 |
 | 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 / General Topics / August 2006day 4 of my "new" approach
After stalling for a few months at the same weight, while eating what I thought I could to lose weight but not, I decided to "jump start" my efforts with a very low (for me anyways) calorie diet. My approach, without any formal or commercial plan to follow, was to center my diet around lean protein and high fiber. I've averaged around 1000 calories per day so far, and my protein intake has been always above 100g per day. The only problem I'm having is some wild cravings in the evening, for junk I usually never eat like hot dogs and Taco Bell! I'm down 6 lbs from 138 to 132. I understand that much of this is water weight, but it is still encouraging because I wasn't sure I'd have the willpower to do this. My plan is to eat lowcal for 5 days, have a refeed day where I eat at or slightly above maintenance, and then do lowcal for 5 more days. I'm also doing daily exercise burning an average of 300 calories. My goal is to lose 8-10 lbs, and I'm giving myself until mid October o make it happen. When you eat so little calories, there's no room for error. My eating is carefully planned out before I start the day. This is definitely not a diet for everyone. I can't see myself doing it for very long, and the main things that keep me motivated is that my clothes already fit better, and those refeeds every 5 days. > When you eat so little calories, there's no room for error. My eating is > carefully planned out before I start the day. This is definitely not a > diet for everyone. I can't see myself doing it for very long, and the > main things that keep me motivated is that my clothes already fit better, > and those refeeds every 5 days. You've got my sympathy. I'm trying to stay on 1200c a day and losing so slowly I may not live long enough to see 130 lbs. It looks like I'll have to go even lower to lose even a lb a week. :o( LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 156 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== >> When you eat so little calories, there's no room for error. My >> eating is carefully planned out before I start the day. This is [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > so slowly I may not live long enough to see 130 lbs. It looks like > I'll have to go even lower to lose even a lb a week. :o( Or exercise more :) Here is a resistance training program DESIGNED for fat loss: http://www.mensfitness.com/fitness/22 > Or exercise more :) Here is a resistance training program DESIGNED for > fat loss: > http://www.mensfitness.com/fitness/22 Nothing there I can do at home with lists of how many calories each burns. The gym where I went said these types of exercises are not meant for weight loss but to tone and build endurance. I went for 6 months and didn't lose one pound or one inch. I gained over an inch on each calf. I did end up having to have my shoulders and elbows x-rayed....... it was a waste of time, effort and money. If you stumble on a site with lists of the calories each exercise that can be done at home burns, I'd love to see it. Also a lot of repetition is out because my Dr said that's where the joint pain came from. I don't have arthritis. LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 156 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== > After stalling for a few months at the same weight, while eating what I > thought I could to lose weight but not, I decided to "jump start" my [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > main things that keep me motivated is that my clothes already fit better, > and those refeeds every 5 days. I've been doing this very thing for nearly nine weeks, only just a bit lower in calories. I toggle between about 900 calories and 1200 calories. I'm finding myself quite satisfied on the 900 calories now, and a bit hesitant to go back to 1200, but I know I need to do it. I plan my meals in advance, and I keep menus for 200 calorie breakfasts, 250 calorie lunches, 300 calorie dinners, and 75 calorie snacks. I have about ten entries for each now, so it's a simple matter to just chose one from each catagory each day. I don't aim for as much protein as you, I try to keep mine at around 20-25% of my total calories. I am too low in fats, around 16%, but I'd rather have a quantity of veggies at this point rather than a spoonful of fat...even if it is good fat. That's something I'll probably add back in when I switch back to 1200 calories. This switching from low to higher calories has been useful for many to keep the metabolism from going into hibernation. I know it helps mine. itzme >> After stalling for a few months at the same weight, while eating what I >> thought I could to lose weight but not, I decided to "jump start" my [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > > itzme The reason I'm eating so much protein is that I've been told that it will help prevent some of the muscle loss inherent with low calorie dieting. I can't afford to lose anymore metabolically active muscle than I have to. Also, protein is very slowly digested, so I feel full much longer on a high protein meal than a high carb meal. I think one of the biggest reasons my weight has dropped so much is the water loss associated with the low carb intake, so I expect quite a bit of that to come back when I get to maintenance and up my carbs. I start my day with a hearty high fiber hot cereal, because I feel full much longer than on a protein shake or something light. I can survive midday on very little, but then by dinner I need something more substantial, so then I have enough calories left in my "allowance" to have a lean protein and a pile of veggies. My dessert lately has been a cup of sugar free cocoa. I really savor it! Do you do a "refeed" ever? I think a day of eating about maintenance level is supposed to do something for the leptin, but I know very little about this process. >>> After stalling for a few months at the same weight, while eating what I >>> thought I could to lose weight but not, I decided to "jump start" my [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > level is supposed to do something for the leptin, but I know very little > about this process. I stay on the 900 calories for about two weeks, then 1200 for a week We go out to dinner a couple times a month, and I eat what I want (within reason, I still stick with low fat meat or fish, veggies, salad with low fat dressing, etc), even a small piece of pecan pie or a couple of cookies. No guilt, no regrets. It's still much less than I was eating previously, and if anything, it seems to speed up my metabolism for a few days. I'm not into muscle building. Hell, I'm pushing 70 in a couple of years and I don't feel the need to kick sand in anybody's face. I have no problem opening the pickle jar, and if I did I'd either get my husband to do it for me or I'd quit buying pickles ;-) I do 45 minutes of 2 or 3 pound weights and stretch/flex exercises on Mon, Wed and Fri, and I walk at least 2 miles or 40 minutes every Tue, Thur and Sat. I sweep, mop, rake, hoe, make beds, do laundry and generally keep busy and enjoy life as it comes. I dedicate my time to my family and friends, not to a gym. itzme 195/176.5/145 > I'm not into muscle building. Hell, I'm pushing 70 in a couple of years > and I don't feel the need to kick sand in anybody's face. That's kinda how I feel. But the Gym crowd claims muscle burns more fat. I'm sure it does but I lost nothing in 6 months but time and money. Maybe it works better for men and young women. I also ended up feeling very disillusioned. I wasn't going to go another 6 months doing something uncomfortable that I despised and didn't help at all. The only thing I did was build endurance that wasn't needed with my lifestyle. Once the weight is gone I'll see if toning is needed. I'll then be suffering through it for the reason it was designed - to tone, not lose weight. I've also noticed "the gym" becomes like a hobby or addiction with some people. They actually enjoy it and look forward to working out. They find it hard to understand why others find it physically exhausting and horribly tedious. I do give them credit for sticking with it no matter their reason. I have no problem > opening the pickle jar, and if I did I'd either get my husband to do it > for me or I'd quit buying pickles ;-) I do 45 minutes of 2 or 3 pound > weights and stretch/flex exercises on Mon, Wed and Fri, and I walk at > least 2 miles or 40 minutes every Tue, Thur and Sat. I sweep, mop, rake, > hoe, make beds, do laundry and generally keep busy and enjoy life as it > comes. I dedicate my time to my family and friends, not to a gym. Again. I agree with you. Family and friends are the most precious things we have while we're here. I too would rather spend my free time with them. :o) When my excess weigh is gone I do plan to visit a new gym they're building not too far from us if I feel some toning is in order. But with my husband now semi-retired I don't know if I can afford it......... LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 156 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== > I'm not into muscle building. Hell, I'm pushing 70 in a couple of years > and I don't feel the need to kick sand in anybody's face. I have no [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > rake, hoe, make beds, do laundry and generally keep busy and enjoy life as > it comes. I dedicate my time to my family and friends, not to a gym. You're doing resistance training with your weights and that's pretty much all that *anyone* on this group advocates. It's important to maintain muscle mass, especially as you get older. Muscle does burn more calories doing nothing than fat does (fact, not speculation) - simple metabolism boost. No one said you need to be a body builder or kick sand. I don't feel the two hours a week I spend in the gym are wasted especially since my DH joins me and I have friends there if I want to do any socializing. But again I don't recall *anyone* on this group saying that a gym was mandatory either. Simply doing resistance activities to maintain or even build some muscle mass is going to make a positive difference in weight loss efforts when combined with a proper diet.  Signaturethe volleyballchick >> I'm not into muscle building. Hell, I'm pushing 70 in a couple of years >> and I don't feel the need to kick sand in anybody's face. I have no [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >doing nothing than fat does (fact, not speculation) - simple metabolism >boost. No one said you need to be a body builder or kick sand. Muscle is also important to the elderly for its own sake -- never mind metabolism. I regularly visit the assisted-living facility where my 90-year-old mother lives, and I see many residents who no longer have the strength to get up out of a chair by themselves or to lift everyday objects (like, say, a bottle of laundry detergent). Many cannot open doors in public buildings. This weakness has a very negative effect on their quality of life, and potentially on their ability to continue living with a degree of independence. It's fine to say that we're not this bad, but none of these people were this weak when they were 60 or 70 either; they just lost their functional strength over time. And resistance training also builds bone mass and helps lessen the risk of osteoporosis. One is never too old to benefit from retaining strong muscles and bones. I'm 58 myself, and certainly don't plan to abandon strength training as I grow older. Chris 262/130s/130s started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004 > Muscle is also important to the elderly for its own sake -- never mind > metabolism. I regularly visit the assisted-living facility where my [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > 262/130s/130s > started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004 I have three grandmothers who are all about the same age, give or take a year or two. One has spent the last 30 years in a recliner watching television from the time she wakes to the time she sleeps. She uses a walker (the wheeled variety), gets meals-on-wheels, and can barely lift a can of peas. Her sedentary lifestyle was a matter of choice, and not due to any health concerns. Second grandmother was a farmers, wife, and--when he died--went to work in a factory to support her family. Worked til retirement, and really hasn't stopped working yet. Up at dawn, clean, go to town, come home and do more chores, walk the dog, mow the lawn, garden, etc. Always active, always healthy, and everyone in town calls her Ma. Third grandmother was a police officer. She retire at least 20 years ago and became a widow shortly thereafter. She threw all of her energies into doing public service. She works for a senior center, an abused women's shelter (she writes orders of protection), FEMA, and does food deliveries for shut ins. She still carries--just in case. All the guys in the family just call her Sarge--she's a no-nonsense kinda gal. She told me the other day that it no longer matters how much or how little she eats, she has stayed the same weight for the last ten years. Anyway, after all this rambling collection of biographies, I agree with Chris that muscle is very important for staying strong and active in later life, and strength has much to do with quality of life. While these grandmas never participated in structured weight training, the ones who remain active in their 80's did a lot of physical labor in their younger years, and have maintained an extremely active lifestyle through their golden years. I wanna be just like them. Amy 168/117/... Age 39 (and holding) >> Muscle is also important to the elderly for its own sake -- never mind >> metabolism. I regularly visit the assisted-living facility where my [quoted text clipped - 56 lines] > 168/117/... > Age 39 (and holding) OK, where did I say muscle wasn't important for staying strong and active? What I said was, I don't have to devote my life to going to a gym to develop muscle. I can be, in fact I am, healthy and physically active without being overly muscular, and I prefer to spend my time on the people and the activities I feel are more important. Sorry, I'm just not an iron pumping, marathon running, bike riding type of person. It's not a one-size-fits-all world, you know. itzme >>> Muscle is also important to the elderly for its own sake -- never mind >>> metabolism. I regularly visit the assisted-living facility where my [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > > itzme And you are overgeneralizing terribly here I'm afraid. Why do you have to portrait what we do as so extreme? Most of us are not marathon runners, we are not devout iron pumpers, and only some of us ride bikes. We are talking about general resistance training, which does NOT require a gym membership, extreme time or dedication, or massive amounts of testosterone. Your statement that if you couldn't open the pickle jar, you'd have your husband do it or quit buying pickles is disturbing to me. I mean, there is a good chance you may be on your own someday. You shouldn't give up the pickles so to speak just because you don't have anyone to open them for you. By the way - from your posts, you sound very active and fit. You very well may not need any additional resistance training. However, your comments are so negative about weight training, like we are trying to force you to become a powerlifter, it's beginning to irritate me. >>>> Muscle is also important to the elderly for its own sake -- never mind >>>> metabolism. I regularly visit the assisted-living facility where my [quoted text clipped - 82 lines] > comments are so negative about weight training, like we are trying to > force you to become a powerlifter, it's beginning to irritate me. ditto Apparently no one else is allowed to express an opinion or else we're trying to force our lifestyle choices on others. Though of course like you said there aren't many of us that devote our lives to going to the gym - at least the 2-3 hours a week I go there with my DH don't constitute my life. Signaturethe volleyballchick >>> Muscle is also important to