a great food, loaded with protein.

Peanut butter has alot of calories.  I've just recently added it to my diet.

>  And what is
> wrong with cheese.  I had a little more than an ounce--not really
> excessive.

I think cheese is ok, once in a great while.  Correct me if I am wrong, but
I believe cheddar cheese has a high fat content.

>  Does fried food cause headaches?

Not that I know of, but it is not good for a dieter, IMO.

>  I have never gotten
> headaches from fried eggs before.  It's not like I had french fries or
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> foods I have eaten all my life would suddenly cause headaches in smaller
> amounts than I usually eat them.

That's entirely possible.

> > Maybe instead of cream in your coffee you could use some non-dairy creamer.
>
> I appreciate your advice, but no thanks to that!  I will not pollute my
> coffee or my body with chemicals when I can just have the real thing.
> What I have in my coffee each day is a half cup of milk with a splash of
> cream.

It was JMO of course...:)

> > It also sounds like you need to add alot more fresh vegetables.
>
> I did have a large salad with the brisket at dinner, which had lots of
> carrots, cucumber, lettuce, and sweet red pepper.  I just didn't figure
> out the calories for that.

I LOVE salads!  The more stuff I can put in them, the better!

> Adding fresh veggies is always a good idea, but I want to feel satisfied
> and full, instead of starving and headachy.
determined - 27 Apr 2004 21:42 GMT
brisket is loaded, and I mean LOADED with sodium.

> >>Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
> >>pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 68 lines]
> Adding fresh veggies is always a good idea, but I want to feel satisfied
> and full, instead of starving and headachy.
determined - 27 Apr 2004 21:46 GMT
> brisket is loaded, and I mean LOADED with sodium.

Let me correct that stmt with this - corned beef is loaded with sodium.  I
have a pack in the fridge and a serving of 4oz has 600 mg of sodium...
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 03:24 GMT
>> brisket is loaded, and I mean LOADED with sodium.
>
> Let me correct that stmt with this - corned beef is loaded
> with sodium.  I have a pack in the fridge and a serving of
> 4oz has 600 mg of sodium...

My book says a 4oz piece has 1140mg!
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:10 GMT
>>>brisket is loaded, and I mean LOADED with sodium.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> My book says a 4oz piece has 1140mg!

Corned beef and brisket are not the same thing at all!  Only the
original cut of beef is the same.  The way you prepare it makes all the
difference!
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 17:15 GMT
>>>>brisket is loaded, and I mean LOADED with sodium.
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Only the original cut of beef is the same.  The way you
> prepare it makes all the difference!

I know, being a lover of both!  But they're both nasty from
diet perspective.
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 03:16 GMT
<snip>
would cut out the beef and stick with chicken and fish.

> Is there a reason for that specifically?  Is beef not good
> for dieters?
>     (I use organic by the way.)

Beef, lean cuts like round, are okay in moderation.  However,
it still has a high amount of saturated fat, is high in
calories and the cholesterol is very high.

>> I would cut out any fried food and the peanut butter and
>> cheese.

Get the natural PB (the kind you have to stir), because the
others have additives and are usually "hydrogenated" which
turns the good fat into bad fat that's just as bad as lard.

Cheese, real cheese, is okay, again, in moderation.  Most
"american" cheese, cheese whiz, etc, are mostly fat and oil
and chemicals. Not good.

> Why?  Peanut butter is a great food, loaded with protein.
> And what is wrong with cheese.  I had a little more than an
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> My impression yesterday was that I was feeling incredibly
> hungry all day, and that resulted in a headache.  It never

If I skip a meal or two, I get a headache, then get rewarded
with the runs the next day!

> occurred to me that foods I have eaten all my life would
> suddenly cause headaches in smaller amounts than I usually
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> just have the real thing. What I have in my coffee each day
> is a half cup of milk with a splash of cream.

You might try subbing evaporated milk.  It takes a little
getting used to but it's creamy!

>> It also sounds like you need to add alot more fresh
>> vegetables.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Adding fresh veggies is always a good idea, but I want to
> feel satisfied and full, instead of starving and headachy.

Salads take some adjusting to, but once you do, you won't feel
deprived with a good salad.  I'm 6'3' and former "meat freak"
myself, but I eat salads a lot now and I like them.
Lictor - 28 Apr 2004 08:20 GMT
> Get the natural PB (the kind you have to stir), because the
> others have additives and are usually "hydrogenated" which
> turns the good fat into bad fat that's just as bad as lard.

They are actually a lot *worse* than saturated fats, because you get trans
fats in the process. Trans fats up LDL cholesterol, but do nothing to HDL
(or even lower it). Saturated fats up both LDL and HDL. Also, saturated fats
are associated with vitamins (A,D,E) while the vitamins from oils are often
destroyed by all the heating and hydrogenation. Some saturated fats, like
these from milk, also come with very interesting fatty acids, like CLA
(conjugated linoleic acid) which fight against cancer. The few trans fats
you naturally find in butter are much less dangerous than the trans fats
from vegetal oil. On the other hand, the omega acids in oils are the first
things to get hydrogenated and are destroyed in the process.
As for lard, you can still buy it from pigs fed with flax seeds. It's around
1/3 saturated fats, 1/3 unsaturated and 1/3 polyunsaturated. It's also very
high in omega-3.
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 17:20 GMT
>> Get the natural PB (the kind you have to stir), because
>> the others have additives and are usually "hydrogenated"
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> It's around 1/3 saturated fats, 1/3 unsaturated and 1/3
> polyunsaturated. It's also very high in omega-3.

I actually thought that was the case, but I wasn't sure about
the details, so I pulled back.  Thanks for the update!  My fat
literature refers to fats as the the good, the bad and the
ugly, with trans-fats as the ugly.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:08 GMT
>>Is there a reason for that specifically?  Is beef not good
>>for dieters?
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> it still has a high amount of saturated fat, is high in
> calories and the cholesterol is very high.

I just had 3 ounces of it for dinner on one night.  It isn't like I eat
it for every meal, or even every day.  My cholesterol is fortunately
very low (the bad type).

>>>I would cut out any fried food and the peanut butter and
>>>cheese.
>
> Get the natural PB (the kind you have to stir), because the
> others have additives and are usually "hydrogenated" which
> turns the good fat into bad fat that's just as bad as lard.

Yes, I use natural already.

> Cheese, real cheese, is okay, again, in moderation.  Most
> "american" cheese, cheese whiz, etc, are mostly fat and oil
> and chemicals. Not good.

I only eat real cheese--no processed.

>>Why?  Peanut butter is a great food, loaded with protein.
>>And what is wrong with cheese.  I had a little more than an
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> If I skip a meal or two, I get a headache, then get rewarded
> with the runs the next day!

I didn't skip meals, but it sure felt like I did.  That is what is so
puzzling.

> You might try subbing evaporated milk.  It takes a little
> getting used to but it's creamy!

It is such a small amount of cream and just a half a cup of milk, which
is not bad for me by any stretch of the imagination.  Why do you and the
person who suggested the non-dairy creamer recommend substituting?  If
it is just to save a few calories, I would rather save the calories in
another way!

>>>It also sounds like you need to add alot more fresh
>>>vegetables.
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> deprived with a good salad.  I'm 6'3' and former "meat freak"
> myself, but I eat salads a lot now and I like them.

I had a big salad AND a nice serving of beef brisket.  I didn't feel
deprived afterwards.  I felt full.

But I did feel very hungry again a couple of hours later, and therefore
had my bread and cheese snack so I would be able to sleep.
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 17:27 GMT
<snip>

> It is such a small amount of cream and just a half a cup of
> milk, which is not bad for me by any stretch of the
> imagination.  Why do you and the person who suggested the
> non-dairy creamer recommend substituting?  If it is just to
> save a few calories, I would rather save the calories in
> another way!

<snip>

It's a matter of where you draw your lines, I guess.  If that's
something you really want, keep it!  I refuse to give up coffee,
even though I know it casuses *some* resistance (increases
insulin, which makes your body produce fat).  I also get a small
cookie with coffee in the morning, but I'm pretty good the rest
of the day.  At home, I use dry creamer, but when I'm out I get
milk and a splash of half/half.  Unless you drink 10 cups of
coffee a day, it won't make much difference.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 19:54 GMT
> <snip>
>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> milk and a splash of half/half.  Unless you drink 10 cups of
> coffee a day, it won't make much difference.

My feeling exactly.  The point is to lose weight, but that shouldn't
mean that everything that is pleasurable has to go!
Patricia Heil - 27 Apr 2004 15:58 GMT
What are you doing for exercise?

> Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
> pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
> STARVING and getting headaches?
suz - 27 Apr 2004 18:19 GMT
> What are you doing for exercise?

1.5 hours of Power Yoga 4 times a week, and brisk walking (often pushing
a stroller) on the off days.

>>Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
>>pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>>That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
>>STARVING and getting headaches?
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 03:26 GMT
>> What are you doing for exercise?
>
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
>>>That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.
>>>Why am I STARVING and getting headaches?

Power Yoga?  Sounds like a contradiction, like Jumbo Shrimp or
military intelligence.
meg - 28 Apr 2004 11:57 GMT
> >> What are you doing for exercise?
> >
[quoted text clipped - 35 lines]
> Power Yoga?  Sounds like a contradiction, like Jumbo Shrimp or
> military intelligence.

Its probaly you just thinking your starving and your not try having a
pint of water befor you eat anything that might help you not feel so
hungry and it will make you not eat as much as well.
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 17:16 GMT
>> >> What are you doing for exercise?
>> >
[quoted text clipped - 41 lines]
> might help you not feel so hungry and it will make you not
> eat as much as well.

Also help digestion dramatically. I don't get heartburn
anymore.  This was a daily problem.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:13 GMT
>>>What are you doing for exercise?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Power Yoga?  Sounds like a contradiction, like Jumbo Shrimp or
> military intelligence.

LOL!  It has parts that are like traditional yoga, where you hold the
poses for a long time, and other parts where you go through the sun
salutations, for example, quickly, building up a lot of sweat
(especially since the room is heated up quite a lot) and making that
part of the workout very aerobic.  It isn't authentic, but for me, it
feels wonderful, and encompasses both aerobic and strength training in
each session.
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 17:17 GMT
>>>>What are you doing for exercise?
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> wonderful, and encompasses both aerobic and strength
> training in each session.

Sounds like a time-saver.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 19:52 GMT
>>>>>What are you doing for exercise?
>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Sounds like a time-saver.

I love it.  I got so strong and felt so healthy so quickly, and without
all the misery of say, running.  (Apologies to runners!  It is a sport I
could never get into.)  I also love that the class is a bit different
each time, depending on the teacher or on the time of day, or whatever
other factor, which keeps it interesting for me.  I can't stand going to
a gym, because the machines are so boring and all I can think of is how
many minutes 'til it ends!
Heywood Mogroot - 29 Apr 2004 07:18 GMT

> other factor, which keeps it interesting for me.  I can't stand going to
> a gym, because the machines are so boring and all I can think of is how
> many minutes 'til it ends!

