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 » Low Carbohydrate Diets
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

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



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 5th, 2007, 05:17 AM posted to alt.support.diet,sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet.low-carb
Mu
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 538
Default Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

On 2 Feb 2007 09:06:46 -0800, Caleb wrote:

If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about
losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see
them there!


Yours,


Caleb


Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and
how much you regained from day 101 onwards?


janice


So it is him!


Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my
progress.

I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or
complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer
emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary
approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science
about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not
easy.

I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time --
hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to
do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this
approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc.

Couple of points for people to remember:

There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention.

It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up.

Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a
simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99
that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance
beam" on Google.)

Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres
to your dietary goals -- is important.

Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from
Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and
that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up
metabolism) are not supported by current data.

Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just
keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you
might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight
loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in
their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And
certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different
folks.

To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy.
Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a
road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things.

Yours,

Caleb


Caleb, Mu here.

Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically
worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain?

Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO.

Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so
few can or elect to do so. Scratch that.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #2  
Old February 5th, 2007, 07:52 AM posted to alt.support.diet,sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet.low-carb
GaryG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

"Mu" wrote in message
...
On 2 Feb 2007 09:06:46 -0800, Caleb wrote:

If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about
losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see
them there!

Yours,

Caleb

Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and
how much you regained from day 101 onwards?

janice

So it is him!


Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my
progress.

I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or
complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer
emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary
approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science
about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not
easy.

I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time --
hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to
do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this
approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc.

Couple of points for people to remember:

There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention.

It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up.

Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a
simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99
that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance
beam" on Google.)

Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres
to your dietary goals -- is important.

Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from
Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and
that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up
metabolism) are not supported by current data.

Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just
keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you
might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight
loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in
their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And
certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different
folks.

To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy.
Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a
road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things.

Yours,

Caleb


Caleb, Mu here.

Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically
worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain?

Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO.

Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so
few can or elect to do so. Scratch that.


Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the
assistance of exercise.

The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common
characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant
amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer.
According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly
active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk)
through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in
physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort.

The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the
"overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting
fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one
ingests (at least, it does for many of us)..

And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically
active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular fitness
(strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to
exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function, decreased
depression, etc., etc.

GG


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet

News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+

Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption

=----


  #3  
Old February 5th, 2007, 12:00 PM posted to sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.christnet.prayer,alt.support.diabetes
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 73
Default Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
friend Mu wrote:
neighbor Caleb wrote:

If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about
losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see
them there!

Yours,

Caleb

Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and
how much you regained from day 101 onwards?

janice

So it is him!

Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my
progress.

I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or
complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer
emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary
approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science
about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not
easy.

I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time --
hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to
do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this
approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc.

Couple of points for people to remember:

There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention.

It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up.

Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a
simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99
that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance
beam" on Google.)

Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres
to your dietary goals -- is important.

Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from
Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and
that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up
metabolism) are not supported by current data.

Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just
keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you
might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight
loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in
their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And
certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different
folks.

To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy.
Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a
road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things.

Yours,

Caleb


Caleb, Mu here.

Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically
worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain?

Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO.

Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so
few can or elect to do so. Scratch that.


Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the
assistance of exercise.

The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common
characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant
amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer.
According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly
active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk)
through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in
physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort.

The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the
"overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting
fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one
ingests (at least, it does for many of us)..


Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese
typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often
is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is
clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating
less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more
comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own
personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not
because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose
tissue (VAT), which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by
eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming
hungrier that one has ever been in one's life.

And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically
active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular fitness
(strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to
exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function, decreased
depression, etc., etc.


Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being
physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you
remain untruthful.

If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for
you to be judged a liar.

Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit:

http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts

May you wisely choose to surrender to HIM by publicly confessing with
your mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"

http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay

Andrew
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com

  #4  
Old February 5th, 2007, 02:41 PM posted to sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diabetes
GaryG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
ps.com...
convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
friend Mu wrote:
neighbor Caleb wrote:

If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about
losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see
them there!

Yours,

Caleb

Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet,

and
how much you regained from day 101 onwards?

janice

So it is him!

Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

my
progress.

I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or
complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people

suffer
emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible

dietary
approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science
about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not
easy.

I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time --
hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough

to
do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started

this
approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc.

Couple of points for people to remember:

There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention.

It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up.

Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a
simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99
that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance
beam" on Google.)

Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres
to your dietary goals -- is important.

Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from
Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and
that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding

up
metabolism) are not supported by current data.

Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just
keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you
might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their

weight
loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in
their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!"

And
certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different
folks.

To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not

easy.
Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows

a
road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things.

Yours,

Caleb

Caleb, Mu here.

Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically
worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain?

Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO.

Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control,

so
few can or elect to do so. Scratch that.


Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the
assistance of exercise.

The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common
characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant
amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer.
According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly
active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk)
through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day

in
physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort.

The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with

the
"overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting
fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one
ingests (at least, it does for many of us)..


Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese
typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often
is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is
clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating
less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more
comfortably and with less injury.


Indeed, that has been my own
personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not
because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose
tissue (VAT),


Hey, that's pretty cool...I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that
"training strategy". So, you're saying that you're capable of running an
ultramarathon, due only to your lowered body fat levels? Have you ever
actually completed an ultramarathon to confirm your assertion? If so,
please provide us with a link to the results web page g.

which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by
eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming
hungrier that one has ever been in one's life.


Again, this obsession with hunger...the more you speak of your experience
with the 2 Pound Diet (2PD), the more it sounds like an eating disorder.


And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically
active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular

fitness
(strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to
exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function,

decreased
depression, etc., etc.


Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being
physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you
remain untruthful.


You may have made some silly and unproven claims as to your physical
prowess, but the vast majority of your advice to others is to lose weight
only by focusing on becoming hungry...you never mention the health and/or
weight loss benefits of physical activity.

If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for
you to be judged a liar.


If your intent has been to insult me, you have failed yet again.

Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convects

May you wisely choose to surrender to HIM by publicly confessing with
your mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"

http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirot/TheWay

Andrew
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardialogy.com



  #5  
Old February 5th, 2007, 02:57 PM posted to sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diabetes
The Rev Dr Hugh Jarse NLAHN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

On Feb 5, 2:41 pm, "GaryG" wrote:
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in glegroups.com...



convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
friend Mu wrote:
neighbor Caleb wrote:


If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about
losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see
them there!


Yours,


Caleb


Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet,

and
how much you regained from day 101 onwards?


janice


So it is him!


Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

my
progress.


I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or
complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people

suffer
emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible

dietary
approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science
about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not
easy.


I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time --
hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough

to
do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started

this
approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc.


Couple of points for people to remember:


There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention.


It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up.


Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a
simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99
that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance
beam" on Google.)


Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres
to your dietary goals -- is important.


Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from
Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and
that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding

up
metabolism) are not supported by current data.


Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just
keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you
might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their

weight
loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in
their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!"

And
certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different
folks.


To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not

easy.
Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows

a
road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things.


Yours,


Caleb


Caleb, Mu here.


Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically
worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain?


Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO.


Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control,

so
few can or elect to do so. Scratch that.


Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the
assistance of exercise.


The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common
characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant
amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer.
According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly
active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk)
through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day

in
physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort.


The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with

the
"overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting
fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one
ingests (at least, it does for many of us)..


Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese
typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often
is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is
clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating
less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more
comfortably and with less injury.
Indeed, that has been my own
personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not
because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose
tissue (VAT),


Hey, that's pretty cool...I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that
"training strategy". So, you're saying that you're capable of running an
ultramarathon, due only to your lowered body fat levels? Have you ever
actually completed an ultramarathon to confirm your assertion? If so,
please provide us with a link to the results web page g.

which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by
eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming
hungrier that one has ever been in one's life.


Again, this obsession with hunger...the more you speak of your experience
with the 2 Pound Diet (2PD), the more it sounds like an eating disorder.





And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically
active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular

fitness
(strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to
exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function,

decreased
depression, etc., etc.


Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being
physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you
remain untruthful.


You may have made some silly and unproven claims as to your physical
prowess, but the vast majority of your advice to others is to lose weight
only by focusing on becoming hungry...you never mention the health and/or
weight loss benefits of physical activity.

If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for
you to be judged a liar.


If your intent has been to insult me, you have failed yet again.


Earthquack's intended insults are compliments. The ultimate accolade
is "Demon"

  #6  
Old February 5th, 2007, 03:07 PM posted to alt.support.diet.low-carb
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 142
Default Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

On Feb 5, 6:00 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote:
convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
friend Mu wrote:
neighbor Caleb wrote:


If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about
losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see
them there!


Yours,


Caleb


Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet, and
how much you regained from day 101 onwards?


janice


So it is him!


Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie my
progress.


I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or
complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people suffer
emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible dietary
approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science
about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not
easy.


I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time --
hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough to
do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started this
approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc.


Couple of points for people to remember:


There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention.


It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up.


Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a
simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99
that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance
beam" on Google.)


Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres
to your dietary goals -- is important.


Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from
Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and
that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding up
metabolism) are not supported by current data.


Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just
keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you
might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their weight
loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in
their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!" And
certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different
folks.


To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not easy.
Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows a
road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things.


Yours,


Caleb


Caleb, Mu here.


Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically
worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain?


Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO.


Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control, so
few can or elect to do so. Scratch that.


Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the
assistance of exercise.


The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common
characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant
amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer.
According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly
active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk)
through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day in
physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort.


The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with the
"overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting
fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one
ingests (at least, it does for many of us)..


Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese
typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often
is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is
clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating
less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more
comfortably and with less injury. Indeed, that has been my own
personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not
because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose
tissue (VAT), which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by
eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming
hungrier that one has ever been in one's life.

And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being physically
active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular fitness
(strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too tired to
exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function, decreased
depression, etc., etc.


Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being
physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you
remain untruthful.

If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for
you to be judged a liar.

Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit:

http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts

May you wisely choose to surrender to HIM by publicly confessing with
your mouth that "Jesus is LORD:"

http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/TheWay

Andrew
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhDhttp://EmoryCardiology.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Hey chung-nuts, why should we listen to an unemployed board-certified
quack like you?

TC

  #7  
Old February 5th, 2007, 03:15 PM posted to sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diabetes
GaryG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

"The Rev Dr Hugh Jarse NLAHN" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Feb 5, 2:41 pm, "GaryG" wrote:
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in

glegroups.com...



convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
friend Mu wrote:
neighbor Caleb wrote:


If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions

about
losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to

see
them there!


Yours,


Caleb


Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day

diet,
and
how much you regained from day 101 onwards?


janice


So it is him!


Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on

alt.support.diet.low-calorie
my
progress.


I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult

or
complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people

suffer
emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible

dietary
approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket

science
about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is

not
easy.


I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this

time --
hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that

tough
to
do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first

started
this
approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc.,

etc.

Couple of points for people to remember:


There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their

attention.

It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up.


Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I

have a
simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since

'99
that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb"

"balance
beam" on Google.)


Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat

adheres
to your dietary goals -- is important.


Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from
Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea

and
that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle

speeding
up
metabolism) are not supported by current data.


Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and

just
keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you,

you
might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their

weight
loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic

in
their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may

vary!"
And
certainly it is true that there are different strokes for

different
folks.


To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not

easy.
Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually

plows
a
road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential

things.

Yours,


Caleb


Caleb, Mu here.


Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be

practically
worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain?


Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO.


Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption

control,
so
few can or elect to do so. Scratch that.


Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with

the
assistance of exercise.


The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common
characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost

significant
amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or

longer.
According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be

highly
active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825

kcal/wk)
through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per

day
in
physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort.


The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help

with
the
"overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to

getting
fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what

one
ingests (at least, it does for many of us)..


Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese
typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often
is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is
clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating
less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more
comfortably and with less injury.
Indeed, that has been my own
personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not
because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose
tissue (VAT),


Hey, that's pretty cool...I'm sure many athletes would be interested in

that
"training strategy". So, you're saying that you're capable of running

an
ultramarathon, due only to your lowered body fat levels? Have you ever
actually completed an ultramarathon to confirm your assertion? If so,
please provide us with a link to the results web page g.

which can not be completely lost by exercise but only by
eating less down to the optimal amount which does result in becoming
hungrier that one has ever been in one's life.


Again, this obsession with hunger...the more you speak of your

experience
with the 2 Pound Diet (2PD), the more it sounds like an eating disorder.





And, of course, there are many, many other benefits to being

physically
active besides just the calories burned - increased cardiovascular

fitness
(strangely, whacko Chung never mentions this...perhaps he's too

tired to
exercise due to his eating disorder), increased mental function,

decreased
depression, etc., etc.


Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being
physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you
remain untruthful.


You may have made some silly and unproven claims as to your physical
prowess, but the vast majority of your advice to others is to lose

weight
only by focusing on becoming hungry...you never mention the health

and/or
weight loss benefits of physical activity.

If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for
you to be judged a liar.


If your intent has been to insult me, you have failed yet again.


Earthquack's intended insults are compliments. The ultimate accolade
is "Demon"


LOL - I think the order of progression is "Dear Neighbor",
"Liar/Untruthful", "Convicted", "Mark of Satan", and finally "Demon" (though
I may have overlooked some intermediate categories).

GG


  #8  
Old February 5th, 2007, 04:12 PM posted to sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diabetes,alt.christnet.christianlife
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default Luke 6:21

convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
friend Mu wrote:
neighbor Caleb wrote:

If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about
losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see
them there!

Yours,

Caleb

Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet,

and
how much you regained from day 101 onwards?

janice

So it is him!

Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

my
progress.

I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or
complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people

suffer
emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible

dietary
approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science
about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not
easy.

I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time --
hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough

to
do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started

this
approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc.

Couple of points for people to remember:

There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention.

It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up.

Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a
simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99
that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance
beam" on Google.)

Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres
to your dietary goals -- is important.

Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from
Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and
that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding

up
metabolism) are not supported by current data.

Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just
keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you
might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their

weight
loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in
their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!"

And
certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different
folks.

To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not

easy.
Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows

a
road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things.

Yours,

Caleb

Caleb, Mu here.

Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically
worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain?

Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO.

Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control,

so
few can or elect to do so. Scratch that.

Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the
assistance of exercise.

The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common
characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant
amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer.
According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly
active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk)
through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day

in
physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort.

The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with

the
"overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting
fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one
ingests (at least, it does for many of us)..


Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese
typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often
is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is
clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating
less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more
comfortably and with less injury.


Indeed, that has been my own
personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not
because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose
tissue (VAT),


Hey, that's pretty cool...


The truth is cool.

I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that
"training strategy".


The world class athletes already know that the hungrier they are the
more capable they physically become.

When an athlete loses in a competition where s/he was a physical match
with his/her competitior, s/he knows that s/he was not hungry enough.

In countries where the brainwashing that "hunger is bad" does not
occur (ie Kenya), the runners are leaner, trimmer, and much faster
because they know in their hearts that "hunger is good."

Truth is absolute and invincible.

"I am the way, the truth, and the life..." -- LORD Jesus Christ

Amen ! Laus Deo ! ! ! Marana tha ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Andrew
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
http://EmoryCardiology.com

  #9  
Old February 5th, 2007, 05:02 PM posted to sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diabetes,alt.christnet.christianlife
Pastor Kutchie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 34
Default F*&k! You're stupid,Earthquack!

On Feb 5, 4:12 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote:
convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:
friend Mu wrote:
neighbor Caleb wrote:


If anyone else wants to share their successes or questions about
losing weight through low-calorie methods, I'd be delighted to see
them there!


Yours,


Caleb


Why don't you tell us how much you lost on the last 100 day diet,

and
how much you regained from day 101 onwards?


janice


So it is him!


Yup! It sure is me. I'll be posting on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

my
progress.


I guess one of my points is that it simply is not that difficult or
complicated to take the weight off. There is no need for people

suffer
emotional turmoil, self-doubt, etc. If they follow a sensible

dietary
approach over time, they WILL lose weight. Nothing rocket science
about it. However, following a sensible approach over time is not
easy.


I've done it before (quite simply) and I'll do it again this time --
hope it's the last time -- but regardless, it's just not that tough

to
do. I sure am a hell of a lot healthier than when I first started

this
approach in '99. I am alive, am far more physically fit, etc., etc.


Couple of points for people to remember:


There's a lot of bad advice out there competing for their attention.


It all does break down to calories in versus calories used up.


Weighing regularly is probably essential for most people. (I have a
simple balance beam system that I have found very helpful since '99
that you can read about if you search "indicator" "caleb" "balance
beam" on Google.)


Recording calories -- or at least insuring that what you eat adheres
to your dietary goals -- is important.


Regular exercise is important, although the recent research from
Pennington (Ravussin et al) shows that exercise is not a panacea and
that some of the vaunted effects of exercise (e.g., muscle speeding

up
metabolism) are not supported by current data.


Most important is just to keep at it -- put your nose down and just
keep plugging along. For every one who unreasonably assails you, you
might imagine their face at a trough, wonder exactly what their

weight
loss history is (is there a weight-loss wing of the Mayo Clinic in
their name?), etc. As Rosie used to say, "Your mileage may vary!"

And
certainly it is true that there are different strokes for different
folks.


To repeat, weight-loss is not rocket science but it still is not

easy.
Too bad we can't be like a horse in blinders that continually plows

a
road in a field, undistracted by harmful or inconsequential things.


Yours,


Caleb


Caleb, Mu here.


Counting calories is such an inexact computation as to be practically
worthless. Would you care for Mu to explain?


Cals in, cals out, thermodynamics OK, real usefulness = ZERO.


Reg exercise is of no real ongoing value for overconsumption control,

so
few can or elect to do so. Scratch that.


Rubbish...plenty of successful weight loss has been achieved with the
assistance of exercise.


The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common
characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant
amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer.
According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly
active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk)
through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day

in
physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort.


The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with

the
"overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting
fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one
ingests (at least, it does for many of us)..


Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese
typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often
is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is
clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating
less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more
comfortably and with less injury.


Indeed, that has been my own
personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not
because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose
tissue (VAT),


Hey, that's pretty cool...


The truth is cool.

I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that
"training strategy".


The world class athletes already know that the hungrier they are the
more capable they physically become.

When an athlete loses in a competition where s/he was a physical match
with his/her competitior, s/he knows that s/he was not hungry enough.

In countries where the brainwashing that "hunger is bad" does not
occur (ie Kenya), the runners are leaner, trimmer, and much faster
because they know in their hearts that "hunger is good."


Remember, back in 1972, when all those Biafran athletes swept the
board. Boy! Were they hungry!

  #10  
Old February 5th, 2007, 10:42 PM posted to sci.med.cardiology,alt.support.diet,alt.support.diet.low-carb,alt.support.diabetes
Don Kirkman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie

It seems to me I heard somewhere that GaryG wrote in article
:

"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
ups.com...
convicted neighbor GaryG wrote:


The National Weight Control Registry has been studying the common
characteristcs and strategies employed by folks who've lost significant
amounts of weight (avg. 30 kg) and kept it off for five years or longer.
According to their research, their subjects "also appear to be highly
active: they reported expending approximately 11830 kJ/wk (2825 kcal/wk)
through physical activity". That's an average of 400 calories per day

in
physical activity...or, about an hour of fairly vigorous effort.


The act of commiting oneself to an exercise program can also help with

the
"overconsumption control" you mention. When one is committed to getting
fit, it naturally follows that one will pay more attention to what one
ingests (at least, it does for many of us)..


Those who choose to unwisely engage in strenuous exercise while obese
typically end up being worse off when they sustain injury which often
is attributed to osteoarthritis rather than to the exercise. What is
clinically observed is that once people are lean and trim from eating
less, they find themselves more capable of exercising strenuously more
comfortably and with less injury.


Indeed, that has been my own
personal experience now physically able to run ultramarathons not
because of training but because of losing all my visceral adipose
tissue (VAT),


That's especially good because in 2004, at the age of 39, Dr. Chung ran
a half-marathon (13.1 miles) in 3 hours 27 minutes; he improved to 2:49
in 2005 and I found no record for him in the same race in 2006 (for
comparison, I'm a typical mid-pack runner, but in 1989 at the age of 60
I ran a 1:45 half-marathon and a 1:50 the year before that).
http://www.silvercomet10k.com/

Hey, that's pretty cool...I'm sure many athletes would be interested in that
"training strategy". So, you're saying that you're capable of running an
ultramarathon, due only to your lowered body fat levels? Have you ever
actually completed an ultramarathon to confirm your assertion? If so,
please provide us with a link to the results web page g.


To have run an ultra (whether 50 miles or 100, typical distances for
ultras), he would have to have been absent from the newsgroups for
twenty-four hours or more. Did that ever happen?

A Google search for Andrew Chung in ultramarathon results came up empty.
Since ultra running is such a small, tight-knit community I think the
sudden appearance of an unknown would have been remarked on by somebody
along the way.

[. . .]

Actually, my discussions with Don Kirkman about personally being
physically active remain in the Google archives to prove that you
remain untruthful.


Actually archiving your opinions adds nothing to their veracity. Garbage
into Google, garbage out. The same goes for your constant
self-referential "proofs" on your Web pages.

You may have made some silly and unproven claims as to your physical
prowess, but the vast majority of your advice to others is to lose weight
only by focusing on becoming hungry...you never mention the health and/or
weight loss benefits of physical activity.


If your intent has been to deceive, you have now provided evidence for
you to be judged a liar.


If your intent has been to insult me, you have failed yet again.


Clearly you remain convicted by the Holy Spirit:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convects


Oh, oh, no! the macro's broken (or maybe it's just a climate change)
--
Don Kirkman
 




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
Invitation to discuss low-calorie approaches to weight-loss on alt.support.diet.low-calorie Caleb General Discussion 172 February 12th, 2007 02:16 AM
My favorite calorie counter / weight loss program sandra General Discussion 2 May 2nd, 2006 11:36 PM
My favortie calorie counter / weight loss program sandra Weightwatchers 0 May 2nd, 2006 07:50 PM
Zero Calorie Diet Sodas: Good Or Bad For Weight Loss? ianmason General Discussion 1 June 15th, 2005 08:50 AM
Weight loss is more than calorie-counting reenum General Discussion 2 January 29th, 2005 07:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2017 WeightLossBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.