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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
I've got that same part telling me that I'm being ridiculous in even trying
this again. I want that part to shut up. So I'm going to try it one step at a time. It joined in chorus with the "you're never going to find a decent job so don't bother trying" gremlin. Usually when I think I'm being ridiculous, I want to stuff my face with empty calories. Tonight's response to stuffing my face was to measure out some chips and salsa and to try that first. That wasn't enough so I grabbed a pinch of marinated ginger. That wasn't doing much either so I got a a huge bowl of spring mix, 3oz tomatoes, 1 oz peppers, cukes, and 2 tbsp of salad dressing. I'm addressing the "want sweet" desire with some bubble gum. Still better that what is lurking in the freezer in the dark corners. I don't have to stop all the bad habits, just tweek 'em enough to keep going to the next day and not turn them into bad decisions. Julie "Prairie Roots" wrote in message ... When I started, I set my goal weight at 157, not as low as the high end of WW range, but certainly ambitious for me. As I settled into the program and realized that thin and healthy is how I want to be and this way of eating is how I want to live, I lowered my goal weight to the high end of WW goal. Now that I'm within 15 lbs of reaching it, I'm beginning to think I can get down to 130. I won't decide until I've hit my WW goal. It's been since the mid 1970s since I weighed under 160. I weighed 140 all through high school, 20 lbs overweight according to my doctor at the time. In other words, I've never weighed 130 as an adult. Some part of thinks it might be possible. Even as another part of me thinks I'm being ridiculous. Of course, that same part of me doesn't believe I've come as far as I have. Prairie Roots 232/158.8/WW goal 145 joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003 On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 08:49:32 -0600, "skiur" wrote: Hi everyone, This is a bit of a silly question. When you set your target, do you go by your own goal or is the chart weight assigned to you? I'm not really confident that I can get to the chart assigned weight for my height. I've never been that weight. I can't imagine it or picture myself that way. Julie |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
The ranges can be found at:
http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx Hope this helps. Connie Fred wrote: Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or misread the chart. Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a 2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal. But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step. On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote: Fred wrote in news WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45?? or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women. It is based on height. My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is 177#. -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
Sounds like a great response to your gremlins!!
Connie skiur wrote: I've got that same part telling me that I'm being ridiculous in even trying this again. I want that part to shut up. So I'm going to try it one step at a time. It joined in chorus with the "you're never going to find a decent job so don't bother trying" gremlin. Usually when I think I'm being ridiculous, I want to stuff my face with empty calories. Tonight's response to stuffing my face was to measure out some chips and salsa and to try that first. That wasn't enough so I grabbed a pinch of marinated ginger. That wasn't doing much either so I got a a huge bowl of spring mix, 3oz tomatoes, 1 oz peppers, cukes, and 2 tbsp of salad dressing. I'm addressing the "want sweet" desire with some bubble gum. Still better that what is lurking in the freezer in the dark corners. I don't have to stop all the bad habits, just tweek 'em enough to keep going to the next day and not turn them into bad decisions. Julie "Prairie Roots" wrote in message ... When I started, I set my goal weight at 157, not as low as the high end of WW range, but certainly ambitious for me. As I settled into the program and realized that thin and healthy is how I want to be and this way of eating is how I want to live, I lowered my goal weight to the high end of WW goal. Now that I'm within 15 lbs of reaching it, I'm beginning to think I can get down to 130. I won't decide until I've hit my WW goal. It's been since the mid 1970s since I weighed under 160. I weighed 140 all through high school, 20 lbs overweight according to my doctor at the time. In other words, I've never weighed 130 as an adult. Some part of thinks it might be possible. Even as another part of me thinks I'm being ridiculous. Of course, that same part of me doesn't believe I've come as far as I have. Prairie Roots 232/158.8/WW goal 145 joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003 On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 08:49:32 -0600, "skiur" wrote: Hi everyone, This is a bit of a silly question. When you set your target, do you go by your own goal or is the chart weight assigned to you? I'm not really confident that I can get to the chart assigned weight for my height. I've never been that weight. I can't imagine it or picture myself that way. Julie -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye caramba "Connie" wrote in message ... The ranges can be found at: http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx Hope this helps. Connie Fred wrote: Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or misread the chart. Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a 2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal. But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step. On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote: Fred wrote in news WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45?? or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women. It is based on height. My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is 177#. -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
So sorry!! Pretend you didn't see it??
Connie buck naked wrote: Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye caramba "Connie" wrote in message ... The ranges can be found at: http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx Hope this helps. Connie Fred wrote: Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or misread the chart. Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a 2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal. But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step. On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote: Fred wrote in news WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45?? or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women. It is based on height. My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is 177#. -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
I remember when I first looked at the chart. I kind of shrugged my
shoulders and figured if I lost about 20 pounds I would be very happy. I concentrated most thought on the 10% goal. I never expected to reach the WW goal to be honest. But it happened over the weeks and months. On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 23:35:33 -0600, "buck naked" wrote: Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye caramba "Connie" wrote in message ... The ranges can be found at: http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx Hope this helps. Connie Fred wrote: Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or misread the chart. Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a 2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal. But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step. On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote: Fred wrote in news WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45?? or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women. It is based on height. My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is 177#. -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
Just remember that the chart does not take into consideration age or sex.
Your doctor may recommend a different weight for you that is higher than the WW one. At this point I would just aim for around 140-150 as your preliminary goal. Something your head can deal with so that the journey is not overwhelming. My current "goal" is 150 when I know that it should be around 135. I'd be happy at 150 at this point after being almost 250 last year. Once you get closer to that preliminary goal reevaluate it with your doctor to see just how far you can go. Take one step at a time. One goal at a time. "buck naked" wrote in message ... Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye caramba "Connie" wrote in message ... The ranges can be found at: http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx Hope this helps. Connie Fred wrote: Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or misread the chart. Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a 2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal. But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step. On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote: Fred wrote in news WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45?? or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women. It is based on height. My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is 177#. -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
The chart does take age into acount. I believe it is set up into 4 different
columns, one for all adults, next for ages up to 25, next for 25-45, next for 45+. Sex is not taken into account as I believe new studies have said that it doesn't matter what sex you are, weight is an age and height related issue. Not sure I believe that, but it seems to be what is being sold to us now. G What isn't taken into account is body build ... such as those wide shoulders, bigger boned frames, etc, which I think is very important. I would think that someone my height who is petite (such as my daughter) will look and feel much worse carrying the same amount of weight around that I do. But yes, definitely check in with the physician. You are setting your goal exactly as I did. I don't think I set my ww goal until well into the game. When I reached it I did talk to my physician and was told an absolute minimum he would like to see me at. I think he was so thrilled to see me where I was that he just threw a number out of the top of his head ... but at least it was a number and I knew by that point that it was doable. It will be interesting to see what he has to say when I have my checkup this week. G Joyce On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:15:05 GMT, "Laura" wrote: Just remember that the chart does not take into consideration age or sex. Your doctor may recommend a different weight for you that is higher than the WW one. At this point I would just aim for around 140-150 as your preliminary goal. Something your head can deal with so that the journey is not overwhelming. My current "goal" is 150 when I know that it should be around 135. I'd be happy at 150 at this point after being almost 250 last year. Once you get closer to that preliminary goal reevaluate it with your doctor to see just how far you can go. Take one step at a time. One goal at a time. "buck naked" wrote in message ... Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye caramba "Connie" wrote in message ... The ranges can be found at: http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx Hope this helps. Connie Fred wrote: Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or misread the chart. Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a 2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal. But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step. On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote: Fred wrote in news WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45?? or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women. It is based on height. My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is 177#. -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
were you confronted with a difference in your body build after you had lost
some weight. I have always considered myself med./heavier boned now that I have lost some weight I see I might not be Lee Joyce wrote in message ... The chart does take age into acount. I believe it is set up into 4 different columns, one for all adults, next for ages up to 25, next for 25-45, next for 45+. Sex is not taken into account as I believe new studies have said that it doesn't matter what sex you are, weight is an age and height related issue. Not sure I believe that, but it seems to be what is being sold to us now. G What isn't taken into account is body build ... such as those wide shoulders, bigger boned frames, etc, which I think is very important. I would think that someone my height who is petite (such as my daughter) will look and feel much worse carrying the same amount of weight around that I do. But yes, definitely check in with the physician. You are setting your goal exactly as I did. I don't think I set my ww goal until well into the game. When I reached it I did talk to my physician and was told an absolute minimum he would like to see me at. I think he was so thrilled to see me where I was that he just threw a number out of the top of his head ... but at least it was a number and I knew by that point that it was doable. It will be interesting to see what he has to say when I have my checkup this week. G Joyce On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:15:05 GMT, "Laura" wrote: Just remember that the chart does not take into consideration age or sex. Your doctor may recommend a different weight for you that is higher than the WW one. At this point I would just aim for around 140-150 as your preliminary goal. Something your head can deal with so that the journey is not overwhelming. My current "goal" is 150 when I know that it should be around 135. I'd be happy at 150 at this point after being almost 250 last year. Once you get closer to that preliminary goal reevaluate it with your doctor to see just how far you can go. Take one step at a time. One goal at a time. "buck naked" wrote in message ... Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye caramba "Connie" wrote in message ... The ranges can be found at: http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx Hope this helps. Connie Fred wrote: Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or misread the chart. Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a 2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal. But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step. On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote: Fred wrote in news WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45?? or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women. It is based on height. My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is 177#. -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
One more question-goal weight
Ha, this was one for me too. My wrist watch kept having to be made smaller?
I recalled that wrist measurement was supposed to indicate frame size? Well. Mine indicates Small. On the other hand I have very Long bones, I think all that average stuff, applies to average people, not Us. "Miss Violette" wrote in message ... were you confronted with a difference in your body build after you had lost some weight. I have always considered myself med./heavier boned now that I have lost some weight I see I might not be Lee Joyce wrote in message ... The chart does take age into acount. I believe it is set up into 4 different columns, one for all adults, next for ages up to 25, next for 25-45, next for 45+. Sex is not taken into account as I believe new studies have said that it doesn't matter what sex you are, weight is an age and height related issue. Not sure I believe that, but it seems to be what is being sold to us now. G What isn't taken into account is body build ... such as those wide shoulders, bigger boned frames, etc, which I think is very important. I would think that someone my height who is petite (such as my daughter) will look and feel much worse carrying the same amount of weight around that I do. But yes, definitely check in with the physician. You are setting your goal exactly as I did. I don't think I set my ww goal until well into the game. When I reached it I did talk to my physician and was told an absolute minimum he would like to see me at. I think he was so thrilled to see me where I was that he just threw a number out of the top of his head ... but at least it was a number and I knew by that point that it was doable. It will be interesting to see what he has to say when I have my checkup this week. G Joyce On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:15:05 GMT, "Laura" wrote: Just remember that the chart does not take into consideration age or sex. Your doctor may recommend a different weight for you that is higher than the WW one. At this point I would just aim for around 140-150 as your preliminary goal. Something your head can deal with so that the journey is not overwhelming. My current "goal" is 150 when I know that it should be around 135. I'd be happy at 150 at this point after being almost 250 last year. Once you get closer to that preliminary goal reevaluate it with your doctor to see just how far you can go. Take one step at a time. One goal at a time. "buck naked" wrote in message ... Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye caramba "Connie" wrote in message ... The ranges can be found at: http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx Hope this helps. Connie Fred wrote: Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or misread the chart. Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a 2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal. But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step. On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote: Fred wrote in news WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45?? or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women. It is based on height. My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is 177#. -- Cheers, Connie Walsh 241.5/204/155 RAFL 210.5/204/198.5 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ok, fine, whatever, I give up | Luna | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 101 | November 1st, 2005 04:33 AM |
We may be screwed | That T Woman | General Discussion | 2 | December 7th, 2004 10:03 AM |
Study credits Weight Watchers with helping many to keep weight off | Neutron | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | May 29th, 2004 06:07 PM |
Glycogen weight question and a status update | JJ | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 27 | April 19th, 2004 10:51 PM |
goal weight | Sam Hain | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 5 | January 10th, 2004 05:36 AM |