That's why I like cycling, by the time I get bored with it I'm way out
in BFE (that's the boonies for you fuddy-duddies) and have no choice
but to peddle my sorry *#^ back...
J.J. Marie - 29 Apr 2004 20:03 GMT
Hark! I heard imouttahere@mac.com (Heywood Mogroot) say:
>  
> > other factor, which keeps it interesting for me.  I can't stand going to
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> in BFE (that's the boonies for you fuddy-duddies) and have no choice
> but to peddle my sorry *#^ back...

I feel the same about walking, which is why I do it outside and not on
a treadmill. I walk a one mile stretch of bike trail then turn around
and go back to my car -- takes about 40 minutes at this point. Even if
I do want to quit halfway through (which is happening less and less),
I can't, as I still have to walk that mile back...

Signature

J.J. in WA State - 251/232/150
(Change COLD to HOT for e-mail)

OceanView - 29 Apr 2004 23:23 GMT
> Hark! I heard imouttahere@mac.com (Heywood Mogroot) say:
>>  
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> through (which is happening less and less), I can't, as I
> still have to walk that mile back...

I do both, though seldom in one day as I did today (about 4
miles).  I walk indoors when the weather doesn't cooperate.
People who walk (or run or bike) outdoors tend to do it longer
and stick with it long term.
Heywood Mogroot - 30 Apr 2004 05:58 GMT
> > Hark! I heard imouttahere@mac.com (Heywood Mogroot) say:
>  
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> People who walk (or run or bike) outdoors tend to do it longer
> and stick with it long term.

4 years ago I did something insane: I drove with my bike, parked the
car at the top of a long climb (the highway between the ocean and
Alice's on the SF Peninsula), and coasted ~10 miles downhill...
OceanView - 01 May 2004 00:46 GMT
>> > Hark! I heard imouttahere@mac.com (Heywood Mogroot) say:
>>  
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
> between the ocean and Alice's on the SF Peninsula), and
> coasted ~10 miles downhill...

They do that in Hawaii, too.  You leave at three in the
morning, take a small bus up to the summit of Haleakala
(dormant volcano), then ride 30 miles down on bikes.  In a few
hours, you go from 30F degress to 80F.
Heywood Mogroot - 03 May 2004 09:43 GMT
> >> > Hark! I heard imouttahere@mac.com (Heywood Mogroot) say:
>  
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
> (dormant volcano), then ride 30 miles down on bikes.  In a few
> hours, you go from 30F degress to 80F.

yeah, I know, I hope to see the tourists coasting down when I'm
pedalling *up* Haleakula someday.

But the diff is my car, the only way home, was still parked back at
the top of the slope...
OceanView - 04 May 2004 02:26 GMT
>> >> > Hark! I heard imouttahere@mac.com (Heywood Mogroot)
>> >> > say:
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
> But the diff is my car, the only way home, was still parked
> back at the top of the slope...

Bummer! Lot of first gear pedalling.
JMA - 30 Apr 2004 00:46 GMT
> > other factor, which keeps it interesting for me.  I can't stand going to
> > a gym, because the machines are so boring and all I can think of is how
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> in BFE (that's the boonies for you fuddy-duddies) and have no choice
> but to peddle my sorry *#^ back...

I like the structure of the gym for my weight training.  OTOH, I have grown
to despise the treadmill and go outside to run or walk whenever possible.
Yesterday it was 80 degrees out (after snowing 2 days earlier) and after my
run I went in to do some lifting and I couldn't believe someone was actually
walking on the treadmill. The gym is near a great trail for
walking/running/biking.

Jenn
yeah yeah, lift before cardio but that's only for weightlifters who run :P
Lictor - 29 Apr 2004 07:57 GMT
> I can't stand going to
> a gym, because the machines are so boring and all I can think of is how
> many minutes 'til it ends!

Many people feel this way too. ;) You don't need to go to the gym to
exercise. Practicing inline skating will give you a cardio workout that is
as high intensity as anything you do in the gym (and also build some very
serious leg and butt muscles) - but it will also be a lot funnier. I still
think dumbbells are better than machines for most musculation exercises, and
they're also less boring. I have done a fair share of martial arts in my
youth, and the workout you get out of them is pretty high quality (enough to
build a six-pack and improve endurance) and not boring at all.
OceanView - 29 Apr 2004 23:26 GMT
>> I can't stand going to
>> a gym, because the machines are so boring and all I can
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> to build a six-pack and improve endurance) and not boring
> at all.

I do the machines because of structure that I need, and the
ease of measuring progress.  But I do mix in some free
weights.

The key for most people is to find something you like, even if
it's badmitton!
jmk - 27 Apr 2004 16:10 GMT
> Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
> pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
> STARVING and getting headaches?

If it were me, I would need a lot more fiber than that.  It looks like
you ate about 50% fat, 25% protein and 25% carbohydrate and about 12
grams of fiber.  I would probably want about 3x the fiber to feel full.
 Also, be really sure to drink plenty of water.  I don't know what WOE
you are following so I'll stop there.  I do hope that you are doing some
kind of exercise as well but I realize that sometimes you can't change
everything all at once either.

Signature

jmk in NC

Alex - 27 Apr 2004 16:29 GMT
>Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
>pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
>STARVING and getting headaches?

I'm no expert by any means, but here's what I see -- you are spiking
your blood sugar repeatedly with sweet fruit & wine and empty carbs
(bread) that metabolize like sugar. So you are getting the least bang
for the buck, so to speak. Eat some lean meats, fish and veggies
through the day and you may notice a marked improvement. Try yogurt,
eggs, lowfat cottage cheese, nuts as snacks rather than bread.

