A Weightloss and diet forum. WeightLossBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » WeightLossBanter forum » alt.support.diet newsgroups » General Discussion
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

lowering of metabolism after weight loss



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 14th, 2005, 09:44 PM
Matthew
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wendy wrote in message
...

Clearly to be a world class athelete requires an immense amount
of steroids


Wrong.

Matthew


  #12  
Old April 14th, 2005, 09:51 PM
Cubit
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Humans are not rats.

I recall a study that showed metabolism dropping by 15% when the fat on the
human body goes below a "setpoint." The setpoint was different for each
individual. 15% is not large enough to make weight management impossible.
However, it does tip the scales, so to speak.


"wendy" wrote in message
...


  #13  
Old April 14th, 2005, 09:56 PM
wendy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Rachael Reynolds wrote:

But broadly speaking, we are all the same - at each end there are extremes -
supreme atheletes at one end and at the other there are the people with a
major lack of dopamine receptors or whatever, but the vast vast bulk of us
are averagely in the middle.


There's no such thing as being in the middle genetically. You are
unique. 50% or more of obesity is said to be related to genetics.
Whatever your genetics are what you have to fight. If you keep thinking
you are just a total failure because you think it is all psychological
then you aren't understanding the enemy.

Not sure about this rat thing anyway - they didn't have to think about
whether they want to gain, lose or maintain weight. The psychological thing
is too important to be ignored.


That's not what is ignored. That's all people talk about.
  #14  
Old April 14th, 2005, 09:59 PM
wendy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

GaryG wrote:
Well...it's not rocket science either. Losing weight simply requires
consuming a few less calories per day than one burns.


And running a 4 minute mile simply require running a mile under 4 minutes.


As with many other things in life, anything that requires patience and
persistence will tend to have a low rate of success. It's just a lot easier
for most people to reach for the bag of snacks and the remote control,
rather than get up off the couch and go for a walk. But, that's more an
issue of personal priorities than metabolism.


Why is it easier? You don't forget to breath. You don't over drink
water. Why do you want to eat the snacks and use the remote control? It
could be different, but it's not. The influences are so built-in we
don't even recognize they are at play.
  #15  
Old April 14th, 2005, 10:00 PM
wendy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

GaryG wrote:
No offense, but it sounds like you are in search of excuses.


When i fall is gravity an excuse? No, it's a reason. You seem to be a
person who doesn't want to understand how what is our real relationship
to food and exercise.
  #16  
Old April 14th, 2005, 10:01 PM
wendy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

GaryG wrote:
It's possible the effect on metabolism seen in those rats was due to a
"starvation" response. If they had lost weight the weight slowly (the same
way they had gained it), it's possible the effect on metabolism would have
been different.


It's possible. But i believe that rate is about a 1 pound a month.
  #17  
Old April 14th, 2005, 10:02 PM
wendy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matthew wrote:
wendy wrote in message
...


Clearly to be a world class athelete requires an immense amount
of steroids



Wrong.

Matthew


It was a joke. Sorry.
  #18  
Old April 14th, 2005, 10:04 PM
wendy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Cubit wrote:
Humans are not rats.

I recall a study that showed metabolism dropping by 15% when the fat on the
human body goes below a "setpoint." The setpoint was different for each
individual. 15% is not large enough to make weight management impossible.
However, it does tip the scales, so to speak.


A woman is not a man. One person is not the next. One race is not the
next. Like it or not animal models are what we learn a lot from. It
doesn't always work, but to dismiss any study based on animal models
isn't wise.

If i could guarantee you a 15% rate of return you would be a very happy
person.

As for weight management being impossible, that is not the argument. But
that's a pretty damn high standard.
  #19  
Old April 14th, 2005, 10:23 PM
Polar Light
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"wendy" wrote in message
...
Rachael Reynolds wrote:

But broadly speaking, we are all the same - at each end there are
extremes - supreme atheletes at one end and at the other there are the
people with a major lack of dopamine receptors or whatever, but the vast
vast bulk of us are averagely in the middle.


There's no such thing as being in the middle genetically. You are unique.
50% or more of obesity is said to be related to genetics. Whatever your
genetics are what you have to fight. If you keep thinking you are just a
total failure because you think it is all psychological then you aren't
understanding the enemy.


When you say 'obesity is said to be related to genetics', what does it mean?
Is it the tendency to overeat? the bigger apetite? the taste for high
calorie food?
or do obese people really have a slower metabolism? or better absorption?

Not sure about this rat thing anyway - they didn't have to think about
whether they want to gain, lose or maintain weight. The psychological
thing is too important to be ignored.


That's not what is ignored. That's all people talk about.


It's a combination of both. Weight gain/loss is physiological but
psychological factors affect what you eat. If you're dying for a BigMac it's
more likely to be because of advertising you've seen than for genetical
reasons. Your digestive system plays a part too, not everybody can have
several fast food meals in a row without feeling sick, yet I've read stories
of obese people who would stop at different places on their way home, have a
meal at each one of them & still have room for ice cream. It may be their
mind that makes them eat like that but their bodies accept it, who is to
blame, body or mind?


  #20  
Old April 14th, 2005, 10:37 PM
GaryG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"wendy" wrote in message
...
Rachael Reynolds wrote:

But broadly speaking, we are all the same - at each end there are

extremes -
supreme atheletes at one end and at the other there are the people with

a
major lack of dopamine receptors or whatever, but the vast vast bulk of

us
are averagely in the middle.


There's no such thing as being in the middle genetically. You are
unique. 50% or more of obesity is said to be related to genetics.
Whatever your genetics are what you have to fight.


The rate of obesity is skyrocketing...are you saying that's due to genetics?
Why were so few people obese 50 years ago?

GG

If you keep thinking
you are just a total failure because you think it is all psychological
then you aren't understanding the enemy.

Not sure about this rat thing anyway - they didn't have to think about
whether they want to gain, lose or maintain weight. The psychological

thing
is too important to be ignored.


That's not what is ignored. That's all people talk about.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ok, fine, whatever, I give up Luna Low Carbohydrate Diets 101 November 1st, 2005 05:33 AM
Principles of Effective Weight Loss Gary Matthews Weightwatchers 0 March 31st, 2005 10:46 AM
Adherene to, not type of diet important for fat loss ( 4 popular diets compared ) [email protected] General Discussion 5 January 5th, 2005 07:57 PM
Ping Dally Barbara Hirsch General Discussion 2 August 20th, 2004 11:11 AM
Weight Loss Support Groups Paul General Discussion 0 November 20th, 2003 05:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 WeightLossBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.