Why are slim people slim?

124»

Replies

  • nettiklive
    nettiklive Posts: 206 Member
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    nettiklive wrote: »
    lporter229 wrote: »
    Yeah, I agree that it's not just about food either. I don't think that inactive people truly realize how active some people are. Conversely, I don't think that active people realize how sedentary some people can be. And I am not talking about "exercise" activities like running, biking, lifting etc. I am talking about moving in general. Some people just move a lot more than others and it matters a lot.

    This is something I really have trouble wrapping my mind around. Because if you look at the estimated calorie burns from actual exercise, it's really not that much - 100-400 or so calories per session depending on activity for a small person like myself - and that's with cardio, sweating and panting your butt off and hating life, lol. The whole concept of you can't outrun a bad diet because it takes something like half an hour of running to burn off a banana (making this up but you know these types of estimates). So in light of that, it's really hard for me to understand how some extra walking, tapping your foot and twiddling your thumbs can really add up to all that much to make a difference. I always thought that this cliche advice like take the stairs and park further out was completely useless, maybe targeted at morbidly obese people as a start to get them to move at all, but not to keep someone stick thin with no effort...

    It does add up. Every little thing adds up. The difference between running and just moving without even thinking about it is that you're not even thinking about it. I've always hated the "X minutes burns Y food" thing. It isn't a single food that puts someone over, it's the total of them.

    The difference between normal and obese BMI for a short 5' woman is just under 150 calories, so per that example, the difference between a normal weight and an obese woman is a couple of fruits. What if the normal weight one just burns one calorie more a minute for 3 hours out of the day without even noticing by tapping, walking, taking the stairs and whatnot?

    We think there is a huge difference in eating between people who are overweight and those who aren't, but this isn't always the case. Sometimes the things that make a difference are so small it isn't even funny. I've gone from about 1500-1800 steps a day to about 7000 steps without exercise just by moving a little bit more here and there. It doesn't feel too different from the way I was, but I'm effectively walking nearly an entire hour more without even thinking about it. An hour of walking feels like effort, an hour of walking that just happens intermittently over a day without thinking doesn't even register for me as out of the norm, but the calories burned are effectively the same. Add some deliberate exercise sessions, and I'm pretty sure I would maintain a lower weight on the same food intake (which in my case would still be a high weight because I was super morbidly obese - yes, that's a real term).

    Could be. I guess it just seems so difficult to grasp because when I exercise, I'm sweating, gasping, red-faced and generally feel like dying haha. So if all that doesn't burn all that many calories, it seems hard to believe that simply walking or other mild activities that don't feel like a lot of effort and don't get your heart rate up to where you're sweaty and out of breath, would have the same, or higher, effect...
  • Noreenmarie1234
    Noreenmarie1234 Posts: 7,492 Member
    lporter229 wrote: »
    nettiklive wrote: »
    lporter229 wrote: »
    Yeah, I agree that it's not just about food either. I don't think that inactive people truly realize how active some people are. Conversely, I don't think that active people realize how sedentary some people can be. And I am not talking about "exercise" activities like running, biking, lifting etc. I am talking about moving in general. Some people just move a lot more than others and it matters a lot.

    This is something I really have trouble wrapping my mind around. Because if you look at the estimated calorie burns from actual exercise, it's really not that much - 100-400 or so calories per session depending on activity for a small person like myself - and that's with cardio, sweating and panting your butt off and hating life, lol. The whole concept of you can't outrun a bad diet because it takes something like half an hour of running to burn off a banana (making this up but you know these types of estimates). So in light of that, it's really hard for me to understand how some extra walking, tapping your foot and twiddling your thumbs can really add up to all that much to make a difference. I always thought that this cliche advice like take the stairs and park further out was completely useless, maybe targeted at morbidly obese people as a start to get them to move at all, but not to keep someone stick thin with no effort...

    I have always been an "antsy" person. I don't like to sit still. I am a chemist and about half of my time is spent in a lab moving around and the other half is spent behind my desk. On days when I am in my office all day, I am constantly getting up to do things because I can't sit in one place for too long. When I get home from work I cook and clean, take my dog for a walk, and do whatever other things need to be done to avoid sitting around. Be it good or bad, I do not really have the patience to sit and watch TV.
    I have MFP friends with fitbits who are always talking about how they struggle to get 10K steps per day. Until I recently got an activity tracker, I could not have told you how many steps I walked per day, but I figured I was probably getting at least that many. It turns out I average about 20K steps per day (I do run, so I am not discounting the effect that has on my number of steps, but even on rest days I am well over 10K). That is the point I was trying to make though. Some people are just naturally more active and that goes a long way toward why they are staying thin. It does make a difference.

    Wow I can't imagine being that active. I walk around all day and workout bike etc but unless I deliberately do the elliptical or treadmill I only get about 3000 steps max.
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    CarvedTones wrote: »
    I think having a family slowed me down. Yes, it is active and tiring at ties doing things with the kids but there is a lot more sitting watching and waiting for them. It also made things I do for recreation less frequent. I am not complaining about that tradeoff, just pointing out it is a source of a slow down. There might have been a bump when they were small, but most of the time you are shuttling, watching and waiting.

    And less time for making healthy meals, lol.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    nettiklive wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    nettiklive wrote: »
    lporter229 wrote: »
    Yeah, I agree that it's not just about food either. I don't think that inactive people truly realize how active some people are. Conversely, I don't think that active people realize how sedentary some people can be. And I am not talking about "exercise" activities like running, biking, lifting etc. I am talking about moving in general. Some people just move a lot more than others and it matters a lot.

    This is something I really have trouble wrapping my mind around. Because if you look at the estimated calorie burns from actual exercise, it's really not that much - 100-400 or so calories per session depending on activity for a small person like myself - and that's with cardio, sweating and panting your butt off and hating life, lol. The whole concept of you can't outrun a bad diet because it takes something like half an hour of running to burn off a banana (making this up but you know these types of estimates). So in light of that, it's really hard for me to understand how some extra walking, tapping your foot and twiddling your thumbs can really add up to all that much to make a difference. I always thought that this cliche advice like take the stairs and park further out was completely useless, maybe targeted at morbidly obese people as a start to get them to move at all, but not to keep someone stick thin with no effort...

    It does add up. Every little thing adds up. The difference between running and just moving without even thinking about it is that you're not even thinking about it. I've always hated the "X minutes burns Y food" thing. It isn't a single food that puts someone over, it's the total of them.

    The difference between normal and obese BMI for a short 5' woman is just under 150 calories, so per that example, the difference between a normal weight and an obese woman is a couple of fruits. What if the normal weight one just burns one calorie more a minute for 3 hours out of the day without even noticing by tapping, walking, taking the stairs and whatnot?

    We think there is a huge difference in eating between people who are overweight and those who aren't, but this isn't always the case. Sometimes the things that make a difference are so small it isn't even funny. I've gone from about 1500-1800 steps a day to about 7000 steps without exercise just by moving a little bit more here and there. It doesn't feel too different from the way I was, but I'm effectively walking nearly an entire hour more without even thinking about it. An hour of walking feels like effort, an hour of walking that just happens intermittently over a day without thinking doesn't even register for me as out of the norm, but the calories burned are effectively the same. Add some deliberate exercise sessions, and I'm pretty sure I would maintain a lower weight on the same food intake (which in my case would still be a high weight because I was super morbidly obese - yes, that's a real term).

    Could be. I guess it just seems so difficult to grasp because when I exercise, I'm sweating, gasping, red-faced and generally feel like dying haha. So if all that doesn't burn all that many calories, it seems hard to believe that simply walking or other mild activities that don't feel like a lot of effort and don't get your heart rate up to where you're sweaty and out of breath, would have the same, or higher, effect...