HTH

Ally
212/196/160
Lictor - 27 Apr 2004 18:07 GMT
> I'm no expert by any means, but here's what I see -- you are spiking
> your blood sugar repeatedly with sweet fruit & wine and empty carbs
> (bread) that metabolize like sugar.

Wine doesn't spike sugar, it's mostly sugar free (white wine does have some
sugar, red wine is virtually carb free). Alcohol does the exact opposite of
a sugar spike, it usually pushes you into hypoglycemia (my worst was
drinking vodka while I hadn't eaten, then going to the restaurant, taking my
insulino-secretor diabete medication and then waiting half an hour for that
stupid meal to arrive - thought I would collapse). Anywa,y unless I missed a
glass of wine somewhere, it seems like she's cooking with it. Beef is cooked
with red wine, so no sugar there, and the alcohol goes away when the wine is
heated.

As for the bread and fruits, it's hard to spot, since the list is not broken
into meals. But :
- a piece of whole grain bread with a tablespoon of peanut butter - should
be medium glycemic index because of the fat from peanut butter (assuming
it's not sugar with a little peanuts in the mix) and whole grain bread
(assuming it's real whole bread).
- 2 pieces of wheat bread with melted cheddar cheese - is also slowed down
by the cheese, though might still be pretty fast if it's white wheat.
- What's cantaloup? lol

But this does indeed look like hypoglycemia. So maybe this is a severe case
of reactive hypoglycemia, but her food is not that high GI, I mean, she's
not gorging herself on soda all day long or stuff like this.
But dehydratation can cause headaches. As someone else posted, so can lack
of caffeine.
Beverly - 27 Apr 2004 18:46 GMT
> - What's cantaloup? lol

http://www.cfbf.com/info/cantaloupe.htm
Lictor - 28 Apr 2004 08:25 GMT
> http://www.cfbf.com/info/cantaloupe.htm

Ahhhh, thanks :) That looks really like the traditionnal melon kind we have
in France actually. If it's indeed the same, it has a pretty high glycemic
index, but it's mostly water with a pretty low sugar level.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:34 GMT
>>http://www.cfbf.com/info/cantaloupe.htm
>
> Ahhhh, thanks :) That looks really like the traditionnal melon kind we have
> in France actually. If it's indeed the same, it has a pretty high glycemic
> index, but it's mostly water with a pretty low sugar level.

Compared to other fruits, it is low sugar due to the water.  When I was
pregnant, I had gestational diabetes for the last trimester, and chose
canteloup (with cottage cheese of course) when I wanted fruit, because I
could eat more of it.
suz - 27 Apr 2004 19:41 GMT
>>I'm no expert by any means, but here's what I see -- you are spiking
>>your blood sugar repeatedly with sweet fruit & wine and empty carbs
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
> But dehydratation can cause headaches. As someone else posted, so can lack
> of caffeine.

I didn't get the above message from Lictor, so I'll answer both here.

I did drink a lot of water, since I do get headaches from dehydration.
I only drink coffee in the morning, and had my usual cup.

I did not drink wine with dinner, but the wine was in the sauce and
cooked many hours, so no actual alcohol.

The bread was whole grain, so not completely empty carbs, and was eaten
 with peanut butter or cheese, so that should not have spiked my blood
sugar.

I am a person who tends to eat throughout the day.  I can't be the only
one who will have a piece of melon or another fruit as a snack?  If I am
not diabetic, why would that be a problem?

By the way, I cook.  Not every meal is perfectly balanced--I'm human!
But I do eat a good variety of foods over the course of a day or several
days.  I don't eat fast food, and I don't keep cookies, chips, soda and
other junk food in the house.  I do have a weakness for chocolate, but
didn't have any yesterday.
determined - 27 Apr 2004 21:50 GMT
> >>I'm no expert by any means, but here's what I see -- you are spiking
> >>your blood sugar repeatedly with sweet fruit & wine and empty carbs
[quoted text clipped - 47 lines]
> other junk food in the house.  I do have a weakness for chocolate, but
> didn't have any yesterday.

Don't get defensive, we really are trying to help - we're just looking at
all the possible angles...
Lictor - 28 Apr 2004 08:36 GMT
> I am a person who tends to eat throughout the day.

Some successful dieters are on 6+ meals a day. It seems to work for them.
Others are on 2 meals a day. It also seems to work for them.

> I can't be the only
> one who will have a piece of melon or another fruit as a snack?  If I am
> not diabetic, why would that be a problem?

Actually, I'm diabetic, and I will have a fruit as a snack. lol It seems to
depend on people, but for me, fruits seem to be pretty slow acting, except
for some specific ones (like ripe banana). The fibers in most fruits will
slow down the digestion pretty well. That's my standard thing to snack on
when I exercise, though I have been trying nuts lately. But some other
people seem not to tolerate them so well.

The problem is that noone really knows where your headache come from. Since
you changed your food intake, it would have seem possible they came from
that. The two main causes that *will* cause headache are dehydratation
(directly or as a side effect of sodium intake) and hypoglycemia (though I
tend to get these only if I stay on hypoglycemia for too long). Also,
hypoglycemia doesn't make me feel like I'm starving, it makes me feel
nauseous, so it's obviously a YMMV thing. Other diet related things can
cause that, like potassium or magnesium level, but that would not be an
instant kind of thing.
Since none of these fits, maybe there are sources outside of your diet. Do
you smoke? Did you exercise more/less than usual (high BP can cause
headaches, and exercising raises hunger)? Did you sleep badly? Did you get
stressed or anxious - that's instant headache to my gf?
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:36 GMT
>>I am a person who tends to eat throughout the day.
>
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
> headaches, and exercising raises hunger)? Did you sleep badly? Did you get
> stressed or anxious - that's instant headache to my gf?

