Feeling great, losing weight!

Hello Doug,

Yes you should lose more weight up front especially if your obese or
morbidly obese. By the way I was 125 pounds overweight, and lost 120 pounds
in under 9 months. These last 5/6 pounds seems to be coming off slow, but I
am trying to get them off by June 30th. I started at 300 pounds last August
27th and am currently 181 pounds by changing my eating habits and exercise.

I hope you make it where you want to go with minimum effort and maximum
results.

Paul
300/181/175



"Doug Lerner" wrote in message
...
On 5/21/04 12:34 PM, in article , "Roger
Zoul" wrote:

Doug Lerner wrote:
:: I've had so many stalls this past year and a half, I'd like to enjoy
:: at least a couple of months of decent weight loss before worrying
:: about stuff like that.

Why can't you enjoy losing 5 lbs a month, instead of 6.6 lbs in two
weeks?
You're wrecking your body for no good reason.

First, I appreciate your messages and your concern.

But I don't understand why you think this particular amount of weight loss
is so much at my weight.

We are talking about aiming for 2-3 lb per week or so. I always thought
that
was considered a very normal, well-paced diet. I am extremely overweight,
after all! Even by conservative estimates I am about 90 lb overweight! If
I
lost 5 lb per month it would still take me a year and a half to get down
to
goal. I'd be almost 50 by then.

I too am against radically rapid weight loss. But starting like this, and
realizing that slowdown will inevitably occur along the way seemed like a
reasonable, practical pace. If I started with the goal of losing just 5 lb
per month and then had it slow down from there it could take *years* to
get
down to goal. Is that really necessary?

Isn't it reasonable for an extremely obese person like me to lose a bit on
the rapid side, at least to start with?


::
:: What I *am* doing, to be proactive about this, is increasing
:: exercise. I use the bullworker every morning. And have added situps
:: to my morning routine.

Is there no other option than the bullworker? Can you not at least get
a
good set of dumbells / barbells and an adjustable bench, or better yet,
join
a gym? ARe you doing situps are crunches?

I could get a set of dumbells. But why are they any better than the
bullworker? The bullworker seems to do everything!

As for an adjustable bench, you are obviously not well-aquainted with the
size of typical Japanese dwellings.

I've tried joining a gym before, but the problem is that I have to go out
of
my way, by moped or train, to get there. So it becomes so much of a
nuisance
it's not something I can readily add to my daily routine.

I don't understand the question about situps or crunches. I don't know
what
crunches are.


::
:: Also, I believe weight loss will naturally slow down as 1500
:: calories turns out to be closer and closer to maintenance intake for
:: my reducing body weight. In fact, at some point weight loss should
:: naturally slow to a crawl.

At which point you will have lost much valuable muscle mass. Not good.
Not
being fat should not be your only concern, doug.

I'm eating sufficient protein though. Shouldn't that help?

doug

JJ wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
:: [snip]
:::
::: Not all exercise is the same, Gary. Some will promote
::: greater mass loss (both muscle and fat)...
::
:: What exercise promotes muscle loss?

What I meant was exercising in such a way as to create serious calorie
deficit. Lots of biking, running, too much cardio, even too much weight
lifting.

GaryG wrote:
:: "Roger Zoul" wrote in message
:: ...
::: GaryG wrote:
::::: "Roger Zoul" wrote in message
::::: ...
:::::: Sadly, if you continue at that rate, you're going to lose too
:::::: much muscle mass and end up being flabby when you get to an
:::::: acceptable weight. You might want to slow the rate of loss down
:::::: a bit.
:::::
::::: Do you have any studies you could cite to bolster this claim?
::::: I've been thinking about this "losing too much muscle mass" issue
::::: lately because I hear it often stated but have yet to find any
::::: studies as
::::: to whether or not it's a real issue.
:::
::: Well, go ask over in misc.fitness.weights....also, the types of
::: studies that exist will depend greatly on a perceived need for
::: them....but I have seen such studies which deal with the notion of
::: not losing muscle mass via resistance training, I just can't cite
::: them. I have not seen any slanted to the notion of "losing too
::: much muscle mass" specifically. That notion stem from the obvious
::: logic that muscle is what makes the body look good, move well, and
::: function well metabolically. One could certainly argue that one
::: doesn't need extra muscle, but frankly I'd say you'd be nuts
:::
:::::
::::: I suspect it may be overblown - it seems to me that a person who
::::: is obese will have excess body fat, but also excess muscle mass
::::: (to
::::: allow them to move the fat around).
:::
::: See....they have lots of excess bodyfat, but no excess muscle mass
::: (have you ever heard of excess muscle being harmful to
::: health?)...they have some extra compared to a non fat person
::: perhaps (and it really depends on how active they've been -- those
::: who are or have been very sedentary may not have much extra muscle
::: mass, and the point is to keep as much of that as possible so they
::: when they lose weight the muscle makes them look nicer than
::: otherwise while allowing them to have more "engine" to burn
::: calories. Also, a lot of very overweight people may have very
::: little upper body muscle -- the extra will be in the lower body.
::: Strengthwise, they can be relatively weak in the upper body but
::: stronger in the lower body.
:::
::: So, presumably during the
::::: normal weight loss process an obese person would lose both fat AND
::::: muscle...and, that would be OK because that excess muscle mass is
::::: no longer required.
:::
::: Nope, why in the world would extra (not excess) muscle mass not be
::: required? You can run faster, pick up more, move better, look
::: better, and it will burn more calories......I could see if being
::: fat made you have so much extra muscle that it somehow caused
::: problems, but that is plainly not the case.
::
:: I guess it depends on your goals. If I even look at a set of
:: weights, I start to build muscle mass...but, during the spring and
:: summer this is not what I want because I am a cyclist. Although I
:: might look better with more upper body bulk, it hampers my ability
:: to ride fast uphill. So, I lay off the weights until the fall and
:: winter. Many runners and cyclists are in the same boat on this
:: issue. Even squats and lower body resistance exercises can be
:: counter-productive - they tend to add lower body bulk, without
:: contributing to increased performance on the bike.

Runners and cyclist should (mostly) train for strength, not bulk. That's
easily done by controlling calorie intake. I agree completely with your
point about extra mass hindering performance in those sports (well,
sprinters typically are well-muscled from my observations, anyway).

Finally, most people don't need excessive amounts of muscle bulk, but most
ex-extremely-overweight folks won't be in the catagory if they can manage to
keep as much much as possible while losing fat.

::
:: GG
::
:::
:::::
::::: Of course, you don't want to give up too much muscle mass, and
::::: that's why regular exercise is an important component of a healthy
::::: lifestyle. But, if someone is exercising regularly and losing
::::: weight, worrying about lost muscle mass seems like a non-issue to
::::: me.
:::::
:::
::: And the rate of weight loss matters not? And they type of exercise
::: matters not? Not all exercise is the same, Gary. Some will
::: promote greater mass loss (both muscle and fat) and some will
::: promote greater fat loss. The latter is best.
:::
::: Commonsensical reasoning will only go so far.
:::
::::: GG
:::::
::::::
:::::: Doug Lerner wrote:
:::::::: This is 2nd week since returning to LC2 (low cal, lower carbs).
::::::::
:::::::: While technically I only lost a net 0.5 kg (1.1 lb) this past
:::::::: week compared to last Friday's scale measurement, last Friday
:::::::: was, as I suspected, a one day fluctuation due to unusually
:::::::: high activity
:::::::: and almost no eating the day before. In fact, Saturday showed
:::::::: an uptick of 1 kg, meaning the real net loss for the first
:::::::: week was really
:::::::: only 1.5 kg and not 2.5 kg, as I first thought.
::::::::
:::::::: Then the weight continued to drop on schedule over this week.
:::::::: So
:::::::: it really was 1.5 kg the first week and 1.5 kg this week. At
:::::::: any rate, no matter how you calculate it, it is a total loss
:::::::: of 3.0
:::::::: kg (6.6
:::::::: lb) the past two weeks.
::::::::
:::::::: And I feel great! Very energetic! And hunger is under control.
::::::::
:::::::: I'm keeping calories to an average of 1500 or less and "being
:::::::: mindful" of carbs, avoiding high-glycemic carbs that I know
:::::::: cause hunger cravings. This usually means I am eating about 60
:::::::: carbs a day or so, plug/minus 10.
::::::::
:::::::: doug
::::::::
:::::::: Day 457
:::::::: lb: 288.2 / 238.7
:::::::: kg: 131 / 108.5
:::::::: Body mass loss: 17.2%
:::::::: goal: undecided

Roger Zoul wrote:
JJ wrote:
Roger Zoul wrote:
[snip]

Not all exercise is the same, Gary. Some will promote
greater mass loss (both muscle and fat)...

What exercise promotes muscle loss?

What I meant was exercising in such a way as to create
serious calorie
deficit. Lots of biking, running, too much cardio, even
too much
weight lifting.

Thanks. I wasn't implying that this was not correct, or
even that I didn't agree with you. I had just read this as
being in the context of a type of exercise, as opposed to a
quantity of exercise. I guess that, technically, muscle
wasting is a reality in any serious calorie deficit mode,
even if the exercise were just sitting around watching your
heart beat.

Have a great (remainder of the) weekend. It's truly a
beautiful day, at least here in North Georgia. I think I'll
drive up and hike to the top of Amicalola Falls again this
afternoon...assuming I can talk my wife into it.

--
JJ.