RAFL - Fred - Mar 10th

when I read about your extreme exercise, I need a nap, Lee
Fred wrote in message
...
Yes, I know about bradycardia. I had an ekg and they gave _ME_ the
results. As I sat waiting to show it to the doc, I peeked at the
printout. It said in plain english "ABNORMAL" and I freaked and then
sat and sat and sat, waiting to hear the bad news when I finally went
into the doc. He says: "ah, everything's okay" and I said: "It says
ABNORMAL" His reply was that I should not peek!!! He said it was
normal for me. The computer tagged it as abnormal since it was slow.

And a few years back, a week into Atkins, I had a faux heart attack
and went to the emergency room. While hooked up at 1am in the
morning, I set off the alarms. My rate while trying to sleep set off
the alarms (G) Doc came in. And he was earnest and young. I still
have this mental picture.... I asked about the alarm and he mentioned
my rate was very slow. And I foolishly mentioned the athletic
training effect and "trained athlete." And he looked at me and I just
pictured the cartoon - Doc looking at patient and the balloon over
doc's head shows "FATBOY ain't no trained athlete!" I am quite
serious - the image is still with me (G)

A bit later older doc (still probably younger than me) came in and
asked why I did not think I was having a heart attack and why he
should let me go home? So we discussed what and why. I told him the
day before I did the hike (the one above, but there was more ice/snow
and using the ice axe back then I probably pulled a chest and arm
muscle) and no chest pains. Then I told him about the bike rides that
week and the routes. About 90 miles and no chest pains. He signed me
out about 4am after I signed a release that it was against advice but
okay.

I don't recall how long my rate is that slow.

I think that the polar monitor use to then go off the richter scale
the other way for my age/rate/etc. I was stress tested, sheesh, well,
a number of years ago and passed FINE. And I guess I stress tested
yesterday - UP, 3,400 feet, 4 miles (one way up) in a bit under 2
hours. Altho, I was tired. Then came home and mowed the lawn!!!

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:45:30 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Well, nurse talking now, there is a condition (bradycardia) that is not
necessarily a normal thing. It can be very normal for a young athletic
person to have a resting heart rate of 40 - 42. It can also be a
conduction
thing, or several other not so nice things, but usually all of them come
with fatigue, or dizziness. Has your heart rate Always been that low?
If
so, I think I would go get a stress test just for fun. What happened
with
the polor monitor that made it unacceptable? Never got high enough? How
high does it get when you are exercising? My resting heart rate is about
50, and I know it is the working out, because it used to be in the 80's.


"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
I have heard different things about slow pulse and that it is not
always training - and I don't run or do that much mid-week but the
pulse has been slow for a very long time. Like 40-42 or thereabouts.

I also recall using a Polar monitor for a while but the results were
generally UNACCEPTABLE (G) The battery has since died and I would
have to send it in somewhere.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:54:27 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

I would think with your level of activity the slow pulse is more
indicative
of your general fitness .. I have an extremely low pulse, but a
pretty
busy
metabolism.
I really really really love the diet power program myself.

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Bookmarked for the moment - getting ready for a hike as soon as the
oatmeal (too slow this morning) is ready.

Sounds interesting. I've always wondered about my metabolism with
my
very slow pulse. I will look more later. Just whizzing through the
messages as that oatmeal grows and is harvested (G)

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:03:50 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I would call it a commercial program, but you can download it from
their
website
or download a trial version (think the trial is for 15 days).
http://www.dietpower.com/

This is more of a dieting aid/tracking type program, not so much a
cookbook. I
would liken it to fitday, in the sense that you journal your daily
food
intake as
well as your exercise and daily weight - has an included food base
with
nutrients
that you can add to. It keeps a running total of your daily
nutritional
intake.
It goes further by calculating your metabolism, recommends what
caloric
intake you
need to eat to maintain. And adds a recipe function where you can
add
your own
recipes to the program for quick entry into your journal (similar
to
mastercook
without the search function for anything other than titles).
Mastercook
would
give me the sodium intake for one recipe ... dietpower gave me the
information for
the entire day. I am very new to the program so Lesanne would be
a
much
better
source for information.

Right now I am seeing how well this program works and how long it
takes
to balance
things out. I'm experimenting moving away from the ww website (and
payment). I'm
hoping I can maintain reasonably by using the calories suggested by
this
program,
hoping it's a bit more accurate than my constantly trying to figure
out
how many
points I need at any given time. So far, this program has been
great -
but I've
only been using it faithfully for 10 days (and have not used the ww
website at
all).

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:24:12 -0800, Fred

wrote:

BALANCE. But... well, but..... but....

I saw you and Lesanne discussing some food program last week. Is
it
online or a commercial product? Wouldn't MasterCook show the info
if
you entered it?

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:28:29 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I do hear ya loud and clear on this one Fred. I seem to go down
a
few
weeks,
followed by a few weeks of upward creeps - somewhere in the end
it
balances out I
suppose. I am now thinking (just thinking mind you) that when
maintaining, maybe
we need more of a *range* instead of that firm one number thing?
Maybe
a 2-3
pound range that we fit into nicely, since it is dang near
impossible
to be the
same exact weight over and over.

But yes, those gains do tend to throw you off. Today was the
prime
example for me
... been consistent the entire week, weight jumped up a full 2
pounds
this morning
- really irked me. G After thinking a bit though, explanation
was
fairly clear
(in my mind). I didn't eat much yesterday, had a huge salad for
lunch
and made
chicken soup for dinner. But that soup was mega salty when I ran
the
nutrion info
through the diet program (that Lesanne pointed me to and I
totally
adore). I
think I ended up with somewhere between 4000 and 5000 mgs.
sodium!
Well, ya wanna
bet where they all are today? G

So like you, confidence is a little shot even though I know in my
mind
that I'm
doing what I should be doing.

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:38:04 -0800, Fred

wrote:

Thanks. Yes, I like "maintaining downward" also.

There is a real barrier in thought. Clearly, EXACT maintaining
is
impossible. That means there will be gains. And there might be
two
of them and there will be losses. But the upward, even small
ones
still tend to throw you off.

Here's an example:

2.2
-3.4
0.8
1.2
0
1.2
-1.4

Those two up's, then that zero and another up start throwing off
the
confidence. And one down does not necessarily restore it.
Balance
on
the scale's balance beam of life. And yes, it was all safely
under
GOAL but goal is also only a number to NOT PAY. But there is
the
cushion goal which was being juggled.

Musing.....


On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:43:42 -0000, "krys"

wrote:

ooh - well done!
thus proving it wasn't a trend
I like maintaining downwards - it sorta feels like a safety
zone........

AMEN. One major reason I am careful about nutrition, because of the
connections between hardening of the arteries and alzheimers.
If it looks like I am coming down with that, I plan on taking up skydiving
and mountain climbing...
Or something

"Fred" wrote in message
...
Well, a long life, if blessed with physical and importantly MENTAL
health will be fine. Otherwise, it probably is unnecessary.

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 17:21:18 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Okay, nuff said, you are one of those persons who has "sinus" i.e.
normal,
bradycardia, irrespective of your athleticness or not... You will have a
problem with pretty much anything designed for the general public, unless
you get the pricey polar monitor and program in your own range.
The good news is, you will most likely live a Very Long Life, persons
with
low heart rate naturally, usually do....

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Yes, I know about bradycardia. I had an ekg and they gave _ME_ the
results. As I sat waiting to show it to the doc, I peeked at the
printout. It said in plain english "ABNORMAL" and I freaked and then
sat and sat and sat, waiting to hear the bad news when I finally went
into the doc. He says: "ah, everything's okay" and I said: "It says
ABNORMAL" His reply was that I should not peek!!! He said it was
normal for me. The computer tagged it as abnormal since it was slow.

And a few years back, a week into Atkins, I had a faux heart attack
and went to the emergency room. While hooked up at 1am in the
morning, I set off the alarms. My rate while trying to sleep set off
the alarms (G) Doc came in. And he was earnest and young. I still
have this mental picture.... I asked about the alarm and he mentioned
my rate was very slow. And I foolishly mentioned the athletic
training effect and "trained athlete." And he looked at me and I just
pictured the cartoon - Doc looking at patient and the balloon over
doc's head shows "FATBOY ain't no trained athlete!" I am quite
serious - the image is still with me (G)

A bit later older doc (still probably younger than me) came in and
asked why I did not think I was having a heart attack and why he
should let me go home? So we discussed what and why. I told him the
day before I did the hike (the one above, but there was more ice/snow
and using the ice axe back then I probably pulled a chest and arm
muscle) and no chest pains. Then I told him about the bike rides that
week and the routes. About 90 miles and no chest pains. He signed me
out about 4am after I signed a release that it was against advice but
okay.

I don't recall how long my rate is that slow.

I think that the polar monitor use to then go off the richter scale
the other way for my age/rate/etc. I was stress tested, sheesh, well,
a number of years ago and passed FINE. And I guess I stress tested
yesterday - UP, 3,400 feet, 4 miles (one way up) in a bit under 2
hours. Altho, I was tired. Then came home and mowed the lawn!!!

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:45:30 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Well, nurse talking now, there is a condition (bradycardia) that is
not
necessarily a normal thing. It can be very normal for a young
athletic
person to have a resting heart rate of 40 - 42. It can also be a
conduction
thing, or several other not so nice things, but usually all of them
come
with fatigue, or dizziness. Has your heart rate Always been that low?
If
so, I think I would go get a stress test just for fun. What happened
with
the polor monitor that made it unacceptable? Never got high enough?
How
high does it get when you are exercising? My resting heart rate is
about
50, and I know it is the working out, because it used to be in the
80's.


"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
I have heard different things about slow pulse and that it is not
always training - and I don't run or do that much mid-week but the
pulse has been slow for a very long time. Like 40-42 or
thereabouts.

I also recall using a Polar monitor for a while but the results were
generally UNACCEPTABLE (G) The battery has since died and I would
have to send it in somewhere.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:54:27 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

I would think with your level of activity the slow pulse is more
indicative
of your general fitness .. I have an extremely low pulse, but a
pretty
busy
metabolism.
I really really really love the diet power program myself.

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Bookmarked for the moment - getting ready for a hike as soon as
the
oatmeal (too slow this morning) is ready.

Sounds interesting. I've always wondered about my metabolism
with
my
very slow pulse. I will look more later. Just whizzing through
the
messages as that oatmeal grows and is harvested (G)

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:03:50 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I would call it a commercial program, but you can download it
from
their
website
or download a trial version (think the trial is for 15 days).
http://www.dietpower.com/

This is more of a dieting aid/tracking type program, not so much
a
cookbook. I
would liken it to fitday, in the sense that you journal your
daily
food
intake as
well as your exercise and daily weight - has an included food
base
with
nutrients
that you can add to. It keeps a running total of your daily
nutritional
intake.
It goes further by calculating your metabolism, recommends what
caloric
intake you
need to eat to maintain. And adds a recipe function where you
can
add
your own
recipes to the program for quick entry into your journal
(similar
to
mastercook
without the search function for anything other than titles).
Mastercook
would
give me the sodium intake for one recipe ... dietpower gave me
the
information for
the entire day. I am very new to the program so Lesanne would
be
a
much
better
source for information.

Right now I am seeing how well this program works and how long
it
takes
to balance
things out. I'm experimenting moving away from the ww website
(and
payment). I'm
hoping I can maintain reasonably by using the calories suggested
by
this
program,
hoping it's a bit more accurate than my constantly trying to
figure
out
how many
points I need at any given time. So far, this program has been
great -
but I've
only been using it faithfully for 10 days (and have not used the
ww
website at
all).

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:24:12 -0800, Fred

wrote:

BALANCE. But... well, but..... but....

I saw you and Lesanne discussing some food program last week.
Is
it
online or a commercial product? Wouldn't MasterCook show the
info
if
you entered it?

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:28:29 -0600, Joyce
wrote:

I do hear ya loud and clear on this one Fred. I seem to go
down
a
few
weeks,
followed by a few weeks of upward creeps - somewhere in the
end
it
balances out I
suppose. I am now thinking (just thinking mind you) that when
maintaining, maybe
we need more of a *range* instead of that firm one number
thing?
Maybe
a 2-3
pound range that we fit into nicely, since it is dang near
impossible
to be the
same exact weight over and over.

But yes, those gains do tend to throw you off. Today was the
prime
example for me
... been consistent the entire week, weight jumped up a full 2
pounds
this morning
- really irked me. G After thinking a bit though,
explanation
was
fairly clear
(in my mind). I didn't eat much yesterday, had a huge salad
for
lunch
and made
chicken soup for dinner. But that soup was mega salty when I
ran
the
nutrion info
through the diet program (that Lesanne pointed me to and I
totally
adore). I
think I ended up with somewhere between 4000 and 5000 mgs.
sodium!
Well, ya wanna
bet where they all are today? G

So like you, confidence is a little shot even though I know in
my
mind
that I'm
doing what I should be doing.

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:38:04 -0800, Fred

wrote:

Thanks. Yes, I like "maintaining downward" also.

There is a real barrier in thought. Clearly, EXACT
maintaining
is
impossible. That means there will be gains. And there might
be
two
of them and there will be losses. But the upward, even small
ones
still tend to throw you off.

Here's an example:

2.2
-3.4
0.8
1.2
0
1.2
-1.4

Those two up's, then that zero and another up start throwing
off
the
confidence. And one down does not necessarily restore it.
Balance
on
the scale's balance beam of life. And yes, it was all safely
under
GOAL but goal is also only a number to NOT PAY. But there is
the
cushion goal which was being juggled.

Musing.....


On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:43:42 -0000, "krys"

wrote:

ooh - well done!
thus proving it wasn't a trend
I like maintaining downwards - it sorta feels like a safety
zone........

I hope you avoid that plague. My sister and I have our plans - I
already do the mountain part and might consider taking DOWN skydiving!

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 01:24:05 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

AMEN. One major reason I am careful about nutrition, because of the
connections between hardening of the arteries and alzheimers.
If it looks like I am coming down with that, I plan on taking up skydiving
and mountain climbing...
Or something

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Well, a long life, if blessed with physical and importantly MENTAL
health will be fine. Otherwise, it probably is unnecessary.

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 17:21:18 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Okay, nuff said, you are one of those persons who has "sinus" i.e.
normal,
bradycardia, irrespective of your athleticness or not... You will have a
problem with pretty much anything designed for the general public, unless
you get the pricey polar monitor and program in your own range.
The good news is, you will most likely live a Very Long Life, persons
with
low heart rate naturally, usually do....

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Yes, I know about bradycardia. I had an ekg and they gave _ME_ the
results. As I sat waiting to show it to the doc, I peeked at the
printout. It said in plain english "ABNORMAL" and I freaked and then
sat and sat and sat, waiting to hear the bad news when I finally went
into the doc. He says: "ah, everything's okay" and I said: "It says
ABNORMAL" His reply was that I should not peek!!! He said it was
normal for me. The computer tagged it as abnormal since it was slow.

And a few years back, a week into Atkins, I had a faux heart attack
and went to the emergency room. While hooked up at 1am in the
morning, I set off the alarms. My rate while trying to sleep set off
the alarms (G) Doc came in. And he was earnest and young. I still
have this mental picture.... I asked about the alarm and he mentioned
my rate was very slow. And I foolishly mentioned the athletic
training effect and "trained athlete." And he looked at me and I just
pictured the cartoon - Doc looking at patient and the balloon over
doc's head shows "FATBOY ain't no trained athlete!" I am quite
serious - the image is still with me (G)

A bit later older doc (still probably younger than me) came in and
asked why I did not think I was having a heart attack and why he
should let me go home? So we discussed what and why. I told him the
day before I did the hike (the one above, but there was more ice/snow
and using the ice axe back then I probably pulled a chest and arm
muscle) and no chest pains. Then I told him about the bike rides that
week and the routes. About 90 miles and no chest pains. He signed me
out about 4am after I signed a release that it was against advice but
okay.

I don't recall how long my rate is that slow.

I think that the polar monitor use to then go off the richter scale
the other way for my age/rate/etc. I was stress tested, sheesh, well,
a number of years ago and passed FINE. And I guess I stress tested
yesterday - UP, 3,400 feet, 4 miles (one way up) in a bit under 2
hours. Altho, I was tired. Then came home and mowed the lawn!!!

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:45:30 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Well, nurse talking now, there is a condition (bradycardia) that is
not
necessarily a normal thing. It can be very normal for a young
athletic
person to have a resting heart rate of 40 - 42. It can also be a
conduction
thing, or several other not so nice things, but usually all of them
come
with fatigue, or dizziness. Has your heart rate Always been that low?
If
so, I think I would go get a stress test just for fun. What happened
with
the polor monitor that made it unacceptable? Never got high enough?
How
high does it get when you are exercising? My resting heart rate is
about
50, and I know it is the working out, because it used to be in the
80's.


"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
I have heard different things about slow pulse and that it is not
always training - and I don't run or do that much mid-week but the
pulse has been slow for a very long time. Like 40-42 or
thereabouts.

I also recall using a Polar monitor for a while but the results were
generally UNACCEPTABLE (G) The battery has since died and I would
have to send it in somewhere.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:54:27 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

I would think with your level of activity the slow pulse is more
indicative
of your general fitness .. I have an extremely low pulse, but a
pretty
busy
metabolism.
I really really really love the diet power program myself.

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Bookmarked for the moment - getting ready for a hike as soon as
the
oatmeal (too slow this morning) is ready.

Sounds interesting. I've always wondered about my metabolism
with
my
very slow pulse. I will look more later. Just whizzing through
the
messages as that oatmeal grows and is harvested (G)

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:03:50 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I would call it a commercial program, but you can download it
from
their
website
or download a trial version (think the trial is for 15 days).
http://www.dietpower.com/

This is more of a dieting aid/tracking type program, not so much
a
cookbook. I
would liken it to fitday, in the sense that you journal your
daily
food
intake as
well as your exercise and daily weight - has an included food
base
with
nutrients
that you can add to. It keeps a running total of your daily
nutritional
intake.
It goes further by calculating your metabolism, recommends what
caloric
intake you
need to eat to maintain. And adds a recipe function where you
can
add
your own
recipes to the program for quick entry into your journal
(similar
to
mastercook
without the search function for anything other than titles).
Mastercook
would
give me the sodium intake for one recipe ... dietpower gave me
the
information for
the entire day. I am very new to the program so Lesanne would
be
a
much
better
source for information.

Right now I am seeing how well this program works and how long
it
takes
to balance
things out. I'm experimenting moving away from the ww website
(and
payment). I'm
hoping I can maintain reasonably by using the calories suggested
by
this
program,
hoping it's a bit more accurate than my constantly trying to
figure
out
how many
points I need at any given time. So far, this program has been
great -
but I've
only been using it faithfully for 10 days (and have not used the
ww
website at
all).

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:24:12 -0800, Fred

wrote:

BALANCE. But... well, but..... but....

I saw you and Lesanne discussing some food program last week.
Is
it
online or a commercial product? Wouldn't MasterCook show the
info
if
you entered it?

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:28:29 -0600, Joyce
wrote:

I do hear ya loud and clear on this one Fred. I seem to go
down
a
few
weeks,
followed by a few weeks of upward creeps - somewhere in the
end
it
balances out I
suppose. I am now thinking (just thinking mind you) that when
maintaining, maybe
we need more of a *range* instead of that firm one number
thing?
Maybe
a 2-3
pound range that we fit into nicely, since it is dang near
impossible
to be the
same exact weight over and over.

But yes, those gains do tend to throw you off. Today was the
prime
example for me
... been consistent the entire week, weight jumped up a full 2
pounds
this morning
- really irked me. G After thinking a bit though,
explanation
was
fairly clear
(in my mind). I didn't eat much yesterday, had a huge salad
for
lunch
and made
chicken soup for dinner. But that soup was mega salty when I
ran
the
nutrion info
through the diet program (that Lesanne pointed me to and I
totally
adore). I
think I ended up with somewhere between 4000 and 5000 mgs.
sodium!
Well, ya wanna
bet where they all are today? G

So like you, confidence is a little shot even though I know in
my
mind
that I'm
doing what I should be doing.

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:38:04 -0800, Fred

wrote:

Thanks. Yes, I like "maintaining downward" also.

There is a real barrier in thought. Clearly, EXACT
maintaining
is
impossible. That means there will be gains. And there might
be
two
of them and there will be losses. But the upward, even small
ones
still tend to throw you off.

Here's an example:

2.2
-3.4
0.8
1.2
0
1.2
-1.4

Those two up's, then that zero and another up start throwing
off
the
confidence. And one down does not necessarily restore it.
Balance
on
the scale's balance beam of life. And yes, it was all safely
under
GOAL but goal is also only a number to NOT PAY. But there is
the
cushion goal which was being juggled.

Musing.....


On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:43:42 -0000, "krys"

wrote:

ooh - well done!
thus proving it wasn't a trend
I like maintaining downwards - it sorta feels like a safety
zone........

Sleep, sleep like a baby.....

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 18:44:35 -0600, "Miss Violette"
wrote:

when I read about your extreme exercise, I need a nap, Lee
Fred wrote in message
.. .
Yes, I know about bradycardia. I had an ekg and they gave _ME_ the
results. As I sat waiting to show it to the doc, I peeked at the
printout. It said in plain english "ABNORMAL" and I freaked and then
sat and sat and sat, waiting to hear the bad news when I finally went
into the doc. He says: "ah, everything's okay" and I said: "It says
ABNORMAL" His reply was that I should not peek!!! He said it was
normal for me. The computer tagged it as abnormal since it was slow.

And a few years back, a week into Atkins, I had a faux heart attack
and went to the emergency room. While hooked up at 1am in the
morning, I set off the alarms. My rate while trying to sleep set off
the alarms (G) Doc came in. And he was earnest and young. I still
have this mental picture.... I asked about the alarm and he mentioned
my rate was very slow. And I foolishly mentioned the athletic
training effect and "trained athlete." And he looked at me and I just
pictured the cartoon - Doc looking at patient and the balloon over
doc's head shows "FATBOY ain't no trained athlete!" I am quite
serious - the image is still with me (G)

A bit later older doc (still probably younger than me) came in and
asked why I did not think I was having a heart attack and why he
should let me go home? So we discussed what and why. I told him the
day before I did the hike (the one above, but there was more ice/snow
and using the ice axe back then I probably pulled a chest and arm
muscle) and no chest pains. Then I told him about the bike rides that
week and the routes. About 90 miles and no chest pains. He signed me
out about 4am after I signed a release that it was against advice but
okay.

I don't recall how long my rate is that slow.

I think that the polar monitor use to then go off the richter scale
the other way for my age/rate/etc. I was stress tested, sheesh, well,
a number of years ago and passed FINE. And I guess I stress tested
yesterday - UP, 3,400 feet, 4 miles (one way up) in a bit under 2
hours. Altho, I was tired. Then came home and mowed the lawn!!!

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:45:30 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Well, nurse talking now, there is a condition (bradycardia) that is not
necessarily a normal thing. It can be very normal for a young athletic
person to have a resting heart rate of 40 - 42. It can also be a
conduction
thing, or several other not so nice things, but usually all of them come
with fatigue, or dizziness. Has your heart rate Always been that low?
If
so, I think I would go get a stress test just for fun. What happened
with
the polor monitor that made it unacceptable? Never got high enough? How
high does it get when you are exercising? My resting heart rate is about
50, and I know it is the working out, because it used to be in the 80's.


"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
I have heard different things about slow pulse and that it is not
always training - and I don't run or do that much mid-week but the
pulse has been slow for a very long time. Like 40-42 or thereabouts.

I also recall using a Polar monitor for a while but the results were
generally UNACCEPTABLE (G) The battery has since died and I would
have to send it in somewhere.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:54:27 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

I would think with your level of activity the slow pulse is more
indicative
of your general fitness .. I have an extremely low pulse, but a
pretty
busy
metabolism.
I really really really love the diet power program myself.

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Bookmarked for the moment - getting ready for a hike as soon as the
oatmeal (too slow this morning) is ready.

Sounds interesting. I've always wondered about my metabolism with
my
very slow pulse. I will look more later. Just whizzing through the
messages as that oatmeal grows and is harvested (G)

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:03:50 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I would call it a commercial program, but you can download it from
their
website
or download a trial version (think the trial is for 15 days).
http://www.dietpower.com/

This is more of a dieting aid/tracking type program, not so much a
cookbook. I
would liken it to fitday, in the sense that you journal your daily
food
intake as
well as your exercise and daily weight - has an included food base
with
nutrients
that you can add to. It keeps a running total of your daily
nutritional
intake.
It goes further by calculating your metabolism, recommends what
caloric
intake you
need to eat to maintain. And adds a recipe function where you can
add
your own
recipes to the program for quick entry into your journal (similar
to
mastercook
without the search function for anything other than titles).
Mastercook
would
give me the sodium intake for one recipe ... dietpower gave me the
information for
the entire day. I am very new to the program so Lesanne would be
a
much
better
source for information.

Right now I am seeing how well this program works and how long it
takes
to balance
things out. I'm experimenting moving away from the ww website (and
payment). I'm
hoping I can maintain reasonably by using the calories suggested by
this
program,
hoping it's a bit more accurate than my constantly trying to figure
out
how many
points I need at any given time. So far, this program has been
great -
but I've
only been using it faithfully for 10 days (and have not used the ww
website at
all).

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:24:12 -0800, Fred

wrote:

BALANCE. But... well, but..... but....

I saw you and Lesanne discussing some food program last week. Is
it
online or a commercial product? Wouldn't MasterCook show the info
if
you entered it?

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:28:29 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I do hear ya loud and clear on this one Fred. I seem to go down
a
few
weeks,
followed by a few weeks of upward creeps - somewhere in the end
it
balances out I
suppose. I am now thinking (just thinking mind you) that when
maintaining, maybe
we need more of a *range* instead of that firm one number thing?
Maybe
a 2-3
pound range that we fit into nicely, since it is dang near
impossible
to be the
same exact weight over and over.

But yes, those gains do tend to throw you off. Today was the
prime
example for me
... been consistent the entire week, weight jumped up a full 2
pounds
this morning
- really irked me. G After thinking a bit though, explanation
was
fairly clear
(in my mind). I didn't eat much yesterday, had a huge salad for
lunch
and made
chicken soup for dinner. But that soup was mega salty when I ran
the
nutrion info
through the diet program (that Lesanne pointed me to and I
totally
adore). I
think I ended up with somewhere between 4000 and 5000 mgs.
sodium!
Well, ya wanna
bet where they all are today? G

So like you, confidence is a little shot even though I know in my
mind
that I'm
doing what I should be doing.

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:38:04 -0800, Fred

wrote:

Thanks. Yes, I like "maintaining downward" also.

There is a real barrier in thought. Clearly, EXACT maintaining
is
impossible. That means there will be gains. And there might be
two
of them and there will be losses. But the upward, even small
ones
still tend to throw you off.

Here's an example:

2.2
-3.4
0.8
1.2
0
1.2
-1.4

Those two up's, then that zero and another up start throwing off
the
confidence. And one down does not necessarily restore it.
Balance
on
the scale's balance beam of life. And yes, it was all safely
under
GOAL but goal is also only a number to NOT PAY. But there is
the
cushion goal which was being juggled.

Musing.....


On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:43:42 -0000, "krys"

wrote:

ooh - well done!
thus proving it wasn't a trend
I like maintaining downwards - it sorta feels like a safety
zone........

ok, Lee
Fred wrote in message
news
Sleep, sleep like a baby.....

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 18:44:35 -0600, "Miss Violette"
wrote:

when I read about your extreme exercise, I need a nap, Lee
Fred wrote in message
.. .
Yes, I know about bradycardia. I had an ekg and they gave _ME_ the
results. As I sat waiting to show it to the doc, I peeked at the
printout. It said in plain english "ABNORMAL" and I freaked and then
sat and sat and sat, waiting to hear the bad news when I finally went
into the doc. He says: "ah, everything's okay" and I said: "It says
ABNORMAL" His reply was that I should not peek!!! He said it was
normal for me. The computer tagged it as abnormal since it was slow.

And a few years back, a week into Atkins, I had a faux heart attack
and went to the emergency room. While hooked up at 1am in the
morning, I set off the alarms. My rate while trying to sleep set off
the alarms (G) Doc came in. And he was earnest and young. I still
have this mental picture.... I asked about the alarm and he mentioned
my rate was very slow. And I foolishly mentioned the athletic
training effect and "trained athlete." And he looked at me and I just
pictured the cartoon - Doc looking at patient and the balloon over
doc's head shows "FATBOY ain't no trained athlete!" I am quite
serious - the image is still with me (G)

A bit later older doc (still probably younger than me) came in and
asked why I did not think I was having a heart attack and why he
should let me go home? So we discussed what and why. I told him the
day before I did the hike (the one above, but there was more ice/snow
and using the ice axe back then I probably pulled a chest and arm
muscle) and no chest pains. Then I told him about the bike rides that
week and the routes. About 90 miles and no chest pains. He signed me
out about 4am after I signed a release that it was against advice but
okay.

I don't recall how long my rate is that slow.

I think that the polar monitor use to then go off the richter scale
the other way for my age/rate/etc. I was stress tested, sheesh, well,
a number of years ago and passed FINE. And I guess I stress tested
yesterday - UP, 3,400 feet, 4 miles (one way up) in a bit under 2
hours. Altho, I was tired. Then came home and mowed the lawn!!!

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:45:30 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Well, nurse talking now, there is a condition (bradycardia) that is
not
necessarily a normal thing. It can be very normal for a young
athletic
person to have a resting heart rate of 40 - 42. It can also be a
conduction
thing, or several other not so nice things, but usually all of them
come
with fatigue, or dizziness. Has your heart rate Always been that low?
If
so, I think I would go get a stress test just for fun. What happened
with
the polor monitor that made it unacceptable? Never got high enough?
How
high does it get when you are exercising? My resting heart rate is
about
50, and I know it is the working out, because it used to be in the
80's.


"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
I have heard different things about slow pulse and that it is not
always training - and I don't run or do that much mid-week but the
pulse has been slow for a very long time. Like 40-42 or
thereabouts.

I also recall using a Polar monitor for a while but the results were
generally UNACCEPTABLE (G) The battery has since died and I would
have to send it in somewhere.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:54:27 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

I would think with your level of activity the slow pulse is more
indicative
of your general fitness .. I have an extremely low pulse, but a
pretty
busy
metabolism.
I really really really love the diet power program myself.

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Bookmarked for the moment - getting ready for a hike as soon as
the
oatmeal (too slow this morning) is ready.

Sounds interesting. I've always wondered about my metabolism
with
my
very slow pulse. I will look more later. Just whizzing through
the
messages as that oatmeal grows and is harvested (G)

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:03:50 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I would call it a commercial program, but you can download it
from
their
website
or download a trial version (think the trial is for 15 days).
http://www.dietpower.com/

This is more of a dieting aid/tracking type program, not so much
a
cookbook. I
would liken it to fitday, in the sense that you journal your
daily
food
intake as
well as your exercise and daily weight - has an included food
base
with
nutrients
that you can add to. It keeps a running total of your daily
nutritional
intake.
It goes further by calculating your metabolism, recommends what
caloric
intake you
need to eat to maintain. And adds a recipe function where you
can
add
your own
recipes to the program for quick entry into your journal
(similar
to
mastercook
without the search function for anything other than titles).
Mastercook
would
give me the sodium intake for one recipe ... dietpower gave me
the
information for
the entire day. I am very new to the program so Lesanne would
be
a
much
better
source for information.

Right now I am seeing how well this program works and how long
it
takes
to balance
things out. I'm experimenting moving away from the ww website
(and
payment). I'm
hoping I can maintain reasonably by using the calories suggested
by
this
program,
hoping it's a bit more accurate than my constantly trying to
figure
out
how many
points I need at any given time. So far, this program has been
great -
but I've
only been using it faithfully for 10 days (and have not used the
ww
website at
all).

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:24:12 -0800, Fred

wrote:

BALANCE. But... well, but..... but....

I saw you and Lesanne discussing some food program last week.
Is
it
online or a commercial product? Wouldn't MasterCook show the
info
if
you entered it?

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:28:29 -0600, Joyce
wrote:

I do hear ya loud and clear on this one Fred. I seem to go
down
a
few
weeks,
followed by a few weeks of upward creeps - somewhere in the
end
it
balances out I
suppose. I am now thinking (just thinking mind you) that when
maintaining, maybe
we need more of a *range* instead of that firm one number
thing?
Maybe
a 2-3
pound range that we fit into nicely, since it is dang near
impossible
to be the
same exact weight over and over.

But yes, those gains do tend to throw you off. Today was the
prime
example for me
... been consistent the entire week, weight jumped up a full 2
pounds
this morning
- really irked me. G After thinking a bit though,
explanation
was
fairly clear
(in my mind). I didn't eat much yesterday, had a huge salad
for
lunch
and made
chicken soup for dinner. But that soup was mega salty when I
ran
the
nutrion info
through the diet program (that Lesanne pointed me to and I
totally
adore). I
think I ended up with somewhere between 4000 and 5000 mgs.
sodium!
Well, ya wanna
bet where they all are today? G

So like you, confidence is a little shot even though I know in
my
mind
that I'm
doing what I should be doing.

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:38:04 -0800, Fred

wrote:

Thanks. Yes, I like "maintaining downward" also.

There is a real barrier in thought. Clearly, EXACT
maintaining
is
impossible. That means there will be gains. And there might
be
two
of them and there will be losses. But the upward, even small
ones
still tend to throw you off.

Here's an example:

2.2
-3.4
0.8
1.2
0
1.2
-1.4

Those two up's, then that zero and another up start throwing
off
the
confidence. And one down does not necessarily restore it.
Balance
on
the scale's balance beam of life. And yes, it was all safely
under
GOAL but goal is also only a number to NOT PAY. But there is
the
cushion goal which was being juggled.

Musing.....


On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:43:42 -0000, "krys"

wrote:

ooh - well done!
thus proving it wasn't a trend
I like maintaining downwards - it sorta feels like a safety
zone........

oh har de har. I plan on using the skydiving to end up in a general up
location despite the original downness....
or something

"Fred" wrote in message
...
I hope you avoid that plague. My sister and I have our plans - I
already do the mountain part and might consider taking DOWN skydiving!

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 01:24:05 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

AMEN. One major reason I am careful about nutrition, because of the
connections between hardening of the arteries and alzheimers.
If it looks like I am coming down with that, I plan on taking up
skydiving
and mountain climbing...
Or something

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Well, a long life, if blessed with physical and importantly MENTAL
health will be fine. Otherwise, it probably is unnecessary.

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 17:21:18 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Okay, nuff said, you are one of those persons who has "sinus" i.e.
normal,
bradycardia, irrespective of your athleticness or not... You will
have a
problem with pretty much anything designed for the general public,
unless
you get the pricey polar monitor and program in your own range.
The good news is, you will most likely live a Very Long Life, persons
with
low heart rate naturally, usually do....

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Yes, I know about bradycardia. I had an ekg and they gave _ME_ the
results. As I sat waiting to show it to the doc, I peeked at the
printout. It said in plain english "ABNORMAL" and I freaked and
then
sat and sat and sat, waiting to hear the bad news when I finally
went
into the doc. He says: "ah, everything's okay" and I said: "It
says
ABNORMAL" His reply was that I should not peek!!! He said it was
normal for me. The computer tagged it as abnormal since it was
slow.

And a few years back, a week into Atkins, I had a faux heart attack
and went to the emergency room. While hooked up at 1am in the
morning, I set off the alarms. My rate while trying to sleep set
off
the alarms (G) Doc came in. And he was earnest and young. I still
have this mental picture.... I asked about the alarm and he
mentioned
my rate was very slow. And I foolishly mentioned the athletic
training effect and "trained athlete." And he looked at me and I
just
pictured the cartoon - Doc looking at patient and the balloon over
doc's head shows "FATBOY ain't no trained athlete!" I am quite
serious - the image is still with me (G)

A bit later older doc (still probably younger than me) came in and
asked why I did not think I was having a heart attack and why he
should let me go home? So we discussed what and why. I told him
the
day before I did the hike (the one above, but there was more
ice/snow
and using the ice axe back then I probably pulled a chest and arm
muscle) and no chest pains. Then I told him about the bike rides
that
week and the routes. About 90 miles and no chest pains. He signed
me
out about 4am after I signed a release that it was against advice
but
okay.

I don't recall how long my rate is that slow.

I think that the polar monitor use to then go off the richter scale
the other way for my age/rate/etc. I was stress tested, sheesh,
well,
a number of years ago and passed FINE. And I guess I stress tested
yesterday - UP, 3,400 feet, 4 miles (one way up) in a bit under 2
hours. Altho, I was tired. Then came home and mowed the lawn!!!

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:45:30 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

Well, nurse talking now, there is a condition (bradycardia) that is
not
necessarily a normal thing. It can be very normal for a young
athletic
person to have a resting heart rate of 40 - 42. It can also be a
conduction
thing, or several other not so nice things, but usually all of them
come
with fatigue, or dizziness. Has your heart rate Always been that
low?
If
so, I think I would go get a stress test just for fun. What
happened
with
the polor monitor that made it unacceptable? Never got high
enough?
How
high does it get when you are exercising? My resting heart rate is
about
50, and I know it is the working out, because it used to be in the
80's.


"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
I have heard different things about slow pulse and that it is not
always training - and I don't run or do that much mid-week but
the
pulse has been slow for a very long time. Like 40-42 or
thereabouts.

I also recall using a Polar monitor for a while but the results
were
generally UNACCEPTABLE (G) The battery has since died and I
would
have to send it in somewhere.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:54:27 GMT, "Lesanne"

wrote:

I would think with your level of activity the slow pulse is more
indicative
of your general fitness .. I have an extremely low pulse, but a
pretty
busy
metabolism.
I really really really love the diet power program myself.

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Bookmarked for the moment - getting ready for a hike as soon
as
the
oatmeal (too slow this morning) is ready.

Sounds interesting. I've always wondered about my metabolism
with
my
very slow pulse. I will look more later. Just whizzing
through
the
messages as that oatmeal grows and is harvested (G)

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:03:50 -0600, Joyce
wrote:

I would call it a commercial program, but you can download it
from
their
website
or download a trial version (think the trial is for 15 days).
http://www.dietpower.com/

This is more of a dieting aid/tracking type program, not so
much
a
cookbook. I
would liken it to fitday, in the sense that you journal your
daily
food
intake as
well as your exercise and daily weight - has an included food
base
with
nutrients
that you can add to. It keeps a running total of your daily
nutritional
intake.
It goes further by calculating your metabolism, recommends
what
caloric
intake you
need to eat to maintain. And adds a recipe function where
you
can
add
your own
recipes to the program for quick entry into your journal
(similar
to
mastercook
without the search function for anything other than titles).
Mastercook
would
give me the sodium intake for one recipe ... dietpower gave
me
the
information for
the entire day. I am very new to the program so Lesanne
would
be
a
much
better
source for information.

Right now I am seeing how well this program works and how
long
it
takes
to balance
things out. I'm experimenting moving away from the ww
website
(and
payment). I'm
hoping I can maintain reasonably by using the calories
suggested
by
this
program,
hoping it's a bit more accurate than my constantly trying to
figure
out
how many
points I need at any given time. So far, this program has
been
great -
but I've
only been using it faithfully for 10 days (and have not used
the
ww
website at
all).

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:24:12 -0800, Fred

wrote:

BALANCE. But... well, but..... but....

I saw you and Lesanne discussing some food program last
week.
Is
it
online or a commercial product? Wouldn't MasterCook show
the
info
if
you entered it?

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:28:29 -0600, Joyce
wrote:

I do hear ya loud and clear on this one Fred. I seem to go
down
a
few
weeks,
followed by a few weeks of upward creeps - somewhere in the
end
it
balances out I
suppose. I am now thinking (just thinking mind you) that
when
maintaining, maybe
we need more of a *range* instead of that firm one number
thing?
Maybe
a 2-3
pound range that we fit into nicely, since it is dang near
impossible
to be the
same exact weight over and over.

But yes, those gains do tend to throw you off. Today was
the
prime
example for me
... been consistent the entire week, weight jumped up a
full 2
pounds
this morning
- really irked me. G After thinking a bit though,
explanation
was
fairly clear
(in my mind). I didn't eat much yesterday, had a huge
salad
for
lunch
and made
chicken soup for dinner. But that soup was mega salty when
I
ran
the
nutrion info
through the diet program (that Lesanne pointed me to and I
totally
adore). I
think I ended up with somewhere between 4000 and 5000 mgs.
sodium!
Well, ya wanna
bet where they all are today? G

So like you, confidence is a little shot even though I know
in
my
mind
that I'm
doing what I should be doing.

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:38:04 -0800, Fred

wrote:

Thanks. Yes, I like "maintaining downward" also.

There is a real barrier in thought. Clearly, EXACT
maintaining
is
impossible. That means there will be gains. And there
might
be
two
of them and there will be losses. But the upward, even
small
ones
still tend to throw you off.

Here's an example:

2.2
-3.4
0.8
1.2
0
1.2
-1.4

Those two up's, then that zero and another up start
throwing
off
the
confidence. And one down does not necessarily restore it.
Balance
on
the scale's balance beam of life. And yes, it was all
safely
under
GOAL but goal is also only a number to NOT PAY. But there
is
the
cushion goal which was being juggled.

Musing.....


On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:43:42 -0000, "krys"

wrote:

ooh - well done!
thus proving it wasn't a trend
I like maintaining downwards - it sorta feels like a
safety
zone........

You could, would have to manually calculate the points from the nutritional data
available. Not a biggie to me since I normally calculated then anyway, as I found
that even the journal on the ww website was often wrong. There is a notes section
in the dietpower program, where you can jot anything down that you want to. It
would be easy to log your points in this section, as well as update frequently and
refer back to it easily. I haven't done it, and truthfully ... haven't been
counting my points since I've been using the program. I totally watch the
calories, as well as continuing with the same way of eating (higher fiber, lower
fat, tons of fruits and veggies). Maybe next week I'll try playing a bit and
logging the points - just to see how it all balances out.

Joyce

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 07:14:53 -0600, "Miss Violette"
wrote:

is there a way to figure the points and include them in the journal? Lee
Joyce wrote in message
.. .
ROFL! Guess I gotta stop gaining then, huh? I'm looking at my daily
weights ...
down a pound, down 3 pounds, up half, up 1.5, down 2, up half, up, down,
up, down.
I feel like I'm on a danged roller coaster. sigh But the weekly average
was
dead on the head to what the scale read on Friday - which I found very
interesting. And I do feel like I've been eating more. Maybe I haven't,
maybe
I've only been logging things that I usually don't (such as that one
hershey kiss,
1T promise, 1T ketchup) those little things that I don't figure into the
points
system.

BUT ... tom finally arrived today, could explain for the bit higher than
usual
(then again might not), does explain the chocolate cravings. G

I do see this entire program as being very valuable, so much better than
anything
I have seen or used. I love the journal better than the ww, and you know
I am a
big fan of the points system. And I'm having a wonderful time with the
graphs ...
just discovered if I right click on the weight chart I can change that
graph to
show anything. Some of those lines are so funny!

Joyce

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:20:58 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote:

J when you don't gain on what you are eating it will begin to lower that
number to the "real" deal.
Takes a few weeks like you said. But good info.

"Joyce" wrote in message
.. .
I totally agree with not wanting to track in to places, and that was
pretty much
becoming a routine for me ... due to the online journal switching to
the
flexpoint
system and me not ever really getting the hang of it with maintenance.
Now I'm at
the point that I don't want to continue paying $15/month to only use
the
journal
.. which is all I do use. So dietpower has been a great answer. I
have
stopped
journaling at the ww website, kind of an experiment in seeing how close
this other
program is. But like Lesanne said, it's going to take a good month of
faithfully
logging every darned thing to probably get the program to calculate
what
my body
is or isn't doing. So far I've been hanging in there - up a bit, down
a
bit but
well within norm for me. I still don't quite believe what it is giving
me
for a
metabolic rate (over 2100 today) and I'm not coming near eating that
amount ...
but I imagine over time that figure will become more steady and truer.

Joyce

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 07:44:55 -0600, Prairie Roots
wrote:

A few weeks ago, I downloaded the trial version and played around with
it enough to see that it's a good program. My trial expired and I
haven't purchased the program because I'm not interested in tracking
my food in two places. While I'm still losing, I'll stick with WW
Online. But once I'm at goal, I'll be looking for the benefits of
being a lifetimer and maintaining without paying.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:03:50 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I would call it a commercial program, but you can download it from
their
website
or download a trial version (think the trial is for 15 days).
http://www.dietpower.com/

This is more of a dieting aid/tracking type program, not so much a
cookbook. I
would liken it to fitday, in the sense that you journal your daily
food
intake as
well as your exercise and daily weight - has an included food base
with
nutrients
that you can add to. It keeps a running total of your daily
nutritional
intake.
It goes further by calculating your metabolism, recommends what
caloric
intake you
need to eat to maintain. And adds a recipe function where you can
add
your own
recipes to the program for quick entry into your journal (similar to
mastercook
without the search function for anything other than titles).
Mastercook
would
give me the sodium intake for one recipe ... dietpower gave me the
information for
the entire day. I am very new to the program so Lesanne would be a
much better
source for information.

Right now I am seeing how well this program works and how long it
takes
to balance
things out. I'm experimenting moving away from the ww website (and
payment). I'm
hoping I can maintain reasonably by using the calories suggested by
this
program,
hoping it's a bit more accurate than my constantly trying to figure
out
how many
points I need at any given time. So far, this program has been
great -
but I've
only been using it faithfully for 10 days (and have not used the ww
website at
all).

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:24:12 -0800, Fred
wrote:

BALANCE. But... well, but..... but....

I saw you and Lesanne discussing some food program last week. Is it
online or a commercial product? Wouldn't MasterCook show the info
if
you entered it?

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:28:29 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I do hear ya loud and clear on this one Fred. I seem to go down a
few
weeks,
followed by a few weeks of upward creeps - somewhere in the end it
balances out I
suppose. I am now thinking (just thinking mind you) that when
maintaining, maybe
we need more of a *range* instead of that firm one number thing?
Maybe a 2-3
pound range that we fit into nicely, since it is dang near
impossible
to be the
same exact weight over and over.

But yes, those gains do tend to throw you off. Today was the prime
example for me
... been consistent the entire week, weight jumped up a full 2
pounds
this morning
- really irked me. G After thinking a bit though, explanation
was
fairly clear
(in my mind). I didn't eat much yesterday, had a huge salad for
lunch
and made
chicken soup for dinner. But that soup was mega salty when I ran
the
nutrion info
through the diet program (that Lesanne pointed me to and I totally
adore). I
think I ended up with somewhere between 4000 and 5000 mgs. sodium!
Well, ya wanna
bet where they all are today? G

So like you, confidence is a little shot even though I know in my
mind
that I'm
doing what I should be doing.

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:38:04 -0800, Fred

wrote:

Thanks. Yes, I like "maintaining downward" also.

There is a real barrier in thought. Clearly, EXACT maintaining is
impossible. That means there will be gains. And there might be
two
of them and there will be losses. But the upward, even small ones
still tend to throw you off.

Here's an example:

2.2
-3.4
0.8
1.2
0
1.2
-1.4

Those two up's, then that zero and another up start throwing off
the
confidence. And one down does not necessarily restore it.
Balance
on
the scale's balance beam of life. And yes, it was all safely
under
GOAL but goal is also only a number to NOT PAY. But there is the
cushion goal which was being juggled.

Musing.....


On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:43:42 -0000, "krys"
wrote:

ooh - well done!
thus proving it wasn't a trend
I like maintaining downwards - it sorta feels like a safety
zone........

Linda P
232/158/WW goal 145
joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003

Wow, a resting heart rate of 50? And here I thought I was doing great when mine
was at 70 when in the Drs. office. G Hub had problems with a low heart rate for
awhile, he only noticed it when he was on the treadmill ... would get light headed
and couldn't get the heart rate up much over 60 no matter how hard he pushed.
That was when he pretty much gave up the gym work, just didn't feel well enough to
continue on. The situation did change when they changed his blood pressure meds,
now he has no problems at all.

Joyce

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 13:45:30 GMT, "Lesanne" wrote:

Well, nurse talking now, there is a condition (bradycardia) that is not
necessarily a normal thing. It can be very normal for a young athletic
person to have a resting heart rate of 40 - 42. It can also be a conduction
thing, or several other not so nice things, but usually all of them come
with fatigue, or dizziness. Has your heart rate Always been that low? If
so, I think I would go get a stress test just for fun. What happened with
the polor monitor that made it unacceptable? Never got high enough? How
high does it get when you are exercising? My resting heart rate is about
50, and I know it is the working out, because it used to be in the 80's.


"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
I have heard different things about slow pulse and that it is not
always training - and I don't run or do that much mid-week but the
pulse has been slow for a very long time. Like 40-42 or thereabouts.

I also recall using a Polar monitor for a while but the results were
generally UNACCEPTABLE (G) The battery has since died and I would
have to send it in somewhere.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:54:27 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

I would think with your level of activity the slow pulse is more
indicative
of your general fitness .. I have an extremely low pulse, but a pretty
busy
metabolism.
I really really really love the diet power program myself.

"Fred" wrote in message
.. .
Bookmarked for the moment - getting ready for a hike as soon as the
oatmeal (too slow this morning) is ready.

Sounds interesting. I've always wondered about my metabolism with my
very slow pulse. I will look more later. Just whizzing through the
messages as that oatmeal grows and is harvested (G)

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:03:50 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I would call it a commercial program, but you can download it from
their
website
or download a trial version (think the trial is for 15 days).
http://www.dietpower.com/

This is more of a dieting aid/tracking type program, not so much a
cookbook. I
would liken it to fitday, in the sense that you journal your daily
food
intake as
well as your exercise and daily weight - has an included food base
with
nutrients
that you can add to. It keeps a running total of your daily
nutritional
intake.
It goes further by calculating your metabolism, recommends what
caloric
intake you
need to eat to maintain. And adds a recipe function where you can add
your own
recipes to the program for quick entry into your journal (similar to
mastercook
without the search function for anything other than titles).
Mastercook
would
give me the sodium intake for one recipe ... dietpower gave me the
information for
the entire day. I am very new to the program so Lesanne would be a
much
better
source for information.

Right now I am seeing how well this program works and how long it
takes
to balance
things out. I'm experimenting moving away from the ww website (and
payment). I'm
hoping I can maintain reasonably by using the calories suggested by
this
program,
hoping it's a bit more accurate than my constantly trying to figure
out
how many
points I need at any given time. So far, this program has been
great -
but I've
only been using it faithfully for 10 days (and have not used the ww
website at
all).

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:24:12 -0800, Fred
wrote:

BALANCE. But... well, but..... but....

I saw you and Lesanne discussing some food program last week. Is it
online or a commercial product? Wouldn't MasterCook show the info if
you entered it?

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:28:29 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I do hear ya loud and clear on this one Fred. I seem to go down a
few
weeks,
followed by a few weeks of upward creeps - somewhere in the end it
balances out I
suppose. I am now thinking (just thinking mind you) that when
maintaining, maybe
we need more of a *range* instead of that firm one number thing?
Maybe
a 2-3
pound range that we fit into nicely, since it is dang near
impossible
to be the
same exact weight over and over.

But yes, those gains do tend to throw you off. Today was the prime
example for me
... been consistent the entire week, weight jumped up a full 2
pounds
this morning
- really irked me. G After thinking a bit though, explanation was
fairly clear
(in my mind). I didn't eat much yesterday, had a huge salad for
lunch
and made
chicken soup for dinner. But that soup was mega salty when I ran
the
nutrion info
through the diet program (that Lesanne pointed me to and I totally
adore). I
think I ended up with somewhere between 4000 and 5000 mgs. sodium!
Well, ya wanna
bet where they all are today? G

So like you, confidence is a little shot even though I know in my
mind
that I'm
doing what I should be doing.

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:38:04 -0800, Fred
wrote:

Thanks. Yes, I like "maintaining downward" also.

There is a real barrier in thought. Clearly, EXACT maintaining is
impossible. That means there will be gains. And there might be
two
of them and there will be losses. But the upward, even small ones
still tend to throw you off.

Here's an example:

2.2
-3.4
0.8
1.2
0
1.2
-1.4

Those two up's, then that zero and another up start throwing off
the
confidence. And one down does not necessarily restore it. Balance
on
the scale's balance beam of life. And yes, it was all safely under
GOAL but goal is also only a number to NOT PAY. But there is the
cushion goal which was being juggled.

Musing.....


On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:43:42 -0000, "krys"
wrote:

ooh - well done!
thus proving it wasn't a trend
I like maintaining downwards - it sorta feels like a safety
zone........

I will keep this in mind, Lee
Joyce wrote in message
...
You could, would have to manually calculate the points from the
nutritional data
available. Not a biggie to me since I normally calculated then anyway, as
I found
that even the journal on the ww website was often wrong. There is a notes
section
in the dietpower program, where you can jot anything down that you want
to. It
would be easy to log your points in this section, as well as update
frequently and
refer back to it easily. I haven't done it, and truthfully ... haven't
been
counting my points since I've been using the program. I totally watch the
calories, as well as continuing with the same way of eating (higher fiber,
lower
fat, tons of fruits and veggies). Maybe next week I'll try playing a bit
and
logging the points - just to see how it all balances out.

Joyce

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 07:14:53 -0600, "Miss Violette"

wrote:

is there a way to figure the points and include them in the journal? Lee
Joyce wrote in message
.. .
ROFL! Guess I gotta stop gaining then, huh? I'm looking at my daily
weights ...
down a pound, down 3 pounds, up half, up 1.5, down 2, up half, up,
down,
up, down.
I feel like I'm on a danged roller coaster. sigh But the weekly
average
was
dead on the head to what the scale read on Friday - which I found very
interesting. And I do feel like I've been eating more. Maybe I
haven't,
maybe
I've only been logging things that I usually don't (such as that one
hershey kiss,
1T promise, 1T ketchup) those little things that I don't figure into
the
points
system.

BUT ... tom finally arrived today, could explain for the bit higher
than
usual
(then again might not), does explain the chocolate cravings. G

I do see this entire program as being very valuable, so much better
than
anything
I have seen or used. I love the journal better than the ww, and you
know
I am a
big fan of the points system. And I'm having a wonderful time with the
graphs ...
just discovered if I right click on the weight chart I can change that
graph to
show anything. Some of those lines are so funny!

Joyce

On Sun, 14 Mar 2004 01:20:58 GMT, "Lesanne"
wrote:

J when you don't gain on what you are eating it will begin to lower
that
number to the "real" deal.
Takes a few weeks like you said. But good info.

"Joyce" wrote in message
.. .
I totally agree with not wanting to track in to places, and that was
pretty much
becoming a routine for me ... due to the online journal switching to
the
flexpoint
system and me not ever really getting the hang of it with
maintenance.
Now I'm at
the point that I don't want to continue paying $15/month to only use
the
journal
.. which is all I do use. So dietpower has been a great answer. I
have
stopped
journaling at the ww website, kind of an experiment in seeing how
close
this other
program is. But like Lesanne said, it's going to take a good month
of
faithfully
logging every darned thing to probably get the program to calculate
what
my body
is or isn't doing. So far I've been hanging in there - up a bit,
down
a
bit but
well within norm for me. I still don't quite believe what it is
giving
me
for a
metabolic rate (over 2100 today) and I'm not coming near eating that
amount ...
but I imagine over time that figure will become more steady and
truer.

Joyce

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 07:44:55 -0600, Prairie Roots
wrote:

A few weeks ago, I downloaded the trial version and played around
with
it enough to see that it's a good program. My trial expired and I
haven't purchased the program because I'm not interested in
tracking
my food in two places. While I'm still losing, I'll stick with WW
Online. But once I'm at goal, I'll be looking for the benefits of
being a lifetimer and maintaining without paying.

On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 01:03:50 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I would call it a commercial program, but you can download it from
their
website
or download a trial version (think the trial is for 15 days).
http://www.dietpower.com/

This is more of a dieting aid/tracking type program, not so much a
cookbook. I
would liken it to fitday, in the sense that you journal your daily
food
intake as
well as your exercise and daily weight - has an included food base
with
nutrients
that you can add to. It keeps a running total of your daily
nutritional
intake.
It goes further by calculating your metabolism, recommends what
caloric
intake you
need to eat to maintain. And adds a recipe function where you can
add
your own
recipes to the program for quick entry into your journal (similar
to
mastercook
without the search function for anything other than titles).
Mastercook
would
give me the sodium intake for one recipe ... dietpower gave me the
information for
the entire day. I am very new to the program so Lesanne would be
a
much better
source for information.

Right now I am seeing how well this program works and how long it
takes
to balance
things out. I'm experimenting moving away from the ww website
(and
payment). I'm
hoping I can maintain reasonably by using the calories suggested
by
this
program,
hoping it's a bit more accurate than my constantly trying to
figure
out
how many
points I need at any given time. So far, this program has been
great -
but I've
only been using it faithfully for 10 days (and have not used the
ww
website at
all).

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:24:12 -0800, Fred

wrote:

BALANCE. But... well, but..... but....

I saw you and Lesanne discussing some food program last week. Is
it
online or a commercial product? Wouldn't MasterCook show the
info
if
you entered it?

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:28:29 -0600, Joyce wrote:

I do hear ya loud and clear on this one Fred. I seem to go down
a
few
weeks,
followed by a few weeks of upward creeps - somewhere in the end
it
balances out I
suppose. I am now thinking (just thinking mind you) that when
maintaining, maybe
we need more of a *range* instead of that firm one number thing?
Maybe a 2-3
pound range that we fit into nicely, since it is dang near
impossible
to be the
same exact weight over and over.

But yes, those gains do tend to throw you off. Today was the
prime
example for me
... been consistent the entire week, weight jumped up a full 2
pounds
this morning
- really irked me. G After thinking a bit though, explanation
was
fairly clear
(in my mind). I didn't eat much yesterday, had a huge salad for
lunch
and made
chicken soup for dinner. But that soup was mega salty when I
ran
the
nutrion info
through the diet program (that Lesanne pointed me to and I
totally
adore). I
think I ended up with somewhere between 4000 and 5000 mgs.
sodium!
Well, ya wanna
bet where they all are today? G

So like you, confidence is a little shot even though I know in
my
mind
that I'm
doing what I should be doing.

Joyce

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:38:04 -0800, Fred

wrote:

Thanks. Yes, I like "maintaining downward" also.

There is a real barrier in thought. Clearly, EXACT maintaining
is
impossible. That means there will be gains. And there might
be
two
of them and there will be losses. But the upward, even small
ones
still tend to throw you off.

Here's an example:

2.2
-3.4
0.8
1.2
0
1.2
-1.4

Those two up's, then that zero and another up start throwing
off
the
confidence. And one down does not necessarily restore it.
Balance
on
the scale's balance beam of life. And yes, it was all safely
under
GOAL but goal is also only a number to NOT PAY. But there is
the
cushion goal which was being juggled.

Musing.....


On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 18:43:42 -0000, "krys"

wrote:

ooh - well done!
thus proving it wasn't a trend
I like maintaining downwards - it sorta feels like a safety
zone........

Linda P
232/158/WW goal 145
joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003