I have young children, so no, I am not getting much sleep!  Perhaps it
is not diet related, though I was starving all day.  I am going to eat
normally and count calories to see what my body wants, and then cut
200-400 calories from there, as others have suggested.
Beverly - 27 Apr 2004 16:32 GMT
> Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
> pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
> STARVING and getting headaches?

Have you cut your caffeine intake along with the diet?  If so, this could
be the source of the headaches.
determined - 27 Apr 2004 16:47 GMT
> Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
> pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
> STARVING and getting headaches?

I don't know how much you weigh, but computer calculators aren't always
accurate.  If you are getting adequate exercise you should be able to lose
at between 10-12 cal x current weight in lbs.  You may be going too low...
Looking at your diet, I think I would cut back a little on the fruit, eat
more veggies, cut back on the bread and eggs...  More protein, more fiber,
less carbs, less fat.  Eat frequent small meals throughout the day.  And
also, the body has a hard time adjusting all at once to a large calorie
drop, so you might want to just cut 100 calories a week from your daily
intake until you are down to 1300.  Say your body was used to 1800
calories - so go to 1700 then 1600 and so on over several weeks.  The
headaches should stop.  Your body just needs time to adjust.

det
Michelle Guy - 27 Apr 2004 17:54 GMT
And alot of fat. Try adding low fat alternatives, cutting back from
cream to milk, poached eggs instead of fried, cheese can be very high
in fat. How about a meat and salad sandwich with just a trace of
mustard instead of butter.  5 portions of fruit and veg, loads of bulk
without alot of fat and calories. It would really bulk up so you are
not hungry and your blood sugar levels should also even out a bit,
because you eat more frequently.  1600 cals try for 400 cals for the 3
main meals and a snack of 100 cals each.  Tweak after a week, you are
an individual so the computers are not always right, if you are losing
to fast add 100 cals per day, if not cut cals by 50 or so and up the
exercise by 50 or so.  Let us know how you get on.
Michelle
Ozzie in Switzerland
69.8/59.7/61kg

>Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
>pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
>STARVING and getting headaches?
Brad Sheppard - 27 Apr 2004 20:18 GMT
I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
because you're eating too few calories. Want an easy way to lose the
ten pounds?  Try drinking one cup of grapefruit juice before each
meal.  It has worked for me when nothing else did.  BTW the juice is
also good for you.  The acid in the juice slows digestion, apparently.

> Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
> pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
> STARVING and getting headaches?
determined - 27 Apr 2004 21:53 GMT
> I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
> because you're eating too few calories. Want an easy way to lose the
> ten pounds?  Try drinking one cup of grapefruit juice before each
> meal.  It has worked for me when nothing else did.  BTW the juice is
> also good for you.  The acid in the juice slows digestion, apparently.

Is there a site somewhere that gives impartial information about the affects
of grapefruit juice on digestion?  Everything that I've looked at is trying
to sell something.  I wouldn't mind adding grapefruit juice to my diet, I
actually like it quite a bit.  But I pretty much cut out all juice and other
sugary stuff when i changed my woe 2 years ago...  So I'd want to have more
solid info first.

det
Brad Sheppard - 28 Apr 2004 15:41 GMT
Det,

for the no-hype story from the "horses mouth"  see
http://www.scrippsclinic.com/news/Article_Fulltext.cfm?ID=211&nc0.76064654

For the hype (and book) see
http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=66490

Caution!  Grapefruit interferes with some meds (eg statin drugs).  

> > I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> > calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> det
suz - 27 Apr 2004 22:02 GMT
> I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
> because you're eating too few calories. Want an easy way to lose the
> ten pounds?  Try drinking one cup of grapefruit juice before each
> meal.  It has worked for me when nothing else did.  BTW the juice is
> also good for you.  The acid in the juice slows digestion, apparently.

What a neat idea!  I love grapefruit juice.  Do you happen to remember
which medicines it interferes with?  I seem to recall that you cannot
take certain meds with grapefruit juice.
~Deb~ - 27 Apr 2004 22:12 GMT
> > I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> > calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> which medicines it interferes with?  I seem to recall that you cannot
> take certain meds with grapefruit juice.

Xanax is one of the meds that you can't have grapefruit or grapefruit juice
with.
Tara N. - 27 Apr 2004 23:24 GMT
Alprazolam (depression/anxiety med) is another med where you should not
consume grapefruit juice with.

.  Do you happen to remember
> which medicines it interferes with?  I seem to recall that you cannot
> take certain meds with grapefruit juice.
OceanView - 28 Apr 2004 03:38 GMT
>> I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding
>> out how many calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> recall that you cannot take certain meds with grapefruit
> juice.

http://www.drweil.com/app/cda/drw_cda.html-command=TodayQA-
questionId=3306

I like this guy's web site.  I f the like doesn't work, just
go to www.drweil.com and search on 'grapefruit juice' (if that
isn't obvious!)
jmk - 28 Apr 2004 13:39 GMT
>> I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
>> calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> which medicines it interferes with?  I seem to recall that you cannot
> take certain meds with grapefruit juice.

What Could Possibly Be Bad About Grapefruit?
http://my.webmd.com/content/Article/30/1728_69038.htm?printing=true

Grapefruit Interactions Are Confusing
http://www.healthcentral.com/PrintFormat/PrintFullText.cfm?id=60825

Antioxidant and antiproliferative activities of common fruits.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra
ct&list_uids=12452674


Signature

jmk in NC

suz - 27 Apr 2004 22:05 GMT
> I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
> because you're eating too few calories.

