Does anything truly work?

Options
1246710

Replies

  • Timelordlady85
    Timelordlady85 Posts: 797 Member
    Options
    Everydarnedthing that puts you in a Calorie Deficit works, everydarnedtime.

    It has to. No one can escape the All Powerful And Mighty Calorie Deficit.

    this, Ive tried all diets and calories in,calories out. plain and simple :)
  • LTCorreia
    LTCorreia Posts: 4 Member
    Options
    Hi Elizabeth,

    I, too seem to be on an upward climb with weight and its worse as I get older. I'm over 200 lbs (eek, did I write that for everyone to see??) and 50 years old. I've done a few diets and even went to the Dr. and got pills (actually, while WAY expensive, the Dr. route worked best, but I was 10 years younger. lol)

    I just got Beachbody's 21 day fix just for the eating plan. Yes, I COULD just measure the food myself, but I knew I wasn't gonna do that. Anyway, this helped me visualize where the 'measure food by your palm' thing didn't. You don't need to do the food part if you are better at this than I am. I ate moderately and was not hungry. The prepping was a pain cuz its easier to buy lunch out than lug it on two trains to work. But I also saved like $45 a week on eating out.

    What actually helped was the exercise videos. Me, exercise? yikes - I dont have time for that. But you know what? for 30 mins, I made myself have the time for it. Of course I modified it to the weakling level, and I had to take Motrin cuz I'm so out of shape. But, hey, its day 11, I'm down 3 inches in my waist, 2.5 in my chest, 2 in my hips, etc. and I've lost 6+ lbs. It may not be alot but it is a lot for me.

    The video is easy to follow and only 30 mins. There is a different workout each day with a rest day of yoga. The variety appealed to me. Each exercise within the daily plan lasts about a minute. Like they say, you can do anything for one minute, right?

    Just wanted to share - and by posting, make myself accountable to sustain the program - that this is something that works for me and maybe knowing that will somehow be helpful to you in your search for what is the right wellness program for you.

    Good Luck!
  • msiamjan
    msiamjan Posts: 326 Member
    Options
    Definitely get the cookies and such out of the house. Truly, the kids don't need them and they are not healthy for them either.
  • WBB55
    WBB55 Posts: 4,131 Member
    Options
    LTCorreia wrote: »
    Hi Elizabeth,

    I, too seem to be on an upward climb with weight and its worse as I get older. I'm over 200 lbs (eek, did I write that for everyone to see??) and 50 years old. I've done a few diets and even went to the Dr. and got pills (actually, while WAY expensive, the Dr. route worked best, but I was 10 years younger. lol)

    I just got Beachbody's 21 day fix just for the eating plan. Yes, I COULD just measure the food myself, but I knew I wasn't gonna do that. Anyway, this helped me visualize where the 'measure food by your palm' thing didn't. You don't need to do the food part if you are better at this than I am. I ate moderately and was not hungry. The prepping was a pain cuz its easier to buy lunch out than lug it on two trains to work. But I also saved like $45 a week on eating out.

    What actually helped was the exercise videos. Me, exercise? yikes - I dont have time for that. But you know what? for 30 mins, I made myself have the time for it. Of course I modified it to the weakling level, and I had to take Motrin cuz I'm so out of shape. But, hey, its day 11, I'm down 3 inches in my waist, 2.5 in my chest, 2 in my hips, etc. and I've lost 6+ lbs. It may not be alot but it is a lot for me.

    The video is easy to follow and only 30 mins. There is a different workout each day with a rest day of yoga. The variety appealed to me. Each exercise within the daily plan lasts about a minute. Like they say, you can do anything for one minute, right?

    Just wanted to share - and by posting, make myself accountable to sustain the program - that this is something that works for me and maybe knowing that will somehow be helpful to you in your search for what is the right wellness program for you.

    Good Luck!

    And buy the items through you?
  • AllOutof_Bubblegum
    AllOutof_Bubblegum Posts: 3,646 Member
    Options
    msiamjan wrote: »
    Definitely get the cookies and such out of the house. Truly, the kids don't need them and they are not healthy for them either.

    Gladiator_thumbs_down.gif!320x240
  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,658 Member
    Options
    msiamjan wrote: »
    Definitely get the cookies and such out of the house. Truly, the kids don't need them and they are not healthy for them either.
    Yeah, no.

    Eating isn't just about "need," IMO. And some fat and carbs from something other than avocado and broccoli can be perfectly healthy, too.
  • 999tigger
    999tigger Posts: 5,235 Member
    Options
    I'm sure theyve all said it but a consistent calorific deficit over time works. The reason it hasnt worked for you is becayse you havent done it properly. The best diet plan in the world is no good if you do not put iit into practice. Take responsibility for it and commit.
  • tincanonastring
    tincanonastring Posts: 3,944 Member
    edited August 2015
    Options
    0241USMC wrote: »
    0241USMC wrote: »
    I don't try to stay under the 1200 calories that MFP suggested, I just try not to go over.

    uhhhh ...

    uhhh what? You know what I am trying to say. Why do you have to be negative?

    No.

    I have NO IDEA what you are trying to say.

    The two "facts" presented in the quoted text are what we call "mutually exclusive", right?

    HINT: That means they can't both be true at the same time. That means the sentence is gibberish -- an absurdity.

    How does this have abuse flags? Are people suddenly anti-math? You can't "try not to go over" a certain number while simultaneously "[not] try[ing] to stay under." It is a physical impossibility. Numbers can only be less than, more than, or equal to.
    msiamjan wrote: »
    Definitely get the cookies and such out of the house. Truly, the kids don't need them and they are not healthy for them either.

    bnghd.gif
  • SergeantSausage
    SergeantSausage Posts: 1,673 Member
    Options
    Cocoa1020 wrote: »
    0241USMC wrote: »
    0241USMC wrote: »
    I don't try to stay under the 1200 calories that MFP suggested, I just try not to go over.

    uhhhh ...

    uhhh what? You know what I am trying to say. Why do you have to be negative?

    No.

    I have NO IDEA what you are trying to say.

    The two "facts" presented in the quoted text are what we call "mutually exclusive", right?

    HINT: That means they can't both be true at the same time. That means the sentence is gibberish -- an absurdity.

    basically saying that they stay at 1200 on the dot.

    Riiiiiiiiiggghhhht ...

  • msiamjan
    msiamjan Posts: 326 Member
    Options
    msiamjan wrote: »
    Definitely get the cookies and such out of the house. Truly, the kids don't need them and they are not healthy for them either.
    Yeah, no.

    Eating isn't just about "need," IMO. And some fat and carbs from something other than avocado and broccoli can be perfectly healthy, too.

    Yes, but, as someone who has had a weight problem all my life, I felt that teaching my kids that sweets and such are for a rare treat, not something to keep around for snacking, would help them more in the long run. It's not necessary to keep thing like that around the house--my point is that not having them at home would help the OP and won't hurt the kids. No doubt they get lots of sweets and other fatty foods elsewhere.
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,150 Member
    Options
    Stop dieting and make a lifestyle change. CICO really does work!
  • vivmom2014
    vivmom2014 Posts: 1,647 Member
    Options
    msiamjan wrote: »

    Yes, but, as someone who has had a weight problem all my life, I felt that teaching my kids that sweets and such are for a rare treat, not something to keep around for snacking, would help them more in the long run. It's not necessary to keep thing like that around the house--my point is that not having them at home would help the OP and won't hurt the kids. No doubt they get lots of sweets and other fatty foods elsewhere.

    Why? Because they're restricted from having any sweets around their own house? Not a good dynamic.

  • DeguelloTex
    DeguelloTex Posts: 6,658 Member
    Options
    msiamjan wrote: »
    msiamjan wrote: »
    Definitely get the cookies and such out of the house. Truly, the kids don't need them and they are not healthy for them either.
    Yeah, no.

    Eating isn't just about "need," IMO. And some fat and carbs from something other than avocado and broccoli can be perfectly healthy, too.

    Yes, but, as someone who has had a weight problem all my life, I felt that teaching my kids that sweets and such are for a rare treat, not something to keep around for snacking, would help them more in the long run. It's not necessary to keep thing like that around the house--my point is that not having them at home would help the OP and won't hurt the kids. No doubt they get lots of sweets and other fatty foods elsewhere.
    See, we don't eat only what's "necessary," though. Peach cobbler isn't -- strictly speaking, anyway -- necessary. We eat it a lot this time of year. With ice cream!

    I think I'm doing my kids more help in the long run by teaching them not to worry about particular foods but to pay attention to their diet as a whole. People often want forbidden fruit simply because it's forbidden.

    Much like keeping something in the house isn't necessary, keeping it out of the house isn't necessary.

  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    Your thread title caught my attention because I do feel like nothing truly works. No guarantees anywhere. I once read a quote from a scientist saying that studies prove that a good way to gain weight is to go on a calorie restricted diet for a period of time first. In other words, diets are a real problem in that we are statistically likely to regain the weight and then some. So, although CICO truly works initially, it only works for a limited period of time for many people. Obviously I'm here believing I can be a statistical minority. I have vowed not to let myself get overly hungry, or to take any other extreme measures to lose this weight, and I have vowed to pay attention to the quality and quantity of food I'm eating forever and ever amen.

    wut...??

    CICO only fails when one stops eating in a deficit, there is no "time lapse" on CICO...

  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    msiamjan wrote: »
    Definitely get the cookies and such out of the house. Truly, the kids don't need them and they are not healthy for them either.

    yea, no ....

    you can eat cookies and have an overall healthy diet...

    I have a bag of oreos and a freezer full of gelato right now at the house...
  • strong_curves
    strong_curves Posts: 2,229 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Your thread title caught my attention because I do feel like nothing truly works. No guarantees anywhere. I once read a quote from a scientist saying that studies prove that a good way to gain weight is to go on a calorie restricted diet for a period of time first. In other words, diets are a real problem in that we are statistically likely to regain the weight and then some. So, although CICO truly works initially, it only works for a limited period of time for many people. Obviously I'm here believing I can be a statistical minority. I have vowed not to let myself get overly hungry, or to take any other extreme measures to lose this weight, and I have vowed to pay attention to the quality and quantity of food I'm eating forever and ever amen.

    wut...??

    CICO only fails when one stops eating in a deficit, there is no "time lapse" on CICO...

    Werd!

    I think some people assume that once they get down to their goal weight, they no longer have to watch how much they eat.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Your thread title caught my attention because I do feel like nothing truly works. No guarantees anywhere. I once read a quote from a scientist saying that studies prove that a good way to gain weight is to go on a calorie restricted diet for a period of time first. In other words, diets are a real problem in that we are statistically likely to regain the weight and then some. So, although CICO truly works initially, it only works for a limited period of time for many people. Obviously I'm here believing I can be a statistical minority. I have vowed not to let myself get overly hungry, or to take any other extreme measures to lose this weight, and I have vowed to pay attention to the quality and quantity of food I'm eating forever and ever amen.

    wut...??

    CICO only fails when one stops eating in a deficit, there is no "time lapse" on CICO...

    Werd!

    I think some people assume that once they get down to their goal weight, they no longer have to watch how much they eat.

    that could be it...
  • jaqcan
    jaqcan Posts: 498 Member
    Options
    0241USMC wrote: »
    I did have MFP settings to lose 2 lbs a week. I changed it to 1lb a week and my calories went from 1200 to 1590. That is a lot more manageable. Thanks everyone for your suggestions.

    SO glad you recalculated.
  • kgeyser
    kgeyser Posts: 22,505 Member
    Options
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Your thread title caught my attention because I do feel like nothing truly works. No guarantees anywhere. I once read a quote from a scientist saying that studies prove that a good way to gain weight is to go on a calorie restricted diet for a period of time first. In other words, diets are a real problem in that we are statistically likely to regain the weight and then some. So, although CICO truly works initially, it only works for a limited period of time for many people. Obviously I'm here believing I can be a statistical minority. I have vowed not to let myself get overly hungry, or to take any other extreme measures to lose this weight, and I have vowed to pay attention to the quality and quantity of food I'm eating forever and ever amen.

    wut...??

    CICO only fails when one stops eating in a deficit, there is no "time lapse" on CICO...

    Werd!

    I think some people assume that once they get down to their goal weight, they no longer have to watch how much they eat.

    I think the person meant that while a calorie deficit is necessary for weight loss, eventually some people end up having to change the way they eat in order to be successful - just eating "less" isn't enough. They have to focus on eating more whole foods, or preparing foods at home, or eating certain foods less frequently in order to stay on track. Basically, focusing on just calorie intake for a time may work, but it will be the actual lifestyle change that will yield results, and for those people, the quality of food intake matters. At least that's how I'm reading it.