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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
morris wrote:
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/heal...p?newsid=67422 We all srt of knew this, but the summary is pretty good. Key phrase: dieting is actually a consistent predictor of future weight gain." ************************************************** ***************** Scientists Say Dieting Does Not Work 10 Apr 2007 US scientists conducting a comprehensive review of dieting research have concluded that dieting does not work. The study is published in the April edition of American Psychologist, the journal of the American Psychological Association. Researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), reviewed 31 long-term studies lasting between 2 to 5 years. UCLA associate professor of psychology and lead author of the study, Traci Mann said: "You can initially lose 5 to 10 percent of your weight on any number of diets, but then the weight comes back." "We found that the majority of people regained all the weight, plus more," she added. The researchers found a very small minority of study participants managed to sustain weight loss, while the majority put all the weight back on, and more in the longer term. "Diets do not lead to sustained weight loss or health benefits for the majority of people," said Dr Mann. Dr Mann and colleagues sought to determine the long term effects of dieting and address the question "Would they have been better off to not go on a diet at all?". So they analyzed every study they could find that followed people on diets for 2 to 5 years. Studies that take less than 2 years are "too short to show whether dieters have regained the weight they lost," they said. They discovered that it would have been better for most of them if they had not gone on a diet at all. "Their weight would be pretty much the same, and their bodies would not suffer the wear and tear from losing weight and gaining it all back," explained Dr Mann. Their findings show that: -- People on diets typically lose 5 to 10 per cent of their weight in the first 6 months. -- But 33 to 66 per cent regain more than what they lose within 4 to 5 years. Dr Mann and colleagues suspect the real situation is actually even worse; the figures do not really reflect reality, making diet studies look better than they are. They say there are a number of reasons for this: -- Many participants phone or mail their results in themselves, without an impartial assessor. -- A lot of studies have a below 50 per cent follow up rate; and the people who put on a lot of weight are less likely to stay in touch. UCLA graduate student of psychology and co-author of the study, Janet Tomiyama said that "Several studies indicate that dieting is actually a consistent predictor of future weight gain." One study in particular that they looked at found that men and women who took part in a weight reduction programme gained significantly more weight than those who did not over the same period of time. Tomiyama mentioned another study, this time looking at links between lifestyle and weight in 19,000 healthy older men over four years. This study found that, "One of the best predictors of weight gain over the four years was having lost weight on a diet at some point during the years before the study started," she said. Also, in many studies with control groups, the people in the control group very often were better off than the participants who dieted. Dr Mann suggests that eating in moderation and exercise do make a difference. Although they were not looking at exercise in particular, Dr Mann said that: "Exercise may well be the key factor leading to sustained weight loss. Studies consistently find that people who reported the most exercise also had the most weight loss." One study following obese patients discovered that: -- Among those followed for under 2 years, 23 per cent of patients had regained their weight loss. -- Among those followed for more than 2 years, 83 per cent had regained their weight loss. Another study found that 50 per cent of dieters weighed 11 pounds (5 kilos) more than their starting weight 5 years after their diet. Among the health hazards of repeated weight loss and regain are cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes and altered immune function, said Dr Mann and colleagues. They said more research is needed on the effects of weight loss and regain on health, and say scientists do not fully understand the underlying factors involved in this complex relationship. Dr Mann quoted her mother, who herself has tried to diet many times, without success. Dr Mann's mother said her daughter's findings were "obvious". Although this study reviewed 31 long term dieting projects, they did not look into specific diets. The researchers are of the opinion that weight loss programmes are not good value for money in the treatment of obesity. "The benefits of dieting are too small and the potential harm is too large for dieting to be recommended as a safe, effective treatment for obesity," said Dr Mann. Between 1980 and 2000, the proportion of obese Americans has doubled, from 15 to 31 per cent of the population. Thankfully, the 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet: http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp Suggested reading: http://abchung.livejournal.com/986.h...d=16090#t16090 May GOD bless you. Prayerfully in Jesus' ever-lasting love, Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD http://EmoryCardiology.com May HIS immortal brethren pray for our dying mortal friends and neighbors: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts In memory of our dearly departed Bob(this one) Pastorio: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts/Bob As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies (Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17). http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love The Official SMC FAQ List: http://HeartMDPhD.com/TheTruth/FAQ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