I am beginning to think this is the case.  I have never been so hungry
as these last two days!  I have such admiration for you folks who manage
to survive on even fewer calories day after day and week after week.

Perhaps my chasing and lifting my 2 young children, not to mention the
sleep deprivation, adds up to more "exercise" than I thought.
determined - 27 Apr 2004 22:13 GMT
> > I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> > calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> as these last two days!  I have such admiration for you folks who manage
> to survive on even fewer calories day after day and week after week.

Most of us aren't losing weight on lower calories...  For example, I started
at 140 lbs (5'3") and lost weight just fine at 1400-1600 per day.  I only
felt deprived and hungry initially, but once I learned to eat to fuel my
body properly, I didn't feel that way anymore.

det
~Deb~ - 27 Apr 2004 22:26 GMT
> > > I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> > > calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> det

I lost all my weight lowering calories, but I should have been exercising
all along, that's where I made my mistake.
determined - 27 Apr 2004 23:36 GMT
> > > > I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> > > > calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> I lost all my weight lowering calories, but I should have been exercising
> all along, that's where I made my mistake.

Yeah, I had to lower my calories too.  What I meant to say, was that most of
us don't cut calories drastically, in response to her post which stated "I
have such admiration for you folks who manage to survive on even fewer
calories day after day and week after week."  We all have had to cut
calories, but most of us have found a non-starvation way of eating in
addition to exercise for losing weight.  I just wanted to make sure that she
knew that starving or severe calorie restriction is not a requirement to
lose weight.

det
~Deb~ - 27 Apr 2004 23:50 GMT
> > > > > I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> > > > > calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> det

Ah, yes, I remember that part of that post....and what you say is true....
JayJay - 27 Apr 2004 23:52 GMT
> Yeah, I had to lower my calories too.  What I meant to say, was that most of
> us don't cut calories drastically, in response to her post which stated "I
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> knew that starving or severe calorie restriction is not a requirement to
> lose weight.

One name - to emphasize the failure of starvation diets....

CALEB BURNS

Year after year the return of Caleb to the group to starve himself for 100
days only to regain his weight in the other 265days in the year...

Moderate lower calories and exercise will make all the difference in the
world in the long run.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 00:26 GMT
> Moderate lower calories and exercise will make all the difference in the
> world in the long run.

I thought that lowering my calories by just 200 per day (assuming
exercise) was moderate, but someone else suggested that it might be that
the number of calories I need to maintain is actually higher than the
calculators have estimated, meaning that I have been dropping more than
200 calories per day.
JayJay - 28 Apr 2004 00:51 GMT
> I thought that lowering my calories by just 200 per day (assuming
> exercise) was moderate, but someone else suggested that it might be that
> the number of calories I need to maintain is actually higher than the
> calculators have estimated, meaning that I have been dropping more than
> 200 calories per day.

Suz,

You've already been given alot of answers and options.   Its time to just
put them into place.

Sorry, at this moment I'm not in a mood to post much.  So, my suggestion is
to re-read the post that suggested you go back to your normal way of eating,
and just track what you were eating "before"   put it into fitday and see
how many  calories you were consuming before.   Also, see what all you were
eating and what kinds of foods and drinks you were having.

From there you make adjustments.   That will allow you to continue to eat
the foods you enjoy, yet cut back on some simple items that might make a big
impact on calories.

From there - read tis group.  read posts from people like Chris, who post
their daily intake.   Get ideas of different foods/recipes that you can
make.

Then you start listening to your body.   It takes about 2 weeks to get
adjusted to lower calorie eating without feeling the hunger pangs.  Once you
get past your initial shock, then you learn to listen to your body.  You
learn hunger, you learn what foods make you feel good and what makes you
feel crappy.   You learn the types of food that set you off on a day of
eating everything in sight, or make you want more food.   And you learn what
foods will keep you feeling satisfied and not hungry for hours.

We all post about different foods and recipies that are tasty, as well as
satisfying and low in calorie so the fit well into varying ways of eating.
The "oatmeals" and the "protein powders" and all those.

Good luck.
determined - 28 Apr 2004 02:21 GMT
> > Moderate lower calories and exercise will make all the difference in the
> > world in the long run.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> calculators have estimated, meaning that I have been dropping more than
> 200 calories per day.

How do you know how many calories you were eating before the diet change?
suz - 28 Apr 2004 03:00 GMT
>>>Moderate lower calories and exercise will make all the difference in the
>>>world in the long run.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> How do you know how many calories you were eating before the diet change?

I don't.  I just assumed that because I have been the same weight for a
while that I must have been eating the number of calories for maintenance.
determined - 28 Apr 2004 03:39 GMT
> >>>Moderate lower calories and exercise will make all the difference in the
> >>>world in the long run.
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> I don't.  I just assumed that because I have been the same weight for a
> while that I must have been eating the number of calories for maintenance.

So you were eating at maintenance weight.  But how do you know what your
caloric maintenance level is?  It is really important to know that # in
order to set realistic goals for weight loss.  Lowering calories 200 a day
is a conservative step, but you don't really know what your starting point
was.

det
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:30 GMT
>>>>How do you know how many calories you were eating before the diet
>>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> det

Yes, it is becoming crystal clear that the maintenance number from the
websites was lower than mine.  I will take the next day or two to just
eat what I want, and write down the calories, so I can see what my true
maintenance calorie number is.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 00:23 GMT
>>>>>I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
>>>>>calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
>
> det

I understand that.  I am exercising as well.
Beverly - 27 Apr 2004 22:42 GMT
> > I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> > calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Perhaps my chasing and lifting my 2 young children, not to mention the
> sleep deprivation, adds up to more "exercise" than I thought.

I've read that lack of sleep often slows down the weight loss.  Hopefully
someone can post a sight with some information on this for you.
Beverly - 27 Apr 2004 22:44 GMT
> > > I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> > > calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> I've read that lack of sleep often slows down the weight loss.  Hopefully
> someone can post a sight with some information on this for you.

Do a search on 'weight loss lack of sleep' and you'll find many sites with
information on this subject.....
Lictor - 28 Apr 2004 08:43 GMT
> I've read that lack of sleep often slows down the weight loss.  Hopefully
> someone can post a sight with some information on this for you.

Lack of sleep increases cortisol level, which raises hunger, lowers growth
hormone and increase insuline, IIRC. There's a biological reason for this,
lack of sleep is stressful, and the role of stress is to prepare your body
for incoming dangers. The last thing the body will do when it is preparing
to fight for survival is to dump the very stores (water, fat, carbs) that
might save your life when you need to run for it. So, it's all kind of
logical (in a primitive kind of way).
One of the first thing my nutritionist asked me was if I slept well. That's
something she actually asks at each visits. She often advice me to nap, or
at least get full nights of sleep.
Lack of sleep (and stress) also causes headaches - again, something my gf
easily get.
Why the sleep deprivation btw?
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:37 GMT
>>I've read that lack of sleep often slows down the weight loss.  Hopefully
>>someone can post a sight with some information on this for you.
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> easily get.
> Why the sleep deprivation btw?

 kids  LOL
Heywood Mogroot - 28 Apr 2004 08:41 GMT
> > I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
> > calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> as these last two days!  I have such admiration for you folks who manage
> to survive on even fewer calories day after day and week after week.

I've lost 20 lbs over the past 10 months, with zero hunger pangs, but
probably this is mainly due to:

a) this is my first actual calorie-deficit diet in my life
b) I'm a guy

other things:

c) I only eat carbs with fat or protein to slow the insulin hit
d) I try to keep to a 30-30-30 distribution of fat/protein/carbs over
the day
e) When I snack I snack on protein & fat, not carbs.

If you've cut back on caffeine that will most certainly give you
headaches.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:37 GMT
>>>I'd suggest going back to your regular diet and finding out how many
>>>calories you noramlly eat.  Then subtract 400.  You may be starving
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> the day
> e) When I snack I snack on protein & fat, not carbs.

Good point.

> If you've cut back on caffeine that will most certainly give you
> headaches.

I wouldn't dream of it!  ;-)
Heywood Mogroot - 28 Apr 2004 08:43 GMT
(oops 10 weeks not 10 months... most any person can lose 20lbs over 10
months without starving...)
Doug Freyburger - 27 Apr 2004 23:32 GMT
> Yesterday, I was literally starving all day.  I ate:
> coffee with milk and cream (100 calories)
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> some salad (?)
> before bed, 2 pieces of wheat bread with melted cheddar cheese (300)

I get a carb count in the 80-100 range.

> That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
> STARVING and getting headaches?

Likely as not, you have reduced your carb level to the point where
your liver is partially full of stored glycogen.  Full *or* empty
generates no carb cravings.  The headaches are typical of early low
carb detox.  Basically you hit the hard work spto in between low
carbing and high carbing, probably.

So either increase your carbs to fill your liver tank, or decrease
your carbs to empty it.  Either way, the headaches will pass when
you do it most likely.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 00:22 GMT
>>Yesterday, I was literally starving all day.  I ate:
>>coffee with milk and cream (100 calories)
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> I get a carb count in the 80-100 range.

What exactly does that mean?

>>That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
>>STARVING and getting headaches?
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> your carbs to empty it.  Either way, the headaches will pass when
> you do it most likely.

This is very interesting, though I don't really understand it.  I
haven't been craving carbs, per se, but have felt really hungry!
Doug Freyburger - 28 Apr 2004 14:48 GMT
> > I get a carb count in the 80-100 range.
>
> What exactly does that mean?

Grams per day when I tried to do a count from your listed menu.

> > Likely as not, you have reduced your carb level to the point where
> > your liver is partially full of stored glycogen.  Full *or* empty
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> This is very interesting, though I don't really understand it.  I
> haven't been craving carbs, per se, but have felt really hungry!

Understanding is irrelevant.  There is doing and seeing the results.
Food and the body's reaction to food is complex enough that few or
none actually understand much of it, but there are plenty of plans
going around that trigger loss without hunger.  Hunger can be
triggered in very many ways and carbs is only one.

Atkins starts at 20 and then moves up to your body's individual
ideal level.  It does the initial 20 to empty the liver's carb
storage tank quickly to get through the carb cravings quickly.  At
80-100 carb grams per day it is very possible you put yourself
in the middle of your liver's carb storage tank being partially
full, which would trigger a great deal of hunger.  Pushing your
carb grams up *or* down would resolve that.  One moves you into
the low carb camp, the other moves you into the low fat camp.
Either approach works for some and not for others.
suz - 28 Apr 2004 16:04 GMT
>>>I get a carb count in the 80-100 range.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
> the low carb camp, the other moves you into the low fat camp.
> Either approach works for some and not for others.

Thanks for this explanation.
Jessica Simpson - 29 Apr 2004 20:12 GMT
> >>Yesterday, I was literally starving all day.  I ate:

What I do is first thing in the morning: I have an omelette of 6 eggs and 2
cans of tuna. That's 1050 calories right there, but a lot of protein, some
fat, and no refined processed foods. After that initial boost, I'm not
acting on cravings, I'm not hungry for hours, and I'm therefore able to
negotiate throughout the day as to what else I'm going to eat. Net result: I
eat less (and fewer calories) than if I starve myself all day.
Lictor - 29 Apr 2004 20:39 GMT
> What I do is first thing in the morning: I have an omelette of 6 eggs and 2
> cans of tuna. That's 1050 calories right there, but a lot of protein, some
> fat, and no refined processed foods.

