Frustrated

BZAH10 wrote: »

I may be misunderstanding what you said, but if you change your eating habits and lose weight and then go back to the original eating habits you had prior to weight loss then that's a cycle that leads to failure. You need to make sure whatever dietary changes you make DURING weight loss are things that are sustainable for a lifetime.

Yep. This is why we're always harping on taking the time to find ways to fit reasonable portions of your fave foods into your calories. And not overdoing the exercise in a way you can't imagine sticking to for the long haul. Because if you lose weight by eating in a way that bores you and exercising in a way that makes you miserable, there's no way you're going to stick to it.

Take the time to find a way of eating and an activity level that is practical, enjoyable, and keeps you at the right calorie level easily is IMHO the best thing you can do. Mine involves long walks and weekly pizza

Isorkin wrote: »

thank you for all who responded. Yes, I agree, when I start this (again) I am militant. I too loose the weight by eating 1,000 calories a day, no sugar (I drop 10 pounds in the first week by taking out sugar - incredible), and exercise twice a day (5am prior to work, and 11pm my life calms down), but you are all right, you need to find a proper amount of exercise, that is sustainable and healthy foods that do not make you miserable (for lack of another word). I suppose I will be militant for the first month just to drop the 10 lbs to 15 lbs, and from there on find a happy medium. Feed back much appreciated.

The weight loss process is just experimentation/training in preparation for maintaining a healthy weight long term. Maintaining, the statistics tell us, is the hard part.

If being militant didn't work before, why will it work this time? And is undereating (which risks losing more of your existing muscle alongside fat than is really necessary, among other health risks) really a good plan anyway? (10-15 pounds in a month is something that only a severely obese person should undertake: Does that describe you? Fewer than 1200 daily calories for a woman would generally be a level that would be risky, unless under close medical or dietician supervision: Does that describe you?)

Speaking as a 63 year old: There are too many women my age - women I know in real life! - who've gone decades cycling between extremely fast weight loss, then fast regain. The loss has usually been over-restrictive ways of eating (often salad-heavy, or fad diets), with insufficient nutrition. The regain has usually been much more self indulgent, and includes dropping most of the healthy exercise, but still often getting insufficient nutrition (often carb-heavy). Many women fail to specifically get enough protein in general, besides.

With each rapid weight loss, the woman unnecessarily loses a tiny bit of muscle. As she regains, having dropped exercise, the regain is mostly fat. Slowly, over a long time period, the result is poorer body composition: Less muscle, more fat. With less muscle and more fat, she burns slightly fewer calories per day inherently (muscle is very slightly more metabolically active), and has less capability to move in daily life, or to do exercise with intensity. As she gets weaker, resting more and moving less becomes a habit. The habits stick.

This is not a good recipe. What the recipe creates is a lower quality of life as one ages: More illness, more surgery, more drugs needed, less ability to do home chores or fun activities, lower discretionary income (because of medical and hired-services costs), etc.

I have highly-active healthy-weight friends in their 70s who can do pretty much what they like, including treat meals and activities involving lots of walking and even more energetic things (can keep up with 20-somethings). I have ultra-sendentary friends in their 60s who are obese, take blood pressure medications, cholesterol medications, struggle with side effects from medication interactions, have needed multiple joint replacements, are more frequently ill, recovery more slowly from any illness/injury, can't eat certain foods (because it causes problems for their diabetes or gall bladder or what-have-you), and certainly can't do active fun things (they even need their adult kids' or others help with home chores like flipping a mattress or digging in the garden - or they pay for help).

I'm not making this up.

I feel really lucky that I found a way of being active in my mid-40s, after cancer treatment, that I love so much I'd do it even if it weren't good for me. But I stayed obese, and even the regular exercise (including training/competition) wasn't enough to put my blood pressure & cholesterol into the normal range anymore. So, at 59-60, I finally lost from obese to a healthy weight, and have stayed at healthy weight since. Major improvement in my life!

You have choices. Current choices have long-term consequences. What does your future self need from you in order to be happy? I'll bet you can find ways to achieve it that will keep your current self pretty happy, too.

Find some ways of moving more, that you personally enjoy: Doesn't have to be formal exercise. Figure out how to eat in a happy way that gets you to a healthy weight and keeps you there.

P.S. The 10 pounds loss from dropping sugar is largely water weight, because our body holds onto a few grams of water to help it metabolize each gram of carbs (including sugar) that is eaten. It's how a normal, healthy body functions. It isn't fat loss, so it's not the kind of weight loss that sticks around, if you go back to more moderate ways of eating.

Isorkin wrote: »

thank you for all who responded. Yes, I agree, when I start this (again) I am militant. I too loose the weight by eating 1,000 calories a day, no sugar (I drop 10 pounds in the first week by taking out sugar - incredible), and exercise twice a day (5am prior to work, and 11pm my life calms down), but you are all right, you need to find a proper amount of exercise, that is sustainable and healthy foods that do not make you miserable (for lack of another word). I suppose I will be militant for the first month just to drop the 10 lbs to 15 lbs, and from there on find a happy medium. Feed back much appreciated.

You are SERIOUSLY short-changing yourself. Even if that 1000 is net. Your initial 10lbs was likely a lot of water weight though regardless of what it was that kind of loss would have scared the crap out of me. Not only are you not getting enough nutrients on 1000cal but under-eating that severely is also costing you muscle mass. You need to eat more. Preserving the muscle you have is a lot easier than trying to replace it.