Why is losing weight so effortless for some and so difficult for others?
Options
Replies
-
PinkPixiexox wrote: »People are very fond of the "It's simple - CICO" answer in regards to weight loss - and that's exactly how to do it - but there are many who struggle, and that's totally okay too. There is little room for sympathy on the message boards in regards to 'I'm finding this really hard' and it's a shame because everyone has a different story.
Case in point? My mum. She has been up and down weight-wise all her life. There was a time where she was at a very healthy weight and feeling fabulous - she knows all too well HOW this is done. Now? She is around 100 LBS overweight. She knows HOW to lose weight and many would question 'Well why hasn't she?'. Her mother recently passed away and her father is suffering from dementia - she is his full time carer and is slowly having to watch him fade away. She is a single mother to a 12 year old girl and she struggles to pay her rent. She also suffers from depression on top of everything else. So yes, it is simple - CICO, but my mum struggles to focus on weight loss for absolute obvious reasons. She just can't commit to any plan despite knowing how because she just has too much mentally going on in her life to spend her time calorie counting and meal prepping. And I would never, ever hold it against her.
Some people struggle with it - that's just the way it is. And I would never, ever judge someone for that. Others find it easier to mentally 'get in the zone' so to speak. We ALL need a little boost every now and again, that's a fact
This post is the best.....thank you Pink Pixie!
You're very welcome. Thank you for reading it 0 -
Stupid information is also to blame.
HAES, magazines that push fad diets, nonsense like ~starvation mode~ (which someone with 30% bodyfat is certainly not in) self-diagnosing with rare diseases make people think they are not responsible for themselves.
I can't lose weight, it must be dark magic, the Illuminati, my metabolism is hibernating and the stars aren't right.
Can't be what I eat, nope!
Lol. Nope, that tiramisu after my lasagna has nothing to do with it. I only drink diet sodas! I just look at food and gain weight lol 0 -
After reading this thread I am really really desiring cupcakes. Don't have any around.0
-
I haven't read all of the responses, but from my perspective and experience:
(1) the handful of people I know who can seemingly "eat whatever they want and never gain" are self regulating intake more than you realize. You don't see what they do when you're not around. When I've spent days with these people, I see that they might eat 2 big mac meals for dinner, but then they skip breakfast and still go running/working or whatever. That kind of thing.
(2) was at lunch yesterday with a table full of people who I'm sure would say they want to lose weight. Every one of them was at least 60 lbs overweight. i don't mean to say i'm judging their food choices, but based on what i saw they had no concept of the calories they consumed. They might be logging later or something, but it seems to me they're paying lip service to a goal they're not committed to. For me, I may look like "I have it easy" but in reality, my FitBit and MFP were 100% in effect that day, I knew fairly close how many calories I had available for lunch and how many calories was in my lunch I ate. I consciously skipped breakfast and a morning snack for that lunch. Was it easy? No. Was I hungry most of the morning? Yes! Did I eat every bite of that lunch? YES!!!
(3) I feel like the people I personally know that have a "harder" time losing weight or keeping it off haven't spent much time self reflecting on when and why they eat. Sure, they follow a diet and lose maybe. But they haven't learned anything about themselves in that time except that diets suck and why would anyone do them by choice. I'm not judging them for this. I know they have lives and children and stress that makes it seem like a waste of time to work on their relationship with food. They KNOW they have a problem with food. They KNOW they give into cravings. But prioritizing WHY hasn't been on their radar. That's ok. They're not ready.0 -
Thirdly, yes, the 1200 calorie people seem misguided. If they weigh what they say they weigh and they work out the way they say they work out very few of them should be eating 1200 calories! I haven't logged an official 'weigh in' yet but I'm wearing smaller clothes & people are commenting on my appearance and I average 1700 or 1800 calories a day walking +100k steps a week. And that is obviously keeping me in a gradual deficit. When I run my numbers at my eventual goal weight with the same level of activity I can see a baseline of about 1500 calories just to exist and about 2000 calories to maintain that weight at my current activity level. I can only extrapolate that one would have to be an exceedingly tiny adult to ever attempt 1200 calories a day...
Anyway, those are the things that jump out at me: lack of persistence due to unrealistic time frames, failure to get consistent & accurate measures of food volume, and unsustainably draconian calorie restriction goals.
I am on 1200 cal diet right now (measure everything on digital food scale) The food itself is not the problem on days I don't exercise. Very simple foods. Eough fat and proteins. Now if I exercise then it is WAY too little and then I increase. But at the same time I will only do it (1200 cal) for 8 weeks to jump start the process, see some lower numbers on the scale, maybe go down one size (psychological). I definitely think it'll take me up to mid-summer next year to be within 10 lbs of GW and then probably until end of year to reach GW (so 1 year 1/2 to lose 80 lbs that I gained over two years). So we (1200 cal eaters) are misguided; your opinion. But whatever works for us. Everybody says being obese is worse than anything else for your health so how can the cure be worse than the disease?
0 -
In the beginning losing seemed easy for me also, as I got closer to my goal it was near impossible and frustrated me to no end. Then I focused on training for a triathlon, was working out more and eating more with no problems. The difficult part for me was when I had completed my triathlon and had to go back to eating less. I ended up gaining some weight back and I am now trying to lose it again. It seems so much harder this time. So, I have seem both sides, wish I knew why it is so much harder this time.0
-
Yup, best part about massive steaks? Steak salad the next day. No need to reheat and potentially ruin a perfectly cooked steak.[/quote]
OMG Yes- this! Take-out boxes are less ommon in the UK. I usually take my own tupperware box. People do stare- I don't care.0 -
kristen6350 wrote: »Because weight loss is mostly mental. Some people can easily get in the zone - want it more than the next food temptation. Some people don't want it that bad. It's like quitting smoking. If you really want to, you can. But it takes work.
When I'm mentally engaged and want to lose those last 5 pounds it's pretty easy. I buy the right things to eat, I prepare them, I don't eat out that often. My main goal is to lose weight. When I'm not mentally engaged, eating lots of yummy things and being lazy wins out.
My view of weight management too 0 -
(3) I feel like the people I personally know that have a "harder" time losing weight or keeping it off haven't spent much time self reflecting on when and why they eat. Sure, they follow a diet and lose maybe. But they haven't learned anything about themselves in that time except that diets suck and why would anyone do them by choice. I'm not judging them for this. I know they have lives and children and stress that makes it seem like a waste of time to work on their relationship with food. They KNOW they have a problem with food. They KNOW they give into cravings. But prioritizing WHY hasn't been on their radar. That's ok. They're not ready.
I liked your other points too, but this sort of lines up with something I just rememebered (I keep forgetting it, periodically, and that's when questions like my OP turn up) - I KNEW about calories and portions and that other women ate less than me and that eating myself stuffed was unpleasant and that too much chocolate makes people drowsy and that we need enough good food to be healthy - but I just couldn't connect the dots. I had all the information I needed. But nowhere to put it. I wasn't ready. No matter what anyone would tell me, no matter which way they'd put it. It's just another example of the not very nice, but truthful phrase "I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you".0 -
stevencloser wrote: »I have no idea. I was chubby/overweight my whole life for as long as I remember and well into my early 20s, and then I just... kinda decided and did it, no hassle.
Ditto - except I was well into my 30s.
Here's my personal opinion.
Once someone educates themselves and truly embraces exactly what is needed to lose weight...it's a very simple process.
The biggest obstacle to overcome is that there is A LOT of money to be made by intentionally distorting that very simple process, and many companies have taken advantage of that. The intentional distortion causes confusion, and leads people down paths of guaranteed failure.
If people would just educate themselves and ignore all the useless noise, the correct path would be abundantly clear.
0 -
Exactly. If I were running a site trying to make money from people trying to lose weight, I'd try to make it as hard as possible for people to argue using science, I'd place an emphasis on emotions and feelings rather than facts, and I'd make it as inconvenient as possible to find concise lists of posts that conflicted with the foregoing.ceoverturf wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »I have no idea. I was chubby/overweight my whole life for as long as I remember and well into my early 20s, and then I just... kinda decided and did it, no hassle.