the elderly for its own sake -- never mind >>> metabolism. I regularly visit the assisted-living facility where my [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > pumping, marathon running, bike riding type of person. It's not a > one-size-fits-all world, you know. When did anyone claim you have to do any of those things? Maybe if you stop being so defensive and jumping to odd conclusions you might figure out that not every post is directed at you personally. (though this is) Signaturethe volleyballchick >>>> Muscle is also important to the elderly for its own sake -- never mind >>>> metabolism. I regularly visit the assisted-living facility where my [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > stop being so defensive and jumping to odd conclusions you might figure > out that not every post is directed at you personally. (though this is) Actually, my responses are a result of your flaming Lá~ká~ Wáná, and this group accusing her of being a troll for her gym questions. I couldn't care less what you think of me or my responses. There are a few people in this group who try to be helpful to those of us who are striving to lose a few (or many) pounds, but some of you are too busy criticising individual personalities to be of any help. It's the same-old-same-old...If you weren't one of the original posters to this group, or if you won't come in here and agree with what we say, then you must be a troll. What is it with you, volleyballchick, a power play or something? You need to knock off the attitude and lighten up. And yes, there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike rides, iron pumping and marathon runs to take off or keep off their weight. Some of us, myself included, just do not think it's necessary to carry exercise to such an extreme. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to my opinion. This group is called alt.support.DIET. So "back off" yourself, chick. itzme > Actually, my responses are a result of your flaming Lá~ká~ Wáná, and this > group accusing her of being a troll for her gym questions. I couldn't [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > with you, volleyballchick, a power play or something? You need to knock > off the attitude and lighten up. Actually I've never called LW a troll, just someone who has reading difficulties leading to false assumptions of what is being said to her. She started the whole problem by generally declaring that resistance training does nothing to help in weight loss. This is a false statement and when confronted with the actual evidence that she was wrong she kept changing the issue to paint herself as the victim of some type of persecution. I don't deal with people like that because I have limited usenet time. I don't need to waste my time on people who can't read in a medium dominated only by reading. I've killfiled her nonsense because of it and the crap in the WW group and I suggest you do the same for me if you think I have that little of a life that usenet is some kind of power trip. I prefer to deal with people grounded in reality. If you don't like my approach, f.ck off. I'm not here to cater to your personal neuroses. > And yes, there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike rides, iron > pumping and marathon runs to take off or keep off their weight. Some of > us, myself included, just do not think it's necessary to carry exercise to > such an extreme. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to my opinion. This > group is called alt.support.DIET. So "back off" yourself, chick. OK, you just don't know how to read either. There are people in this group that participate in those activities because they prefer them as ways to help with their weight loss. You are the one that can't differentiate between a few hours a week in a gym and hardcore iron pumping. Yes, we have some members who do many many miles of bike rides, not all of us though. I'm lucky if I get 20 mi. per week. The marathon runners are few and far between here. See, we all do things to help our DIET because we understand that staying physically active is important to our WOL and weight loss efforts. I hate gardening so I play golf. Actually I spend more time on a golf course each week than doing any of my other activies. The way you and your pal LW interpret everything, if I were to mention how great it is to walk the course every morning you'd be screeching about how I'm expecting everyone to be Tiger Woods in order to lose and maintain weight loss. With the approach of volleyball season, my time is even more limited for this kind of foolishness so I'll make things easy on us both and simply ignore you like I do LW. Signaturethe volleyballchick >> Actually, my responses are a result of your flaming Lá~ká~ Wáná, and this >> group accusing her of being a troll for her gym questions. I couldn't [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > usenet time. I don't need to waste my time on people who can't read in a > medium dominated only by reading. I didn't gather that at all from her posts. I understood her to say that it didn't help HER, with HER weight loss, and she (reasonably) asked why that should be. You, and some others, replied with insults rather than answers, and accused her of being a troll. > I've killfiled her nonsense because of it and the crap in the WW group and > I suggest you do the same for me if you think I have that little of a life > that usenet is some kind of power trip. I prefer to deal with people > grounded in reality. If you don't like my approach, f.ck off. I'm not > here to cater to your personal neuroses. I don't believe in killfiles. I like to read what people have to say, and all of the posts interest me. I also don't let them bother me to the point where I feel I have to use profanity in my replies. I'm not THAT involved! And if you don't want to "cater to my personal neuroses", just don't bother responding to my posts, and I'll do likewise with yours. I didn't enter this group just for your input, there are other people here who are actually, like, helpful. >> And yes, there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike rides, >> iron pumping and marathon runs to take off or keep off their weight. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > DIET because we understand that staying physically active is important to > our WOL and weight loss efforts. I learned to read long ago. Unlike you, I also learned to comprehend what I've read. I was referring to people who do 40 mile bike rides, run marathons and spend hours and hours of their lives in a gym, I never said a thing about those people who do these activities to a lesser extreme. I don't care if they do it...more power to them, I applaud them for it. I simply said it is not for everyone, and those of us who don't feel it is a necessary part of our physical well being should not be labeled as trolls or idiots. Now, if this extreme exercise discription does not fit you, then why are you so upset with what I post? You vilify WW and anything that doesn't conform to YOUR way of thinking. > I hate gardening so I play golf. Actually I spend more time on a golf > course each week than doing any of my other activies. The way you and > your pal LW interpret everything, if I were to mention how great it is to > walk the course every morning you'd be screeching about how I'm expecting > everyone to be Tiger Woods in order to lose and maintain weight loss. Number one, LW is not my pal, I have never met her, nor in any way corresponded with her other than here on this group. I don't even agree with her dieting method, but that is HER choice, not mine. Nunya B. said: "if I were to mention how great it is to walk the course every morning you'd be screeching about how I'm expecting everyone to be Tiger Woods in order to lose and maintain weight loss" Now, that was an absolutely ridiculous statement. Please do not presume what MY reactions would be. For one thing, if I did screech, you wouldn't be able to hear me. I think you are the one with interpretation problems. Chris Braun doesn't expect everybody here to eat 