# he now has to eat 800 calories a day less than a typical man his size



## VegasBella (May 2, 2016)

> Danny Cahill stood, slightly dazed, in a blizzard of confetti as the audience screamed and his family ran on stage. He had won Season 8 of NBC’s reality television show “The Biggest Loser,” shedding more weight than anyone ever had on the program — an astonishing 239 pounds in seven months.
> 
> [...]
> 
> ...



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/02/health/biggest-loser-weight-loss.html?_r=0


----------



## Patri (May 2, 2016)

Fascinating. I guess the trick is to never get fat in the first place. Sad that people try so hard, and it really is a losing battle (in the wrong direction).


----------



## WinniWoman (May 2, 2016)

This is exactly right. I was a Wellness Director for a hospital weight loss program and the dirty little secret is even after you lose the weight and stick with the maintenance diet and exercise program, eventually you will have to eat less calories and exercise more as the years go on, which over time is unsustainable. This is because your metabolism slows. This is nothing new. This actually happened to me over the last 10 years.

After losing 65 pounds and sticking with maintenance, weight still began to creep up. I was frantic and tried to eat less and exercise even more, but it was unrealistic as I needed the calories for my energy and activity level.

I am now back up at the original weight I was before the weight loss and have sworn off diets for the rest of my life. I eat healthy and exercise daily and am active at work and home. I like a treat occasionally and I like my bottle of wine on a Sat. evening and I usually eat what ever I want on weekends within reason. For example-since I eat salads every day at work for lunch, if I want a sandwich on a Saturday I- heaven forbid- have it!

My LDL cholesterol has been up the past few years, as occasionally is my ANA positive. Weird, as I don't eat red meat or pork or chicken- just occasionally turkey. Working on that with my doc.


----------



## mdurette (May 2, 2016)

I was never "slim" always heavier than I should be.   About 12 years ago I hit a size 18 and was 207 pounds.   Atkins was the rage back then and I started my weight loss journey.    It took a year and I hit size 6 and 142 pounds.    2 months later I was pregnant.   I made it through the pregnancy and year of nursing eating normal - but healthy.   I ended up at 155 pounds and a size 8.

That was 10 years ago.....fighting weight is still a constant.  I go up to 165+ and diet back down to 155.   I have done this more times that I can count.  And I will continue do it time and time again, because I refuse to be fat again.

Today, I am doing the ideal protein diet and am I loosing weight and quickly.    Too quickly.  I'm purposely going off plan a bit this week to slow it down.  I started at 167 4 weeks ago and am down to 153 (and I was in Aruba for a week!)

I feel for these people, if they truly are exercising and eating the way they should and still gaining weight that is terrible to face.  I think the psychological of this would be worse than just being obese, to know you had it and lost it for your own fault or not.

Patri...you got it right, never find yourself overweight in the first place.   As a parent of a 10 year old girl.   I try so hard to ensure she knows nutrition and to make good choices about food.   My goal with her is nutrition, not fat and skinny.   I don't want her growing up to think "skinny" is the goal, when healthy is really what it is about.    Do I wish my parents knew more about nutrition when I was growing up.......


----------



## heathpack (May 3, 2016)

I read that NYT article and I thought the basic premise was flawed- the article implies because the Biggest Loser contestants inevitably gain weight back that most people could expect the same.  

But the way the Biggest Loser contestants go about losing weight is CRAZY in my opinion.  Creating a 3500 cal deficit per day?!  Of course your body fights back against that, it's not a huge surprise.  You do a starvation diet & your body concludes its starving?  Shocking.

How about doing the same study, but this time of people who lose weight sanely?  Would you get the same result?  Smarter, I think, to study the metabolism of people who lose weight with a whimper, not a bang.  And to study people who successfully keep the weight off.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 3, 2016)

heathpack said:


> I read that NYT article and I thought the basic premise was flawed- the article implies because the Biggest Loser contestants inevitably gain weight back that most people could expect the same.
> 
> But the way the Biggest Loser contestants go about losing weight is CRAZY in my opinion.  Creating a 3500 cal deficit per day?!  Of course your body fights back against that, it's not a huge surprise.  You do a starvation diet & your body concludes its starving?  Shocking.
> 
> How about doing the same study, but this time of people who lose weight sanely?  Would you get the same result?  Smarter, I think, to study the metabolism of people who lose weight with a whimper, not a bang.  And to study people who successfully keep the weight off.



I lost my 65 lbs slowly. Took one year. I basically ate for the weight I wanted to be for the activity level I had. The premise being that is how I would eat for the rest of my life. No crazy dieting, etc. It worked. I thought I had it beat. I knew (or thought I knew) I would be fine eating and exercising this way forever. No dice. Didn't work out in the long run. Slowly over 10-15 years later (and trying to fight the small gains as they came by eating even less) the weight came back on. 

Sigh...I am now just doing the best I can and living my life and not obsessing anymore.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 3, 2016)

I was/am pretty much a healthy eater and always exercised when our son was young. My husband is not an exerciser other than walking and eats what he likes. Not fat- slightly husky. Healthy, except for high blood pressure under control with meds for most of his life (he is 62 now). Our son was spoiled with food my my Italian parents and is obese(28 years old now). 

I confess I caved in to him a lot when he was young with food and snacks. When he was in college I would tell him to cool it with midnight pizzas and he would tell me "all the skinny kids are eating pizza at midnight". I told him they were not him, but I felt for him because I knew what he meant. Some people can eat certain things and never seem to gain weight. He was never a very active kid. More of a slow mover. He liked to play basketball, but not built for it really. Most people thought he was a football player due to his build.

This all said, he just told me that a man who worked in his office- a real health nut- fit and trim- walked 10 miles every day and did 75 push-ups every day- that sort of thing- just dropped dead at the age of 62- assumably of a heart attack.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 3, 2016)

Another example- a woman I work with (62)- been very overweight most of her adult life. Stopped smoking a few years ago. Doesn't eat all day- just a couple of cups of coffee and water- then dinner at night- maybe a beer. She told me her blood work is always perfect.

Another lady I work with- in her 50's- a health nut. No meat or alcohol. Very skinny. Just told me her blood work came back that her sugars were so high she is a borderline diabetic! She just doesn't understand it.


----------



## bogey21 (May 3, 2016)

I took my weight down from 200 to 155 about a year ago.  First I totally quit alcohol and ice cream (poured the alcohol down the drain and stopped buying both alcohol and ice cream).  

I saw progress then gave up french fries, chips, etc and all fast food restaurants except Subway.   Since then I have stopped eating meat except for a burger once every two weeks.  Another thing I do is weigh every day.  If I am up even one pound, I cut back for the day.  

I have never felt better and have been able to cut my blood pressure medication from 100 MG to 25MG.

George


----------



## x3 skier (May 3, 2016)

Interesting article. I dropped about 25 pounds after I retired and its stayed gone. Only changes are slightly more exercise. 

I suppose as long as it stays gone, I'll be content although I should be 20 pounds less for my "ideal" weight. I'm old enough not to worry about it. 

Cheers


----------



## heathpack (May 3, 2016)

mpumilia said:


> I lost my 65 lbs slowly. Took one year. I basically ate for the weight I wanted to be for the activity level I had. The premise being that is how I would eat for the rest of my life. No crazy dieting, etc. It worked. I thought I had it beat. I knew (or thought I knew) I would be fine eating and exercising this way forever. No dice. Didn't work out in the long run. Slowly over 10-15 years later (and trying to fight the small gains as they came by eating even less) the weight came back on.
> 
> Sigh...I am now just doing the best I can and living my life and not obsessing anymore.




I'm sorry that happened to you.

But there are people who lose weight successfully and maintain that loss.  They are tracked in the National Weight Loss Registry.  What I'm saying is that *those* are the people who should be studied.

My understanding is that they exercise at least 1 hour/day, don't eat tons and remain hyper vigilant.  You could study metabolism in those people instead.  Because the goal should be to understand the successes, not just the failures.

I participate in a Cycling forum.  Lots of people take up Cycling to lose weight (I did, now it's way more than that).  I'm amazed at how many people there state that "weight is lost at the table, not on the bike".  I understand what they're trying to say- you can go out & do a hard ride & burn 700 cal and eat a large sub that completely negates that calorie deficit.

But for me, no WAY could I lose/maintain without the exercise (I ride maybe 8-10 hrs/week, burning 5000 cal/wk or thereabouts).  

So all I'm saying is this article is about one approach to losing weight that failed.  The conclusion should not therefore be "all weight loss attempts are doomed to fail" because not all weight loss attempts were examined.  It just seems counterproductive to me.  People need to know what does work not that the process is insurmountable- because some people do in fact lose weight and keep it off.


----------



## Patri (May 3, 2016)

heathpack said:


> I'm sorry that happened to you.
> 
> But there are people who lose weight successfully and maintain that loss.  They are tracked in the National Weight Loss Registry.  What I'm saying is that *those* are the people who should be studied.
> 
> ...



Multiple studies over the years do reflect that it is difficult for most people to keep the weight off. I don't know the stats. This at least is an explanation of a contributing factor. (I bet more people regain than don't).


----------



## heathpack (May 3, 2016)

Patri said:


> Multiple studies over the years do reflect that it is difficult for most people to keep the weight off. I don't know the stats. This at least is an explanation of a contributing factor. (I bet more people regain than don't).



Right.  I 100% understand that.  I have some suspicions myself as to why that might be.  And I'll bet that its actually way more complicated than people imagine because its probably somewhat different for different people.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that some people are successful.  Figure out how they vary from people who are unsuccessful and give people *that* information.

Its as if we're telling people to do something complex- like building a bridge over a river for example- but not teaching them how to do it.  Instead, we tell them to get the info on their own from the internet, friends, books, snake oil salesmen.  Then when most people fail, we conclude "well, science proves that most people can't build a bridge successfully".

That's all I'm saying.  Of course there are people out there studying this type of thing.  But these studies don't seem to make the news quite as well.


----------



## vacationhopeful (May 3, 2016)

This thread is depressing.

So, I figure I better add my story into the mix.

About 12-14 years ago, I noticed my KNEE was hurting more and more. As a fun loving youth, I had taken up skiing in the mid-1970s. It was fun. I was beyond snow-plowing; took lots of ski lessons; owned my skis, etc. 

Had multiple friends who had major knee surgery and one had double knee replacements. I thought to myself ... that surgery WAS brutal!!!! NO WAY did I want to go thru that!

Decide I better lose weight. Brought some QVC prepackage food .. you know, 30 day shipment; lots of water. I QUIT those meals after less than 60 days.

Now, I work with guys in construction since the 1987 ... I do the run & fetch to buy materials. I do the planning and pay the bills. I HOLD stuff as the 3rd hand. I haul the trash out. 10 hours a day/Monday thru Friday. I eat lunch with the boys and for years, THAT has been my biggest meal of the day. MY ONLY REQUEST is "No McDonald's food".

I lost 35 +/- pounds during the time of the QVC food & next 4-5 months ... and have kept it off. My knee stopped hurting. 

No gym. No personal trainer. No diet stuff. I do NOT drink many sodas but will have a "soda that comes with the meal sometimes" .. almost always drink water. If I want steak, I eat steak. I eat cheese steaks (live near Philly). I eat breakfast around 6AM (bagel or cereal), 11AM lunch (biggest meal work days) and find something to eat when hungry after dark (canned soup, vegetables meal ... really more of a snack).

I qualified for Long Term Care Insurance at the BIG DISCOUNT rate ... a goal also back then. I have a thread I started on TUG back then.

I just turned 64; I have lost (via eating a bit less at lunch) another 5 pounds and am trying to get down another 5. No issue ... as I have NOT gained any weight from 10-12 years ago that I am trying to "RE-LOSE".

Am I in perfect health? Nope, I take the blood pressure and colrestrol meds. 

All I am trying to say is "WORRY LESS" and figure out WHAT works for you. Besides, worrying or fretting is added stress .. bad for weight control and getting a good rate for LTC insurance.


----------



## bogey21 (May 3, 2016)

vacationhopeful said:


> No gym. No personal trainer. No diet stuff. I do NOT drink many sodas but will have a "soda that comes with the meal sometimes" .. almost always drink water.



No gym for me either.  I try to walk stairs rather than take elevators and park as far away from the entrance to Walmart, Kroger, etc.  In addition I walk my German Shepherd 3 or 4 times a day.  That is the extent of my exercise....Never drink soda, diet or otherwise.  Drink water with meals and sugar free lemonade during the day.

Like others have said stick with what works for you.  Everyone is different.

George


----------



## T-Dot-Traveller (May 3, 2016)

*No easy fixes - this did work for me*

I am a sales rep and in my car everyday

About 8 years ago when I my weight had  hit 190 lbs and my pants waist size was 38 inches I created this diet 

The : NO FOOD FROM GAS STATIONS DIET 

******
Currently about 165 lbs
40 years ago 145 lbs

My wife thinks it is unfair . She works a lot harder to edit the pounds gained in those same 40 years . I compliment her on her hard work and results.

^^I have learned something in 38 years of marriage.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 3, 2016)

heathpack said:


> I'm sorry that happened to you.
> 
> But there are people who lose weight successfully and maintain that loss.  They are tracked in the National Weight Loss Registry.  What I'm saying is that *those* are the people who should be studied.
> 
> ...



Yes. I know that. People also say as you age your metabolism slows, but then again there are plenty of skinny old people out there. So everyone has to be different- genes- whatever. I wonder if some people's metabolism recovers fully where as others' don't. For me, I exercise an hour per day ( I have an indoor cycle, a gazelle and a weight bench and I also go out and walk 2 miles before leaving for work at 7:30 am.I also have a yoga bench) and I am on my feet in and out of a car like 20 times a day for work- walking, up and down stairs, carrying stuff. And- weekends cleaning and doing projects around my house. I used to exercise on the weekends also, but as I am aging and working full-time with a job like I have I now give myself a break of sorts (if you want to call it that) since I am cleaning and doing yard work and so on on wknds. . Hell- I couldn't do any better. I like so many others, have limited time and I believe in exercise but I also like doing other things and HAVE to do other things required in life. 

