Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

"Patricia Heil" wrote in message
news


Who was it said that the definition of stupidity is doing something,
getting a bad result, and doing the same thing expecting it to come out
differently? Sound like anybody we know?


That would be the definition of Insanity. And yes, that same definition has
been posted to Caleb every year he tries this. As a clinical psychologist,
you'd think he'd know the definition of insanity.

On Feb 4, 5:21 pm, "SFrunner" wrote:
On Feb 4, 5:04 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:



"Caleb" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Feb 4, 10:49 am, "teachrmama" wrote:
"determined" wrote in message

m...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"LFM" wrote in message
news

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

Teachrmama - if you are truely interested in a dialog with this
poster,
please take it to Alt.support.diet.low-calorie You will find very
little support of this poster in here

Actually, there are topics here that I do not enter opinions on
because
they are of no interest to me. It is easy to just skip over them. I
understand that you feel great disdain for this poster, but you are
not
required to read his posts, or any conversations that he is in. I
always
respond respectfully to other posters, and do not feel that my
conversation with Caleb is violating any of this newsgroup's rules and
regulations. If you were standing behind me in the grocery store and
I
were carrying on a conversation with Caleb, would you ask that we go
to
McDonald's and discuss things, rather than conversing in a public
place
you just happened to be in? With all due respect, that is how I feel
you
are speaking to me here.

You know what? Caleb is nothing more than a troll... The fact that
you
want to maintain a dialogue with a troll kind of hurts your own
credibility. It doesn't take a whole lot of knowledge of diet/health to
know that his approach is not healthy or effective at permanent weight
loss. If you can't figure that out for yourself, fine. But it leaves
the
rest of us here who have seen him go through this countless times
absolutely flabbergasted and exasperated.

I agree with you that losing weight and regaining it is not a good way to
maintain a healthy weight or lifestyle. I certainly have no intentions
of
following such a plan. I have come too far in my own efforts to want to
try
a plan that is not a total change to a new way of eating. But I am
curious
as to Caleb's reasons for the choices he is making, and how he came to
make
the choices he has. Maybe he comes back here repeatedly because he is
learning new approaches each time he comes. I see him as very polite--I
haven't seen him trying to force his choices on anyone else. I do hope
that
he will realize that if he continues with the healthy eating choices he
makes in the 100 days, he will be healthier than if he regains and
reloses
the same weight time after time. But having polite conversations with
him
does not mean that I am espousing his choices, and I am not certain why
it
riles up some of the regular posters here. I find that odd.

Teachrmama -- I endorse totally what you are saying. I do not want to
regain the weight and I sure hope I don't. But I am learning new
techniques each time I try this. Rather like stepping into the same
stream twice -- things change.

Good. I'm glad to hear that. For me, I have found that extremely low
calorie approaches lead only to overindulgence when I do begin to eat
"normally" again. So the approach I have chosen is to eat the way I want
to eat for the rest of my life, and to exercise the way I want to exercise
for the rest of my life. Then I never have to go "off a diet." I'm set.
And can make minor adjustments here and there as needed. I do hope you have
chosen an approach this time that will become a lifestyle rather than just a
diet. =c)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

FYI...if you had done any searching at all, you would have found all
the answers to your questions. It's quite easy. This one is from 2002:

"What Caleb does with his own body is obviously his right. But
through many
postings, Caleb has made it clear he sees himself on some sort of
"mission",
to disprove what he sees as some "myths" of dieting.

He personifies some of the real problems with diets. Among them:

1) Fixation on "scale" weight. I have never seen him show any concern
for
what he is actually losing (fat vs muscle). Obviously, he's lost
fat. But
at this point, he is probably losing far more muscle than fat.

2) Fixation on an "end date". Each year, he pays lip service to
continuing
on with "maintenance", and keeping up with the supposed "good habits"
he
learns during his 100 days. IMO, the problem is he is NOT learning
"good
habits"; he is basically starving himself for a fixed period, after
which he
feels free to return to his normal eating.

3) And again, IMO Caleb is a walking, talking example of what some
refer to
as "starvation mode". For example, Caleb has just spent 10 or so
days, at
1000 cals or less, at 203 lbs. Unless one assumes he is just eating
more
than he knows, the metabolic effect is undeniable. Caleb's answer?
Starve
himself more to break this "plateau", by eating what, 200 calories?

Seriously, I wish Caleb the best of luck, and hope he somehow comes to
find
a way of maintaining his weight loss.

I know he will not listen to criticism of his approach, and the
suggestions
some have made to help him. That doesn't mean, however, that the
errors he
makes shouldn't be pointed out at times, to help others avoid the
same
mistakes."

Well, obviously, as he reappears year after year after year after
year, he hasn't learned a thing since 2002 and before.

Go ahead and do some searching, it will answer all your questions.

Well, actually, I agree with some of the above methods, even though I
did not write the criticism.

I am concerned about the numbers on the scale, and find them
informative and motivating. This is a crime?

About an end date -- I find it helpful to have an end date to focus.
But then do people losing weight for the summer swimsuit season, for
their marriage, etc.

About tightening up calories to reach a goal - -well, I think almost
all of us do so.

Caleb

On Feb 4, 8:09 am, "determined" wrote:
Would you care to discuss with us the fact that you have lost and regained
more weight each time you have tried this method? Because google allows us
to look back at your track record and see that in fact, when you started
this 100 day diet back in 2001, your starting weight was 241, and here it
is, 2006 and your new starting weight is over 250. So you have effectively
gained weight through all these miserable diets.

Can you cheerfully explain why you need another 100 day diet? Or will you
just ignore us and these legitimate questions, because you simply do not
have a good answer?


Determined -- in 1999, I was 272, I believe, but the exact numbers are
not important. What is important is to me is to get back into harness
again. And I am back in harness again.

I guess I am likening weight-loss to something like training for a
marathon. That is, very few runners are at the top of their game all
year long. People peak for certain races, with longer training runs,
more intense weight loss, etc. Cardiologist Jack Scaff, founder of the
Honolulu Marathon, used to say that he could tell he was serious about
training for the Honolulu Marathon because he was getting down to a
six pack of beer a day. Seems to me that he was exemplifying the real
world for many people, that he is not good most of the time. But the
training for a marathon takes about three months as well, pretty close
to my 100 day time period.

Should Dr. Scaff jog long distances every single week? Well, I sure am
not going to tell him to do so. I think he did GREAT at getting up to
speed. And his clinics brought a lot of people to health as well.

Lotsa different paths to our goals.

Yours,

Caleb

On Feb 4, 6:43 pm, "LFM" wrote:
"Patricia Heil" wrote in message

news


Who was it said that the definition of stupidity is doing something,
getting a bad result, and doing the same thing expecting it to come out
differently? Sound like anybody we know?

That would be the definition of Insanity. And yes, that same definition has
been posted to Caleb every year he tries this. As a clinical psychologist,
you'd think he'd know the definition of insanity.

LFM -- I know what has worked for me in the past and it will work for
me again in the future.

Caleb

"The Queen of Cans and Jars" wrote in message
...
teachrmama wrote:

"The Queen of Cans and Jars" wrote in message
. ..
teachrmama wrote:

I'm just not clear on why you think that gives you the right to tell
me I
shouldn't talk to him either.

Talk to him all you want - in the group that he set up for talking
about
it. Is it really all that hard to understand?

Actually, yes it is. Why shouldn't we be free to talk here?

You are free to talk about it here, but don't whine when people
complain. No one wants to hear Caleb's bull**** for the umpteenth time.

Oh, good. I'm glad you don't care whether or not I talk to him. =c)

"LFM" wrote in message
. ..

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"The Queen of Cans and Jars" wrote in message
. ..
teachrmama wrote:

I'm just not clear on why you think that gives you the right to tell me
I
shouldn't talk to him either.

Talk to him all you want - in the group that he set up for talking about
it. Is it really all that hard to understand?

Actually, yes it is. Why shouldn't we be free to talk here? There are
certainly some extremely obnoxious threads here right now that haven't
been jumped on the way this rather innocuous thread has been.

Caleb posts are considered trolling and off topid to ASD. Therefore if
you want to continue with an off topic dialog with a troll, then do not be
surprised with others chose to classify you in the same category as they
do him, and kill file you, ignore you and lose respect in you. Your
credibility is at risk by continuing your dialog with him in this forum.

Why are you so upset about something so minor? You are making yourself look
like a control freak. Just ignore the threads you do not want to
participate in. That's what I do.

"LFM" wrote in message
. ..

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...


I don't doubt that you have a darn good reason for your choices. I'm
just not clear on why you think that gives you the right to tell me I
shouldn't talk to him either. THAT's the part that I find odd.


I didn't say you couldn't/shouldn't talk to him - I suggested to you that
if you wish to continue the dialog with him that you take it to the
appropriate newsgroup that he setup for his plan, out of respect to the
rest of this group.

Do you tell everyone that participates in threads you do not approve of the
same thing?

On Feb 4, 6:42 pm, "LFM" wrote:
"teachrmama" wrote in message

...



"The Queen of Cans and Jars" wrote in message
...
teachrmama wrote:

I'm just not clear on why you think that gives you the right to tell me
I
shouldn't talk to him either.

Talk to him all you want - in the group that he set up for talking about
it. Is it really all that hard to understand?

Actually, yes it is. Why shouldn't we be free to talk here? There are
certainly some extremely obnoxious threads here right now that haven't
been jumped on the way this rather innocuous thread has been.

Caleb posts are considered trolling and off topid to ASD. Therefore if you
want to continue with an off topic dialog with a troll, then do not be
surprised with others chose to classify you in the same category as they do
him, and kill file you, ignore you and lose respect in you. Your
credibility is at risk by continuing your dialog with him in this forum.

LFM - Who exactly died and made you chief of the world? Guilt by
declaration is right up there with a belief in a flat earth.

Your accusations are childish, shrill, and will turn others against
you. They are so 7th and 8th grade: "If you're friends with Lucy then
you can't be friends with me! But I will like you if you don't like
Lucy!"

I'll talk to almost anyone on matters of importance -- and I sure wish
that Herr Bush would do the same thing.

By the way, what is the secret group that you're a member off that
gets to decide who the trolls are and whether I'm off-topic "to ASD"?
What is your secret hand shake? Do you get to wear masks and
headdresses? Reminds me of Senator Joe McCarthy (intoning slowly
because it seems as though he knows what he's tlaking about): "My
friends, I have in my hands a list of the communists who have taken
over the government... Are you now or have you ever been a member of
the communist party?" Ooo! Ooo! I have just the update: "Are you now
talking to -- or have you ever talked to -- Caleb on ASD after we told
you not to do so?"

Inquiring minds want to know -- when did the secret group convene? Do
you have the minutes of the meeting? Who wrote up the bylaws? Who else
is on the docket in the future to be so censured?

What weight-loss topics are fobidden on ASD? etc., etc.

So one can see that trying to stiffle free speech on this group is
somewhat like trying to capture a cloud with a butterfly net. Pretty
darned tough to do. You are responsible for yourself, and perhaps your
children (if you have any), and for your dog. I'd try not to
micromanage the cat, though. Our cat hates it.

Yours,

Caleb

teachrmama wrote:

Gosh, I am so glad nobody gave up on me because of all the times I tried to
do things my way. Or on certain family members who went to 12 step
meetings for "support" but really didn't follow the program. All of us seem
to have stumbled and bumbled our way to truths that we were blind
to--sometimes by choice--in the past. If I were to be judged only by my
past choices, I would never be free to be the person I am becoming today.
2002 was 5 years ago--I'm talking to him today.

You really don't get it, do you? Caleb's not stumbling. He
*deliberately* loses and regains weight. Wake the hell up and pay
attention to what people are telling you.

On Feb 4, 7:24 pm, (The Queen of Cans and Jars)
wrote:
teachrmama wrote:
Gosh, I am so glad nobody gave up on me because of all the times I tried to
do things my way. Or on certain family members who went to 12 step
meetings for "support" but really didn't follow the program. All of us seem
to have stumbled and bumbled our way to truths that we were blind
to--sometimes by choice--in the past. If I were to be judged only by my
past choices, I would never be free to be the person I am becoming today.
2002 was 5 years ago--I'm talking to him today.

You really don't get it, do you? Caleb's not stumbling. He
*deliberately* loses and regains weight. Wake the hell up and pay
attention to what people are telling you.

The Queen --

How nice that you can read my mind! My goodness, perhaps you should
answer all my posts now!

And of course you are utterly incorrect in my "deliberately" regaining
weight. But it's your story and you just stick to it. Even though
others appear to criticize me for regaining unintentionally, you just
pretend that you and the others are in agreement on this issue.
(Nothing to see -- move along, move along. We're all in agreement
here! Ignore that man behind the curtain.Listen to me - the great and
wonderful Wizard of Oz!)

I know of few people -- outside of sumo wrestlers and perhaps some
other athletes -- who intentionally gain a lot of weight. I sure
don't. Seems to me you are reasoning a bit loosely to think that I
would do this. (What else do I do? Gargle with gasoline?)

Teachrmama -- My goodness! the worth of criticism has declined
markedly since I was here last. I recognize the shrillness but the
thought processes are certainly confused.

Caleb