On Apr 12, 9:19 am, "Humpty Dumpty" sat on a
wall and wrote: morris wrote: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/heal...p?newsid=67422 We all srt of knew this, but the summary is pretty good. Key phrase: dieting is actually a consistent predictor of future weight gain." ************************************************** ***************** Scientists Say Dieting Does Not Work 10 Apr 2007 snip Humpty Dumpty... Thankfully, the 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet: ....had a great fall: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diet July 31st will be a significant day for you, Earthquack. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
"Andrew B. muChung, MDemon/ Between 1980 and 2000, the proportion of obese Americans has doubled, from 15 to 31 per cent of the population. Advertising works; making food tasty by using lots of fat and sugar also works. Thankfully, the 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet: Yet more xian "truth" from the muChung demon. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
Oh No, Atkins gets his teeth kicked in again. The low-carbers too,
another way to play around with the overconsumption game, now we will need a new alt.support. diet group, let's call it alt.support.diet.thetruthhurtsrealbadwhatgameislef ttoplaynow soIcanstilltrytoloseweightandeatwhateverIwant On 12 Apr 2007 01:19:30 -0700, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote: morris wrote: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/heal...p?newsid=67422 We all srt of knew this, but the summary is pretty good. Key phrase: dieting is actually a consistent predictor of future weight gain." ************************************************** ***************** Scientists Say Dieting Does Not Work 10 Apr 2007 US scientists conducting a comprehensive review of dieting research have concluded that dieting does not work. The study is published in the April edition of American Psychologist, the journal of the American Psychological Association. Researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), reviewed 31 long-term studies lasting between 2 to 5 years. UCLA associate professor of psychology and lead author of the study, Traci Mann said: "You can initially lose 5 to 10 percent of your weight on any number of diets, but then the weight comes back." "We found that the majority of people regained all the weight, plus more," she added. The researchers found a very small minority of study participants managed to sustain weight loss, while the majority put all the weight back on, and more in the longer term. "Diets do not lead to sustained weight loss or health benefits for the majority of people," said Dr Mann. Dr Mann and colleagues sought to determine the long term effects of dieting and address the question "Would they have been better off to not go on a diet at all?". So they analyzed every study they could find that followed people on diets for 2 to 5 years. Studies that take less than 2 years are "too short to show whether dieters have regained the weight they lost," they said. They discovered that it would have been better for most of them if they had not gone on a diet at all. "Their weight would be pretty much the same, and their bodies would not suffer the wear and tear from losing weight and gaining it all back," explained Dr Mann. Their findings show that: -- People on diets typically lose 5 to 10 per cent of their weight in the first 6 months. -- But 33 to 66 per cent regain more than what they lose within 4 to 5 years. Dr Mann and colleagues suspect the real situation is actually even worse; the figures do not really reflect reality, making diet studies look better than they are. They say there are a number of reasons for this: -- Many participants phone or mail their results in themselves, without an impartial assessor. -- A lot of studies have a below 50 per cent follow up rate; and the people who put on a lot of weight are less likely to stay in touch. UCLA graduate student of psychology and co-author of the study, Janet Tomiyama said that "Several studies indicate that dieting is actually a consistent predictor of future weight gain." One study in particular that they looked at found that men and women who took part in a weight reduction programme gained significantly more weight than those who did not over the same period of time. Tomiyama mentioned another study, this time looking at links between lifestyle and weight in 19,000 healthy older men over four years. This study found that, "One of the best predictors of weight gain over the four years was having lost weight on a diet at some point during the years before the study started," she said. Also, in many studies with control groups, the people in the control group very often were better off than the participants who dieted. Dr Mann suggests that eating in moderation and exercise do make a difference. Although they were not looking at exercise in particular, Dr Mann said that: "Exercise may well be the key factor leading to sustained weight loss. Studies consistently find that people who reported the most exercise also had the most weight loss." One study following obese patients discovered that: -- Among those followed for under 2 years, 23 per cent of patients had regained their weight loss. -- Among those followed for more than 2 years, 83 per cent had regained their weight loss. Another study found that 50 per cent of dieters weighed 11 pounds (5 kilos) more than their starting weight 5 years after their diet. Among the health hazards of repeated weight loss and regain are cardiovascular disease, stroke, diabetes and altered immune function, said Dr Mann and colleagues. They said more research is needed on the effects of weight loss and regain on health, and say scientists do not fully understand the underlying factors involved in this complex relationship. Dr Mann quoted her mother, who herself has tried to diet many times, without success. Dr Mann's mother said her daughter's findings were "obvious". Although this study reviewed 31 long term dieting projects, they did not look into specific diets. The researchers are of the opinion that weight loss programmes are not good value for money in the treatment of obesity. "The benefits of dieting are too small and the potential harm is too large for dieting to be recommended as a safe, effective treatment for obesity," said Dr Mann. Between 1980 and 2000, the proportion of obese Americans has doubled, from 15 to 31 per cent of the population. Thankfully, the 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet: http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit/overweight.asp Suggested reading: http://abchung.livejournal.com/986.h...d=16090#t16090 May GOD bless you. Prayerfully in Jesus' ever-lasting love, Andrew |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
brother Mu wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...58ad68dce88a8? Oh No, Atkins gets his teeth kicked in again. The low-carbers too, another way to play around with the overconsumption game, now we will need a new alt.support. diet group, let's call it alt.support.diet.thetruthhurtsrealbadwhatgameislef ttoplaynow soIcanstilltrytoloseweightandeatwhateverIwant Support groups would become obsolete if folks would come to realize their being overweight happens because of the three lies they have in their hearts about hunger: (1) Hunger is like a red warning indicator light. (2) The growling sounds of the stomach during hunger is like a warning buzzer. (3) Hunger means it is time to eat because energy levels are low. Just as a person with a buzzing red low fuel warning light going off in his/her car is immediately compelled to focus on refueling until this light goes out, a person who believes in his/her heart that hunger is like such a light in his/her car will be irresistibly compelled to immediately focus on eating until s/he stops being hungry and will imagine physical weakness/fatigue while hungry. On the other hand, here is the truth about hunger: (1) Hunger is a reassuring green light. (2) The growling sounds of the stomach during hunger is a reassuring sound like the sounds of a throaty large displacement engine. (3) Hunger means "all systems go" and "two thumbs up." Just as a shuttle astronaut is emboldened to ignite rocket engines when reassured by green "all systems go" lights, a person who knows in his heart that hunger means the same thing feels both bolder and stronger when hungry. Bolder and stronger people do not need support groups. May GOD continue to bless you making you hungrier than you have ever been in you life. Prayerfully in Jesus' ever-lasting love, Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD http://EmoryCardiology.com May HIS immortal brethren pray for our dying mortal friends and neighbors: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts In memory of our dearly departed Bob(this one) Pastorio: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts/Bob As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies (Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17). http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love The Official SMC FAQ List: http://HeartMDPhD.com/TheTruth/FAQ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
On 12 Apr 2007 16:58:46 -0700, Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
brother Mu wrote: Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...58ad68dce88a8? Oh No, Atkins gets his teeth kicked in again. The low-carbers too, another way to play around with the overconsumption game, now we will need a new alt.support. diet group, let's call it alt.support.diet.thetruthhurtsrealbadwhatgameislef ttoplaynow soIcanstilltrytoloseweightandeatwhateverIwant Support groups would become obsolete if folks would come to realize their being overweight happens because of the three lies they have in their hearts about hunger: (1) Hunger is like a red warning indicator light. (2) The growling sounds of the stomach during hunger is like a warning buzzer. (3) Hunger means it is time to eat because energy levels are low. Just as a person with a buzzing red low fuel warning light going off in his/her car is immediately compelled to focus on refueling until this light goes out, a person who believes in his/her heart that hunger is like such a light in his/her car will be irresistibly compelled to immediately focus on eating until s/he stops being hungry and will imagine physical weakness/fatigue while hungry. On the other hand, here is the truth about hunger: (1) Hunger is a reassuring green light. (2) The growling sounds of the stomach during hunger is a reassuring sound like the sounds of a throaty large displacement engine. (3) Hunger means "all systems go" and "two thumbs up." Just as a shuttle astronaut is emboldened to ignite rocket engines when reassured by green "all systems go" lights, a person who knows in his heart that hunger means the same thing feels both bolder and stronger when hungry. Bolder and stronger people do not need support groups. May GOD continue to bless you making you hungrier than you have ever been in you life. Prayerfully in Jesus' ever-lasting love, Andrew That's good stuff there, Chung. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
brother Mu wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: brother Mu wrote: Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...58ad68dce88a8? Oh No, Atkins gets his teeth kicked in again. The low-carbers too, another way to play around with the overconsumption game, now we will need a new alt.support. diet group, let's call it alt.support.diet.thetruthhurtsrealbadwhatgameislef ttoplaynow soIcanstilltrytoloseweightandeatwhateverIwant Support groups would become obsolete if folks would come to realize their being overweight happens because of the three lies they have in their hearts about hunger: (1) Hunger is like a red warning indicator light. (2) The growling sounds of the stomach during hunger is like a warning buzzer. (3) Hunger means it is time to eat because energy levels are low. Just as a person with a buzzing red low fuel warning light going off in his/her car is immediately compelled to focus on refueling until this light goes out, a person who believes in his/her heart that hunger is like such a light in his/her car will be irresistibly compelled to immediately focus on eating until s/he stops being hungry and will imagine physical weakness/fatigue while hungry. On the other hand, here is the truth about hunger: (1) Hunger is a reassuring green light. (2) The growling sounds of the stomach during hunger is a reassuring sound like the sounds of a throaty large displacement engine. (3) Hunger means "all systems go" and "two thumbs up." Just as a shuttle astronaut is emboldened to ignite rocket engines when reassured by green "all systems go" lights, a person who knows in his heart that hunger means the same thing feels both bolder and stronger when hungry. Bolder and stronger people do not need support groups. May GOD continue to bless you making you hungrier than you have ever been in you life. Prayerfully in Jesus' ever-lasting love, Andrew That's good stuff there, Chung. All praise and glory redirected to GOD so that we will both be blessed thereby making us even hungrier. It remains my choice to continue to receive the guidance of the Holy Spirit in everything I say, do, and write. May HE continue to heal our hearts with HIS living water so that we can love our neighbors a little more and LORD Jesus Christ infinitely more, dear brother Mu whom I love unconditionally. Prayerfully in Jesus' ever-lasting love, Andrew -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD http://EmoryCardiology.com May HIS immortal brethren pray for our dying mortal friends and neighbors: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts In memory of our dearly departed Bob(this one) Pastorio: http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts/Bob As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies (Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17). http://HeartMDPhD.com/Love The Official SMC FAQ List: http://HeartMDPhD.com/TheTruth/FAQ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
V: Sure one can stay on diet and gain weight -- if the diet offers too many calories for a given caloric budget. That is why I am in tune with what I need to be at certain weight. It is no different from balancing a money budget. $1800 a month to spend...1800 calories a day to spend. Now the only choice is how do I spend? I can spend my $1800 each month on drugs, gambling and hookers and be kicked out of my apartment and end up dying in the street of sickness and disease. Or I can spend it on rent, healthy food, car and gas money, a massage and a few lotto tickets. It is up to me how I wish to break it down - but all our choices have consequences. Same with food. I can eat 1800 calories of 100% junk each day, get very little 'real food,' get nil nutrition and just feed my sensation addiction and as a result I will develop poor health and sickness. Or I can 'eat balanced' for the most part but still have a little fun with my eating. And if I can't have 'any fun' with my eating as some 'celibate eaters' must do, then it is just good old basic eating for me and I must find my fun in being normal sized and healthy. But it is all a choice. If one desires some fun with food, life will not be 100% perfect as I wrote in my sex post, but it is our choice with what we like and what serves us best. My goal is try to eat as normal as I can, but I also realize I can't ever eat as normal person would. so I try to balance these two areas. In any case, we can all be grateful when we feel resentful for our 'diets' as deer and cow eat only grass and they don't complain...so we can glad we are not a herbivore. .....My discussion of this topic from an earlier post. (...) writes: "I would like to know the formula for finding the calories per day that I would need to lose weight." V writes: For those that do not know how calories work, when you eat 3500 unburned or unneeded calories, whether in a day or over a week, it puts on a pound of fat. (For reference: 3200 calories is the same as 4 sticks or one pound of butter.) We all burn up so much calories in a day and my balance point at 53 years of age for my height and metabolism and lifestyle is about 1800 to 1900 calories a day. It took some time to figure this number out, but thorough trial and error I now have it, although metabolisms change with age, as my caloric balance point was about 2500 calories a day when I was 30 years old. If you are in a big city you can get a Resting Metabolism Rate test at a hospital or gym to find out your caloric Resting Metabolism Rate. This Resting Metabolism Rate is very important to know since shows you your budget in a numerical caloric figure and this gives you the clarity to know the dividing line where good eating starts to turn to bad eating or when you eat too many calories for your metabolism and you start putting on the fat. I had to find it out by trial and error, since I live in a rural area with no such test facility. The rough calculation for a MIDDLE AGE person finding out how much to eat is figured like this. You take 10% of the calories you CONSISTENTLY eat each day and this will be your weight if you live sedentary life with little or no exercise. This is a ROUGH calculation only and varies with age, lifestyle and gender, but it works for me where I am at with my life. Each of you must figure it yourself to find your caloric balance point, and as you age this point will vary. But, once you have some clarity in how to figure this number you can design a diet that will take you to your goal weight. One important note when you figure this calculation - you must be steady with the calories you eat when you are figuring it out. You cannot figure this number if you eat 3000 calories one day, then 2200 the next, then 1100 after that and 4200 the day after that and so on. You must be somewhat steady and within a 100 to 150 calories a day or less difference each day to learn from this. The more exacting in consistency each day you can get the better. It doesn't matter if you are consistent with eating 4000 calories a day. Eat it consistently and see where it gets you then go from there. Once you settle on a daily caloric figure you see what that figure gives you in body weight then you have somewhere to start from when deciding how much you need to eat to get where you want to be. If you lose no weight at the figure you consistently eat at you must cut back. If you are gaining weight at this consistent figure then you have the answer right there. Your body will tell you what the figure is if you can listen to it. For Example: If you eat 3000 calories per day and are sedentary you could weigh in the 300 pound range. This calculation would apply to female middle aged couch potatoes that sits at home all day and does not move around much. I find that most people can add 250 to 400 calories to this figure to get a realistic reading. So, a middle age 300 pounder that works or exercises might be eating 3400 calories per day on average. If they can eat more calories than this and not be heavier they are blessed with a high metabolism, if the opposite is true for them then they suffer from slower metabolism. Some overweight people blame their fat on slow metabolisms? None of us have dead metabolism that turn air to fat, if we stop eating we will starve to death. No one gets fat from breathing air and drinking water, even though many overeaters swear to this belief. We each have a caloric balance point whether it is a slow metabolism or not and for success with weigh loss over the long haul we need to have clarity of what that caloric number is. It is no different from the debtor that has a financial balance point with their budget. If they stay within their budget they are debt free, if they go beyond their financial balance point or budget they are in debt. We debt to ourselves with fat when we refuse to live within our caloric budget. With my lifestyle and activity level, I can add 400 calories to the 1500 calories I need to maintain 155 pounds, so this is where I get the 1900 calories a day diet to live on. (Actually I try to eat 1800 per day 6 days a week and can eat up to 2500 calories on Sundays when I eat breakfast with the family.) All these figures don't have to exact. Some days I eat a little more, some days less. But, on average I have to fit into the caloric budget or will put on the fat. In addition, we burn a slightly different amount of calories each day even if we do the same thing and work at the same activities. Many variables with calories such as external and internal temperature, stress and just the fact hat we are not perfect calorie burning machines. This brings up a point about the 2 types of fat people: Those that are fat by desire and those that are fat by design. Those that compulsively overeat are fat by desire (Even though they say they don't desire to be fat, it is from their choosing.) Those that are fat from ignorance of calories are fat from design. Such as traveling salesman or busy people that don't necessarily eat that much or compulsively eat, they just don't eat smart and eat too many calories for their caloric budget from lack of clarity and knowledge. I can tell you flat out, if I was not an overeater but added the "normal" American breakfast of eggs, sausage, flapjacks with sweetened coffee each morning I'd be fat - unless I cut those calories out someplace else during the day. I just don't burn all those calories as I did when I was young to eat 3 big meals, so, I must divide my calories throughout the day somewhat methodically or I will be fat. If we look at all the older people with pot belies, they ere the young trim people of yesterday for the most part, but slowing metabolisms caught up with them. As we age, we lose muscle as well as having our metabolism slow down and this produces the double whammy effect that just snowballs with more and more fat on our bodies. When we add a pound of muscle through exercise such as weight training the pound of muscle burns an extra 50 calories a day while resting, so the more muscle we add the more calories we burn for free. (Some sources claim this figure to be less if your muscles are inactive.) As we lose a pound of muscles as we age the opposite holds true. so, our good diet of today becomes the bad diet of tomorrow. Same calories only now those same calories produces fat on our aging bodies that used to not be fattening when we were younger. I think most of us on these lists are fat from compulsively eating, but either way fat by design or fat by desire, we need to have clarity about calories and nutrition if we want to succeed with weight loss. If a person refuses to count calories from some personal prejudice or just lazy, they must be on a pre planned and pre weighed diet. This way, someone has done the work for you. One thing is for sure, they cannot keep on directing their own eating as their own direction got them into all this mess, so they need some other standard that what they feel like eating that day. With calorie counting, it is no big deal for me since I soon learned the numbers for most foods and it becomes second nature just as I write down my money with my Debtors Anonymous program. I have been recording my finances and spending since 1987 and recording my food and calories since the late 1990's. I can tell you flat out, if I did not have this numerical clarity with my food and finances I'd be sunk with my OA and DA programs. As far as diets? My diet is diverse, nature based, balanced and based on the food pyramid. Remember those of you that hate the word "diet"- the word diet comes from the Greek word meaning "way of living" and we all need a new way of living if our old way is not working for us. When I lost my final 25 pounds of fat it was from cutting back 300 calories a day for many months and that was how I lost all the other previous fat by cutting back few hundred calories until each plateau in weight loss, then I would cut back some more if I wanted to lose more fat. I lost the weight slow and consistently in a sustainable manner eating a balanced diet. All these fad diets that are unsustainable and not healthy can be harmful to you in the long run. You need sustainability, for once you are off the old unbalanced diet the fat comes back with your normal unhealthy eating patterns. The only difference between my losing weight diet and my normal diet as of now is the losing weight diet was on average 15% less calories per day than the one I am on now. With eating 300 calories per day less I was able to lose almost 2-3 pound per month to finally get the rest of my fat off. When I was heavier I had to cut back more, since I was eating over 2800 calories a day, but through trial and error I kept cutting back with the calories when I would plateau and the weight stopped coming off. I cut back from 2800 calories to 2400, then down to 2200 and then to 2000. After each plateau in weight loss I would need to cut back if I wanted to get to my goal (normal) weight. You see, the numbers will tell you themselves what you need to do, If you stop losing weight at 2500 calories a day, then you need to cut back to 2200 calories a day to see that that figure gives you and if that is not enough you cut back some more. We are all different with all different metabolic rates you we each need to figure our own numbers. If you were towing sleds in Antarctica like a couple of women explorers did they figured they need 5000 calories a day to stay balanced. But, once they returned home they had to go back to a normal eating plan as their workload was drastically changed and they did not have to burn calories battling frigid temperatures as well. Once I have my diet worked out I now have a "way of living" that can allows me to be at peace with food. But, I must also practice acceptance as well as work the 12 steps to find consistent peace and work a balanced recovery program. Balanced living is very important to addicts. You can lose weight by eating a 1000 calories a day diet of candy bars. But is it healthy? Is it sustainable? Is it balanced? What about vomiting and laxatives so you can artificially eat more food? Working yourself ragged exercising day and night to the point of ill health to eat more? All must be answered as NO! These are not healthy or sustainable practices for a lifetime of weight control. So make your losing weight diet and lifestyle healthy and sustainable so the switch back to normal eating is not that different from a diet of weight loss eating, with the main difference just being less calories by 15%-20%. Healthy diets, being smart about nutrition and calorie counting only goes so far - don't neglect the spiritual end of recovery. In the 12 step programs we need to work the steps as well and watch our stress. If our lives are in ruin through unbalanced and stressful living, counting calories and study metabolic rates will do nothing for us as we stuff the food to pacify ourselves. Adrenal steroids (cortisol) and adrenaline are secreted when a person is under stress reach the brain and over time can affect the structure of the brain. When stress hormones, intended for a life or death fight or flight situation, remain switched for an extended period, they can slow the growth of nerve fibers in the areas of the brain responsible for emotions and other brain functions. We also produce cortisol from any other stressors the body perceives, whether it is physical stress, such as a sickness, injury, surgery, or temperature extremes as well as psychological stress that we and the world put on us. Each of us has produces a different amount of these chemicals and has a different sensitivity to them and this might be the missing link as to a part of the question as to why some of us are more addictive than others with how we each produce and react to these stress chemicals differently. Besides fat, anger and depression can be helped with exercise. Exercise helps remove these stress chemicals from our bodies as well as produce other chemicals that give us a sense of well being - endorphins. Yes, we have our own drug pusher within each of us. We can learn to reduce the urge to pacify ourselves with food, drugs, alcohol, compulsive spending from stress, but really need to work on restructuring our lives so they are less stressful if we ever want to find peace and serenity. You see, 12 steps or not, we all have to answer to natural law. Within the boundaries of natural law is where stress chemicals come from within us and as addicts I believe we are super sensitized to these chemicals and we seek relief though our various addictions. So, as addicts we should be in tune with using any tools available to us for recovery purposes whether it is the spiritual tools of the 12 steps or the mechanical tools of eating right and exercise. I find that sometime spiritual practitioners neglect the natural laws that govern our bodies and suffer in this area from lack of living a balanced life. Some of us forget we are spiritual beings residing in physical bodies living in physical world and governed my both spiritual and physical or natural laws in addition to man made laws. We need some effort with spiritual work and some effort in physical work for a good balance or as the Buddha recommended - taking the middle path. Joining the simple living movent in 1996 also helped with reducing stress and giving me a new life. Take care, V (Male) Agnostic Freethinker Practical Philosopher AA#2 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
On Apr 12, 4:19 am, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote: Thankfully, the 2PD-OMER Approach is not a diet: 2PD of Mentos (tm) and diet coke. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Scientists Say Dieting does not work
On Apr 12, 7:58 pm, "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote: Support groups would become obsolete if folks would come to realize their being overweight happens because of the three lies they have in their hearts about hunger (snip) 2PD of Drano (tm) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dieting does not work | [email protected] | General Discussion | 4 | February 22nd, 2008 03:07 AM |
Scientists Say Dieting does not work | Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD | General Discussion | 45 | April 18th, 2007 09:36 AM |
Psychologists Say "Dieting Doesn't Work" (For MOST Dieters) | jim buch | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 6 | April 9th, 2007 03:55 AM |
Scientists Learn More About How Roughage Keeps You 'Regular' | Jbuch | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | August 24th, 2006 03:36 PM |
Article, sugar might make you fat, say scientists. | [email protected] | General Discussion | 0 | August 9th, 2006 12:14 AM |