Scale stuck for 3 weeks

Options
124

Replies

  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    Options
    mek1966 wrote: »
    Try eating food with only one ingredient.

    ?????
  • Rocknut53
    Rocknut53 Posts: 1,794 Member
    Options
    mochamommy wrote: »
    Rocknut53 wrote: »
    My question is: how long do you honestly think you can keep up this pace before you burn out? IMHO you are abusing your body by underfueling and denying it the sleep it needs to rejuvenate. Take a deep breath and slow down a bit. Weight loss doesn't happen overnight, just like gaining it didn't happen overnight. Stress and lack of sleep only sabotage your efforts (speaking from experience).

    Been working 7 days a week for 5 years in April.

    That's not what I was asking. We all know what hard work is. I'm almost 20 years older than you and have worked 12 hours shifts (on a drilling rig) regularly over extended periods of time. Because I was exhausted from my work schedule I didn't even consider that exercise was important to my well being although I did manage some walks as time allowed. We are all just questioning your priorities aside from work and family.
  • Silentpadna
    Silentpadna Posts: 1,306 Member
    Options
    mek1966 wrote: »
    Try eating food with only one ingredient.

    ?????

    The single ingredient thing is not a panacea as many people claim. I have, however, heard it recommended to people at the beginning - not as the way to lose weight, but as a tool or means to an end. That end being that when people tend to do that, they end up eating more nutrient dense foods, which can help. That obviously can't work outside of portion and calorie control, but it is not without benefits.

    I don't focus on those types of things, but again, it has merit in that it can "help" with making food choices that enhance the ability to create a deficit. It still has to be in context obviously.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,166 Member
    Options
    mek1966 wrote: »
    Try eating food with only one ingredient.

    ?????

    The single ingredient thing is not a panacea as many people claim. I have, however, heard it recommended to people at the beginning - not as the way to lose weight, but as a tool or means to an end. That end being that when people tend to do that, they end up eating more nutrient dense foods, which can help. That obviously can't work outside of portion and calorie control, but it is not without benefits.

    I don't focus on those types of things, but again, it has merit in that it can "help" with making food choices that enhance the ability to create a deficit. It still has to be in context obviously.

    After years and years of following rules like this in the hope they would create weight loss, I guess I just wish that when people offered advice that is designed to get people to a certain end, they would just recommend the end instead of the rule that will sometimes back people into a certain end. If eating nutrient-dense foods is the recommendation, why not just state that?

    Probably the whole "one ingredient" prescription is pure woo/magical thinking as far as real justification, on the part of many who propose it.

    But, if I were to speculate and seek for some kind of minimal rational basis, I think the point would be "whole foods" (another ill-defined term) more than "nutrient dense" foods. I remember reading a very small study (sorry, no cite) suggesting that "whole" (less "processed") foods had a slightly higher calorie cost in digestion, via TEF. The point is not "processed"/"unprocessed" in a pure sense either - IIRC, one of the food component differences used in the test was a hearty whole grain bread in one case vs. regular mainstream white bread in the other, and the degree of processed-ness isn't that different beween the two. There's a little more digestive work to do, though.

    Protein powder, for example, is nutrient dense, but I'm guessing the workload to digest/metabolize is on the lighter side compared to many common "one ingredient" or "whole" or "minimally processed" protein sources.

    It's majoring in the minors, anyway: Won't break a plateau, unless through satiation and compliance. ;)

    Well, I guess there could be that rare plateau where more fiber in "single ingredient" foods could do the trick! ;););)
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 9,964 Member
    Options
    mochamommy wrote: »
    mochamommy wrote: »
    People have to work to make money and pay bills. I have to feed my family by cooking and I want my home to be clean.

    All that is understood.

    But most people who are spending 15+ uncompensated hours a week commuting don't need supplementary income from working on the weekend.

    Goverment jobs don’t pay well. Not much else around here

    Government jobs tend to pay plenty well if you manage your lifestyle appropriately. They also come with benefits like Health care and time off for fitness and fitness and lifestyle counseling.

    Not in all countries.

    And not at all levels of government, even in the U.S. (Government means state, county, city, as well as federal.)
  • Kst76
    Kst76 Posts: 935 Member
    Options
    OP, eat more than 1300 calories every day. And don't obsess over the gym so much, It clearly doesn't help you.

    I lose 1- 2 pounds a week and I eat 1200 to 2000 calories a day. Some days more. I alternate.
    One day I eat 1200, the next day I eat 2000, the next day I eat 1500...and so on.
    Then I go to the gym and exercise maybe 4 days a week. But I also have an average of 15000 steps a day from work and other activities. I live in the City so getting walking in is easy.
    I never go hungry either.