:-o
If I try to eat even half of that for breakfast, I have to go right back to
bed and sleep until my stomach is done with it - unless it's a run to the
bathroom to puke (really). My typical breakfast right now is some porridge
(6 tea spoons of hotmeal, two tea spoons of dried fruits and unsugared soy
milk). I might eventually eat a kiwi on top of that, but then I'm likely to
have lunch at 3pm instead of noon. And that's already a larger breakfast
than the majority of the people in my country (for more than 50% of adult
French people, breakfast is a cup of coffee - at most).
Some people are just not meant for large breakfast I guess. The only
exception is the week-end brunch at 11am, then I manage to eat more (2 eggs,
1 bagel, 2 slices of smoked salmon, some bread&butter, some cream and if I'm
really really hungry a slice of smoked ham), and that's all I need until
dinner (usually 8-9pm).
Chris Braun - 28 Apr 2004 03:50 GMT
>Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
>pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
>STARVING and getting headaches?

I haven't yet read all the responses -- perhaps someone else has
commented on this.  But, I'm guessing that you at the brisket, the
salad, and the bread with cheese all in the evening -- and maybe the
second piece of cantaloupe as well.  This is half of your day's
calories at dinner at subsequently.  If your hunger was mainly up
until dinner time, that's probably due to how you distributed the
day's eating.  In particular, you don't seem to have had much of a
noon meal.  I'd recommend trying to consume 2/3 of your day's calories
before dinner time.

Chris
262/153/ (145-150)
suz - 28 Apr 2004 13:32 GMT
>>Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
>>pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 36 lines]
> Chris
> 262/153/ (145-150)

For dinner, I had the brisket and the salad.  Before bed I had the bread
and cheese.  Lunch was the peanut butter on bread and a bit later, I had
the popcorn, and then a bit later, the canteloupe.
Lictor - 28 Apr 2004 09:03 GMT
> All of the calculators said I needed around 1600 calories per day to
> maintain my current weight, and estimated that I had to drop 400 per day
> to lose 10 pounds in 3 months.  Since I exercise, I added 200 calories
> back, so I need to drop 200 calories per day.

These calculators are mostly bullshit. They will very accurately these
values for an average human being. The only problem is that an average human
being really doesn't exist in the real world.
The only way to really know your daily needs would be to put you in a close
chamber and to measure oxygen intake. That's a pretty expensive thing to do,
and then, we would know your daily need for *that* day. It's likely to
change with your menstrual cycle, your stress level, how much you sleep and
of course exercise. Likewise, the calculation for energy spent exercising
are for average human beings. They're interresting if you want to compare
different kinds of exercise, but that's about all.
Likewise, I would not credit any calorie table with a high precision,
because they, too, only measure average nonexistant food - most real food
will jump around that value by as much as 20%.

What this means is that you can't do the math at that level of precision.
This especially need that your evaluation of 1600 cal/day might be
*completely* off. It depends completely on your metabolism, and this one is
very different from one person to the next. Several things can lower it :
- low thyroid hormones
- lean mass lower than usual (muscular disease, total lack of exercise,
protein deprivation...)
- crash diet that has put the body in starvation mode (starvation mode being
the body trying to lower the metabolism as much as possible to fight off the
diet - the body is often very successful at that).
- some people have just a passive attitude, in their daily life, their every
move is a lesson in economy.
And several others can up it :
- high thyroid hormones
- lean mass higher than usual (you lift weights, you have naturally high
hormones, you're just blessed with good genetics...). That's also why
exercise amounts for much more than the calories you burn while doing it,
the extra muscles will also burn calories for you 24/24.
- stress, you're naturally hyperactive, you're so nervous you don't know
what sitting still means...

This means that some people can maintain on a very low level of calories.
There are reports of people who *maintain* on a 1200 calories diet. At the
other hand of the spectrum, you have people who are massively obese and can
actually start losing weight on a 3000 calories intake, just because their
body was used to be stable on a 5000 calories diet. Yes, this is totally
unfair. I don't count my calories, but I know I lose weight eating the same
portions as most people around me.

That's why you can't use a formula, do some calculation and come up with
your reasonning above. The human body is way to complex for these formulas
to be anything more than an approximation. Maybe your diets never put your
body in starvation mode, maybe you have good muscles, maybe you're just an
active person or whatever, and as a result, your need 2200 calories instead
of 1600 to maintain. In that case, your 1400 diet would be much lower than
expected.
Lacey K - 29 Aug 2005 22:19 GMT
>Every so often, my weight creeps up (I am 42 now) and I want to lose 10
>pounds to stay comfortable in my clothes.  There are many websites that
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>That is 1300 calories plus the salad, whatever that was.  Why am I
>STARVING and getting headaches?

None of that stuff actually has any substance to it. Its all like empty
calories that burned up really fast and that's why you're so hungary. I
actually had more filling food for about the same calories today:

coffee, black(0)
salad with 2tbsp Ken's light ranch dressing, 2 tbsp cheese- (240)
1 can tuna mixed with 2tbsp cheese, 2 tbsp sour cream (210)
1 cup manderine oranges (70)
8 small pretzels (package)- (100)
3 oz. Pot Roast with carrots and potatoes (500)
Diet Coke (2)

I have not been hungary all day. Maybe you are not gettin enough carbs.
Whoever said you dont need carbs is lying because they give you energy and
keep you from gettin so hungary.
 
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.