14 eggs a week and strip wallpaper to lose weight. dkw doesn't insist everyone eat vegetarian to lose weight. What makes you think anybody cares if you play golf? It's a great way to have fun while building up or preserving a bit of muscle tone. > With the approach of volleyball season, my time is even more limited for > this kind of foolishness so I'll make things easy on us both and simply > ignore you like I do LW. I think that would be best. If someone says something to which you do not agree, just bury your head in the sand and ignore it. Yes, that will do. Now, I have to go mow my lawn and weed my tomatoes. Then I have to make the bed, mop my kitchen, wash the dishes, throw in a load of laundry, clean the toilets and sinks, fix lunch, do the dishes and clean the kitchen, go for my afternoon walk, pick up my granddaughter and take her shopping, then bring her home with me to spend a few days before she returns to school, then cook dinner, do the dishes, go for a short evening walk, watch an hour of TV while catching up with my email. Just another day in the old rocking chair, as usual. itzme > I learned to read long ago. Unlike you, I also learned to comprehend what > I've read. I was referring to people who do 40 mile bike rides, run [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > then why are you so upset with what I post? You vilify WW and anything > that doesn't conform to YOUR way of thinking. Excellent way for you to demonstrate your lack of reading comprehension. I've never EVER villified WW. I'm a member and have recommended it on this group to others. Nor have I ever said a gym was necessary to anyone's well being or have I labeled you or LW a troll. If anything I actually posted something to those calling her a troll to say that the term was being overused around here. Keep up the good work and showing us all just how smart you really is. Remember that google is your friend and can easily show you that I have not ever said the things you keep applying to me but please don't let the actual facts screw with your version of reality. I was right to decide to ignore you, now it's time to actually do it. It's not putting my head in the sand, it's my way of no longer beating it against a wall. Signaturethe volleyballchick >> I learned to read long ago. Unlike you, I also learned to comprehend >> what I've read. I was referring to people who do 40 mile bike rides, run [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I've never EVER villified WW. I'm a member and have recommended it on > this group to others. Nunya B. said: "I've killfiled her nonsense because of it and the crap in the WW group" That wasn't exactly a wonderful recommendation for WW. Do you attack posters at that group, too? I've never been there, so I wouldn't know. > Nor have I ever said a gym was necessary to anyone's well being or have I > labeled you or LW a troll. If anything I actually posted something to > those calling her a troll to say that the term was being overused around > here. Keep up the good work and showing us all just how smart you really > is. How smart I really is? I guess I is smarter than you is. itzme said: "You, and some others, replied with insults rather than answers, and accused her of being a troll." OK, sorry. I omitted one word. You, and some others, replied with insults rather than answers and SOME accused her of being a troll. Where did I state YOU, Nunya B. volleyballchick, said a gym was necessary? Cite the post, please. You told me to "back off" and "F- off". Threatening AND insulting. > Remember that google is your friend and can easily show you that I have > not ever said the things you keep applying to me but please don't let the > actual facts screw with your version of reality. I don't need to Google. I have the posts right here in front of me. You are reading things into my posts that I have never said. Maybe you need to use Google, and find where I said any of the things of which you are accusing me. As long as you attack, I'll respond. You said you were going to ignore me, please do. > I was right to decide to ignore you, now it's time to actually do it. > It's not putting my head in the sand, it's my way of no longer beating it > against a wall. I have a feeling the beating would do no damage. itzme >>> I learned to read long ago. Unlike you, I also learned to comprehend >>> what I've read. I was referring to people who do 40 mile bike rides, [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > That wasn't exactly a wonderful recommendation for WW. Do you attack > posters at that group, too? I've never been there, so I wouldn't know. I was referring to a discussion with LW in the WW group, not WW, but again, let's not let facts that are easy to find and read get in the way of your terrific assumptions. You're just batting .1000 so keep it up! >> Nor have I ever said a gym was necessary to anyone's well being or have >> I labeled you or LW a troll. If anything I actually posted something to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > How smart I really is? I guess I is smarter than you is. Apparently not since you can't recognize sarcasm. > itzme said: "You, and some others, replied with insults rather than > answers, and accused her of being a troll." > > OK, sorry. I omitted one word. You, and some others, replied with > insults rather than answers and SOME accused her of being a troll. Oh, sorry I didn't read your mind, I'll have to work on that. > Where did I state YOU, Nunya B. volleyballchick, said a gym was necessary? > Cite the post, please. > > You told me to "back off" and "F- off". Threatening AND insulting. and you keep saying that I and others insist that going to the gym is necessary. I told you to back off because you were jumping all over me for no reason and I told you to f.ck off because you are simply annoying. >> Remember that google is your friend and can easily show you that I have >> not ever said the things you keep applying to me but please don't let the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > accusing me. As long as you attack, I'll respond. You said you were > going to ignore me, please do. Umm, wrong. You said that I called your pal a troll and that I vilified WW. Sorry if I'm only responding to your actual statements. Next time I'll dust off those psychic gifts and try to figure out what's in your mind - oh wait, that would be a dark and lonely place. Again, Google is your friend. You want to make assumptions about me when my posting history is available with actual facts instead of the assinine conclusions you're jumping to. >> I was right to decide to ignore you, now it's time to actually do it. >> It's not putting my head in the sand, it's my way of no longer beating it >> against a wall. > > I have a feeling the beating would do no damage. Yeah, pot, kettle, black honey. Keep on going, you're digging youself a lovely little hole. There's an old saying out there in usenet land - don't call someone stupid and then spell it wrong. Looks like your "spelling" can use some work. Try to focus on the fact that posters here go ONLY on what you post, not your intent or your thoughts. Signaturethe volleyballchick >>>> I learned to read long ago. Unlike you, I also learned to comprehend >>>> what I've read. I was referring to people who do 40 mile bike rides, [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] > "spelling" can use some work. Try to focus on the fact that posters here > go ONLY on what you post, not your intent or your thoughts. And I should listen to you, why? I quoted your posts. You've not quoted mine. And you were using sarcasm, and I'm supposed to assume this? Well, alrighty, then. I'll try, but this dark and lonely place I call my mind might have a problem with that. You've also mentioned you were going to ignore me and/or my posts. More than once. Want the quotes? Oh, you were just kidding, and I was supposed to read your mind? Oh-kay. itzme > I learned to read long ago. Unlike you, I also learned to comprehend what > I've read. I was referring to people who do 40 mile bike rides, run [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > or idiots. Now, if this extreme exercise discription does not fit you, > then why are you so upset with what I post? I'm just going to interject my 2cents worth here. Just because this kind of hits home for me and recently had a similar conversation in real life. My DH plays tennis 2 nights a week. A typical match lasts anywhere from 2 to 3 hrs. Usually he "plays" from 6 to 10 pm. (how much active vs. social time is debatable) and he comes home drenced in sweat every time. So, he's pysically active for a good 4hr stretch 2 nights a week. Now me, I prefer biking as my exercise past time. With the bike I have, I can easily average 17 to 20mph rides. Therefore it is quite easy for me to complete a 20 mile bike ride in an hour to hour and half time frame. Weeknights that is easy. Heck, I consider 15 miles to be a "short" ride because that will take about 45 mins to complete. That's not a real heavy workout and doesn't requre "extremes" by any means. And on the weekends it would not be any thought for me, at all, to throw on a hydration pack and a power bar in my bag and go for a 40 mile ride. That's a 2 to 3 hr ride for me. And I live in an area with 90+ degree temps with 85% + humidity. Go early and stay hydrated is the key. Granted - that's my case. But 20 miles for me is all flat ground on a good bike. Given my old mountain bike, I still couldn't go more than 15mph on it, so my mileage was less. Put me in the Mts on a bike and I'm lucky to do 15 miles in a 4 hr period and I'm whopped for days! You have to put things into perspective. Recently, my DH and a tennis friend were doing yard work at a rental house we co-own. Said house is 7 miles from our home. I chose to ride my bike to the house while they were working. Both men were amazed at the ride. Hell, it took me 20 mins (and that was with waiting for street lights). I rolled my eyes at the boys, and that is what started the conversation. These men can play tennis for 3 hr stretches and think nothing of it, but to think of someone riding 20 miles is like this big feat. Its not a big feat, really. Its 1 hr of exercise. The same one hour that is "recommend" by the USDA for weight loss. Its not "extreme". > You have to put things into perspective. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Its not a big feat, really. Its 1 hr of exercise. The same one hour > that is "recommend" by the USDA for weight loss. Its not "extreme". I get the same reaction at work when I ride my bike in. We're talking only 10.5 miles and a few serious hills. I average about 12 mph and it takes approx 45 min. due to stopping at intersections. No major feat but you would think I'd just completed the Ironman they way my coworkers go on about it. Signaturethe volleyballchick >> You have to put things into perspective. >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > you would think I'd just completed the Ironman they way my coworkers go on > about it. I think the difference I'd have with the ride to work would be the sweating - so I'd have to shower at work. But hey, if it weren't for the fact that I live 25 miles down a 6 lane interstate from work, I'd consider it. ;) >>> You have to put things into perspective. >>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > fact that I live 25 miles down a 6 lane interstate from work, I'd consider > it. ;) Well I'm lucky that I have mostly back roads to travel on but the cars are still dangerous because there's a big pissing contest between the cyclists and drivers. One guy actually waited at the end of his driveway and then backed out right at me to force me off of the road one day. Luckily I have a hybrid and can handle the gravel and grass. Anyway, I'd only ride in during summer break because of the shower thing. When I go in during the summer it's not to deal with people but to do work on my classroom or on the network and to grab my snail mail. I could shower in the girls locker room but I don't trust the custodians to not be walking in on me. Signaturethe volleyballchick > Actually, my responses are a result of your flaming Lá~ká~ Wáná, and this > group accusing her of being a troll for her gym questions. I couldn't care [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > itzme There are many here who and do 40 mile rides or marathons or whatever because they lost the weight and found that they could now do these things. There are some who have been doing them since their weight-loss journey began and continue to do them because they actually enjoy doing such things. There are many who do no exercise at all, but are strict in their Way Of Eating. There are many who exercise quite a bit but are a bit more lax about their eating habits. I really don't get all the vehement anti-exercise rants. For instance, I lost the bulk of my weight with no other exercise than walking. I joined a gym only after I lost over 40 pounds. Some would do it the other way around. It doesn't make either wrong, just different. My story about my grandmothers was more about "quality of life" stuff in response to Chris's post. I wasn't responding to anyone else's opinions or posts. Perhaps you should find a place to post that is a bit more to your style of dieting and exercise? Or to sit back and lurk a bit before calling a long-time member (VB Chick) a troll? Amy >> Actually, my responses are a result of your flaming Lá~ká~ Wáná, and this >> group accusing her of being a troll for her gym questions. I couldn't [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > Amy I was one who recently posted about my 40 mile bike ride. This is not something I do regularly. In fact, that was the first time I had ever achieved such a thing, and I was celebrating the fact that I could. I am 30, not old by any means, but probably in the best shape of my life, even though I am not yet at goal weight. I contribute that to the fact that this time around I focused on physical fitness - including endurance and weight lifting. I feel wonderful. But I will only do those marathon type activities once in awhile. The rest of the time I squeeze in the exercise wherever I can - walking the dog, taking the farthest parking spot from the store, walking to the store, taking the stairs, weight lifting when I can, using the elliptical at home, etc. >>> Actually, my responses are a result of your flaming Lá~ká~ Wáná, and >>> this [quoted text clipped - 59 lines] > the store, walking to the store, taking the stairs, weight lifting when I > can, using the elliptical at home, etc. That is wonderful and, as I stated before, I applaud you for it. I'm being attacked for being "anti-exercise", which I certainly am not. I'll state one more time...the long bike rides, the marathon running and the pumping iron are not what I would care to do for MYSELF. If I were able to do the long bike rides, I would love to. Unfortunately, the last time I rode a bicycle, it had brakes in the pedals ;-) I also park way out at the street and walk to the store. I have no stairs, and I have a bad right knee that bothers me doing stairs (old injury), so that's not an option for me, so I must walk up hills rather than climb steps. I don't have a dog, but I wish I did. itzme >> Actually, my responses are a result of your flaming Lá~ká~ Wáná, and this >> group accusing her of being a troll for her gym questions. I couldn't [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > Amy Would you direct me to any "anti-exercise rants" I may have made? Would do direct me to any post where I named anybody a troll? Please use direct quotes. Thank you. itzme > There are many here who and do 40 mile rides or marathons or whatever > because they lost the weight and found that they could now do these [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > bit more lax about their eating habits. I really don't get all the > vehement anti-exercise rants. They're not anti-exercise rants. It's more and issue of people being insulted by a few rude posters, old-timers here apparently, when someone disagrees with them or claims resistance training is NOT for them. Or resistance training