|
|
Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie
On 2 Feb 2007 09:06:46 -0800, Caleb wrote:
If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see them there! Yours, Caleb Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and how much you regained from day 101 onwards? janice So it is him! Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my progress. I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not easy. I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time -- hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc. Couple of points for people to remember: There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention. It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up. Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99 that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance beam" on Google.) Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres to your dietary goals -- is important. Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up metabolism) are not supported by current data. Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different folks. To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy. Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things. Yours, Caleb Caleb, Mu here. Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain? Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO. Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so few can or elect to do so. Scratch that. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie
"Mu" wrote in message
... On 2 Feb 2007 09:06:46 -0800, Caleb wrote: If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see them there! Yours, Caleb Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and how much you regained from day 101 onwards? janice So it is him! Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my progress. I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not easy. I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time -- hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc. Couple of points for people to remember: There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention. It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up. Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99 that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance beam" on Google.) Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres to your dietary goals -- is important. Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up metabolism) are not supported by current data. Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different folks. To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy. Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things. Yours, Caleb Caleb, Mu here. Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain? Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO. Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so few can or elect to do so. Scratch that. Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the assistance of exercise. The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer. According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk) through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort. The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the "overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one ingests (at least, it does for many of us).. And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular fitness (strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function, decreased depression, etc., etc. GG ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie
convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
friend Mu wrote: neighbor Caleb wrote: If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see them there! Yours, Caleb Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and how much you regained from day 101 onwards? janice So it is him! Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my progress. I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not easy. I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time -- hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc. Couple of points for people to remember: There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention. It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up. Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99 that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance beam" on Google.) Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres to your dietary goals -- is important. Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up metabolism) are not supported by current data. Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different folks. To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy. Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things. Yours, Caleb Caleb, Mu here. Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain? Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO. Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so few can or elect to do so. Scratch that. Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the assistance of exercise. The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer. According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk) through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort. The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the "overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one ingests (at least, it does for many of us).. Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose tissue (VAT), which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming hungrier that one has ever been in one's life. And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular fitness (strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function, decreased depression, etc., etc. Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you remain untruthful. If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for you to be judged a liar. Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts May you wisely choose to surrender to HIM by publicly confessing with your mouth that "Jesus is LORD:" http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD http://EmoryCardiology.com |
Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
ps.com... convicted neighbor GaryG wrote: friend Mu wrote: neighbor Caleb wrote: If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see them there! Yours, Caleb Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and how much you regained from day 101 onwards? janice So it is him! Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my progress. I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not easy. I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time -- hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc. Couple of points for people to remember: There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention. It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up. Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99 that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance beam" on Google.) Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres to your dietary goals -- is important. Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up metabolism) are not supported by current data. Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different folks. To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy. Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things. Yours, Caleb Caleb, Mu here. Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain? Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO. Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so few can or elect to do so. Scratch that. Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the assistance of exercise. The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer. According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk) through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort. The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the "overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one ingests (at least, it does for many of us).. Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose tissue (VAT), Hey, that's pretty cool...I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that "training strategy". So, you're saying that you're capable of running an ultramarathon, due only to your lowered body fat levels? Have you ever actually completed an ultramarathon to confirm your assertion? If so, please provide us with a link to the results web page g. which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming hungrier that one has ever been in one's life. Again, this obsession with hunger...the more you speak of your experience with the 2 Pound Diet (2PD), the more it sounds like an eating disorder. And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular fitness (strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function, decreased depression, etc., etc. Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you remain untruthful. You may have made some silly and unproven claims as to your physical prowess, but the vast majority of your advice to others is to lose weight only by focusing on becoming hungry...you never mention the health and/or weight loss benefits of physical activity. If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for you to be judged a liar. If your intent has been to insult me, you have failed yet again. Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convects May you wisely choose to surrender to HIM by publicly confessing with your mouth that "Jesus is LORD:" http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirot/TheWay Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD http://EmoryCardialogy.com |
Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie
On Feb 5, 2:41 pm, "GaryG" wrote:
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in glegroups.com... convicted neighbor GaryG wrote: friend Mu wrote: neighbor Caleb wrote: If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see them there! Yours, Caleb Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and how much you regained from day 101 onwards? janice So it is him! Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my progress. I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not easy. I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time -- hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc. Couple of points for people to remember: There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention. It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up. Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99 that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance beam" on Google.) Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres to your dietary goals -- is important. Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up metabolism) are not supported by current data. Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different folks. To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy. Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things. Yours, Caleb Caleb, Mu here. Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain? Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO. Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so few can or elect to do so. Scratch that. Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the assistance of exercise. The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer. According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk) through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort. The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the "overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one ingests (at least, it does for many of us).. Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose tissue (VAT), Hey, that's pretty cool...I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that "training strategy". So, you're saying that you're capable of running an ultramarathon, due only to your lowered body fat levels? Have you ever actually completed an ultramarathon to confirm your assertion? If so, please provide us with a link to the results web page g. which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming hungrier that one has ever been in one's life. Again, this obsession with hunger...the more you speak of your experience with the 2 Pound Diet (2PD), the more it sounds like an eating disorder. And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular fitness (strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function, decreased depression, etc., etc. Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you remain untruthful. You may have made some silly and unproven claims as to your physical prowess, but the vast majority of your advice to others is to lose weight only by focusing on becoming hungry...you never mention the health and/or weight loss benefits of physical activity. If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for you to be judged a liar. If your intent has been to insult me, you have failed yet again. Earthquack's intended insults are compliments. The ultimate accolade is "Demon" |
Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie
On Feb 5, 6:00 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote: convicted neighbor GaryG wrote: friend Mu wrote: neighbor Caleb wrote: If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see them there! Yours, Caleb Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and how much you regained from day 101 onwards? janice So it is him! Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my progress. I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not easy. I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time -- hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc. Couple of points for people to remember: There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention. It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up. Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99 that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance beam" on Google.) Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres to your dietary goals -- is important. Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up metabolism) are not supported by current data. Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different folks. To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy. Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things. Yours, Caleb Caleb, Mu here. Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain? Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO. Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so few can or elect to do so. Scratch that. Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the assistance of exercise. The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer. According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk) through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort. The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the "overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one ingests (at least, it does for many of us).. Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose tissue (VAT), which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming hungrier that one has ever been in one's life. And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular fitness (strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function, decreased depression, etc., etc. Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you remain untruthful. If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for you to be judged a liar. Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts May you wisely choose to surrender to HIM by publicly confessing with your mouth that "Jesus is LORD:" http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhDhttp://EmoryCardiology.com- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hey chung-nuts, why should we listen to an unemployed board-certified quack like you? TC |
Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie
"The Rev Dr Hugh Jarse NLAHN" wrote in message
ups.com... On Feb 5, 2:41 pm, "GaryG" wrote: "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in glegroups.com... convicted neighbor GaryG wrote: friend Mu wrote: neighbor Caleb wrote: If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see them there! Yours, Caleb Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and how much you regained from day 101 onwards? janice So it is him! Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my progress. I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not easy. I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time -- hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc. Couple of points for people to remember: There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention. It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up. Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99 that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance beam" on Google.) Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres to your dietary goals -- is important. Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up metabolism) are not supported by current data. Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different folks. To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy. Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things. Yours, Caleb Caleb, Mu here. Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain? Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO. Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so few can or elect to do so. Scratch that. Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the assistance of exercise. The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer. According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk) through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort. The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the "overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one ingests (at least, it does for many of us).. Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose tissue (VAT), Hey, that's pretty cool...I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that "training strategy". So, you're saying that you're capable of running an ultramarathon, due only to your lowered body fat levels? Have you ever actually completed an ultramarathon to confirm your assertion? If so, please provide us with a link to the results web page g. which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming hungrier that one has ever been in one's life. Again, this obsession with hunger...the more you speak of your experience with the 2 Pound Diet (2PD), the more it sounds like an eating disorder. And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular fitness (strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function, decreased depression, etc., etc. Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you remain untruthful. You may have made some silly and unproven claims as to your physical prowess, but the vast majority of your advice to others is to lose weight only by focusing on becoming hungry...you never mention the health and/or weight loss benefits of physical activity. If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for you to be judged a liar. If your intent has been to insult me, you have failed yet again. Earthquack's intended insults are compliments. The ultimate accolade is "Demon" LOL - I think the order of progression is "Dear Neighbor", "Liar/Untruthful", "Convicted", "Mark of Satan", and finally "Demon" (though I may have overlooked some intermediate categories). GG |
Luke 6:21
convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: convicted neighbor GaryG wrote: friend Mu wrote: neighbor Caleb wrote: If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see them there! Yours, Caleb Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and how much you regained from day 101 onwards? janice So it is him! Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my progress. I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not easy. I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time -- hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc. Couple of points for people to remember: There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention. It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up. Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99 that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance beam" on Google.) Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres to your dietary goals -- is important. Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up metabolism) are not supported by current data. Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different folks. To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy. Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things. Yours, Caleb Caleb, Mu here. Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain? Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO. Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so few can or elect to do so. Scratch that. Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the assistance of exercise. The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer. According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk) through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort. The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the "overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one ingests (at least, it does for many of us).. Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose tissue (VAT), Hey, that's pretty cool... The truth is cool. I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that "training strategy". The world class athletes already know that the hungrier they are the more capable they physically become. When an athlete loses in a competition where s/he was a physical match with his/her competitior, s/he knows that s/he was not hungry enough. In countries where the brainwashing that "hunger is bad" does not occur (ie Kenya), the runners are leaner, trimmer, and much faster because they know in their hearts that "hunger is good." Truth is absolute and invincible. "I am the way, the truth, and the life..." -- LORD Jesus Christ Amen ! Laus Deo ! ! ! Marana tha ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD http://EmoryCardiology.com |
F*&k! You're stupid,Earthquack!
On Feb 5, 4:12 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote: convicted neighbor GaryG wrote: Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: convicted neighbor GaryG wrote: friend Mu wrote: neighbor Caleb wrote: If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see them there! Yours, Caleb Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and how much you regained from day 101 onwards? janice So it is him! Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my progress. I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not easy. I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time -- hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc. Couple of points for people to remember: There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention. It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up. Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99 that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance beam" on Google.) Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres to your dietary goals -- is important. Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up metabolism) are not supported by current data. Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different folks. To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy. Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things. Yours, Caleb Caleb, Mu here. Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain? Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO. Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so few can or elect to do so. Scratch that. Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the assistance of exercise. The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer. According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk) through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort. The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the "overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one ingests (at least, it does for many of us).. Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose tissue (VAT), Hey, that's pretty cool... The truth is cool. I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that "training strategy". The world class athletes already know that the hungrier they are the more capable they physically become. When an athlete loses in a competition where s/he was a physical match with his/her competitior, s/he knows that s/he was not hungry enough. In countries where the brainwashing that "hunger is bad" does not occur (ie Kenya), the runners are leaner, trimmer, and much faster because they know in their hearts that "hunger is good." Remember, back in 1972, when all those Biafran athletes swept the board. Boy! Were they hungry! |
Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie
It seems to me I heard somewhere that GaryG wrote in article
: "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message ups.com... convicted neighbor GaryG wrote: The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer. According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk) through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort. The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the "overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one ingests (at least, it does for many of us).. Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose tissue (VAT), That's especially good because in 2004, at the age of 39, Dr. Chung ran a half-marathon (13.1 miles) in 3 hours 27 minutes; he improved to 2:49 in 2005 and I found no record for him in the same race in 2006 (for comparison, I'm a typical mid-pack runner, but in 1989 at the age of 60 I ran a 1:45 half-marathon and a 1:50 the year before that). http://www.silvercomet10k.com/ Hey, that's pretty cool...I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that "training strategy". So, you're saying that you're capable of running an ultramarathon, due only to your lowered body fat levels? Have you ever actually completed an ultramarathon to confirm your assertion? If so, please provide us with a link to the results web page g. To have run an ultra (whether 50 miles or 100, typical distances for ultras), he would have to have been absent from the newsgroups for twenty-four hours or more. Did that ever happen? A Google search for Andrew Chung in ultramarathon results came up empty. Since ultra running is such a small, tight-knit community I think the sudden appearance of an unknown would have been remarked on by somebody along the way. [. . .] Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you remain untruthful. Actually archiving your opinions adds nothing to their veracity. Garbage into Google, garbage out. The same goes for your constant self-referential "proofs" on your Web pages. You may have made some silly and unproven claims as to your physical prowess, but the vast majority of your advice to others is to lose weight only by focusing on becoming hungry...you never mention the health and/or weight loss benefits of physical activity. If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for you to be judged a liar. If your intent has been to insult me, you have failed yet again. Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convects Oh, oh, no! the macro's broken (or maybe it's just a climate change) -- Don Kirkman |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:44 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
WeightLossBanter