Ditto - except I was well into my 30s.
Here's my personal opinion.
Once someone educates themselves and truly embraces exactly what is needed to lose weight...it's a very simple process.
The biggest obstacle to overcome is that there is A LOT of money to be made by intentionally distorting that very simple process, and many companies have taken advantage of that. The intentional distortion causes confusion, and leads people down paths of guaranteed failure.
If people would just educate themselves and ignore all the useless noise, the correct path would be abundantly clear.
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
Exactly. If I were running a site trying to make money from people trying to lose weight, I'd try to make it as hard as possible for people to argue using science, I'd place an emphasis on emotions and feelings rather than facts, and I'd make it as inconvenient as possible to find concise lists of posts that conflicted with the foregoing.ceoverturf wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »I have no idea. I was chubby/overweight my whole life for as long as I remember and well into my early 20s, and then I just... kinda decided and did it, no hassle.
Ditto - except I was well into my 30s.
Here's my personal opinion.
Once someone educates themselves and truly embraces exactly what is needed to lose weight...it's a very simple process.
The biggest obstacle to overcome is that there is A LOT of money to be made by intentionally distorting that very simple process, and many companies have taken advantage of that. The intentional distortion causes confusion, and leads people down paths of guaranteed failure.
If people would just educate themselves and ignore all the useless noise, the correct path would be abundantly clear.
In the short-term yeah, I can see where your site might be tempted by the prospect of some quick dollar signs and those might seem like good ideas. At least until such time as the user group realizes your site was peddling a bunch of woo and leaves en masse.
In the long term though, I would think that if your site could accumulate several members who were long-term users, achieved great success using their methods, and promoted those members' success, and fostered an environment where they stuck around even after they were successful to help out others, that would be a much better long-term business model.0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
Hi, I'm DeguelloTex and I had 14 chocolate cupcakes with chocolate frosting over the weekend. Then we ran out.refuseresist wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Why should she have as much extra cupcake as someone much larger, though?honkytonks85 wrote: »People who are shorter and lighter have fewer calories to work with. If you are 5'3 and weigh 65kg unfortunately you need to cut calories pretty much down to 1200 calories to create a reasonable deficit and be super accurate with your logging.
Not always true. Many women workout hard to be able to eat more. This thread isn't specifically about short women, but several are peppered through the responses:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/506349/women-who-eat-more-than-1800-calories-a-day/
Yeah but it will still be harder on the petite woman to have that extra cupcake than for the 6 foot man, if both exercise the same.
I've never been a 5' woman, but I'd think that her appetite and caloric needs should be roughly proportional to the 6' man's, such that an extra cupcake would be out of proportion for her.
Lol I am a 5' woman, and my desire and capacity for cupcakes outstrips any man I have ever known.
Well, you've certainly got me beat
0 -
oh_happy_day wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »oh_happy_day wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Why should she have as much extra cupcake as someone much larger, though?honkytonks85 wrote: »People who are shorter and lighter have fewer calories to work with. If you are 5'3 and weigh 65kg unfortunately you need to cut calories pretty much down to 1200 calories to create a reasonable deficit and be super accurate with your logging.
Not always true. Many women workout hard to be able to eat more. This thread isn't specifically about short women, but several are peppered through the responses:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/506349/women-who-eat-more-than-1800-calories-a-day/
Yeah but it will still be harder on the petite woman to have that extra cupcake than for the 6 foot man, if both exercise the same.
I've never been a 5' woman, but I'd think that her appetite and caloric needs should be roughly proportional to the 6' man's, such that an extra cupcake would be out of proportion for her.
If only when people brought cupcakes to work they baked teeny tiny ones for us petite people. If only restaurants provided meals that fit our requirements. It annoys me to spend money on a nice steak and it's literally quadrulple what I 'should' eat. When even the salads and entrees are out of proportion unless I've exercised for two hours earlier on in the day. And then I'm hungry anyway because the volume was tiny but the calorie density was high. I'm fine if I can prep all my own food, eating out is much harder when you have less wiggle room.
That is often not allowed in restaurants where I live due to food safety laws. And you're missing the point about there being something deeply frustrating about spending $60 on a meal and still being hungry because I've had to cut it in half. I work out a lot to eat more which gets me by. In some ways the calorie needs and appetites of a 5' person are proportionate (sometimes), can you admit that there might be additional challenges in eating out and so forth?
You can't bring food home from Australian restaurants? Pity.
Here in the US, at the majority of the restaurants I frequent, half an entree is the perfect size for filling me up. I'm almost 5'7". I bring the other half home, which has the additional benefit of being able to weigh it.
(For anyone else curious, $60 AUD = $42 US dollars.)
0 -
It attracts the drop bears.kshama2001 wrote: »oh_happy_day wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »oh_happy_day wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Why should she have as much extra cupcake as someone much larger, though?honkytonks85 wrote: »People who are shorter and lighter have fewer calories to work with. If you are 5'3 and weigh 65kg unfortunately you need to cut calories pretty much down to 1200 calories to create a reasonable deficit and be super accurate with your logging.
Not always true. Many women workout hard to be able to eat more. This thread isn't specifically about short women, but several are peppered through the responses:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/506349/women-who-eat-more-than-1800-calories-a-day/
Yeah but it will still be harder on the petite woman to have that extra cupcake than for the 6 foot man, if both exercise the same.
I've never been a 5' woman, but I'd think that her appetite and caloric needs should be roughly proportional to the 6' man's, such that an extra cupcake would be out of proportion for her.
If only when people brought cupcakes to work they baked teeny tiny ones for us petite people. If only restaurants provided meals that fit our requirements. It annoys me to spend money on a nice steak and it's literally quadrulple what I 'should' eat. When even the salads and entrees are out of proportion unless I've exercised for two hours earlier on in the day. And then I'm hungry anyway because the volume was tiny but the calorie density was high. I'm fine if I can prep all my own food, eating out is much harder when you have less wiggle room.
That is often not allowed in restaurants where I live due to food safety laws. And you're missing the point about there being something deeply frustrating about spending $60 on a meal and still being hungry because I've had to cut it in half. I work out a lot to eat more which gets me by. In some ways the calorie needs and appetites of a 5' person are proportionate (sometimes), can you admit that there might be additional challenges in eating out and so forth?
You can't bring food home from Australian restaurants? Pity.
0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »oh_happy_day wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »oh_happy_day wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Why should she have as much extra cupcake as someone much larger, though?honkytonks85 wrote: »People who are shorter and lighter have fewer calories to work with. If you are 5'3 and weigh 65kg unfortunately you need to cut calories pretty much down to 1200 calories to create a reasonable deficit and be super accurate with your logging.
Not always true. Many women workout hard to be able to eat more. This thread isn't specifically about short women, but several are peppered through the responses:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/506349/women-who-eat-more-than-1800-calories-a-day/
Yeah but it will still be harder on the petite woman to have that extra cupcake than for the 6 foot man, if both exercise the same.
I've never been a 5' woman, but I'd think that her appetite and caloric needs should be roughly proportional to the 6' man's, such that an extra cupcake would be out of proportion for her.
If only when people brought cupcakes to work they baked teeny tiny ones for us petite people. If only restaurants provided meals that fit our requirements. It annoys me to spend money on a nice steak and it's literally quadrulple what I 'should' eat. When even the salads and entrees are out of proportion unless I've exercised for two hours earlier on in the day. And then I'm hungry anyway because the volume was tiny but the calorie density was high. I'm fine if I can prep all my own food, eating out is much harder when you have less wiggle room.
That is often not allowed in restaurants where I live due to food safety laws. And you're missing the point about there being something deeply frustrating about spending $60 on a meal and still being hungry because I've had to cut it in half. I work out a lot to eat more which gets me by. In some ways the calorie needs and appetites of a 5' person are proportionate (sometimes), can you admit that there might be additional challenges in eating out and so forth?
You can't bring food home from Australian restaurants? Pity.
Here in the US, at the majority of the restaurants I frequent, half an entree is the perfect size for filling me up. I'm almost 5'7". I bring the other half home, which has the additional benefit of being able to weigh it.
(For anyone else curious, $60 AUD = $42 US dollars.)