did not help with weight loss such as in my case. A few make it sound like unless someone does this r-training they will not lose weight and keep it off which is false. All I'm doing is my usual house and yard work plus walking about 12 miles a week and am losing weight. Of course I'm also practicing strict "portion control." > For instance, I lost the bulk of my weight with no other exercise than > walking. I joined a gym only after I lost over 40 pounds. Some would do > it the other way around. It doesn't make either wrong, just different. There you go - so why do the others insult people and get annoyed with those of us who don't want to hear them endlessly beating their resistance-training drums? If we wanted advice on resistance/fitness/endurance training or taking 40mi bike rides we would seek out those groups that cover such things. > Perhaps you should find a place to post that is a bit more to your style > of dieting and exercise? Perhaps those obsessed with discussing fitness and endurance training should find a place to post that's more their style. This group calls itself alt.support.diet - not alt.support.fitness or alt.endurance. Or they can IGNORE those of us just interested in dieting, nutrition and normal exercise such as gardening, walking and maybe some jogging. Or to sit back and lurk a bit before calling a > long-time member (VB Chick) a troll? There is no excuse for anyone, old-timer of newbie to be rude and insulting to someone who disagrees with them here - period! LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 155.5 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Female. Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== > And yes, there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike rides, iron > pumping and marathon runs to take off or keep off their weight. Some of us, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > itzme What the hell do you mean by "there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike rides"? I not only claim to do them but I DO them. There's nothing extreme about a 40 mile bike ride if you're in good condition and enjoy the sport. Just because someone chooses to participate in a sport and strive to be good at it doesn't automatically mean they're carrying the exercise to extremes. It only means they're enjoying the benefits of good health from proper diet and exercise. Beverly >> And yes, there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike rides, >> iron [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Beverly That's wonderful. I already applauded those that can, and do it. I've applauded until my hands are tired, but it's too bad some cannot simply understand that ALL I STATED WAS THAT IT IS NOT FOR EVERYONE, MYSELF INCLUDED. itzme > >> And yes, there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike rides, > >> iron [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > itzme Your post implied that people only claimed to do 40 mile bike rides. It implied they weren't telling the truth. If it's not for you then that's fine, just don't accuse others of not telling the truth about their exercise. >> >> And yes, there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike rides, >> >> iron [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > fine, just don't accuse others of not telling the truth about their > exercise. The "implication" was in the perception of the reader. I didn't "accuse" anybody of not telling the truth. <sigh> itzme > >> >> And yes, there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike rides, > >> >> iron [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > itzme You need to learn to choose words that convey your thoughts a little more accurately then. <sigh> > > >> >> And yes, there are posts in here that claim to do 40 mile bike > rides, [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > accurately then. > <sigh> Beverly, please don't feed the troll. :-) Neil > Beverly, please don't feed the troll. :-) > > Neil Some of them are just fun to play with :) Hey, the Livestrong ride is just around the corner. Are we still going to meet for lunch, dinner, coffee? I'm open to any suggestions. Beverly > > Beverly, please don't feed the troll. :-) > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Beverly OK, I'm game if you are. Andy seems to have gone silent. When are you arriving in town? Neil > > > Beverly, please don't feed the troll. :-) > > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Neil I will be there Friday Sept 7 through Sunday the 10th. The bike ride is on Sunday. I plan to visit Valley Forge and do some biking on Friday. Is Saturday good for you? I'll be leaving early Monday morning so I can get back in town for the usual Monday night ride. I'm staying in Plymouth Meeting. Beverly - email address is bowens @ woh....rr....com > OK, where did I say muscle wasn't important for staying strong and active? I noticed some of the people on this NG put words in the mouths of others, or suggest they're saying something they are not. It's extremely annoying to say the least, and some are outright rude. > What I said was, I don't have to devote my life to going to a gym to > develop muscle. I can be, in fact I am, healthy and physically active > without being overly muscular, As are many of us. But some on this NG are really into "fitness" I've noticed. I met that type when I was going to the gym (I only went for 6 months). The gym becomes a very important part of their life. It becomes a part of their social life and a part of their conversation. You can see most of them posing in the mirrors, admiring themselves. I never understood this passion for the gym or workouts, but then some people don't understand my love of gardening either. They point out the bugs, the snakes, the dirt that gets under your fingernails....... yet I get plenty of *FREE* exercise, fresh air, some sunlight to make vitamin-D, ultra-cheap pesticide free veggies and other things, with the exception of exercise, you can't get at the gym. I also didn't appreciate the chlorine fumes from the indoor pool that seeped throughout the building. My eyes and nose would be burning by the time I left that place. That can't be healthy for anyone. and I prefer to spend my time on the people and the > activities I feel are more important. Sorry, I'm just not an iron > pumping, marathon running, bike riding type of person. It's not a > one-size-fits-all world, you know. AMEN!!!!! And that's what makes the world go 'round. :o) LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 155.5 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Female. Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== > As are many of us. But some on this NG are really into "fitness" I've > noticed. I met that type when I was going to the gym (I only went for 6 > months). The gym becomes a very important part of their life. It becomes a > part of their social life and a part of their conversation. You can see > most of them posing in the mirrors, admiring themselves. I can't quite figure out whether you just wrote this last sentence to be offensive, or if you do not have a clue why most of us are doing weight training. It has nothing to do with vanity; it has everything to do with healthy, fitness, and quality of life. If I look in the mirror in the gym, it's to be sure my squat form is correct or my arm position is correct at the top of a snatch, not to "pose" and admire myself. You would do better not to try to present yourself as an authority on a subject of which you are clearly ignorant. Chris 262/130s/130s >> As are many of us. But some on this NG are really into "fitness" I've >> noticed. I met that type when I was going to the gym (I only went [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Chris > 262/130s/130s I've concluded that this poster likes to be a victim. She's like the kid on the playground who cries and goes to tattle when she gets slapped back after slapping someone first. The exaggerations and constant claims of being insulted by regular members then actually calling long time regulars