I bring my salad to work every day, while my thinner coworkers are ordering pizza and McDonalds and so forth. No snacking except my low fat Greek yogurt in the am after exercise. All other meals at home. 

 Meanwhile, the thin woman at work I mentioned and also a friend of mine don't exercise at all!


----------



## Kel (May 3, 2016)

I watched the Biggest Loser one time.  I thought it was a very unhealthy platform for weight loss and long term maintenance.  And, there is no way that people who are obese and morbidly obese should workout to that extreme in the beginning of a weight loss workout program.  An extreme workout for people that obese is extremely hard on joints, bones and organs.  And, it is not a realistic workout program that the average person can do forever.  You want to be able find a workout program that works for you to be able to do forever.

A moderate workout, eating healthy foods within a healthy range of calories (for losing and then for maintaining) and drinking plenty of water is the only way to lose weight and then maintain a healthy weight.  And, there is no problem with having the great dessert, burger and fries, salad with ranch dressing or some other yummy splurge once in a while.  I now drink light beer instead of regular beer and I like it.  Go figure.    Most salads ordered in restaurants have more calories than a burger and fries.  I see so many people think they are making healthy choices when they are really making high calorie unhealthy choices.  They just don’t get it.

Twelve years ago, my scale went up 25 lbs. in 2 years.  It was the only time in my life where life happened and I let myself go.  I was so uncomfortable and my clothes hurt.  I joined Weight Watchers online and in 4 months the weight was off and it has stayed off for 10 years.  When I see the scale move up a couple of pounds – I go back to 1,200 calories (or in Weight Watcher’s old program - 20 points) until the pounds are gone.  I can typically eat 1,800 to 2,000 calories a day to maintain my 118 lb. to 120 lb. range.  I love the Weight Watchers program and I have been doing the program for 10 years - sometimes on a strict basis and sometimes on a more relaxed basis.  And, even when I splurge – I’m still on the program.   I plan to do the program forever.   I do a moderate workout almost every day – a 30 minute walk/jog and 30 minutes of gentle yoga, stretching and light weights. 

Losing weight was one of the hardest things I had to do.  Maintaining has been easy - thanks Weight Watchers.  A lot of my friends don’t even know I still follow Weight Watchers.  Most think I stopped Weight Watcher’s 10 years ago.  Love it.


----------



## heathpack (May 3, 2016)

mpumilia said:


> Yes. I know that. People also say as you age your metabolism slows, but then again there are plenty of skinny old people out there. So everyone has to be different- genes- whatever. I wonder if some people's metabolism recovers fully where as others' don't. For me, I exercise an hour per day ( I have an indoor cycle, a gazelle and a weight bench and I also go out and walk 2 miles before leaving for work at 7:30 am.I also have a yoga bench) and I am on my feet in and out of a car like 20 times a day for work- walking, up and down stairs, carrying stuff. And- weekends cleaning and doing projects around my house. I used to exercise on the weekends also, but as I am aging and working full-time with a job like I have I now give myself a break of sorts (if you want to call it that) since I am cleaning and doing yard work and so on on wknds. . Hell- I couldn't do any better. I like so many others, have limited time and I believe in exercise but I also like doing other things and HAVE to do other things required in life.
> 
> I bring my salad to work every day, while my thinner coworkers are ordering pizza and McDonalds and so forth. No snacking except my low fat Greek yogurt in the am after exercise. All other meals at home.
> 
> Meanwhile, the thin woman at work I mentioned and also a friend of mine don't exercise at all!



Well, cycling is helpful for sure.  

I have power meters on my bikes and they measure actual work done, so I know for sure how many calories I burn with exercise.  

I also train intentionally with minimal calorie intake (this helps with fat metabolism, no to burn fat but for the logistical issue that happened on the bike that you sometimes cannot take in calories fast enough to keep up with the rate of glycogen utilization, its an advantage if you train your body to be able to run your muscles on fatty acids from your own fat supplies).  This means that I can routinely go out for a ride and create a 1000-1500 cal deficit.  Which is huge for me because I am only allotted 1500 cal/day as my baseline.

I've been racing my bike and the way racing cyclists see things is a little different.  Because the most important thing for going up hills is your power-to-weight ratio, cyclists pretty much all want to be skinnier.  So my friends are mostly cyclists and they are all pretty into weight management, that really helps.

I also mentioned that I train 8-10 hrs per week and this is actually considered a *light* training load for a competitive cyclist.  My coach has me train less hours than many people because he works me so hard.  But it really helps to have that mindset that 8-10 hours of hard cycling per week is "not a lot".

Lest you think that I am some skinny athlete that doesn't need to worry about weight- I am a former couch potato who was previously 50# heavier than I am now.

I have no universal answers but I do think that I lucked into liking cycling.  Its been hugely helpful for me in losing and managing weight.

Good luck to you!


----------



## JudyS (May 3, 2016)

I am writing a book on this topic -- how the body opposes weight loss, generally making it impossible to lose large amounts of weight through exercise and diet. I plan to call it, _Your Fat is Not Your Fault: Why Dieting is a Losing Proposition_.



Patri said:


> Fascinating. I guess the trick is to never get fat in the first place. Sad that people try so hard, and it really is a losing battle (in the wrong direction).


"Never getting fat in the first place" is probably just as hard as losing weight and keeping it off. Some people are fat when they are born, and many others get fat before they are weaned. It's not like an infant can jog and drink diet breast milk to stay lean. 

I grew up in a family of outdoorsy health-food fanatics. My parents were very, very strict about what my sister and I ate, and we got lots of exercise. I was a fat child anyway -- when I was 12, I weighed twice what my best friend weighed. (My sister was lean, although not as thin as my best friend.) I had been fat even when I was still an infant. 

I've done all sorts of diets, but I get incredibly hungry and cold. In 2007, I lost 40 pounds and decided I was going to keep it off, no matter how hungry and cold I was. (I was famished, and I was still well into the obese category. I would have had to lose another 40 pounds to be "normal" by government standards.) In 2008, about a year after I started dieting, I started getting infection after infection. (Dieting suppresses immunity.) I ended up bed-ridden. Now that I could no longer exercise (I had been quite active most of my life), my diabetes got much worse, causing me to develop cirrhosis of the liver. Cirrhosis is a irreversible condition (except through a liver transplant). I am now disabled and have come close to dying from my liver problems. So much for how diet and exercise makes everyone healthy. 

The study mentioned in the NY Times is just one of many that demonstrates that weight is primarily due to biology, not behavior. Yet, few people want to believe this. The doctor who works for "The Biggest Loser" refuses to believe the results. He is quoted as saying that people who've lost weight need more "ongoing support with exercise doctors, psychologists, sleep specialists, and trainers." That's very helpful to the huge number of people employed in in the weight-loss industry. It's not helpful to fat people who need real medical research on how to fix their metabolic problems.


----------



## "Roger" (May 3, 2016)

Just a quick note about the role of exercise...

I exercise regularly (without being a workout warrior) partly for weight control and partly because being reasonably fit I can do more things and feel better (quality of life).  One of the main reasons for moderate exercise, however, is that more and more studies are coming in that being fit helps forestall cognitive decline.


----------



## JudyS (May 3, 2016)

heathpack said:


> ....
> But the way the Biggest Loser contestants go about losing weight is CRAZY in my opinion.  Creating a 3500 cal deficit per day?!  Of course your body fights back against that, it's not a huge surprise.  You do a starvation diet & your body concludes its starving?  Shocking.
> 
> How about doing the same study, but this time of people who lose weight sanely?  Would you get the same result?  Smarter, I think, to study the metabolism of people who lose weight with a whimper, not a bang.  And to study people who successfully keep the weight off.





heathpack said:


> I'm sorry that happened to you.
> 
> But there are people who lose weight successfully and maintain that loss.  They are tracked in the National Weight Loss Registry.  What I'm saying is that *those* are the people who should be studied.


People in the National Weight Control Registry are studied, a lot. A tiny proportion of dieters (about 1 in 100,0000) are in the National Weight Control Registry. And, there is evidence that people who make it into the National Weight Control Registry are physiologically different than other dieters. Most dieters experience a drop in body temperature when they diet, which means their body is conserving energy by not generating heat. But most dieters in the National Weight Control Registry have normal body temperatures -- this means their bodies do not conserve calories to a normal extent. And, you know what? At least one-third of the people in the National Weight Control Registry gain the weight back within a few years of joining the Registry, even though it's easier for them to keep weight off than it is for normal people. And, they are kept as members of the Registry even after they gain the weight back. So, the number of people in the  National Weight Control Registry is exaggerated, because many of them have regained the weight. 

The truth is, for most fat people, the only thing that might make you lean is bariatric surgery. (I wanted bariatric surgery, but my insurance wouldn't pay for it. Now I'm too sick to be a candidate.) No matter what diet you do, no matter how hard you try, the weight comes back. The drive to regain is based on *how much *weight a person has lost, no matter *how they lost it*. 

I am furious at being told that my weight problems are my fault. When I have gone on low-carb diets and the diet has failed, people say it's my fault because I should have gone on a low-fat diet. When I have gone on low-fat diets and the diet has failed, people say it's my fault because I should have gone on a low-carb diet. If I eat 1600 calories a day and don't lose weight, I get some people telling me it is my fault because I am eating *too much*, and other people telling me it is my fault because I am eating *too little*. (I even had one idiot online who said I wasn't losing weight because my diet wasn't strict enough. I pointed out that I was famished, day and night, and he said, "Oh, I guess you aren't losing weight because you are eating too little." So, the same person said both that I was eating too much and that I was eating too little. I am not making this up.) 

This study on Biggest Loser contestants provides some new data, but there are many other studies, in both humans and animals that point to the same thing. Almost all people (and other mammals) have a weight setpoint that their bodies vigorously defend. Get much (maybe 5-10%) below that set point, and the body fights to gain the weight back. Here is an excellent study demonstrating this in rats: http://ajpregu.physiology.org/content/287/2/R288.long 

A few people are physiologically different, and do not defend their setpoint. For example, anorexics behave pretty much the same as normal-weight bulimics. But anorexics' bodies don't fight back when the person tries to lose weight. 

I am sick of how some lean people constantly brag about what a great lifestyle they have, how much exercise they do and how great they eat. I have done the same things. My lifestyle as a young child was pretty much ideally designed to promote leanness (my parents wouldn't have had it any other way) and I was still fat. And when I tried really hard as an adult, it didn't make me lean -- it made me sicker.

People who are lean are *luckier* than people who are fat, not more virtuous or deserving than fat people. I would never talk about people with brain cancer and brag about how my lifestyle is better than theirs and say that is why they have brain cancer and I do not. But my metabolic problems are life-threatening, and yet I face this sort of blame every day.  

Some of the comments on this thread are excellent examples of how people refuse to believe the evidence that weight is biological, not behavioral. If even the most successful dieters gain the weight back, dieters who were so exceptional that they actually won a reality TV shows for their weight loss? People will just say they did it wrong.

I often feel like I am arguing with people who won't believe the earth revolves around the sun. And yet it moves.


----------



## JudyS (May 3, 2016)

By the way, numerous studies have looked at National Weight Control Registry participants, trying to find something they are doing that other dieters are not doing. These studies have found nothing. Some of the people in the National Weight Control Registry lost weight on low-fat diets, some lost it on low-carb diets. Some lost it slowly, some lost it quickly. It's true that almost everyone in the National Weight Control Registry exercises, a lot, but this is probably just a measure of their dedication. Other studies show that exercise has very little effect on weight loss. (Exercise does cause big improvements in health, but health and leanness are not the same thing.) 

By the way, the author of the NY Times article (the one this thread links to) is Gina Kolata, one of the best science writers in the business.I strongly encourage anyone interested in health to read her other articles. She really knows her stuff.


----------



## vacationhopeful (May 3, 2016)

T-Dot-Traveller said:


> I am a sales rep and in my car everyday
> 
> About 8 years ago when I my weight had  hit 190 lbs and my pants waist size was 38 inches I created this diet
> 
> ...



You are a wise and still married man. 

And you figured out a BIG downfall in the way and what you were eating. Love your diet ... easy plan for YOU to follow.


----------



## Luanne (May 3, 2016)

I lost around 60 pounds almost 14 years ago.  I followed Weight Watchers and  continue to do so.  There is no such thing as losing the weight, then going back to "normal" eating.  I didn't start exercising routinely until a few years ago.  And it was The Biggest Loser that encouraged me to do it.  I figured if those folks could move I certainly could as well.


----------



## heathpack (May 3, 2016)

@judys, I am truly sorry for your weight and health issues.  I understand you not wanting to be made to feel like its your fault.

I guess I just think that giving people the message that it impossible to manage weight seems:
1. Defeatist and counterproductive
2.  Inconsistent with logic, since through most of human history, being obese was rare and there has been insufficient time since the start of the obesity epidemic for humans to have evolved into a scenario in which 30% of us are destined to be obese

Being interested in learning who is successful in managing weight & why is not the same thing as telling you that your medical conditions are your fault.  If someone else here shares their success in managing weight, it does not imply a criticism of you or anyone who has been unsuccessful.

When I set out to try to lose weight, I read everything that I could on the subject.  Some of it was bogus, some of it made sense but did not pertain to me and some of it was stuff I could apply to myself.

The one thing that I never found too helpful however was reading all the articles about why I was destined to never be able to manage my weight.  In some ways these articles are helpful because they give you a realistic sense of what you're up against.  But they can go too far in making people who already feel a little powerless feel pretty hopeless.

So I'm not suggesting a "pie in the sky" unrealistic approach.  Just a focus on the message that "it will be tough, but here's the best things to try".

Hope you feel better and that your book & timeshare business are both successful.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 3, 2016)

I think people are too obsessive about it. If you are overweight, but healthy and feel good, and you eat fairly well and exercise, just live your life and be happy. 

My grandparents were both overweight and lived into their 80s- my grandfather being an alcoholic. I am certainly not advocating that, of course.

But- no way would I ever give up my wine on Saturdays or my pasta on Sundays - though I use the whole grain kind mostly now. Nor will I give up my occasional ice cream (low fat/low sugar) or dark chocolate.

And I am not going to spend more than 5-7 hours per week formally exercising when there are so many things to do and experience and limited time to do them. Sleep is important also.

Like I said- lots of people are thin and healthy and never exercise formally. And many of them eat whatever they want.

Life is to be enjoyed- everything in moderation.


----------



## heathpack (May 3, 2016)

mpumilia said:


> And I am not going to spend more than 5-7 hours per week formally exercising when there are so many things to do and experience and limited time to do them. Sleep is important also...
> 
> Life is to be enjoyed- everything in moderation.



You know what I really like?  Sleep and coffee and riding my bikes.  I frequently ride at 4:30am in order to accommodate my work schedule.  Sometimes when I go to bed at night, I'm totally happy because I know the next three things that are going to happen are: sleep, coffee, bike ride.  

There is no one happier than me on a bike.  Very lucky there.  But if you told me square dancing was the secret to a long life, sorry I'd choose to die young!  Life is indeed too short, we should all just savor whatever it is we like to do.


----------



## JudyS (May 4, 2016)

heathpack said:


> @judys, I am truly sorry for your weight and health issues.  I understand you not wanting to be made to feel like its your fault.
> 
> I guess I just think that giving people the message that it impossible to manage weight seems:
> 1. Defeatist and counterproductive
> 2.  Inconsistent with logic, since through most of human history, being obese was rare and there has been insufficient time since the start of the obesity epidemic for humans to have evolved into a scenario in which 30% of us are destined to be obese....


Heathpack, thank you for your kind words about my health and my attempts to make money. 

Now, let me address your two points.



heathpack said:


> "I guess I just think that giving people the message that it impossible to manage weight seems: 1. Defeatist and counterproductive"



For most people, dieting is what's counterproductive. (I will address defeatism in its own post.) Not only do most people gain back all the weight, but (based on what little evidence we have on the long-term effects of dieting) even the few who keep off some weight are no healthier in the long run. 

There are also concerns, and some evidence, that dieting tends to make people fatter in the long run. The theory is, each time a person loses much weight through diet (and/or exercise), their hypothalamus believes there is a famine. And if there's a famine, what's the safest thing to do in the long run? Store more fat to protect against the next famine. 

I think it's far better to focus on health, not weight. Eat a healthy diet. (It would help if nutritionists could make up their minds about what is healthy, but we know broccoli is good, at least for adults, and pork rinds are bad.)  Exercise is also very important.

However, eating healthy foods (as opposed to counting calories and being hungry) doesn't seem to have any real impact on weight. Exercise doesn't seem to affect weight much, either. In fact, I don't see why people expect exercise to cause weight loss. Sure, calories are burned during exercise, but exercise makes the cardiovascular system more efficient, which means it burns fewer calories, not more, during rest, 

And of course, there are lots of healthy things that have nothing to do with diet and exercise. Get recommended colonoscopies, take medicine if prescribed, drive carefully, don't drink excessively (and certainly not if you're driving.) But many people (I'm not referring to you, I mean other people) don't really care about being healthy -- they care about being *thin*. There are people who won't take their medicine because it makes them gain weight. and, are plenty of people, especially women, who smoke to lose weight. 



heathpack said:


> " giving people the message that it impossible to manage weight seems:
> 2.  Inconsistent with logic, since through most of human history, being obese was rare and there has been insufficient time since the start of the obesity epidemic for humans to have evolved into a scenario in which 30% of us are destined to be obese....


I actually think it's the pro-dieting side that makes logical errors. In my book, I talk about this quite a lot. But, let me just address your point. 

Yes, people were a lot thinner in the past. They were also stunted physically and perhaps intellectually. They were shorter and their heads and brains were quite small, compared to Americans today, and they did much worse on IQ tests (which were administered starting about 100 years ago.) They suffered from severe nutritional deficiencies, such as pellagra, that were sometimes fatal. Mostly, though, they died in droves from tuberculosis because their bodies were too weakened by hunger to fight the disease off. There is still no effective vaccine against TB, and about 30% of the world's population is infected with it. But, the vast majority of these people have few or no symptoms because they eat enough to keep their immune systems strong.

This wasn't the distant past, either. Pellagra was a huge problem in the 1920s. People starved during the Great Depression. There were food shortages during World War II. 

It is true that, compared to today, people were leaner even in the 1950s and 1960s, when food was widely available. But some of this leanness was due to the fact that most people smoked. Children were exposed to smoke in the womb and secondhand in their homes. 

So, yes, people are heavier in the past, but there was no "golden age" when people were both lean and healthy. Many people's bodies seem to prioritize surviving famines over other factors, such as avoiding Type 2 diabetes. (From an evolutionary standpoint, this makes sense, because starvation can kill at any age, whereas Type 2 diabetes doesn't kill people until they are at least middle-aged, after they have passed on their genes.) Such people probably have a choice between being malnourished and being fat.

I will also point out that much of the increase in obesity is because people are living longer, and older people weigh more than younger people. It's quite ironic -- the pro-diet faction says being fat kills, yet people are both fatter and living longer than ever before. 

(The increase in childhood obesity is a complex issue. Children are maturing more quickly than in the past, and this means their BMI rises more quickly as they get older. Current government statistics interpret all of this rise in BMI as increased fat, even though evidence shows that it is mostly increased bone and muscle.) 

As for the increase in extreme obesity, this has happened at the same time as dramatic increases in many other illnesses involving the body's information systems. Fatal peanut allergies, multiple sclerosis, bipolar disorder, infertility, genital malformations in baby boys -- all of these diseases, and many more,  are up dramatically, even though there's been no time for genetic changes to evolve. *Something* in modern life is messing up the body's information systems, including the weight regulation system, but we have no idea what it is.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 4, 2016)

heathpack said:


> You know what I really like?  Sleep and coffee and riding my bikes.  I frequently ride at 4:30am in order to accommodate my work schedule.  Sometimes when I go to bed at night, I'm totally happy because I know the next three things that are going to happen are: sleep, coffee, bike ride.
> 
> There is no one happier than me on a bike.  Very lucky there.  But if you told me square dancing was the secret to a long life, sorry I'd choose to die young!  Life is indeed too short, we should all just savor whatever it is we like to do.


\

LOL! I get up at 4am also - though I usually start my exercise routine at 6am. I love now that the weather gets warm and it is light out and I can add walking.

I love riding a bike- but our rural roads here don't have bike lanes and cars drive like speed demons on them, so I would be afraid to do that. I actually got rid of my bike- hence the indoor cycle. But I always rent a bike when I am in Vermont to ride the paved bike paths.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 4, 2016)

What JudyS just said above- absolutely correct.

I might add again that I believe people are becoming obsessed with thinness and associate it with health, which just isn't true. 

I see it at my job- the younger women- all they ever do is obsess about food- what they are eating for lunch- some of it "bad" like pizza, etc. What they are picking up or making for dinner. It's like they have never eaten before. I honestly think they starve themselves and then they cave and pick up the Chinese food. Most of them- not all- are slender. 

Then they talk about their latest exercise class or whatever and then they talk about fitting into their clothes and so on. I never hear any of them talk about the community, the state of the world, books they maybe read, opinions on various subject matter, maybe something they are creating- a project- , plans for their future, whatever. There are some exceptions, of course. 

No- day in and day out it is how many steps they took with those thing- a -ma- jigs attached to their shoes counting steps. What they are getting for lunch, what they are going to eat next Friday, all the intricacies on what each exercise is doing for them. 

None of this is bad- but there is more to life than trying and imagining we can control EVERYTHING about our health. I am health conscious for sure, but there comes a point where it just becomes too obsessive for some people.

My brother just lost 65 lbs and looks skeletal to me. He recently fell and cracked a rib. His doc told him because there was no meat on him it was a bad one! LOL! I thought the same thing. He is 58 years old and has a stressful job with a of of travelling. Then he gets home on wknds and goes to the gym for spinning class. He says he is always tired. I told him he might be wearing out his heart more than necessary.Maybe he needs more moderate exercise with his schedule. He is on a low carb diet. He is trying desperately to keep the weight off forever. Between work and the gym he has limited time for anything else pleasurable. He hasn't given up alcohol yet- so that's good! Ha! Ha!


----------



## JudyS (May 4, 2016)

OK, now let me address the "defeatism" issue -- the idea that it is defeatist to tell people that dieting almost never works long-term.

I think people should be told what is *true*. And, the evidence is overwhelming that few people keep off substantial amounts of weight through dieting and exercise. 

Medicine is supposed to be based on evidence. Dieting is not evidence-based. There was a time when physicians mostly treated people with bleeding. If you told them that bleeding didn't work, perhaps they would have objected on the grounds that this was defeatist (or whatever the 18th century equivalent of "defeatist" was.) But these days, the standard is that health advice should be based on what actually works.

Patients are also entitled to informed consent. Some doctors admit that they tell patients dieting works, even though the doctors know it almost never does. Such doctors say they do it because dieting is the best tool we have for obesity (they are wrong; bariatric surgery is), and they want patients to try to lose weight through dieting even if it generally doesn't work. This sort of deliberate misinformation (or to put it bluntly, lying) goes against modern medical ethics and denies patients their right to informed consent. 

In general, I think our society pressures people to do health interventions that are not worthwhile. After I had been trying to get pregnant for nine years, I told my family I was discontinuing all fertility treatments. Instead of sympathizing with me and trying to help me with my grief, they gave me a very hard time, telling me I was "giving up too soon." (To keep trying, I would have had to get fertility drugs on the black market -- my doctors said it wasn't safe to give me any more.) Nearly 15 years later, this still burns me up.

And, it's not just fat people who get pressured. Cancer patients who are really suffering and want to end chemo are made to feel like quitters, even if there is no realistic chance that the chemo will save them. 

As for your successful weight loss, I hope I can ask some questions. How much have you lost, and how long have you kept it off?  A few people do lose weight and keep it off, but it's almost never more than 40 pounds. Some of the people on Biggest Loser weighed over 400 pounds. A 40 pounds loss isn't going to bring them anywhere near a normal weight.

What I also want to know, though, is what the h*ll the world wants from me. Even when I ate so little that I was cold all the time and woke up in the middle of the night from hunger, I was still being told that I was too fat and had to do better. Even when I started to get infections from not eating enough, I was told I was too fat and needed to lose more weight. Lose more weight *how*???? 

Remember how I said my family was outdoorsy and were health food fanatics and that my sister was lean? Well, all of this was true, but I left out how furious my father was at me for being fat. And when my father got furious, he got violent. So, I would get beaten with a belt for not "trying hard enough" to lose weight. This happened even though my father controlled everything I ate (and it was very healthy) and made sure I did a lot of exercise. This was, of course, in addition to being called "fatso" everyday and getting regularly beaten up on the playground for being fat. You say people should not accept "the message that it impossible to manage weight." But, that is what happens to fat children when people refuse to accept it.


----------



## heathpack (May 4, 2016)

judyS, so the premises of your book are going to be:

1.  Its a normal human state to be obese, the historical low rates of obesity were simply a result of malnutrition, concurrent illnesses or smoking?
2.  People can't control their weight, they are fated to be whatever weight their genes determine they'll be?
3.  Exercise does not help because it just makes you more metabolically efficient?

Ok...  I'll probably pass on reading that one.  Sorry, it just does not jive with reality as I've experienced it, nor does it seem like a set of premises that I'd have any interest in buying into, even if they were true.


----------



## bogey21 (May 4, 2016)

JudyS said:


> ....The increase in childhood obesity is a complex issue. Children are maturing more quickly than in the past, and this means their BMI rises more quickly as they get older. Current government statistics interpret all of this rise in BMI as increased fat, even though evidence shows that it is mostly increased bone and muscle....



I don't think it is complex at all.  When I was a kid we had PhysEd every day in school; at lunchtime we had almost an hour outside for play ground time; and in the Summer my Mother used to turn me out at 9 or 10 am with instructions "be home by dark".  Now kids are inside; glued to TV, computers or smart phones.  I guarantee you that very few of us were overweight.

George


----------



## heathpack (May 4, 2016)

Judy, you sound like you had a terrible childhood, sorry to hear about that.

As to my weight issues:  I am completely non-vain.  I did not lose weight because I cared about clothes or what other people thought.  My doctor told me to lose weight because he felt like I was healthy but sure to develop the negative consequences of being overweight inevitably- his quote was that I was the poster child for developing metabolic syndrome.

I was overweight my entire life, my mother is obese and has a pathologic relationship with food.  Kids teased me and I felt self-conscious about my weight but it was never a huge issue, my personality is such that I don't care too much what other people think.  

When my doctor told me to lose weight I had a BMI that was pushing 30 and just getting close to the obese classification.  I lost 30 pounds over the first 2 years and have kept that off for 3 years beyond that- so a total of 5 years.  After the initial 30 pound loss, I have slowly lost another 20 pounds over the subsequent 3 years.  So now I am sitting on a total 50 pound weight loss over 5 years, with 30 pounds of that loss being maintained for 3 years, another 5 pounds of it being maintained for 2 years and I have just spend 8 months losing the remaining 15 pounds.  For cycling purposes, I'd like to lose another 10 pounds, but again this is not a vanity thing or even a health thing.  I am actually considering trying to set a world record in a specific cycling distance and to do that, I'd be better off losing another 10 pounds.  We'll see, though.

Over time it has gotten way easier for me to lose weight and maintain weight loss.  I am not hungry all the time, although I do some very specific things to manage hunger.  I like what I eat.  I love to ride my bike.  I don't just burn calories on my bike- I do some very intense workouts and I spend a lot of time riding at my anaerobic threshold.  I also socialize on the bike and generally enjoy myself, both on and off the bike.

Do I think I've got the weight thing licked?  No way.  For me the exercise is key and without that I might very well gain the weight back.  I know it could happen and I'm vigilant about it.  It might be out of my control, who knows?  Only time will tell.  

When I go see my doctor every year, I get 5 gold stars.  Because my health really has improved in conjunction with the weight loss.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 4, 2016)

I think that people should eat as "healthy" as possible in moderation and exercise each day for about a half hour to an hour and then go on and do things they enjoy and take care of their other responsibilities. They should use common sense and make sure they get annual doctor check-ups and blood work and screenings.

Allow some treats along the way and that's all.


People can certainly lose weight and can certainly keep some of it off. Other exceptional people maybe can keep it all off. But as you age- for many people various other things are going to affect the weight and health. Everyone ages differently as well.

PS I relate to what JudyS is saying, When I was very thin after my initial weight loss- and I kept it off for years- I was also always cold and always hungry. I would be lying if I said otherwise. But I was able to tolerate that as my new normal. But I was very conscious of it. My immune system was excellent, however, as I took a million vitamins. My thin coworker is the same. And- she can't wait to eat lunch each day as she is starving. I was like that as well.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 4, 2016)

bogey21 said:


> I don't think it is complex at all.  When I was a kid we had PhysEd every day in school; at lunchtime we had almost an hour outside for play ground time; and in the Summer my Mother used to turn me out at 9 or 10 am with instructions "be home by dark".  Now kids are inside; glued to TV, computers or smart phones.  I guarantee you that very few of us were overweight.
> 
> George



I was. I am 60 now.


----------



## Kel (May 4, 2016)

I looked on the CDC.gov site and it says that 34.9 % of adults and 17 % of youth are obese.  Not just overweight, but obese.  That doesn’t include the overweight people.  I looked at a BMI calculator and I could gain 45 lbs. and still be in the overweight category.  That would feel like obese to me.  Check it out.


----------



## Mosca (May 4, 2016)

After I had a heart attack at age 37, I lost 85 lbs. I then gained it back, and a little more, a pound or two a month over the next four years. 

I've yoyo'd my whole life. I was athletic in high school, gained weight after graduating, lost it, gained it back, and then for the next 15 years I would lose 15, gain 18, lose 25, gain 30, like that until the heart attack. 

Now I don't pay it any attention. I'm a big guy, but I take all my statins and blood pressure pills and such. But I don't want to gain more so I don't lose any. Because every time I lose it I gain more. I should have just stayed off the first "diet".

And come to think of it, everyone I know who had dieted, even those who have had barbaric surgery, they've all gained it back, plus a little more.


----------



## JudyS (May 5, 2016)

heathpack said:


> judyS, so the premises of your book are going to be:
> 
> 1.  Its a normal human state to be obese, the historical low rates of obesity were simply a result of malnutrition, concurrent illnesses or smoking?
> 2.  People can't control their weight, they are fated to be whatever weight their genes determine they'll be?
> ...


Actually, my main premise is going to be that dieting is usually a bad idea in the wrong run. But, in regards to your three main points, what I am going to say is:
1) Some people have become very obese due to unknown factors in modern life. These factors also seem to be causing many other illnesses. We need to find out what these factors are and fix them. 
2) Differences in weight are almost completely biological (which is not the same as genetic.) People need real medical treatment (meaning surgery or drugs) if they are going to lose weight and keep it off. Until recently, hardly anyone was even looking for these treatments. Now, we are starting to find them. 
3) Exercise is great for people's health. Numerous studies show that it has almost no effect on most people's weight, however. 

If I may sum up your premise, it seems to be, "I have lost substantial weight through dieting and exercise, and kept it off for several years. Therefore, anyone can become lean and stay that way for the rest of their lives." But, even if you do in fact stay lean for the rest of your life, there are people who weigh hundreds of pounds more than you. What you did won't necessarily work for them. And, other people do not necessarily have the same physiology that you do. (And in fact, almost anyone with a realistic chance of setting a world record in any sport has unusual physiology.) Also, other people may have less room for improvement in their lifestyle than you did before you lost weight.

Your weight loss is impressive, but a fair number of people keep off 30 pounds for a number of years, and some keep off much more for about two years. What almost never seems to happen is keeping off more than forty pounds for five years or more. The fact that you aren't hungry is very encouraging, because most people in your situation are famished, no matter what they do to try to control their hunger. So, maybe you will be one of the very rare few who keep off more than 40 pounds for more than five years. 

By the way, I didn't think physical vanity was why you wanted to lose weight. It's certainly a huge reason for many people, though. 

I would be interested in knowing the "very specific things" you do to control hunger. I am no longer dieting to lose weight, but I need to follow an eating plan that is very restrictive in salt and that keeps my blood sugar down. Even though I am not losing weight, I am often very hungry. I have tried all the usual suggestions -- eat lots of fiber, eat protein, drink water, stay out of the kitchen, don't keep junk food around, don't watch TV. I still sometimes have trouble sleeping because I am hungry. If there is anything else I can do, I'm interested in trying it.  

I wouldn't expect you to buy my book. That's fine. 



heathpack said:


> ... nor does it seem like a set of premises that I'd have any interest in buying into, even if they were true.


Very interesting. So, you would refuse to believe what I am  saying, no matter how much evidence I have, and no matter whether what I say is true or not. Can I quote you for my book?


----------



## JudyS (May 5, 2016)

bogey21 said:


> I don't think it is complex at all.  When I was a kid we had PhysEd every day in school; at lunchtime we had almost an hour outside for play ground time; and in the Summer my Mother used to turn me out at 9 or 10 am with instructions "be home by dark".  Now kids are inside; glued to TV, computers or smart phones.  I guarantee you that very few of us were overweight.
> 
> George


George, you entirely missed my point. Most of the children classified as overweight, and many of the ones classified as obese, have perfectly normal body fat percentages. Children today put on muscle and bone at a faster rate than children in 1970, yet the government standards count that extra muscle and bone as fat. The government classifies children as overweight or obese by taking the children's BMI and comparing it to the BMI of children of the same age who lived around 1970. I said that method was complex. Do you truly believe that is a simple way of classifying people? 

Furthermore, I already posted a link to a very well-done study showing that getting children to exercise more does not lead them to lose weight, even when the exercise is combined with healthier lunches and nutritional counseling for the parents and children. I can post links to research articles, but I can't make you read them.


----------



## JudyS (May 5, 2016)

Kel said:


> I looked on the CDC.gov site and it says that 34.9 % of adults and 17 % of youth are obese.  Not just overweight, but obese.  That doesn’t include the overweight people.  I looked at a BMI calculator and I could gain 45 lbs. and still be in the overweight category.  That would feel like obese to me.  Check it out.


The government standards on obesity and overweight are completely arbitrary, and have been changed several times with no reason given. People in the "overweight" category are actually healthier than people in the "normal" category. This is true even when looking only at non-smokers.

When Michael Jackson died, not only was he in the "normal" category, he wasn't even at the lower edge of the "normal" category. He could have lost 15 pounds and still not have been considered "underweight" by the government's standards. Yet, he told others that he was too thin to dance well, and many people thought he was emaciated. You could see the ribs on his chest. That's what our government considers "normal."


----------



## JudyS (May 5, 2016)

mpumilia said:


> ....
> After losing 65 pounds and sticking with maintenance, weight still began to creep up. I was frantic and tried to eat less and exercise even more, but it was unrealistic as I needed the calories for my energy and activity level.
> 
> I am now back up at the original weight I was before the weight loss and have sworn off diets for the rest of my life...





Mosca said:


> After I had a heart attack at age 37, I lost 85 lbs. I then gained it back, and a little more, a pound or two a month over the next four years.
> 
> I've yoyo'd my whole life. I was athletic in high school, gained weight after graduating, lost it, gained it back, and then for the next 15 years I would lose 15, gain 18, lose 25, gain 30, like that until the heart attack.
> 
> ...


_Barbaric_ surgery is a great name! I have a relative who lose weight and kept it off for about a decade through bariatric surgery. She is still morbidly obese, though-- the bariatric surgery took off maybe half the extra weight.

Thanks, Mpumilia and Mosca. My experience with dieting is very similar to yours. 

We haven't heard from anyone on TUG who has lost, say, 60 pounds or more and kept it off for at least five years. If you are here, please post.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 5, 2016)

I have a coworker who had surgery- I think it was the lap band? She never lost weight and in fact gained more weight. She commented to me "What was I thinking?" And she is now on some other crazy diet drinking something or another. and has lost 20 lbs. But I really don't hold out much hope for her, but wish her well.

Also- I, too, have read that exercise is great for your health but only has a small role in weight loss. This is know because lots of thin people I know do not exercise at all. Plus, if you look at the meters on exercise equipment- if you are exercising moderately maybe after an hour you might have lost 300 calories or so if you're lucky. LOL!

I once tried that interval exercise routine where you speed up for a few minutes and then slow down during a 25 minute routine (for me it was the cycling). I found that I became more exhausted by the end of the week. I decided to stop as I was dreading doing it. And I was also worried that I was putting too much pressure on my heart. 

Life is hard enough. Didn't need to torture myself every day. Have enough of that just going to work.:rofl:


----------



## vacationhopeful (May 5, 2016)

T-Dot-Traveller said:


> .... I created this diet
> 
> The : NO FOOD FROM GAS STATIONS DIET
> 
> ....



Great diet ... and easy to follow. AND I really laughed when I read that ... there are some places that have NO FOOD you NEED for maintaining your GOOD HEALTH.

I bet other TUGGERs could offer slightly different versions like, "No food delivered to the house" or the "don't eat after dark" or grocery shopping ONLY from my list or only enough food for 1 plastic bag, etc. 

I have also used the "get a smaller refrigerator" tactic.


----------



## ace2000 (May 5, 2016)

JudyS said:


> We haven't heard from anyone on TUG who has lost, say, 60 pounds or more and kept it off for at least five years. If you are here, please post.



I don't qualify at the 60 pounds or more level, but I can say I've kept off at least 40 over the last five years.  In the summer of 2011, I posted on TUG about a CHIP plan that I started, and I can tell you that program changed my life.  I don't have time to post the details now, but through diet and exercise I've kept the weight completely off.

JudyS - if weight is all about "biological" factors, as you say, how do you account for the modern rise in obesity and obesity related diseases?  You really can't, and all I've got to say is that if you come home and spend most of your time on the couch and eat your food out of crinkly bags, you're going to gain weight (I'm not talking to anyone personally here with this comment).  You can't blame that on anything biological.  The American diet has completely tilted to fast food and junk.  I'm more inclined to believe that *might* be the explanation.


----------



## heathpack (May 5, 2016)

JudyS said:


> If I may sum up your premise, it seems to be, "I have lost substantial weight through dieting and exercise, and kept it off for several years. Therefore, anyone can become lean and stay that way for the rest of their lives."



Nope.  I never said any such thing, nor have I told anyone here that they should or could lose weight.  All I've said is that telling people that managing their own weight in impossible is counterproductive.  If you had told ME that and I had listened, you would have been doing me a disservice.

What do I do to manage hunger?  Lots of things, its a little complicated.  But one of the first things to realize is that the way in which I exercise is very uncommon.  I'm not just noodling around my neighborhood for an hour on a bike.  The kind of races I do are either very long and difficult (100+ miles with 10k ft elevation gain for example) or very intense (maximum effort for 1 hour, if I don't feel a little nauseous when I finish I know I could have gone harder).  I work with a coach and every ride I do has a specific purpose, I am probably not just an outlier compared to your typical American in the volume of exercise I do, but I'm an outlier amongst even cyclists in the time I spend in workouts doing max and supramax efforts.

1.  Fasted workouts.  I do lots of intense work on the bike in a fasted state.  This is to train my ability to oxidize fatty acids (which I have in an essentially limitless supply for cycling purposes in my fat stores).  These fasted workouts create huge hunger, which I personally believe relates to glycogen depletion.  To enhance recovery (ie set me up for tomorrow's workout), I consume a recovery drink immediately post-workout, which contains carb (to replace glycogen) and protein (to build muscle).  I've already addressed how the carb helps, but the protein digestion takes as long as two hours which helps with satiety too.  So I frequently get up at 4am, immediately burn 1000 cal, consume 325 cal in the form of a recovery drink, then feel no hunger until 9am or so.
2.  Fat oxidation.  Because of the fasted workouts, I'm more able to ride long distances on minimal calories.  This is a strategic thing to improve race performance in endurance events (because you cannot absorb/digest calories without diverting blood flow to your gut which compromises blood flow to muscles and decreases performance, so the less I need to eat, the better).  Burning more fat on a 3-4 hour ride, delays glycogen depletion, which in turn delays/avoids hunger.  I can routinely go out and create a 1500 cal deficit on a ride.  Huge for me, since that's my daily calorie allotment.
3.  I eat lots of high volume foods- soup every day, huge salads (my lunch prep looks like you're feeding a manatee), fruits, lots of veg, etc.
4.  I don't let hunger go too long, my body will panic.  When I feel hungry, I let it ride for a bit but eat within 30-60 min.  Because I am limiting total cal/day, this means I eat multiple small meals throughout the day.
5.  I try to limit engineered or processed foods.  Some of these foods are designed to drive cravings.  So eating Cheetos for example is rare.  There is also the possibility that processed foods contain more available calories- either because you absorb more calories due to lack of fiber or because they require less calories to digest.  Not sure if this helps but generally I avoid foods that contain "ingredients" and try to emphasize foods that ARE ingredients- ie whole foods.
6.  Because I am cognizant of trying to limit calories while maximizing athletic performance, I am constantly looking to make sure that I am eating the most nutritious foods possible.  I think this helps to manage your head a bit- I see a spinach salad with sunflower seeds and I thing "Mmm, a nice dose of Vit E" vs "Ugh, I wish I was starting my meal with nachos".  Not that I won't eat nachos, just that I don't feel deprived by the spinach salad, I feel like I need that salad.  Also I find a lot of this nutritious food pretty appealing, which adds to the sense of not feeling deprived which in turn can lead to "hunger."
7.  Sleep.  I need it for the training but when I sleep poorly, I'm hungrier for sure.
8.  Happiness.  I do what I like.  I have tons of cycling friends. I love my coach, we have become personal friends, and I'm very grateful to all the people (my mechanic, my fitter, my spouse) who work with me to make my cycling better.  My cycling life is populated by a cast of very supportive people, its kind of amazing.  I have a stressful job, so this helps manage that.  I also get a huge endorphin rush from the high intensity workouts, puts me in a great mood for the rest of the day.  When I am in a bad mood, I feel more "hungry"- which is probably not true hunger but more a tendency to eat out of frustration or feeling upset.

I think that when studies look at "exercise" and say it doesn't work, there is the implication that "exercise" is just a single thing.  There's a huge spectrum to exercise and figuring out the exact combo of things that work for an individual- volume/intensity/type of exercise, calorie restriction, lifestyle, attitude- are going to vary hugely.  If you look at only one factor and conclude that it fails for most people, I guess that makes sense to me.  Because I think probably most people need some combo of things to make it work.


----------



## heathpack (May 5, 2016)

Oh yeah, and protein.  I eat a good amt of protein to build muscle.  Protein is satiating and maybe has a little more thermic effect to metabolize (ie it takes a little more energy to digest protein).

I eat 25% daily calories from protein, 25% from fat and 50% from carb.  So its not a hugely weird diet by any means.  But protein helps with hunger for me, no doubt.


----------



## "Roger" (May 5, 2016)

Okay, here goes nothing... I freely admit that I could be wrong about everything that follows, but one thought pattern.

Why the obesity epidemic? While probably not due to any single cause, a major factor is the modern day production of corn fructose syrup which has made sugar cheap.  Easy access to more calories.

Most weight reduction is the result of the shrinking of fat cells, not their disappearance.  Thus, like Freddie of Elm Street, guess what comes back. (The fat cells are still there and can unshrink.)

A discouraging report from 2008 is that Swedish researchers found that the body replaces about 10% of one's fat cells every year.  At first that sounds like good news in that maybe one can just not replace them by dieting, but there appears to be some body mechanism that keeps the number of fat cells at a given level (and that even includes having fat cells removed by surgery).

An increasing number of infants (children under the age of two) are being reported as overweight. (Corn fructose sugar?) They will probably be fighting weight problems their entire life.

More bad news. While it appears hard, if not impossible, to lower the number of fat cells (you can only shrink them), you can increase the number of fat cells in your body and that new higher number will probably be maintained. So, it is possible for school children eating more sugar and having a more sedentary life style (see George's post) to add to the percentage of people who will be fighting to control their weight. (When I look at school children and compare them to what I experienced when I grew up, it is not simply more muscle.)

I remember reading a while back an article which described how those who successfully kept their weight off were able to do it and it said that they basically have to deal with feeling hungry constantly.  I found this striking in that I am one of what has been described as the lucky ones (not having had significant weight issues - I occasionally have to cut back, but it is a matter of trying to lose three or four pounds, not twenty or more), in that I have the opposite experience.  Rather than constantly feeling hungry, I feel stuffed when I eat more than usual. So there might be an experiential difference between having to maintain a weight loss and never having had more weight.  (Not wanting to take the time to look back, but I believe that the article cited in the original post mentioned some hormone or chemical that accounts for experienced hunger.)

I won't even call this my humble opinion, but my random thoughts on the issues raised in this thread.


----------



## Elan (May 5, 2016)

Another multi-faceted problem.  Some people are genetically predisposed to obesity, some people eat poorly, and others are lazy.  I don't see the point in trying to associate weight issues with any one thing.  

  Me?  I'm packing 10-15 extra right now.  6'1, 185-190lbs.  Should be around 175ish.  Quite frankly, I don't care that much that I'm overweight, because to lose the weight would require time away from other things, such as my kids.  So, I'd rather be a good fat dad, than a skinny bad dad.  If I didn't have kids, I'd undoubtedly be in much, much better shape.  Such is life......


----------



## vacationhopeful (May 5, 2016)

Stress is a major health issue. Does that add to a weight issues or is bad genes? Does an emotionally unhappy person have MORE stress? A stressed out person have worst sleep habits? People with poor sleep, cycle around to eating more and then, gaining more weight?

Or does STRESS cause people to generate and hold onto more FAT?


----------



## ace2000 (May 5, 2016)

"Roger" said:


> Why the obesity epidemic? While probably not due to any single cause, a major factor is the modern day production of corn fructose syrup which has made sugar cheap.  Easy access to more calories.



There's going to be a ton of opinions out there about the current obesity problem in the US, and there's probably several correct answers.  I'm with you though, sugar is a big problem.  The more sugar you eat, the hungrier it makes you in the end, and many don't get that coorelation.  

The carbohydrates found in sugar (and junk food) are so quickly digested that it gives you a very addictive feeling of satisfaction.  We have learned over the past decade that eating rapidly digested carbs results in sudden spikes of blood glucose (sugar) and insulin levels that adversely effect human metabolism and will ultimately lead to health risks.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 5, 2016)

I don't eat sugar and only limited fruit as well because of sugar. I don't snack. I don't eat after 6pm. 

I will say that something I do is I use a small plate (salad type plate) for dinner.

Which brings me to another thing- does anyone else feel that eating such a small dinner, it isn't even worth cooking if you are only two people?

I always cook.  Heck- even making a cup of rice (brown, of course)- that lasts us like 2-3 dinners. Or I freeze some food, too.

The other thing is it takes less than 5 minutes to eat which doesn't make it seem worth the effort. Crazy.

But- I still do. I also have been buying some of those lean cuisines for times I don't have anything precooked and that keeps portions in check.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 5, 2016)

Here's another thing. The PA at my doctors office told me that when I drink my glass of water 1/2 hour before dinner (I drink 8 per day) that I should also take a fiber pill like Citrucel to help me feel more full and because the bad cholesterol enters the small intestine at night and this would help that.

So I have been doing this religiously. No way makes me feel full. Down the line we will see what it does for my cholesterol.

My good cholesterol is very good but with the bad cholesterol my overall cholesterol is high. 

Must be those lunch salads


----------



## heathpack (May 5, 2016)

mpumilia said:


> I don't eat sugar and only limited fruit as well because of sugar. I don't snack. I don't eat after 6pm.
> 
> I will say that something I do is I use a small plate (salad type plate) for dinner.
> 
> ...



Interestingly, I don't particularly avoid sugar (although I don't eat much on the bike, when I do eat, sugar is the best fuel.  Plus sugar is best form of carb for me in my recovery drinks).  I really love fruit and want the nutrition contained in it.  Quite honestly I try not to limit foods that contain phytonutrients, antioxidants, etc, even when they come bundled with sugar or fat calories.  Lots of fruits, veg, and nuts.  Yes nuts!  Right now I have cashews, peanuts, almonds, walnuts, pecans, and sunflower seeds on-hand.  I probably eat 2-3 different nuts per day- in my lunch salad, for a snack, in my oatmeal.  Mmm.

I eat after 6pm but delay starting feeding for the day as long as possible.  On non-workout days, I'm fasting from 7 or 8pm until 9 or 10 the following morning.  Helps me limit calories.  I go to bed around 9pm so I eat pretty close to bedtime.

I cook a lot but frequently it's simple things.  We may cook once and eat the same thing 3-4 days in a row, which simplifies cooking & shopping and minimizes weeknight stress.

Along this vein, we're pretty likely to eat white rice because it cooks faster.  Even though we both like it just fine.  It's also important to be practical on a weeknight when you're pressed for time.

The one thing that you do that I'll avoid is the Lean Cuisine thing.  I just am really leery of processed foods.  I'm not sure there's any harm in a Lean Cuisine but Id rather pick up a salad somewhere or eat something that I stashed in the freezer like some chili or even just take 5 minutes to cook some eggs & toast.

It's interesting to hear the variety of things people do.  I'm enthusiastic about it all.  Because I like to eat.


----------



## klpca (May 5, 2016)

I have three adult children - one is overweight, two are not. As kids they ate the same diet, and had nearly the same lifestyle - the thinner two loved sports, the other one didn't but danced instead - and for sure they ate the same things because this mama didn't make special meals, and daddy pretty much made sure that there were no leftovers, . In my mind this has to be biological in nature. The overweight kid feels really bad about weight and diets all the time, goes to the gym three or four times a week (does spinning!) and still dances - and it's not working. In fact I think that having to live with the stress of trying to lose weight has to be worse than anything. Luckily our family is non-judgemental. I can't imagine having to live with that too.

We have obese people in our family on both sides. I am thin, my husband tends to carry extra weight but can lose if easily with a little diet/exercise modification. (IPA is his downfall). It seems like some people are successful with permanent weight loss but in my personal experience they tend to be those who are like my husband (it comes off rather easily so maintenance is easier - my friend Sue falls into this category) or those who make it a personal mission to maintain the weight loss. Most of my friends who have dieted eventually cannot maintain the lifestyle required to keep off the weight. I wouldn't be able to do it, honestly. My motivation would wane somewhere along the way. I am impressed with people who can focus and remain motivated for the rest of their lives. As someone who lives with a chronic medical condition that requires a severe reduction of alcohol intake, I can tell you that - going into my fourth year of dealing with it - it is only slightly easier to accept it, and only the fear of death keeps me from having an occasional second glass of wine when I am out with friends.


----------



## x3 skier (May 5, 2016)

Interesting discussion. 

One thing I look at when there's some claim that "biology" explains differences in people is to look at other mammals in nature to see if similar situations arise. 

Let's take "Obesity" vs "Slimness", for example. All hippos are fat and I've never seen a skinny one (that wasn't sick) so that set of mammals are just naturally fat like Blue whales. OTOH, I haven't seen a fat gorilla or Orca so that set of mammals also seem to have a "standard" weight. Likewise, the only really fat mice I've seen are those force fed or otherwise abnormally treated or given a "fattening" diet in lab experiments.  Not that I've seen all hippos, gorillas or mice etc. for sure. 

So my inclination is that human beings, being mammals, have some standard weight that they, given a normal diet and mobility, would achieve and maintain. I would also assume the "standard" BMI tables would reflect this. 

I have no scientific references (or non scientific) for my thoughts, just a recognition that physiologically (not mentally) speaking people are just mammals and probably react the same way to food intake and mobility as other mammals. 

No clue if this scientifically valid but it does make sense to my way or reasoning. And this sample of one, me, was able to lose 30 lbs and not gain it back for over 20 years now by changes in diet and a small change in exercise habits. 

Cheers


----------



## DeniseM (May 5, 2016)

heathpack said:


> But if you told me square dancing was the secret to a long life, sorry I'd choose to die young!  Life is indeed too short, we should all just savor whatever it is we like to do.



That's funny - because that's how I feel about riding a bike.  (Although I have tremendous admiration for what you have done - it also seems HARD.)


----------



## Elan (May 5, 2016)

DeniseM said:


> That's funny - because that's how I feel about riding a bike.  (Although I have tremendous admiration for what you have done - it also seems HARD.)



  And that's how I feel about running.  I'll run my ass off on a tennis court, but to just go "on a run" somewhere?  Never.


----------



## clifffaith (May 5, 2016)

mpumilia said:


> But- I still do. I also have been buying some of those lean cuisines for times I don't have anything precooked and that keeps portions in check.



I don't care how healthy a meal I cook, I always end up over eating.  But I'm always amazed that when the Lean Cuisine tray is empty, my stomach sees the empty tray and it thinks it is full.  Works every time.  We really ought to eat more LC than we do -- we both enjoy most of the meals with an Asian flare to them.

I in particular need to take 20-25 pounds off (Cliff always loses when I do without doing a darn thing other than eating what's set in front of him). Three years ago when I first started having back problems I lost 25 pounds, 8 of which have crept back on.  Now my pain level is such that I think surgery is looming so I want the extra pounds gone.  I say this as I take a break from sightseeing in NYC with a Starbuck's mocha and cookies from Magnolia Bakery by my side.  It's tough to give up my sweets.  In fact the last couple of times I've lost weight all I did was stop eating sweets -- tells you how many calories I'm taking in from sugary snacks and desserts.


----------



## heathpack (May 5, 2016)

DeniseM said:


> That's funny - because that's how I feel about riding a bike.  (Although I have tremendous admiration for what you have done - it also seems HARD.)



It is actually really hard.  But exhilarating too.  

I didn't start out this way, at first I just rode casually around.  But then as I got fitter and things became easier on the bike, I wanted to do more challenging rides.  Then when I mastered those and I started working with my coach, he would give me these totally bad a$$ workouts and it was an amazing feeling to be able to do them.  That's where I am now.  He sends me my schedule a week or two in advance and sometimes I look at a workout and think, "that's impossible, no way I can do that".  But I trust him now, if he thinks I can do it, I'm willing to try.  I'm frequently surprised by what I can do.  But I also understand that he intentionally works me to failure, because he learns a lot from the data to see what I can't do, too.  Its no biggie to not be able to complete a workout, you just have to wrap your head around that being ok.

Anyway, a fascinating process.  Hard but really really fun too!


----------



## "Roger" (May 6, 2016)

Here is a companion piece to the article linked to by the OP. It contains a lot of information about dieting.

Some reflections.  There is a lot of discouraging news about dieting. While my own prior post (and this one) is pessimistic, still, my temperament is more aligned with heathpack. One should not let these articles engender a totally defeatist attitude. That can only make things worse (more weight gain yet). My suggestions are to adopt some modest goals. 

Be careful about adding even more weight. Vacation times are often when gains come. If you have gained even a few more pounds, do what one can to get those off. In other words, try to hold the line.

If you are interested in weight loss, don't try to lose massive amounts of weight. If one is going to try to lose some weight, go for just a few pounds.

I can't say enough about the benefits of even modest exercise. Even if it doesn't result in weight loss, you will be able to do more things and that will result in an improvement in your quality of life.

Spend more times outdoors. Take walks with your kids or grandkids. In the spirit of disclosure, I am on the board of a privately financed arboretum.  Most of our emphasis is on educational programs. One thing that more and more research is showing is that more contact with nature promotes mental health and a sense of well being. Preservation of nature is not just about saving the earth. It is about our own well being.

End of sermonette.


----------



## Elan (May 6, 2016)

x3 skier said:


> Interesting discussion.
> 
> One thing I look at when there's some claim that "biology" explains differences in people is to look at other mammals in nature to see if similar situations arise.
> 
> ...



   There are certainly enough genetic-based differences between members of  a common species that would indicate that classification by species is likely not logical.  If I'm 6 ft tall and have blue eyes, and you're 5'5" and have brown eyes, why can't I be fat and you be skinny?  

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obesity-gene-discovery-could-lead-to-new-treatments/

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2016-05/04/fat-labradors-obesity-epidemic-gene


----------



## heathpack (May 6, 2016)

"Roger" said:


> Here is a companion piece to the article linked to by the OP. It contains a lot of information about dieting.



Interesting article.  It contains some of the things that I find very misleading about these types of articles. 

For example, the section where they mention a negligible effect from building muscle- a man adds 4.5 pounds of muscle and he "only" burns 24 extra calories per day.  Um, 24 calories x 365 days per year 8760 cal/yr.  Which is metabolically equivalent to 2.5 pounds a year in theory.  So if that guy did nothing other than build and maintain 4.5 pounds of muscle, he might lose 2.5 pounds per year.  We do this kind of thing all the time in bike racing, we look for the marginal gain.  Which means I might make 10 small changes to what I'm doing that non-racing cyclists all claim is insignificant.  But the cumulative effect of those changes is indeed significant and the "cost" for the tiny changes is often very low.

Then there's the part about your muscles becoming more efficient at processing energy when you lose weight- which means that you burn less calories.  I look at that and see opportunity- awesome, I can now ride longer, perform better in an endurance event.  Its not that I "have to do more exercise", its that I have a genetic gift and maybe if I'm enough of an outlier with that I can actually do something extraordinary like set a world record or complete an Ironman or swim across the English Channel.

Sure looked at in one way, my physiology can be a handicap in life- I'm prone to put on weight more readily than many other people.  But the flip side of that is that that same physiology is maybe a genetic gift that I can exploit to be able to compete in endurance events.


----------



## VegasBella (May 6, 2016)

There's a follow-up article by another NY Times writer. It address some of the issues commented on in this thread:



> men with severe obesity have only one chance in 1,290 of reaching the normal weight range within a year; severely obese women have one chance in 677.





> Whether weight is lost slowly or quickly has no effect on later regain.





> a 2006 study found that elite athletes who competed for Finland in such weight-conscious sports were three times more likely to be obese by age 60 than their peers who competed in other sports.





> Girls who labeled themselves as dieters in early adolescence were three times more likely to become overweight over the next four years. Another study found that adolescent girls who dieted frequently were 12 times more likely than non-dieters to binge two years later.





> Mice and rats enjoy the same wide range of foods that we do. When tasty food is plentiful, individual rodents gain different amounts of weight, and the genes that influence weight in people have similar effects in mice. Under stress, rodents eat more sweet and fatty foods. Like us, both laboratory and wild rodents have become fatter over the past few decades.



And the most important part of the article is right here, so important I emboldened it:



> *Low fitness, smoking, high blood pressure, low income and loneliness are all better predictors of early death than obesity.*



http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/opinion/sunday/why-you-cant-lose-weight-on-a-diet.html

FYI - I'm overweight but fit. I exercise a lot and have excellent cardiovascular health. Example, my VO2 Max is optimal for my age. I'm also someone who has successfully lost and kept 40 pounds off. But I can't dip much lower and keep it off. It's very difficult for me to do that.


----------



## JudyS (May 6, 2016)

Heathpack, thanks for the information about what you do to manage hunger.





heathpack said:


> Nope.  I never said any such thing, nor have I told anyone here that they should or could lose weight.  All I've said is that telling people that managing their own weight in impossible is counterproductive.  If you had told ME that and I had listened, you would have been doing me a disservice...


I'm not sure what your position is, then. Do you think almost all people are able to manage their weight if they try hard enough? Or, that only a few small number are able to? Or somewhere in between?

I believe some people can lose some weight and keep it off, especially if they started off with a lifestyle that promotes fat gain. But, I think almost no one can kept off more than 40 pounds for more than five years. So, some people will be able to say, lose 35 pounds and keep it off for the rest of their lives, depending on how motivated they are and how bad their lifestyle was to begin with.

It is probably possible to predict how much success a person will have in losing some weight and keeping it off. Possibly, something as simple as monitoring the person's basal body temperature when they diet would indicate, within a week or two, how well dieting will work for that person. Also, measuring certain hormones can tell whether the person is starting out at, above, or below their setpoint. But no one is currently doing this. Suppose we eventually can identify people who are almost certain to fail at dieting -- people whose bodies are below their setpoint, say. Would you still object to telling those people not to diet? 

As for whether convincing you not to diet would have been a disservice or not, I think it's too soon to tell. You've done extremely well with weight loss so far, but you hopefully have many, many years left in your life. We don't know what will happen down the road.


----------



## JudyS (May 6, 2016)

x3 skier said:


> ...
> Let's take "Obesity" vs "Slimness", for example. All hippos are fat and I've never seen a skinny one (that wasn't sick) so that set of mammals are just naturally fat like Blue whales. OTOH, I haven't seen a fat gorilla or Orca so that set of mammals also seem to have a "standard" weight. Likewise, the only really fat mice I've seen are those force fed or otherwise abnormally treated or given a "fattening" diet in lab experiments.  Not that I've seen all hippos, gorillas or mice etc. for sure....


Mice vary tremendously in weight due to genetics. For example, "ob/ob" mice have two copies of an allele (a version of a gene) that causes obesity, and they are tremendously fat. There are other genetically obese mice, as well. Rats also come in genetically obese strains -- Zucker rats are one type. 

The numbers of gorillas and orcas are quite small, and small populations tend not to have much genetic diversity. I would expect humans to have much more diversity than gorillas, and orcas. For example, gorillas and orcas all have pretty much the same pigmentation, but humans don't. (There are actually several species of hippo, but each has a pretty small population.)


----------



## heathpack (May 6, 2016)

JudyS said:


> Heathpack, thanks for the information about what you do to manage hunger.
> I'm not sure what your position is, then. Do you think almost all people are able to manage their weight if they try hard enough? Or, that only a few small number are able to? Or somewhere in between?
> 
> I believe some people can lose some weight and keep it off, especially if they started off with a lifestyle that promotes fat gain. But, I think almost no one can kept off more than 40 pounds for more than five years. So, some people will be able to say, lose 35 pounds and keep it off for the rest of their lives, depending on how motivated they are and how bad their lifestyle was to begin with.
> ...



My position is that humans did not evolve to be overweight and until very recently, most people were not overweight.  It's very likely therefore that weight is a managable thing for most people.  

Scientists that study people who lost & then regained weight are not doing the world a disservice because there's lots to learn from observing both how things go wrong & go right for whatever it is you're trying to figure out.  Sometimes scientists draw the wrong conclusions from their own work perhaps, but looking at people on both sides of the coin is the right thing to do.

Laypeople however (mostly mainstream media) sometimes take the results of various scientific studies and draw wrong conclusions or overly simplistic interpretations of the data.  They write articles that may be well-meaning but are often intended to be splashy and to sell papers or win awards.

Since I think that most people are capable of being non-overweight, I personally think the best message to send out is not that it's hopeless.  Maybe it's not easy.  Maybe it will be immensely frustrating.  Maybe it will take you years to figure out.  Maybe you will have concurrent medical or sociological constraints that will prevent you from losing weight or maintaining that weight loss.  If you don't ever master it, don't make yourself crazy over it.  It's worse to be miserable because you can't lose weight than it is to be overweight.

I am not here telling anyone what they should do.  I am just saying that IMO its wrong to limit people's sense of what's possible.

Personally I have some opinions about what it would take for most people but those are really just speculations because although I have a very solid background in nutrition & physiology (and a newfound understanding of exercise physiology), weight loss is not my field.  Mostly though I think what it really will take are dozens of changes to the way people live & how they view food and physical activity, and honestly I think there's a good chance that most people would be unwilling or unable to change things to that extent.  But that's not the same as it being virtually impossible to manage weight.

PS My lifestyle pre-weight loss was typical American, but not terrible.  Basically I ate too much food and my food choices were based mostly on palatibility.  I did zero exercise.  And I was not good at managing stress.


----------



## x3 skier (May 7, 2016)

JudyS said:


> Mice vary tremendously in weight due to genetics. For example, "ob/ob" mice have two copies of an allele (a version of a gene) that causes obesity, and they are tremendously fat. There are other genetically obese mice, as well. Rats also come in genetically obese strains -- Zucker rats are one type.



Interesting. So really fat mice species have a fat gene? I look at that as another example of uniformity among species in nature, given similar environmental factors such as diet and mobility.

I also would think that if obesity was genetically determined, this would have been found out by now. If it has and I missed it, there's a fortune to be made developing genetic analysis and treatment. If it hasn't, I bet it's not for lack of looking.

Cheers


----------



## WinniWoman (May 7, 2016)

These babies are coming out bigger and bigger. Maybe it's the vitamins the moms take? I was just reading about a 13 pound infant!

I think my son was 8 lbs 11 ounces.


----------



## VegasBella (May 7, 2016)

heathpack said:


> My position is that humans did not evolve to be overweight and until very recently, most people were not overweight.  It's very likely therefore that weight is a managable thing for most people.


That doesn't actually follow. 

For example, if throughout most of human history that:

- high calorie foods were relatively scarce (meat dairy sugar and oil were rare and/or expensive, resource-intensive, etc)

- sedentary lifestyles were relatively rare (before industrial revolution there was a lack of technology to do most manual tasks thus humans had to do more physical work on a daily basis)

- obesity level weight-gain during childhood and early adulthood was rare (example, in most of history children did manual labor and did not have free public education which prioritizes deskwork over PE and recess - studies suggest that weight-gain in childhood or early adulthood influences long-term weight)

- dieting was not a thing (see the 2nd article I posted)

- obesity or lack of it is not a good predictor of evolutionary fitness (eg plenty of fat people live quite a while and certainly long enough to reproduce AND some human populations DID "evolve to be overweight" due to cold climate)


----------



## Elan (May 7, 2016)

x3 skier said:


> Interesting. So really fat mice species have a fat gene? I look at that as another example of uniformity among species in nature, given similar environmental factors such as diet and mobility.
> 
> I also would think that if obesity was genetically determined, this would have been found out by now. If it has and I missed it, there's a fortune to be made developing genetic analysis and treatment. If it hasn't, I bet it's not for lack of looking.
> 
> Cheers


X3, did you read the two links I posted?  I think you'd find them interesting.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## x3 skier (May 7, 2016)

Elan said:


> X3, did you read the two links I posted?  I think you'd find them interesting.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk



Interesting CBS article.

"The gene glitch doesn't explain all obesity. It was found in 44 percent of Europeans but only 5 percent of blacks, so other genes clearly are at work, and food and exercise still matter."

Looks like they've found something but not the "answer" as noted in the article comments. If the "Gene glitch" was the "answer" I would think 44% of Europeans would be obese ever since there were "Europeans" and only 5% of Blacks would be obese which is definitely not my observational experience or the historical record. OTOH, although never having been to Africa and spending much time in Europe, photos etc of Black Africans certainly do not have a propensity toward obesity.

All in all, it seems to me while there may be some genetic effect, diet and exercise are much larger effects on one's weight otherwise almost half of Americans of "European" descent would be obese and less than 5% of Americans of African descent would be obese.

In any event, I'm happy with my health and my ability to control my weight however it happens

The "answer" lies somewhere but it will likely be found long after I'm gone.

Cheers


----------



## Glynda (May 7, 2016)

*Genetics*



x3 skier said:


> Interesting. So really fat mice species have a fat gene? I look at that as another example of uniformity among species in nature, given similar environmental factors such as diet and mobility.
> 
> I also would think that if obesity was genetically determined, this would have been found out by now. If it has and I missed it, there's a fortune to be made developing genetic analysis and treatment. If it hasn't, I bet it's not for lack of looking.
> 
> Cheers



I think you've missed it!  Or at least that genetics influence metabolism among other things that can lead to obesity.


----------



## Tia (May 7, 2016)

I think there are way more processed foods being consumed, also genetically engineered crops , plus additives being consumed then 50 years ago. 

Having never in my life had a problem w/extra pounds found it  shocking to reach my middle 40's when I started experiencing migraines (perimenopausal ) stopped w/hormone patches. Then too with no changes to anything I was doing/eating extra pounds started showing up:annoyed:. Also watched my female friends of similar age add extra lbs  they'd never had before


----------



## heathpack (May 7, 2016)

VegasBella said:


> That doesn't actually follow.
> 
> For example, if throughout most of human history that:
> 
> ...



So are you saying that people cannot become aware of the fact that high calorie foods are to be avoided or consumed sparingly?  Or that they cannot learn that a sedentary lifestyle could lead to obesity & instead adopt an active lifestyle?

Sure humans evolved to be metabolically efficient on both the in/out side of the calorie equation.  But that does not mean they are evolutionarily or biologically destined to be overweight, not the same thing.

As an aside, I raced my bike today.  Technically I did better than I've done previously on that course but I could have done better.  I knew two racing friends would be there today and that I probably couldn't beat them.  One is my time trial Nemesis, she has won the SoCal time trial series (a series of 10 races that we just finished today) the past four years straight.  And MEA who used to share a coach with me and is the reining masters national TT champ and who BTW also set a world record last year at the 2000m distance on the track (as in velodrome).  We were chatting at the finish and MEA was telling me some woman BLEW past her like she was standing still.  Ruh oh, someone beat MEA, that means I probably finished off-the-podium in 4th place.

Yep that's exactly what happened: Nemesis second, MEA third, me fourth.  Total lol to see who won, it was Amber Neben, a recently retired pro, ten years younger than me.  Former pro world TT champ.  Winner of multiple pro international stage races (these are very difficult multi-day races).  Think a female Lance Armstrong but without the doping.  Turns out she lives in the neighborhood.

Anyway, win or lose, it was just totally cool to be out there racing with these bad-a$$ women and doing ok at it.  And then casually chatting and hanging out afterwards.  Me.  The former couch potato.  I love it.


----------



## VegasBella (May 7, 2016)

heathpack said:


> So are you saying that people cannot become aware of the fact that high calorie foods are to be avoided or consumed sparingly?  Or that they cannot learn that a sedentary lifestyle could lead to obesity & instead adopt an active lifestyle?



No.

I poked holes in _your claim_ of a causal relationship between "until very recently, most people were not overweight" and "therefore weight is a managable thing for most people." I'm simply saying it doesn't follow. Without more evidence to back up your claim it's not "very likely."

What is more likely given the plethora of studies cited in these articles I posted as well as the articles others have posted here in this thread is that *large, longterm weight loss that resulted from longterm obesity is a complicated struggle for most people that may involve genetic, hormonal, and psychological factors. No one is saying it's impossible.*


----------



## heathpack (May 8, 2016)

VegasBella said:


> No.
> 
> I poked holes in _your claim_ of a causal relationship between "until very recently, most people were not overweight" and "therefore weight is a managable thing for most people." I'm simply saying it doesn't follow. Without more evidence to back up your claim it's not "very likely."
> 
> What is more likely given the plethora of studies cited in these articles I posted as well as the articles others have posted here in this thread is that large, longterm weight loss that resulted from longterm obesity is a complicated struggle for most people that may involve genetic, hormonal, and psychological factors. No one is saying it's impossible.



If the normal state for body weight for most people for most of human history was to be slim, then what do you think accounts for the rise in obesity over the last few decades?

The point that I was trying to make is that it's not human physiology that has changed in that short time.  Therefore it's has to be factors external to any of us.

Most of these factors are within our control- food choices, degree of physical activity, managing stress, sleeping enough.  They require education for people to understand, sure, and a willingness to not just go with the flow culturally.  It would be helpful if we as a culture changed certain pervasive attitudes, weight management would be easier & more automatic.  But these are not things we are powerless about.

Some factors that lead to obesity are outside of people's control, of course.  You might need to take a life-saving medication that has the side effect of causing weight gain for example.  You might have illnesses which restrict food choices and/or limit your ability to be active.

Again, I'm not saying its an *easy* thing to do.  I'm not saying anyone should or should not lose weight.  I'm just saying that it is not inevitable that humans become or remain overweight.


----------



## heathpack (May 8, 2016)

Tia said:


> I think there are way more processed foods being consumed, also genetically Having never in my life had a problem w/extra pounds found it  shocking to reach my middle 40's when I started experiencing migraines (perimenopausal ) stopped w/hormone patches. Then too with no changes to anything I was doing/eating extra pounds started showing up:annoyed:. Also watched my female friends of similar age add extra lbs  they'd never had before



You know that this is normal & expected, right?  

Do you know weight gain occurs in women of your age and what to do to (try to) stave off the weight gain?

Hint:  it's not eat less.  Good news.


----------



## x3 skier (May 8, 2016)

heathpack said:


> If the normal state for body weight for most people for most of human history was to be slim, then what do you think accounts for the rise in obesity over the last few decades?
> 
> The point that I was trying to make is that it's not human physiology that has changed in that short time.  Therefore it's has to be factors external to any of us.
> 
> ...



I agree with you. I find it incredible to think that there has been some sudden change in human beings' physiology that has caused a significant increase in obesity. If the type of foods available result in the normal metabolism of a human being to gain weight while they are also becoming more sedentary as is the current view of most experts I read about, the choice is to not eat those foods and become less sedentary. If people spread the word that certain types of food and lack of exercise WILL result in weight gain, great. If they, OTOH, spread the word we are all doomed no matter what we do, it's not helpful. 

Life has many choices. I chose to eat and exercise to maintain a healthy weight, even if it's on the high side of "normal".  I'm back to within 20 pounds of the weight I graduated from college 50 years ago after being almost 50 pounds fatter. I can live with that. 

This isn't Rocket Science to me (used to work on rocket engines a long time ago, ). 

Cheers


----------



## VegasBella (May 8, 2016)

x3 skier said:


> I find it incredible to think that there has been some sudden change in human beings' physiology that has caused a significant increase in obesity.



It think you may be misreading the articles. The theory is NOT that there has been any drastic change in human physiology. 

The theory is that the same physiology (metabolic efficiency) that was advantageous during times when high-calorie food was relatively scarce, dieting was rare, and intense daily physical activity was necessary for survival is no longer advantageous in today's society. That today, given the abundance of high-calorie foods and lifestyles that are so far less physically demanding that it's actually difficult to find enough time to do the minimum 9 hours of intense exercise per week recommended for sustained weight-loss. The idea is that metabolic efficiency has generally been a very good thing for our evolution.

I'll say it again... *The theory is that the same physiology that was advantageous for most of human history is no longer advantageous. *

The second part of the theory is that this historically advantageous metabolic efficiency influences feelings of hunger (through various hormones) and thus makes the amount of will-power necessary for sustained weight-loss enormous. Again, as already stated in the articles and posts here,* it's not impossible to ignore the hunger and avoid the high calorie foods and sustain the weight-loss on a lower than average daily caloric intake, but it IS difficult.* It's extremely difficult and it's worth recognizing just how difficult it really is.


----------



## Tia (May 8, 2016)

heathpack said:


> You know that this is normal & expected, right?  *Actually didn't until it happened*
> 
> Do you know weight gain occurs in women of your age and what to do to (try to) stave off the weight gain?*no fun in that, prefer to have the hormones back*
> 
> Hint:  it's not eat less.  Good news.   *oh it's all about limited eating/drinking all the good stuff that used to be able to do....*



my 2cents in purple


----------



## heathpack (May 8, 2016)

VegasBella said:


> It think you may be misreading the articles. The theory is NOT that there has been any drastic change in human physiology.
> 
> The theory is that the same physiology (metabolic efficiency) that was advantageous during times when high-calorie food was relatively scarce, dieting was rare, and intense daily physical activity was necessary for survival is no longer advantageous in today's society. That today, given the abundance of high-calorie foods and lifestyles that are so far less physically demanding that it's actually difficult to find enough time to do the minimum 9 hours of intense exercise per week recommended for sustained weight-loss. The idea is that metabolic efficiency has generally been a very good thing for our evolution.
> 
> ...




Or it takes zero willpower.  Depending on how you do it.


----------



## vacationhopeful (May 8, 2016)

20-25+ years ago, I used to have French teenage girls as foreign exchange students living with me for 3-5 weeks during the summer. No school ..they just had to engage in my life's activities. Maybe over 6-7 summers; 1 teenage girl during July and the other during August. I never left them back at my house.

Great Fun .. as I got to take them to all my construction sites and they watch as I dealt with my client population (telling my tenants, "they are foreign and speak no English"). And they got to eat lunchtime Fast Food .. or as they would say "MACdonalds" or PIZZA and I would vote for KFC (which they insisted had to be eaten with forks).

The amount of food they consumed was very modest plus they preferred healthy options ... compared to American teenagers. 

Live either in a different culture or have guests stay with you ... the girls would tell me, how FAT Americans are and how they all eat too much. But they all LOVE Pizza. 

So very unlike US teenagers as I saw all the French teenagers for the weekly sightseeing trip dropoff and pickup... 35-40 kids each month. I don't recall any of these French teenagers having even a slight "overweight" issue.


----------



## "Roger" (May 8, 2016)

vacationhopeful said:


> ...
> 
> Live either in a different culture or have guests stay with you ... the girls would tell me, how FAT Americans are and how they all eat too much. But they all LOVE Pizza.
> 
> So very unlike US teenagers as I saw all the French teenagers for the weekly sightseeing trip dropoff and pickup... 35-40 kids each month. I don't recall any of these French teenagers having even a slight "overweight" issue.


My wife spent a year in France maybe forty years ago. She remembers when she and some other girls went out for pizza, the French girls would eat a single slice for lunch. At the same time, it was not unusual for kids in the dorm where I lived to have an entire pizza just for an evening snack.


----------



## x3 skier (May 8, 2016)

heathpack said:


> Or it takes zero willpower.  Depending on how you do it.



Once again I agree. For some reason, I cannot seem to communicate that I believe since physiology very unlikely to have changed, eating and excercise must have changed if there are more obese persons. Since not everyone is obese, especially Europeans, for example as others have noted, this is not an insurmountable or even difficult thing to do. 

Cheers


----------



## heathpack (May 8, 2016)

Tia said:


> my 2cents in purple



Actually what I was getting at is that we all lose muscle mass as we age & at the same time our metabolism slows as well.  Eat the same and you'll gain weight.

The thing to do is to build muscle and burn calories.  Ideally burn enough calories to actually eat a little more (because calorie restriction further decreases metabolic rate whereas eating increases metabolic rate), but this is hard work.

The extent to which do any of these things depends on your body type (muscular vs chubby), your current weight, your available time, your interest level, etc.

I know people are going to chime in now that exercise has been "proven" not to work.  The reality is that exercise is not just a single thing & there's all kinds of ways in which these studies sabotage the exercise programs they look at.  From the perspective of an athlete, you look at these study designs and say "duh, that's not going to work".

Whatever.  I'm pretty confident in my understanding of all of this, where the flaws are in the studies & the popular thinking.  At this point, it's turning into something akin to a political argument.  People are going to believe what they want to believe.

The biggest issue IMO is actually cultural.  Americans want what they want.  They want the food they want, they want the lifestyle they want, they want hard things to be easy, they want complex things to be simple.

For the most part, I'm going to bow out of this thread from here on.  I could actually go into pretty good depth on a lot of these concepts but in reality I'm not sure it would change much and it's pretty time-consuming.

Good luck to every one of you who are interested in managing their weight!  You can do it.


----------



## x3 skier (May 8, 2016)

heathpack said:


> Whatever.  I'm pretty confident in my understanding of all of this, where the flaws are in the studies & the popular thinking.  At this point, it's turning into something akin to a political argument.  People are going to believe what they want to believe.
> 
> The biggest issue IMO is actually cultural.  Americans want what they want.  They want the food they want, they want the lifestyle they want, they want hard things to be easy, they want complex things to be simple.
> 
> ...



Well said and good luck to all. Tuning out as well.

Cheers


----------



## VegasBella (May 8, 2016)

"Europeans aren't obese"...

Actually the WHO says:


> *The worldwide prevalence of obesity nearly doubled between 1980 and 2008*. According to country estimates for 2008, *over 50% of both men and women in the WHO European Region were overweight*, and roughly 23% of women and 20% of men were obese.



http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/noncommunicable-diseases/obesity/data-and-statistics

FACT: your individual experiences are only one data point.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 8, 2016)

heathpack said:


> Actually what I was getting at is that we all lose muscle mass as we age & at the same time our metabolism slows as well.  Eat the same and you'll gain weight.
> 
> The thing to do is to build muscle and burn calories.  Ideally burn enough calories to actually eat a little more (because calorie restriction further decreases metabolic rate whereas eating increases metabolic rate), but this is hard work.
> 
> ...



I know you are outta here- but here's the flaw. There are plenty of older people that don't exercise at all and are thin. Maybe they eat a few sunflower seeds each day and call it quits, I don't know. Seriously, I assume they don't eat much.

Yes- you can say to exercise more so you can eat more. Trouble is we are all getting older- so what do you think everyone is going to race bike like 8 hours per day as they keep aging and getting into their 70s and 80s? 

For those less obsessive compulsive and with a life going on besides trying to compete with themselves and others in the exercise realm, I still go back to a realistic plan of exercising moderately for an hour each day and keeping calories to a reasonable limit. Eat healthy and for the weight you would like to be for the activity level you are at. Keep active, but don't obsess about it. Do some physical work around your home and yard. Be conscious if you are stationary for too long a period of time each day. 

Splurge from time to time and enjoy the foods and beverages we are all so lucky to have available to us. 

Don't feel guilty if you are tired and need a lounging around day once in a while. Get a good amount of sleep and try to keep stress to a minimum of possible. Get an annual Physical and health screenings and dental visit.

Take a multi vitamin, probiotics and whatever other supplements might be of help or recommended by your doctor.

 That's my advice for what it is worth.


----------



## heathpack (May 8, 2016)

mpumilia said:


> For those less obsessive compulsive and with a life going on besides trying to compete with themselves and others in the exercise realm, I still go back to a realistic plan of exercising moderately for an hour each day.



Lol, I'm not obsessive compulsive. I just happen to have found something I enjoy.  Like you enjoy your pasta night.  Just because you don't understand it or can't relate to it does not make it psychologically unhealthy.  I honestly can't relate to the pasta attachment, but to each his/her own.  

And really?  You think I don't have a life going on outside of cycling?  Hmm, I wonder what you imagine you actually know about me- my career, my other interests, my relationships, etc?  Laughable since I already mentioned that I ride 8-10 hours a week.  Hmm, I wonder what ever I do with myself the rest of the week.  It's completely empty...

No need to feel defensive because someone disagrees with you.  You don't need to try to undermine the other person's argument by characterizing him or her in a negative light.  No one has done the same to you, you've been treated respectfully throughout this entire discussion.

So now I really am done here.  Not kidding this time.  

Unless I just can't resist replying to something else funny that gets posted.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 9, 2016)

heathpack said:


> Lol, I'm not obsessive compulsive. I just happen to have found something I enjoy.  Like you enjoy your pasta night.  Just because you don't understand it or can't relate to it does not make it psychologically unhealthy.  I honestly can't relate to the pasta attachment, but to each his/her own.
> 
> And really?  You think I don't have a life going on outside of cycling?  Hmm, I wonder what you imagine you actually know about me- my career, my other interests, my relationships, etc?  Laughable since I already mentioned that I ride 8-10 hours a week.  Hmm, I wonder what ever I do with myself the rest of the week.  It's completely empty...
> 
> ...


----------



## heathpack (May 9, 2016)

mpumilia said:


> Never said it was psychologically unhealthy or criticizing you!



Well, I'm glad you did not mean to be disparaging.  But characterizing me as obsessive compulsive, which is a psychiatric illness, certainly is an unfair way to attempt to undermine my position.  

As far as being "old": my Nemesis in the local racing scene is 55 years old.  The woman who took third place Sat by 40 seconds over me is 65 years old.  She set her world record and won her national championship last year.  We all work full time, have busy lives, and commute.  I am actually more friends with the 64 year old's husband than I am with her.  He is 67 and also raced on Sat.  These two are trying to talk me into taking up track cycling because the 2017 and 2018 Track World Championships are going to be in LA then.  They are planning on racing.  He'll be 70 for the 2018 Worlds.  These guys are 15 years older than me and still faster.  It ain't over until its over.

My coach is 55 years old and weighs 160 pounds, trim and muscular guy.  He was over 200 pounds when he decided at 40 that he needed to make a change in his life and he took up cycling and lost 40 pounds.  By the time he was 45 years old, he was nationally competitive.

I'm friends with another athlete who works with my coach.  She took up running and then triathalon in her early 50s after having been 200 pounds most of her adult life.  Now she is 65 years old and 135 pounds.  She moved into cycling completely about 5 years ago.  Active racer.  And she works full time too.

I walked as my initial form of exercise and I was able to lose weight doing that.  But eventually, I decided to mix it up, just to keep things interesting.  I started to go to the gym- swim, yoga, elliptical.  And I bought a bike.  I pretty quickly figured out that "exercise" is not "exercise".  I was open to doing whatever it might take to maintain my weight loss or possibly lose a little more.  So I learned a lot about training and exercise physiology.  It was a little easier for me to understand all of this, since I'm a veterinarian and have a very strong background in physiology and nutrition.

But the more I learned, the more I have come to understand how exercise is the key to managing weight.  Which is why it is hard for me to let it go when people say exercise does not work.

Its ok if you say: the kind of exercise that does work is not something most people would embrace.  Ok, that may be true, but you don't need to embrace it fully to start.  I took the attitude that I would be open to it and I discovered a couch potato who really *likes* the exercise.  So maybe encouraging people to explore what they can do and to learn about the way exercise *does* work is better advice to people than telling them repeatedly: dieting doesn't work, exercise doesn't work and its not really that bad to be overweight, so just enjoy life.  Your assumption is that I'm wrong and just focusing on my own personal experience because "science" has proven me wrong.  I have the educational background to actually read the articles and "science" has not proven that exercise does not work.  There is plenty of better science out there supporting my position.

This is what I mean when I say People want what they want- they want it to take the kind of exercise they think they should have to do without being willing to look beyond that.  Honestly most of the studies being embraced here by the folks who believe weight loss is impossible/virtually impossible are being embraced because it makes them feel better themselves about not having been able to lose weight or keep it off.  That's ok, people need to manage their own heads and if you need to believe this as in individual, fine.  But to try to discourage others from finding better solutions is just doing people a real disservice IMO.


----------



## "Roger" (May 9, 2016)

Here is a report on one study that supports heathpack's contentions. As the article fully admits, it is only an animal study, but what the study (putting most of its emphasis on further weight gain) suggests is

... beneath the skin, runners and the dieters looked very unalike. By almost all measures, the runners were metabolically healthier, with better insulin sensitivity and lower levels of bad cholesterol than the dieters. They also burned more fat each day for fuel, according to their metabolic readings, and had more cellular markers related to metabolic activity within their brown fat than the dieting group. Brown fat, unlike the white variety, can be quite metabolically active, helping the body to burn additional calories...​
and 

...So better to avoid weight gain in the first place, if possible. And in that context, she said, “restricting calories can be effective,” but exercise is likely to be more potent in the long term...​I might (again) add that there are more benefits to exercise than just weight control. Lots of studies support that exercise helps forestall mental deterioration in old age.

As far as the here and now, you can just do more things.  While I am no where near in the same class as heathpack, last year I was on a tour of Tuscany. One of the highlights for me was an optional walk between some of the towns in Cinque Terre.  Half the tour group took a pass in that it was going to be too strenuous for them. Of those that did go, I kept pace with a pair of thirty year old bikers (I was sixty-nine at the time) and felt just fine at the end. Others in the group admitted that they were totally exhausted for the last half or third of the hike.  Heathpack is living the dream right now; I wouldn't have given up my experience on the hike for anything.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 9, 2016)

I definitely would never discourage people to exercise (or eat healthy and count calories). I believe in it. I do various types of exercises. My gazelle, my indoor fan cycle, my weight bench, walking. Used to have a treadmill- but got rid of it because of space limitations.

I have jogged; I do yoga; I walk backwards up steep hills for balance and to work other muscle groups. I hike, though in a more limited manner now due to not wanting to stress my knees.  I will bike outside when I have the opportunity. I like kayaking/canoeing. I absolutely love to swim-(wish I had a pool) - more like wading- but I love to move around in water. Always take part in an aqua aerobics class when I am on vacation.

I am just saying people have to have realistic expectations for themselves. Do things they enjoy and yes- step outside the box once in a while to discover something new and beneficial.

One thing I personally don't like is sports- things like tennis, racing, etc. When I only walked for exercise I didn't lose weight. But when I added in another half hour of indoor cycling or the gazelle or treadmill, plus the isometric exercises with hand weights, my weight came off. But- like I said- not over time. The weight came back even though I still do everything.

PS- It was me I was referring to as obsessive. I think most people who exercise every single day to a fault are somewhat compulsive and it's a good thing. As are people who are competitive with themselves or others. Nothing wrong with it. It's not crazy (although others might think so) . I used the term obsessive compulsive loosely- meant no harm. It's my humor.  But not your average person.

PPSS- Roger- I would have loved to do that walk in Cinque Terra. On my bucket list to go there.

Also I agree- if you only had a choice to diet or exercise- but not both- exercise wins out. Both is best for weight loss.


----------



## heathpack (May 9, 2016)

"Roger" said:


> Heathpack is living the dream right now; I wouldn't have given up my experience on the hike for anything.



I totally agree.  The people I have met cycling are amongst the best people I've known in all the things I've done in a pretty interesting life.  I'm just very lucky to be able to do it at all.  I'm really grateful for it and all the people who have helped me along the way.  I'm also grateful for the change in perspective that I've had as I've gone through the training process, because when its not all about weight loss, you start to see it much differently and the weight aspect just becomes one little piece of the puzzle and not that big of a deal.

The blog article that you linked to is hinting at what I'm getting at.  There are well-known methods of increasing metabolism with exercise and of manipulating the fuels that your body burns.  As your body's metabolism slows with age and loss of muscle mass, you can keep ahead of that curve by exercising smart (but it is an evolving thing for sure, you do have to keep ahead of it because your body is simultaneously changing continuously).  

Calorie restriction lowers metabolic rate, and the more you restrict calories, the worse it gets.  Most studies severely restrict calories in order to see significant weight loss during the timeframe of their study.  To make things worse, when you severely restrict calories you usually also restrict protein which translates into also losing muscle mass.  Which is the last thing you want to do, because muscle is metabolically active and burns calories continuously.  Now you're in a double whammy situation.  But this is the norm for studies on weight loss.

Athletes look at things differently.  When I told my coach last Oct that I was going to try to knock off 15-20 pounds, his response was "let's see how it goes".  If I started to lose power on the bike, we'd have halted the process.  I basically have to be very meticulous about not restricting calories too much, getting enough protein, getting the protein at the right time relative to the workout, getting adequate carbs, taking sufficient days off from training to recover (no I don't work out every day) and having the optimized variation in workout intensity to have a positive training effect (which means building muscle and aerobic conditioning).  In reality, organizing all of this is pretty straightforward, its not a complex thing to do on a day-to-day basis.  But you do have to get all the details right or you can't expect to be successful.  You read a lot of these "exercise" studies from the perspective of an athlete and you want to scream 'No no no!  Don't do that!  That is going to be a disaster.'

Anyway, I'm just fortunate.  I like what I'm doing and just grateful for whatever phase of my life that I'm able to keep doing it.


----------



## elaine (May 9, 2016)

I think some people are genetically lucky--good blood and thin by nature . Others not so lucky and some have very unlucky genetics.
I am in the middle, pushing to the unlucky side at 50+ and realized 6 mths ago that I could continue to be overweight (up 40 lbs in 25 years) or do something about it. My cholesterol was up and I (IMHO) was a candidate for Metabolic syndrome.
Dr. told me 5 years ago (when I was 10 lbs lighter) to lose at least 10 lbs by cutting out almost everything white (pasta, potato, rice, bread) and eat more veggies, with limited fruits, more fish, less meat, moderate portions. Add 1-2 servings of nuts and good fats. Be as active as possible, meaning up my activity, even an extra 10 minutes a day. 
When I actually committed to it 6 mths ago, I lost 7 lbs in 3 weeks doing the above, then slacked off somewhat, but maintained that new weight, and now haven been a bit more rigorous, lost another 5 lbs. My bad cholesteral has dropped almost 10%. 
I added walking up the stairs during the day as a break from work, and an exercise band for arms for a few minutes with my office door closed. It's not a diet, but a permanent lifestyle changes--I eat carbs, but really think about the consequences of what goes into my mouth. I  don't deny myself, but stop at 5 bites of something "bad." I also eat an avocado a week. The good fats make you feel full and keep the carb cravings down. I'm less sleepy/lethargic and generally feel pretty good, esp. in the afternoon at my desk job. Walking 4 flights of stairs and then having 1/2 a mini candybar and decaf gives me the same pick up as caffeine + more carbs and calories used to. I definitely feel different, so I tend to agree that sittting might be the new smoking. 
Not saying it's the silver bullet, and I know others here have medical issues that would prevernt them from doing the above, but I wanted to share b/c I wish I had done this 5 years ago--and it was just a few easy switches/fixes and really thinking before I ate something white. And, DH's Dr. essentially told him the same thing to ward off diabetes.


----------



## WinniWoman (May 10, 2016)

Here's a link  for heathpack

https://www.good.is/articles/100-year-old-runner-record


----------



## Tia (May 10, 2016)

mpumilia said:


> Here's a link  for heathpack
> 
> https://www.good.is/articles/100-year-old-runner-record



 good for her!!


----------



## bogey21 (May 10, 2016)

With some it is genetics.  With others, bad eating habits.  I must be in the latter category.  High School weight (1953) was 155 pounds.  A year and a half ago I weighed in at 200 pounds.  Today I am back to 155.  My weight reduction came entirely from cutting out high calorie foods like ice cream, deserts, alcohol, french fries,etc.  Exercise was not part of it.  All I do is walk my dog 3 times a day, climb stairs rather than using elevators, and park as far away from the door at Walmart, Kroger, etc. as possible.   I feel the frustration of those for whom this amount of simplicity doesn't work.

George


----------



## Glynda (May 10, 2016)

*Genetics*



elaine said:


> I think some people are genetically lucky--good blood and thin by nature . Others not so lucky and some have very unlucky genetics.



I am one of *nine* children.  *Only the last three were raised togethe*r and they were raised by our birth mother, who died at thirty-nine, and two step-mothers.  Six of us were privately given up for adoption at birth or shortly after.  We were raised up and down the East Coast and in California. Our heritage is primarily Northern European.  Icelandic, Swedish and Irish.  

Our birth mother was obese. Upon discovering each other as adults, it was learned that seven of the nine are/were obese. Of the two who had never been obese, one was asthmatic from childhood and had her first heart attack in her thirties.  She died after her seventh heart attack last year. The other possibly spent years in the drug culture and is now overweight.  I can not help but believe genetics are strongly at play here and wonder had the circumstances of those two been different they too would have also been obese at some point in time. One may still achieve that status.  

I have struggled with my weight from the birth of our daughter onward.  At one time I was considered obese.  I am now somewhere towards the lower end of overweight.  However, it is a daily battle and I weary of it.  As I think the articles pointed out, and some here have tried to state, at some point the level of dieting and exercise which has proved successful no longer does. The metabolism adjusts. One must then must either eat even less and/or move more.  At what point as we age and/or develop physical problems is this no longer possible to maintain? Have we done more harm to ourselves by the "yo-yo dieting" over the years than had we maintained an overweight status at some point rather than diet ourselves either to obesity or diet and exercise ourselves to deprivation and possible physical injury only to find more is required to maintain the status?  I wish I knew how to just maintain the status quo at this point.


----------