    Someone who's active in there day to day is moving a lot more than just 30-60 minutes though...someone who routinely gets 20K steps at work for example is moving the rough equivalent of 10 miles...I did that easy in my 20s with the work I did...on top of that most of my work also required repetitive lifting of heavy things and moving those things around...and on top of that I did a lot of just recreational activity.

    All of that is going to burn way more than a few hundred calories that you're going to get with 30-60 minutes of exercise.

    In terms of little things to increase NEAT like taking the stairs, parking further away, getting up every hour to cruise the office, etc I would clock in around 3,000 steps per day. If I do the above I'm easily around 8,000 - 10,000 steps (roughly 5 miles)...when I walk my dog in the mornings plus all of that other stuff I'm typically 10-12K steps...and then I do deliberate exercise in the way of cycling and lifting.

    All of that adds up. Without the steps and just sedentary my maintenance is around 2400. Just with 8-10K steps it's more like 2700. With exercise on top it's more like 3,000+ calories per day depending. On average with a mixture and not being perfect and all, my maintenance is 2,800-3000 which I'm much happier with than 2400...and it's way easier to lose 1 Lb per week eating 2,300 - 2,500 calories vs 1,900.
  • Mouse_Potato
    Mouse_Potato Posts: 1,513 Member
    nettiklive wrote: »
    lporter229 wrote: »
    Yeah, I agree that it's not just about food either. I don't think that inactive people truly realize how active some people are. Conversely, I don't think that active people realize how sedentary some people can be. And I am not talking about "exercise" activities like running, biking, lifting etc. I am talking about moving in general. Some people just move a lot more than others and it matters a lot.

    This is something I really have trouble wrapping my mind around. Because if you look at the estimated calorie burns from actual exercise, it's really not that much - 100-400 or so calories per session depending on activity for a small person like myself - and that's with cardio, sweating and panting your butt off and hating life, lol. The whole concept of you can't outrun a bad diet because it takes something like half an hour of running to burn off a banana (making this up but you know these types of estimates). So in light of that, it's really hard for me to understand how some extra walking, tapping your foot and twiddling your thumbs can really add up to all that much to make a difference. I always thought that this cliche advice like take the stairs and park further out was completely useless, maybe targeted at morbidly obese people as a start to get them to move at all, but not to keep someone stick thin with no effort...

    What is active to one person may be sedentary to another. During the work week I do not consider myself to be a particularly active person. I have a desk job. I spend 10 hours a day at my office, but even on my most sluggish chained-to-my-desk-and-working-through-lunch days I will still manage 6000-7000 steps before I leave the office. I will knock out another 5000-10,000+ when I get home just handling household chores and the like. I can't even imagine how one can manage to *only* walk 5000 steps in a day (those with physical limitations excluded, of course). That would actually take effort for me.

    That said, I know there are people like this. If person A walks 5000 steps in normal activity and adds a half hour workout and person B just walks 15,000 steps, who will burn more calories (assuming the same basic stats)?
  • Noreenmarie1234
    Noreenmarie1234 Posts: 7,492 Member
    It makes sense. Someone who is absolutely sedentary but works out two hours a day burning 600 calories is equivalent to someone who is just active in life walking 20k steps who burns the same amount yet one can say wow I work out hours a day and don’t lose weight when the other appears to maintain without working out. I work out hours a day but otherwise am completely sedentary and I burn less than someone who walks 20k a day in regular life.
  • psychod787
    psychod787 Posts: 4,099 Member
    sardelsa wrote: »
    nettiklive wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    nettiklive wrote: »
    lporter229 wrote: »
    Yeah, I agree that it's not just about food either. I don't think that inactive people truly realize how active some people are. Conversely, I don't think that active people realize how sedentary some people can be. And I am not talking about "exercise" activities like running, biking, lifting etc. I am talking about moving in general. Some people just move a lot more than others and it matters a lot.