trolls (which shows she has no idea what a troll really is) and making generally nasty and insulting comments like the one above speak volumes about her. Signaturethe volleyballchick Lá~ká~ Wáná wrote: > As are many of us. But some on this NG are really into "fitness" I've > noticed. I met that type when I was going to the gym (I only went for 6 > months). The gym becomes a very important part of their life. It becomes > a > part of their social life and a part of their conversation. You can see > most of them posing in the mirrors, admiring themselves. Oh my god. Who is this woman? You see MOST of them "Posing in the mirrors"??? MOST??? Most of us who consider going to the gym an important part of our lives are POSING in the mirrors... That's a good one. Maybe we pose because we are admiring our well muscled lean bodies, which we got by GOING TO THE GYM and MAKING IT A VERY IMPORTANT PART OF OUR LIVES. Frankly, I spend very little time posing in front of the mirrors at the gym. I might be guilty of checking my hair once in awhile though... Lá~ká~ Wáná wrote: > As are many of us. But some on this NG are really into "fitness" I've > noticed. I met that type when I was going to the gym (I only went for 6 > months). The gym becomes a very important part of their life. It becomes > a > part of their social life and a part of their conversation. You can see > most of them posing in the mirrors, admiring themselves. I can't quite figure out whether you just wrote this last sentence to be offensive, or if you do not have a clue why most of us are doing weight training. ==> What's offensive about it? The place was lined with mirrors and they admired themselves in these mirrors. What else are the mirrors for? I assumed they were there for what the people were using them for. It has nothing to do with vanity; it has everything to do with healthy, fitness, and quality of life. If I look in the mirror in the gym, it's to be sure my squat form is correct or my arm position is correct at the top of a snatch, not to "pose" and admire myself. You would do better not to try to present yourself as an authority on a subject of which you are clearly ignorant. ==> I claimed to be an authority on WHAT exactly? I *SAW* them posing in the mirrors!!!! What has that got to do with being some kind of expert? Are YOU an expert on mirrors? Gyms? What? LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 155.5 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Female. Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== > Anyway, after all this rambling collection of biographies, I agree with > Chris that muscle is very important for staying strong and active in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > their younger years, and have maintained an extremely active lifestyle > through their golden years. I wanna be just like them. This doesn't apply to everyone though. Both my grandmothers were very active all their lives. One raised 3 children and the other raised 5 children. Neither drove a car so had to walk, walk and walk some more to get anywhere where they lived. One had 1 flight of stairs to climb every time she left her apartment and the other had 5 flights to negotiate. Both were slightly overweight but not obese. Both suffered from high BP and one had her first stroke at age 52. The other one developed heart-failure. Both were dead before the age of 65. My mother, small and petite and never overweight also has high BP and has had both mini strokes and several mild heart attacks. She's still alive at 87. This shocked the family as she always ate healthy, grew a large garden, walked everywhere, was into all the local social activities, shoveled snow in the winter....... So far I have been very lucky and do not have cholesterol problems (even with 1 tbs. of butter a day), high BP or any of the other ills that plagued some of the people in my family, and not all of them obese. LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 155.5 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Female. Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== > X-No-Archive: Yes > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > they don't do it very often. > =================================== My mother was 5'3", and never weighed a pound over 102 in her life. She became diabetic at age 32, had a stroke at age 60 and died before she was 70. She was one of the hardest working women I ever saw...cleaning, yardwork, gardening. I had a very thin sister, who attributed her weight to walking everywhere she went. One day she was walking to the post office, and she got hit by a truck. She was 53. itzme > My mother was 5'3", and never weighed a pound over 102 in her life. She > became diabetic at age 32, had a stroke at age 60 and died before she was > 70. She was one of the hardest working women I ever saw...cleaning, > yardwork, gardening. That's exactly what I mean. There's just no telling what the future holds for us or what genes we inherited from our family. We can be thin as a rail and spend all our spare time at the gym and riding bikes and still die reasonably young. > I had a very thin sister, who attributed her weight to walking everywhere > she went. One day she was walking to the post office, and she got hit by > a truck. She was 53. LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 155.5 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Female. Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== > > My mother was 5'3", and never weighed a pound over 102 in her life. She > > became diabetic at age 32, had a stroke at age 60 and died before she was [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > they don't do it very often. > =================================== This thread has gone off on a meaningless tangent. Certainly my original post never suggested that exercise made one live longer or offered some magic guarantee against accidents. It said that the more fit person will be able to function better -- and thus likely enjoy a better quality of life -- in their old age, however much of that is granted to them. There is evidence that fit, normal-weight individuals live longer on average, but that had nothing to do with the point of my message. I can't believe that wasn't obvious. Chris 262/130s/130s >Anyway, after all this rambling collection of biographies, I agree with >Chris that muscle is very important for staying strong and active in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >their younger years, and have maintained an extremely active lifestyle >through their golden years. I wanna be just like them. I loved the story of your grandmothers, Amy. I'd like to add that attitude of mind also plays a very important part in all of this. Presumably the first grandmother chose her inactive lifestyle, whereas the other two didn't see any need to stop living active lives just because they were getting older. janice > The reason I'm eating so much protein is that I've been told that it will > help prevent some of the muscle loss inherent with low calorie dieting. I > can't afford to lose anymore metabolically active muscle than I have to. By the way, calorie-for-calorie fat is even more lean sparing than protein. The mechanism why this should be true isn't well studied but the few studies that do calorie-for-calorie comparison confirm that it is true. So if you should chose to go below 100 grams of protein (no need to but the choice is there is you wish) increase your fat by the same number of calories. For that matter you can do the same with carbs if you wish but the vitamins and minerals you'd start to lose from the lower veggies would make that a short term strategy if you chose to try it. > Also, protein is very slowly digested, so I feel full much longer on a high > protein meal than a high carb meal. The few studies that compare calorie-for-calorie are ambigous but tend to suggest fat has even better lasting power than protein, but it is widely agreed that either fat or protein has better lasting power than carbs. > I think one of the biggest reasons my > weight has dropped so much is the water loss associated with the low carb > intake, so I expect quite a bit of that to come back when I get to > maintenance and up my carbs. Yup, and you won't know how much water that is until you recharge your body's stored carbs. The body stores glycogen in water, so goodbye stored glycogen means goodbye the water it was dissolved in. > I start my day with a hearty high fiber hot cereal, because I feel full much > longer than on a protein shake or something light. Steel cuts oats work great - Cook in advance and keep a few servings in the fridge. Or calorie-for-calorie a couple of eggs work about the same way - with the problem that their protein cuts into your quota later in the day. > I can survive midday on very little "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". In my opinion that's why successfull long term dieters don't skip breakfast. > but then by dinner I need something more substantial, so then I > have enough calories left in my "allowance" to have a lean protein and a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > is supposed to do something for the leptin, but I know very little about > this process. Leptin hormone drives thyroid. Thyroid drives basal metabloism. Leptin is released by body fat so have 100+ pounds to lose and you will never need a refeed, or have 20- to lose and it should be considered. Leptin is also released by the liver based on your highest carb intake in the last several weeks. So folks who keep their carb intake low after they less to lose end up driving their metabolism lower. That's what starvation mode is - lowered basal metabolism. But since leptin output is determined by the highest carb intake in the last month or so a refeed can be as simple as a few days switching from low-carb to low-fat. >> The reason I'm eating so much protein is that I've been told that it will >> help prevent some of the muscle loss inherent with low calorie dieting. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > widely agreed that either fat or protein has better lasting power than > carbs. So even better would be a well balanced high protein/healthy fat meal for satiety... Maybe like tuna with some olive oil? Or chicken with some diced avacado on top? >> I think one of the biggest reasons my >> weight has dropped so much is the water loss associated with the low carb [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > or so a refeed can be as simple as a few days switching from low-carb > to low-fat. Thanks for the info! > So even better would be a well balanced high protein/healthy fat meal for > satiety... Maybe like tuna with some olive oil? Or chicken with some diced > avacado on top? Give our bodies insufficient fat and they tend to crave fat. It's why some people do well on low fat plans but some never stop craving. They types of fat matter but our bodies simply crave fat when they need it. Compare with carbs where the cravings tend to be strong while our stored glycogen is neither full nor empty but no cravings at either full nor empty. That's why many low carbers don't fell hungry but a carb binge tends to lead to a crash - Low carb's strength is also its weakness. Mixed fat and protein works better (always inserting "calorie-for-calorie" in every sentence) than the leanest protein you can get. It's why tuna salad with mayo is more popular than tuna straight from the can. Sure, tuna with olive oil would work great. I've read that the best compromise among types of fat can be reached by mixing 50-50 olive oil and canola oil. I don't know if I believe the claim that it's an ideal mix, but I've tried it and the taste is fine and canola is less expensive so I can view it as olive oil near half price ... Fat is 9 calories per gram, protein 4, so calorie-for-calorie trading more fat for less protein gives smaller portions. The relative filling effects seem to go calorie-for-calorie not gram-for-gram so that tends to work out fine anyways. You can take this thing of replacing protein for fat too far, though. Go below your daily minimum of protein and protein triggers its own type of starvation mode metabolism reduction. Very likely your minimum is below 100 but not all that far below 100. There's a chapter in the book Protein Power by Drs Eades that tells you how to figure it out exactly. But at 100 you're fine. >>> After stalling for a few months at the same weight, while eating what I >>> thought I could to lose weight but not, I decided to "jump start" my [quoted text clipped - 57 lines] > level is supposed to do something for the leptin, but I know very little > about this process. I'm not an expert but my understanding is that the body can't use excess protein. It just breaks it down and you pee it out. It's certainly a way to ensure you get ENOUGH protein but 40% is more than twice the normal recommended amount. I know low carbers do different percentages. SignatureRachael 176/116/<119 www.justgiving.com/rachaelslondonmarathon >>>> After stalling for a few months at the same weight, while eating what I >>>> thought I could to lose weight but not, I decided to "jump start" my [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > to ensure you get ENOUGH protein but 40% is more than twice the normal > recommended amount. I know low carbers do different percentages. No, you don't pee it out. If it is more than the body needs, it is converted into fat (if you have a calorie surplus), or into useable energy. The thing is, it is digested more slowly, in my understanding, so it "sticks with you" longer. Having a surplus of protein helps keep the body from burning as much muscle during low calorie diets. There is no way around it - when you diet, you lose a bit of muscle with the fat. The trick is to minimize it. >>>>> After stalling for a few months at the same weight, while eating what >>>>> I thought I could to lose weight but not, I decided to "jump start" my [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] > way around it - when you diet, you lose a bit of muscle with the fat. The > trick is to minimize it. No doubt there are endless theories on this but Anita Bean is a well known sports nutritionist and she certainly makes that case in her books. SignatureRachael 176/116/<119 www.justgiving.com/rachaelslondonmarathon > I'm not an expert but my understanding is that the body can't use excess > protein. It just breaks it down and you pee it out. It's certainly a way > to ensure you get ENOUGH protein but 40% is more than twice the normal > recommended amount. I know low carbers do different percentages. I recently read on one of these groups that excess protein is broken down and some of it is stored as FAT. LW Re-Start - 7/5/06 - 170lbs Today - 156 lbs Goal - 130 lbs Height: 5'6" Age: 61 Don't worry about what people think, they don't do it very often. =================================== > > I'm not an expert but my understanding is that the body can't use excess > > protein. It just breaks it down and you pee it out. That "breaks it down" part means extra calories. The "you pee it out" part is true independent of the extra calories - Protein has nitrogen and urea is waste nitrogen for animals. > > It's certainly a way > > to ensure you get ENOUGH protein but 40% is more than twice the normal > > recommended amount. I know low carbers do different percentages. > > I recently read on one of these groups that excess protein is broken down > and some of it is stored as FAT. Protein is converted to glucose at around 50ish percent energy efficiency. Extra dietary protein equals extra calories. Whether those calories end up in fat depends on the total calories eaten; there is no specific conversion of protein to pre-stored-fat as such. So take your carb and fat calories low enough and 40% of calories from protein starts to make sense. Sorta. But high-protein diets that are also both low-fat and low-carb stress kidneys and are unsafe. Take it to the Scarsdale Diet extreme and folks managed to die from doing it to extremes. I don't think anyone in the discussion is going down such an extreme path. |
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.