Does anything truly work?
Replies
-
SergeantSausage wrote: »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
0 -
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!0 -
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.0
-
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?0 -
-
-
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.0
-
SergeantSausage wrote: »SergeantSausage wrote: »
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.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.
0 -
SergeantSausage wrote: »SergeantSausage wrote: »
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 ...
0 -
DeguelloTex 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.0 -
Stop dieting and make a lifestyle change. CICO really does work!0
-
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.
0 -
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!DeguelloTex 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.
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.
0 -
goldthistime 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...
0 -
-
goldthistime 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.
0 -
strong_curves wrote: »goldthistime 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...0 -
This content has been removed.
-
strong_curves wrote: »goldthistime 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.0 -
strong_curves wrote: »goldthistime 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.
not sure how you get that, from this..
"So, although CICO truly works initially, it only works for a limited period of time for many people"
0 -
strong_curves wrote: »goldthistime 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.
not sure how you get that, from this..
"So, although CICO truly works initially, it only works for a limited period of time for many people"
in context, that poster is obviously using "CICO" as a shorthand for just eating less than they're outputting, with no attention paid to food quality in particular.0 -
strong_curves wrote: »goldthistime 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.
But that still falls under CICO doesn't it? When I first started MFP the first thing I looked at was how much I was eating. I realized that eating out a lot was really cutting into the deficit I was trying to create so I started bringing in my own homemade lunches to work & cooking more BUT I only did that because I wanted to get more bang for my caloric buck. I made those changes because of CICO, that's a part of CICO not something separate. I went into it knowing it was going to be a lifestyle change and assumed most people did too. I guess I was wrong.
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »DeguelloTex 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.
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.
Peach cobbler and ice cream for snacks? Or dessert?
0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »DeguelloTex 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.
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.
Peach cobbler and ice cream for snacks? Or dessert?
Yes.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
UltimateRBF wrote: »Hmm, now I want peach cobbler and ice cream.
Now I want peach cobbler ice cream on my warm peach cobbler. With peaches on top.
0 -
wrong thread. stupid multiple tabs...0
-
strong_curves wrote: »strong_curves wrote: »goldthistime 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.
But that still falls under CICO doesn't it? When I first started MFP the first thing I looked at was how much I was eating. I realized that eating out a lot was really cutting into the deficit I was trying to create so I started bringing in my own homemade lunches to work & cooking more BUT I only did that because I wanted to get more bang for my caloric buck. I made those changes because of CICO, that's a part of CICO not something separate. I went into it knowing it was going to be a lifestyle change and assumed most people did too. I guess I was wrong.
I don't think you're wrong, I think it's more just a matter of how people think about things. Obviously, a calorie deficit is needed to lose weight, no one is disputing that. I think the point was that for some people, thinking just in terms of CICO doesn't work for them, even knowing the science is there. They need to focus on the type of food they eat, or activity level, or whatever. Yes, it's all part of the same thing, you're correct. But some people have to focus on the behavioral aspect more to be successful rather than the straight numbers. Not everyone loves counting calories (which I think may have been what that user meant by CICO), so those people just focus on making the changes in their life to be sustainable, rather than the measuring/weighing/counting. Who knows, I might be reading it wrong, hopefully goldthistime will come back and explain.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions