View Single Post
  #8  
Old February 5th, 2007, 05:12 PM posted to sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diabetes,alt.christnet.christianlife
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default 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