    This is something I really have trouble wrapping my mind around. Because if you look at the estimated calorie burns from actual exercise, it's really not that much - 100-400 or so calories per session depending on activity for a small person like myself - and that's with cardio, sweating and panting your butt off and hating life, lol. The whole concept of you can't outrun a bad diet because it takes something like half an hour of running to burn off a banana (making this up but you know these types of estimates). So in light of that, it's really hard for me to understand how some extra walking, tapping your foot and twiddling your thumbs can really add up to all that much to make a difference. I always thought that this cliche advice like take the stairs and park further out was completely useless, maybe targeted at morbidly obese people as a start to get them to move at all, but not to keep someone stick thin with no effort...

    It does add up. Every little thing adds up. The difference between running and just moving without even thinking about it is that you're not even thinking about it. I've always hated the "X minutes burns Y food" thing. It isn't a single food that puts someone over, it's the total of them.

    The difference between normal and obese BMI for a short 5' woman is just under 150 calories, so per that example, the difference between a normal weight and an obese woman is a couple of fruits. What if the normal weight one just burns one calorie more a minute for 3 hours out of the day without even noticing by tapping, walking, taking the stairs and whatnot?

    We think there is a huge difference in eating between people who are overweight and those who aren't, but this isn't always the case. Sometimes the things that make a difference are so small it isn't even funny. I've gone from about 1500-1800 steps a day to about 7000 steps without exercise just by moving a little bit more here and there. It doesn't feel too different from the way I was, but I'm effectively walking nearly an entire hour more without even thinking about it. An hour of walking feels like effort, an hour of walking that just happens intermittently over a day without thinking doesn't even register for me as out of the norm, but the calories burned are effectively the same. Add some deliberate exercise sessions, and I'm pretty sure I would maintain a lower weight on the same food intake (which in my case would still be a high weight because I was super morbidly obese - yes, that's a real term).

    Could be. I guess it just seems so difficult to grasp because when I exercise, I'm sweating, gasping, red-faced and generally feel like dying haha. So if all that doesn't burn all that many calories, it seems hard to believe that simply walking or other mild activities that don't feel like a lot of effort and don't get your heart rate up to where you're sweaty and out of breath, would have the same, or higher, effect...

    Higher heart rate doesn't always mean more calories burned. Also if you do more cardio or more intense cardio, it can lead to being more tired all day, which can lead to reductions in NEAT (so basically you worked hard in the gym, but are drained so you sloth around the rest of the day). Those little things add up over the day and over time. I find if I keep my cardio more steady and less intense, I have more energy to take the stairs, run around, go for a walk, dance in the kitchen, which really helps with my calorie burn at the end of the day.

    Absolutely right about the NEAT. Some people have issues with it dropping after workouts. Weightology has an article/research review that shows some people will compensate with less activity after a work out. Some people do this intentionally, some people subconsciously. There are also people lose weight and have less NEAT. they become less fidgety and walk less. That is most people. Then, you have hyperresponders to weight loss and NEAT. I find myself much more fidgety these days post weight loss. That was even before I started my lean bulk. I just have to move! Maybe I was always like that, just never knew it because I was so heavy. I have relatives that never stop moving. Always shaking legs, tapping feet. I have noticed that when i sit at a table my knee just goes up and down constantly.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Francl27 wrote: »
    CarvedTones wrote: »
    I think having a family slowed me down. Yes, it is active and tiring at ties doing things with the kids but there is a lot more sitting watching and waiting for them. It also made things I do for recreation less frequent. I am not complaining about that tradeoff, just pointing out it is a source of a slow down. There might have been a bump when they were small, but most of the time you are shuttling, watching and waiting.

    And less time for making healthy meals, lol.

    And a lot of those meals cater to the tastes and appetites of adolescents and teens.
  • maybe1pe
    maybe1pe Posts: 529 Member
    edited June 2018
    psychod787 wrote: »
    sardelsa wrote: »
    nettiklive wrote: »
    amusedmonkey wrote: »
    nettiklive wrote: »
    lporter229 wrote: »
    Yeah, I agree that it's not just about food either. I don't think that inactive people truly realize how active some people are. Conversely, I don't think that active people realize how sedentary some people can be. And I am not talking about "exercise" activities like running, biking, lifting etc. I am talking about moving in general. Some people just move a lot more than others and it matters a lot.

    This is something I really have trouble wrapping my mind around. Because if you look at the estimated calorie burns from actual exercise, it's really not that much - 100-400 or so calories per session depending on activity for a small person like myself - and that's with cardio, sweating and panting your butt off and hating life, lol. The whole concept of you can't outrun a bad diet because it takes something like half an hour of running to burn off a banana (making this up but you know these types of estimates). So in light of that, it's really hard for me to understand how some extra walking, tapping your foot and twiddling your thumbs can really add up to all that much to make a difference. I always thought that this cliche advice like take the stairs and park further out was completely useless, maybe targeted at morbidly obese people as a start to get them to move at all, but not to keep someone stick thin with no effort...

    It does add up. Every little thing adds up. The difference between running and just moving without even thinking about it is that you're not even thinking about it. I've always hated the "X minutes burns Y food" thing. It isn't a single food that puts someone over, it's the total of them.

    The difference between normal and obese BMI for a short 5' woman is just under 150 calories, so per that example, the difference between a normal weight and an obese woman is a couple of fruits. What if the normal weight one just burns one calorie more a minute for 3 hours out of the day without even noticing by tapping, walking, taking the stairs and whatnot?

    We think there is a huge difference in eating between people who are overweight and those who aren't, but this isn't always the case. Sometimes the things that make a difference are so small it isn't even funny. I've gone from about 1500-1800 steps a day to about 7000 steps without exercise just by moving a little bit more here and there. It doesn't feel too different from the way I was, but I'm effectively walking nearly an entire hour more without even thinking about it. An hour of walking feels like effort, an hour of walking that just happens intermittently over a day without thinking doesn't even register for me as out of the norm, but the calories burned are effectively the same. Add some deliberate exercise sessions, and I'm pretty sure I would maintain a lower weight on the same food intake (which in my case would still be a high weight because I was super morbidly obese - yes, that's a real term).

    Could be. I guess it just seems so difficult to grasp because when I exercise, I'm sweating, gasping, red-faced and generally feel like dying haha. So if all that doesn't burn all that many calories, it seems hard to believe that simply walking or other mild activities that don't feel like a lot of effort and don't get your heart rate up to where you're sweaty and out of breath, would have the same, or higher, effect...

    Higher heart rate doesn't always mean more calories burned. Also if you do more cardio or more intense cardio, it can lead to being more tired all day, which can lead to reductions in NEAT (so basically you worked hard in the gym, but are drained so you sloth around the rest of the day). Those little things add up over the day and over time. I find if I keep my cardio more steady and less intense, I have more energy to take the stairs, run around, go for a walk, dance in the kitchen, which really helps with my calorie burn at the end of the day.

    Absolutely right about the NEAT. Some people have issues with it dropping after workouts. Weightology has an article/research review that shows some people will compensate with less activity after a work out. Some people do this intentionally, some people subconsciously. There are also people lose weight and have less NEAT. they become less fidgety and walk less. That is most people. Then, you have hyperresponders to weight loss and NEAT. I find myself much more fidgety these days post weight loss. That was even before I started my lean bulk. I just have to move! Maybe I was always like that, just never knew it because I was so heavy. I have relatives that never stop moving. Always shaking legs, tapping feet. I have noticed that when i sit at a table my knee just goes up and down constantly.

    I am definitely more fidgety now. When I’m sitting at work I’m bouncing one of my legs. When I’m using my standing desk I’m constantly moving in someway. During meetings I have to consciously be thinking “don’t bounce your leg. Don’t tap your foot. Don’t sway the chair” so as not to be distracting with my fidgeting. I don’t know for sure how much those calories amount to. But if you consider my Fitbit estimates my daily burn is 2400-2500 from my steps and workouts and really my maintenance is about 300 calories higher I assume they definitely add up. Even right now. Sitting watching tv smuggling with my dog and I’m wiggling both of my legs. I don’t hold still until I’m ready to sleep.

    ETA: the Fitbit steps are 12k average and 6 hours a week weight lifting.
  • LW3380
    LW3380 Posts: 118 Member
    lkndaniels wrote: »
    I am loving this discussion! I struggle with my weight since I was a teen. I started dieting very young and every since I just been on a yo yo effect. I lose and gain it back. I am either dieting or gaining weight. Never maintaining. My relationship with food is a mess. And my mindset that I have to workout to eat health, if I'm not working out then I eat like crap. I have a history of intense binge eating. So I am working on breaking my unhealthy habits. People don't think I am overweight when they see me, just average or a little over average. ( wear clothes to hide my stomach area) I am tall so that help a little. But since I know how much I weigh and see whats under my clothes lol, I know I am overweight.

    This is the same mind set as my partners...I'm trying to show him that overall diet is more important than just when you are exercising. Sticking to a daily calorie goal to either lose or maintain weight is were the initial focus should be, while using exercise for body composition and aesthetics rather than a weight loss tool.

    But sadly it's not sinking in...
  • LW3380
    LW3380 Posts: 118 Member
    @lkndaniels the very best of luck in your journey!
  • rosemaryhon
    rosemaryhon Posts: 507 Member
    My husband & bff are 'naturally' thin. I've noticed these differences between them & me ~ they don't butter their bread, they say "no thanks" when I encourage "come on, it's nicely softened". They prefer salad dressed with oil&vinegar as opposed to ranch or Russian (and they always say "yes!" to salad). They turn their nose up at mayo on sandwiches. They prefer simple pound cake to frosted cakes. They love fruit. They prefer veggies plain-ish as opposed to cheesy casseroles. They are fidgety and unconscious fast walkers. My husband will lay on the couch to relax with tv and have his head raised without a pillow ~ like a loonngg situp.
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    ekim2016 wrote: »
    I was always so slim until I hit 45 ish.. then it began....

    Same here, except my weight gain started at 40. I am more active now than i have ever been, yet struggle to maintain the weight i fought so hard to frickan lose!

    Up until a few years ago, i NEVER exercised. During my teens, 20's and 30's i ate what i wanted, when i wanted never gaining a pound, drove everywhere, exercise was a dirty word.
    I never, ever had to think about calories, exercise or weight gain. It's like I'm now being punished for my carefree, eat like a horse without consequence days lol

    Oh and i was part of the "you cant leave the table until your plates clean" club.
  • Hungry_Shopgirl
    Hungry_Shopgirl Posts: 329 Member
    CarvedTones wrote: »
    rosemaryhon wrote: »
    My husband & bff are 'naturally' thin. I've noticed these differences between them & me ~ they don't butter their bread, they say "no thanks" when I encourage "come on, it's nicely softened". They prefer salad dressed with oil&vinegar as opposed to ranch or Russian (and they always say "yes!" to salad). They turn their nose up at mayo on sandwiches. They prefer simple pound cake to frosted cakes. They love fruit. They prefer veggies plain-ish as opposed to cheesy casseroles. They are fidgety and unconscious fast walkers. My husband will lay on the couch to relax with tv and have his head raised without a pillow ~ like a loonngg situp.

    Even though I know that long term success works best if you don't deprive yourself of things, I experimented with a few things I seemed to do more out of habit than strong desire. I quit buttering bread and really don't miss it. I rarely have biscuits, but when I do I still have honey or jam/jelly but no butter. I really don't miss it. I also almost never use any salad dressing. I only used a few kinds before and would often ask for the dressing on the side when a salad came with a particular dressing and often didn't use it. Sometimes I grind in a spice mix called "Pirate Bite" that has some kick to it and/or use chicken that was cooked with spice (like jerk or teriyaki) but I have pretty much quit using dressing. I think these are sustainable habits; giving up things that were more habits than flavors that I really miss. I also don't have bread as often. If there are rolls out and I really want a roll, I get one, but I think about it before I just grab one out of habit. I used to eat a buttered roll anytime there were rolls on the table.

    I like this idea of checking one's eating habits. The opposite was also true for me. For example, everyone keeps saying "Don't drink your calories". So, I stopped putting skim milk in my coffee in the mornings. But 1) I felt deprived 2) I was hungrier sooner after breakfast. Turns out that amount of milk in my coffee was important for keeping me happy and sated until lunch.
    We all have to find that balance of calorie-smart + happy that we can maintain for life.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    edited June 2018
    I am really somewhat surprised by the removal of butter from my diet. I did think of it as depriving myself at first, but it really was more of a habit than a strong preference. I would use it on bread almost every time if it was handy, but if there was only hard stick butter or it wasn't out on the table I would skip it. I never really thought about it until I went without for weight loss. Same with bread in general; if it was served with a meal I would eat it. But if it wasn't, I didn't think twice about it. I still eat bread, but mostly in sandwiches and an occasional soft roll or biscuit. Donuts were a habit. I almost never bought myself a donut, even when eating at a donut shop, but would eat them if they were out in the break room.
  • Themajez
    Themajez Posts: 61 Member
    I used to be 'naturally slim'. The reason was the hormonal weight regulation I had was perfect. I never gained, I never lost. If I ate too much one day, the next week I would naturally lose weight without even knowing. I didn't even know my weight.
  • NadNight
    NadNight Posts: 794 Member
    I've had unhealthy habits but never been anywhere near over weight. I think there's a few things that help this. I eat a huge breakfast and snack through the day rather than having a proper lunch. I don't eat after dinner- I have my evening meal, a small dessert and then don't consume anything except water. I go to bed early and get up early so late night snacking isn't something I do. I'm a constant fidgeter (thankyou anxiety.) so very rarely stop moving. I don't add sugar to any drinks, only use small amounts of butter and oil, trim the fat off meats after cooking (not before because fat gives good flavour!). I'm also a bit forgetful and tend to go downstairs for something, go back upstairs and realise I've forgotten to get what I wanted then have to back for it! I also have a phobia of lifts so have always used the stairs
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Themajez wrote: »
    I used to be 'naturally slim'. The reason was the hormonal weight regulation I had was perfect. I never gained, I never lost. If I ate too much one day, the next week I would naturally lose weight without even knowing. I didn't even know my weight.

    In my early 20s, I rarely weighed and certainly was all over the place with eamount I ate and amount I burned; lots of randomness. Every time I weighed (not often) I was within a pound or so of 150.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Shouty guy is in the building!
  • philcycle12
    philcycle12 Posts: 17 Member
    I have been the same weight for nearly 20 years give or take a kilo 73 average, I could eat a boat load of donuts and never put weight on, I have tried over the years, I don’t drink alcohol and love mountain biking I just put it down to having a fast metabolism,
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    I went out to dinner with my kids last night, and once again was amazed at my sons very slim girlfriends eating habits. Every time we go out, she eats maybe half of her meal and my son ends up finishing it off. She also puts her fork down every now and then.

    On the other side of the table, there's the rest of us scarfing down our food and practically licking our plates whilst complaining how full we are lol We all get excited about food and count down the minutes til dinner time. Sons girlfriend is meh about food. We walked to the bakery afterward, she got a tiny little cake, the rest of us got stonking big canoli's!!

    Have to add, my kids are still slim, being in their early 20's. But their eating habits will possibly eventually catch up with them, like they did me...
  • Billbegood
    Billbegood Posts: 13 Member
    Like the video said, not sleeping enough makes you hungrier. I have also heard that his is because since you arent rested well enough your body requires more energy from other sources to keep it going such as food.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories