So for those maintaining below 2000/day, is this a lifetime commitment?
Options
Replies
-
OK now the OP's spelling and style have changed :huh: A different troll or the old troll tired of maintaining the 65-year old woman persona with proper care to detail?People are really still responding to this load of crap to keep the OP engaged in something that was answered 12 pages ago...
You know what, I think that might actually be doing some good in the world? While they're kept busy peddling their fads here they can't at the same time go and actively do it somewhere else where they would do more damage.
0 -
Doesn't want to post stats, but expects other to do so when she asks.Springfield1970 wrote: »
I am barely in the overweight bmi range. i choose to be here, I am eating 2300 a day to stay here, and some days its not easy to eat that much actually. I have my own justification for this from research I have read, no just one artical. But the things I have read from one particular author have lengthy bibliographies amd I am not in a position to look at all the research and post links. Its not new research, I am gathering that some of you have heard about these findings before. Even some news articles have covered it, especially in UK news. It wont be hard to locate.Iron_Feline wrote: »The op just wants to justify the fact that they are overweight by claiming it is unhealthy to eat less that 2000 cals.
So far they have yet to provide a single link to back up their claims, not surprising as they are nonsense.
I completely agree. The OP was making the same claims on another thread and when I brought up the accurate information and asked for sources I got the same responses.
OP just wants someone to tell her it's ok to be overweight and that she should continue eating whatever she wants. It's pretty clear from her posts. And all the citing of this "research" sounds delusional.
Actually, if you want us to research your claims ourselves, what is the name of the female researcher you are referring to? Let me guess, you don't have time to post that?
Thanks for your criticism!
Hi
I wonder if I could get you to maybe look at this from a different angle to the BMI one.
I would like to work out (with your permission) your body fat percentage, to see if that is in the healthy range?
All I would need is your weight,height, wrist measurement, hip, waist (at naval) measurement.
I would be able to tell you what your BF percentage is which is a far better indicator of health than the BMI index which takes no account of the composition of the person.
Are you up for a bit of open mindedness?
That will be the day! when 65 year olds start posting their stats on social web sites!!! LOLLLLLL!
0 -
This:
Does not coincide with this:I just wondered if people were truly prepared to eat so measily a bunch of rations for the rest of their lives when they could be eating more.I have no axe to grind
You very clearly have an axe to grind. It is obviously vitally important to you to feel okay about overeating and being slightly overweight. But you aren't okay with it. So you need to *attack* people who look at food primarily as a source of fuel as opposed to a source of pleasure. It's okay that you want to overeat and be slightly overweight. You do you, ya know? Even if *you* is fake-nice and passive aggressive.
Needing to see what others eat as *measly rations* is pretty indicative of your mindset. I eat a heaping bowl of delicious sundae almost every night. I eat pastries. I eat sandwiches. I eat fabulous 3 or 4 course meals everyday. Some days, I just choose to eat pretty much non-stop all day long. I'm also working towards having a strong heart and lungs, good endurance and physical strength. Should anything untoward happen, I'd like to be as prepared to survive it as possible.
But hey. If you need to see my lifestyle as *scraping by on meager rations* in order to feel better about yourself, have at it! No skin off my nose. Now if you'll excuse me, there's a frozen yogurt, blueberry, strawberry and peach sundae with a *kitten*-ton of cool whip on it calling my name. Take care and good health to you!
0 -
I also find your repeated use of the word *robust* interesting.
From Dictionary.com:( <- see that? It's called *citing a source* It's a handy little thing people do to back up their otherwise completely empty assertions)
1. strong and healthy; hardy; vigorous
2. strongly or stoutly built
3. suited to or requiring bodily strength or endurance
Synonyms (from Oxford Dictionaries.com):
strong, vigorous, sturdy, tough, powerful, solid, muscular, sinewy, rugged, hardy, strapping, brawny, burly, husky, heavily built; healthy, fit, fighting fit, hale and hearty, lusty, in fine fettle
So when you use *robust* you mean in the *husky, strapping, brawny, heavily built* sense, I suppose? Where as I see myself as *robust* in the *strong, vigorous, tough, powerful, solid, muscular, sinewy, rugged, hardy, healthy, fit, fighting fit, hale and hearty, lusty, in fine fettle* sense. Still robust though. And still eating sundaes. And still running around the block without coughing up a lung. Go me!
0 -
As someone who is "fun sized" my maintenance is low. However, I can get it above 2000 with exercise. On rest days though, it's 1530.
I haven't lost any weight since I got to this point, so I'm pretty sure I found my zone.0 -
I eat over 3,000 to maintain a body weight of 144lbs (maintained a 127lbs loss for over a year. 2000 calores would be harsh a deficit for me. Do you happen to follow Linda Bacon? The op seems very HAES and Linda is worshiped over there. She has never mentioned 2000 calories, but feels that people in the overweight category are healthier. She also speaks about people eating too few calories and gaining weight...
That's probqbly more to the topic I think. " worshiped over there" where is it?
I'll google Linda Bacon. thank you.
You are the first one to post what I expected most inactive women under 25 or inactive men to be eating ( over 3000) but you are the first, I'm pretty sure, to post this.
Thanks for adding it to the thread!
I am NOT innactive thank you very much...
Did you even look at my profile pic. I am also 30...0 -
I eat over 3,000 to maintain a body weight of 144lbs (maintained a 127lbs loss for over a year. 2000 calores would be harsh a deficit for me. Do you happen to follow Linda Bacon? The op seems very HAES and Linda is worshiped over there. She has never mentioned 2000 calories, but feels that people in the overweight category are healthier. She also speaks about people eating too few calories and gaining weight...
That's probqbly more to the topic I think. " worshiped over there" where is it?
I'll google Linda Bacon. thank you.
You are the first one to post what I expected most inactive women under 25 or inactive men to be eating ( over 3000) but you are the first, I'm pretty sure, to post this.
Thanks for adding it to the thread!
I am NOT innactive thank you very much...
Did you even look at my profile pic. I am also 30...
Your activity level doesn't matter to the OP ... only what she deems as your activity matters. Reality doesn't interfere with her world view.
0 -
brianpperkins wrote: »I eat over 3,000 to maintain a body weight of 144lbs (maintained a 127lbs loss for over a year. 2000 calores would be harsh a deficit for me. Do you happen to follow Linda Bacon? The op seems very HAES and Linda is worshiped over there. She has never mentioned 2000 calories, but feels that people in the overweight category are healthier. She also speaks about people eating too few calories and gaining weight...
That's probqbly more to the topic I think. " worshiped over there" where is it?
I'll google Linda Bacon. thank you.
You are the first one to post what I expected most inactive women under 25 or inactive men to be eating ( over 3000) but you are the first, I'm pretty sure, to post this.
Thanks for adding it to the thread!
I am NOT innactive thank you very much...
Did you even look at my profile pic. I am also 30...
Your activity level doesn't matter to the OP ... only what she deems as your activity matters. Reality doesn't interfere with her world view.
I will accept the under 25 though
0 -
0
-
Op, after clicking on the red links of the halls charts website (as you suggested a few pages back), I found the below. Is this the "research" you are referring to? Just curious. Thanks.
"The most common reason that people use these charts is to find out if they, or someone they love, is overweight. While it is scientifically proven that obesity is unhealthy, please also remember that a negative self-image is also unhealthy. If you are overweight, these charts show that you are not alone. The people you see on television or in magazines, don’t represent the real population.
Medical science can suggest a normal range of body mass index values that are equally reasonable and healthy. Outside of that normal range, when either overweight or underweight, then some statistically significant health risks have been proven. On the other hand, public opinion, as influenced by television and print advertising, portrays an unrealistic narrow range of "ideal". So, remember that genetics and family history is the most significant determinant of your height and weight. (Just don’t use that as an excuse to avoid exercise and good nutrition).
The halls.md charts were created by Steven B. Halls, MD, FRCPC and John Hanson, MSc.
Notice on the charts, that adults get gradually heavier with age, and their BMI gets larger, until around age 60. Not only is that Normal, it’s Healthy. Research in the past decade has proved that having weight near the average for your age, is healthiest for long term survival. It’s not a fluke. You can be marginally skinnier or marginally fatter than average, and it doesn’t matter. But if you are significantly skinny or significantly fatter than the average for your age, then it does affect longevity."
0 -
.. what the hell did I just read?0 -
And it keeps going and going!!
It is a train wreck, you know you shouldn't look but you just can't look away!
I know. I keep coming back to paw through the wreckage. I'm so ashamed:-)0 -
KrissyMuree wrote: »
.. what the hell did I just read?
I think I just lost a few IQ points after reading that
0 -
blankiefinder wrote: »KrissyMuree wrote: »
.. what the hell did I just read?
I think I just lost a few IQ points after reading that
Same, and that moose is a creep.0 -
KrissyMuree wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »KrissyMuree wrote: »
.. what the hell did I just read?
I think I just lost a few IQ points after reading that
Same, and that moose is a creep.
If this truly is the "Hall chart website" op was referring to, then I was unable to find any actual studies cited and was unable to figure out how op came to her conclusions.0 -
KrissyMuree wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »KrissyMuree wrote: »
.. what the hell did I just read?
I think I just lost a few IQ points after reading that
Same, and that moose is a creep.
If this truly is the "Hall chart website" op was referring to, then I was unable to find any actual studies cited and was unable to figure out how op came to her conclusions.
If she takes that site seriously, well ... wow.0 -
KrissyMuree wrote: »
.. what the hell did I just read?
I'm cracking up that the sophisticated research she was so confident in involves a TALKING MOOSE INFOGRAPHIC.
The general point that people get heavier as they get older is fine. Even the point that being a little under or a little over probably isn't that big a deal. Its also fair to say that genetics play a role. But none of this suggests eating over 2000 calories at all costs even if it makes you obese.....
0 -
Yup. That's the plan. I actually aim for 1800.
That, and regular vigorous exercise.
0 -
I am 5'1" , 112 lbs. female, 52yrs. old. In order to maintain my weight I can't go over 1250 calories a day with a lightly active lifestyle. I may have a low metabolism, but that is maintenance, not deficit.0
-
brianpperkins wrote: »KrissyMuree wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »KrissyMuree wrote: »
.. what the hell did I just read?
I think I just lost a few IQ points after reading that
Same, and that moose is a creep.
If this truly is the "Hall chart website" op was referring to, then I was unable to find any actual studies cited and was unable to figure out how op came to her conclusions.
If she takes that site seriously, well ... wow.
BUT but but it is the INTERNET! You can google it and come up with this page. It is by someone claiming to be a dr! And it has a talking moose. It has to be true, right? Everything on the interner is always true, no?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions