Zedeff Member

Ha, in fact, if you bothered to read the document from the NIH, you will note on Chapter 4, Page 74, the following phrase: Ahem... "BAM."

There is a difference in the meanings of the phrases "safe and effective" versus "absolute bare minimum" or even "dangerous" as some users interpret the claim. It is also "safe and effective" to lose weight at 1500 and 2000 calories for women and men respectively, but we don't treat those as absolute thresholds, do we? I'm…

Says who?

July 1st of what year?

As others have said, almond milk is probably the way to go. Many brands are about 40 cal/cup unsweetened or 80 cal/cup sweetened. That works out to about 80 cal (unsweetened plus sugar) or 120 cal (sweetened, no sugar) respectively. Almond milk isn't even an "acquired" taste in my experience - it's good, most people are…

@Mr_Knight could you elaborate on these "advanced dieting" exercises? I'm intrigued and not sure what you are referring to. Thanks!

Many people find it harder to stay on track on weekends and holidays when they are not distracted by work-related tasks; idle hands are the devil's play-things, as the expression goes.

I'm not in maintenance but I know a few of these already: Coffee/tea with milk, not cream and sugar In-store-baked hamburger (sandwich/hotdog) buns: 130 calories versus 250 for national brands! Salad - I can eat a quart of salad with mixed greens, tomatoes, and cucumber for <100 calories. And on that note: Specific salad…

Of course it's possible. You could eat less (fewer calories in) or be more active (more calories out) or both.

It's not a magic trick; if you eat fewer calories than you burn, regardless of when you eat them, you'll lose weight. IF is an eating schedule and not a weight loss plan. If it makes it easier for you to stick to a deficit then it's good, if it makes it harder then it's bad.

True even if you're only moderately short. I'm a 5'8.5" male - below average but not tiny. Losing my first 30 lbs dropped my waist by 1 pant size. The next 20 dropped another. The next 10 has dropped another. Buying clothes is expensive and the rate at which I need them seems to keep speeding up!

You haven't cut enough calories.

This isn't really a matter of opinion. Eat what you eat; if it's 500 calories or 5000 calories it doesn't matter. Track your weight. Are you losing between 0 and 2 pounds per week on average? It's probably a reasonably healthy deficit. Is your weight stable? You're not at a deficit. Are you gaining? You're in a surplus.…

How does "cuts of fattier meat" add to protein intake? Surely, calorie for calorie, you must understand that 95% lean meat has more protein than 80% lean meat.

Try this experiment. Weigh yourself and record your weight. Then drink 3 cups of water and stand on the scale and check your weight. See that 1+ lb weight gain? This is a weight fluctuation. Water didn't cause you to gain a pound of FAT. Gaining a pound in 1 week does not mean you've gained fat, especially if you're…

Good luck to you. I also started out with 100 lbs to lose, starting 260, goal 160 as a 5'9" male, currently about 203. 2 lbs per week is entirely realistic. That being said, don't be disappointed if you don't get there. My MFP goal is set to 2 lbs/week but because life happens (ie. I go over my allotment sometimes) I'm…

I don't understand your question. You are losing weight. How could that signify that you are eating too much? Starvation mode as you are describing it doesn't exist and you almost certainly didn't gain a pound of fat from eating 100 calories.

I'll echo what others have said and echo what you have said OP. 1. Make sure you're not heading into HONC/DKA. 2. I also find that I have symptoms of frequent urination. I've noticed that I pee more in situations when I think my body glycogen stores are very low - if I've eaten pretty low carb over the past 24 hours, if…

Your logic and reason aren't welcome here!

A fair point, but not backed by evidence I suspect. Is there any study that shows that 20% of MFP users maintain their losses for a year? I'm not being sarcastic, if there is such a study I'd love to read it. Some websites actually do surveys and such, so maybe you know something I don't. On the other hand, there IS…

This is a discussion forum, not a friend making forum. If people are allergic to rational discussion then by all means, they don't have to reply to me. I promise I won't track you down and force you to think.

@UltimateRBF A valuable and rational contribution to the discussion, thanks!

Thanks for continuing an actual discussion, I basically agree with everything you said. I guess at a fundamental level we're at different places based on approach. I will readily admit that the OP's plan is probably not sustainable, so we both probably would endorse the same ultimate goals. I am more in the "set an…

Sustainability is not for you to decide. You telling someone else what they do or do not have the willpower to sustain IS nonsense.

You raise some good points; in my replies I was reflecting on my own response to the OP, which said she should eat 1300 based on her own calculations which had an error (subbing BMR for TDEE). So my responses were based on my advice, but I can see how that wasn't a fair approach since everyone else would (rightly) be…

So what? You're saying the same thing I am - failure is seemingly assured for everyone. So does it make sense to tell everyone that they'll fail so they shouldn't try? 1200 calories isn't a dangerous restriction, so what's the purpose of telling the OP not to try it because they'll fail?

Because repeating nonsense doesn't turn it into truth.

I'm of the opinion that sustainability is a question for the user and not the observer. It's really up for the OP to try - and potentially fail - to achieve a goal, not up to the community to tell them what their goal should be. There is evidence for example that only 1 in 20 formerly morbidly obese people can sustain a…

Wendy's chili, small fry. Easy.

Based on what, exactly?