You can't in any European country either, as far as I know.0 -
Italy you can. I guess England counts, though who'd want to.0
-
You can't bring home leftover food that you paid for? What kind of insanity is that? (Sorry for going off topic, that just made me go "what in the heck?" )0
-
kshama2001 wrote: »oh_happy_day wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »oh_happy_day wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Why should she have as much extra cupcake as someone much larger, though?honkytonks85 wrote: »People who are shorter and lighter have fewer calories to work with. If you are 5'3 and weigh 65kg unfortunately you need to cut calories pretty much down to 1200 calories to create a reasonable deficit and be super accurate with your logging.
Not always true. Many women workout hard to be able to eat more. This thread isn't specifically about short women, but several are peppered through the responses:
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/506349/women-who-eat-more-than-1800-calories-a-day/
Yeah but it will still be harder on the petite woman to have that extra cupcake than for the 6 foot man, if both exercise the same.
I've never been a 5' woman, but I'd think that her appetite and caloric needs should be roughly proportional to the 6' man's, such that an extra cupcake would be out of proportion for her.
If only when people brought cupcakes to work they baked teeny tiny ones for us petite people. If only restaurants provided meals that fit our requirements. It annoys me to spend money on a nice steak and it's literally quadrulple what I 'should' eat. When even the salads and entrees are out of proportion unless I've exercised for two hours earlier on in the day. And then I'm hungry anyway because the volume was tiny but the calorie density was high. I'm fine if I can prep all my own food, eating out is much harder when you have less wiggle room.
That is often not allowed in restaurants where I live due to food safety laws. And you're missing the point about there being something deeply frustrating about spending $60 on a meal and still being hungry because I've had to cut it in half. I work out a lot to eat more which gets me by. In some ways the calorie needs and appetites of a 5' person are proportionate (sometimes), can you admit that there might be additional challenges in eating out and so forth?
You can't bring food home from Australian restaurants? Pity.
Here in the US, at the majority of the restaurants I frequent, half an entree is the perfect size for filling me up. I'm almost 5'7". I bring the other half home, which has the additional benefit of being able to weigh it.
(For anyone else curious, $60 AUD = $42 US dollars.)
You can't in any European country either, as far as I know.
I don't think there are restrictions on bringing food home from restaurants where I live (Norway) because of hygiene, but it's generally frowned upon as being miserly. The portions aren't that enormous either. You wouldn't normally try to split a dish with another guest either, for the same reasons.0 -
kommodevaran wrote: »(3) I feel like the people I personally know that have a "harder" time losing weight or keeping it off haven't spent much time self reflecting on when and why they eat. Sure, they follow a diet and lose maybe. But they haven't learned anything about themselves in that time except that diets suck and why would anyone do them by choice. I'm not judging them for this. I know they have lives and children and stress that makes it seem like a waste of time to work on their relationship with food. They KNOW they have a problem with food. They KNOW they give into cravings. But prioritizing WHY hasn't been on their radar. That's ok. They're not ready.
I liked your other points too, but this sort of lines up with something I just rememebered (I keep forgetting it, periodically, and that's when questions like my OP turn up) - I KNEW about calories and portions and that other women ate less than me and that eating myself stuffed was unpleasant and that too much chocolate makes people drowsy and that we need enough good food to be healthy - but I just couldn't connect the dots. I had all the information I needed. But nowhere to put it. I wasn't ready. No matter what anyone would tell me, no matter which way they'd put it. It's just another example of the not very nice, but truthful phrase "I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you".
There are times I want to put up Craig's List ads that say "I will be your food coach." And then they can have a consultation or whatever for $20/half hr, and if they seem ready and eager to me, then I'd be on call to help them through things. Like, a weight loss "sponsor" for a monthly $10 fee, or something. Because in addition to what you were just saying, I also think sometimes people are "ready" but don't have the tools or have bad information or simply information that doesn't apply to them. Like, "cut fat like a madman!" advice that's for professional body builders and doesn't really apply to my obese aunt, or whatever. That advice won't really work for her. It's true advice, but just doesn't apply to her current situation.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 989 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions