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

"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

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"

"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

On Feb 4, 11:52 pm, "GaryG" wrote:
"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.comThe #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption

=----

GaryG -- I agree with you about the general usefulness of exercise!
Helps us feel better, reduces BP, etc. Also it helps in other ways --
e.g., I might treat overeating in a different light. (e.g., I might
ask myself: How many trips up my hill to get rid of the calories in
this sandwich? How does extra weight affect my backpacking in June?
etc.)

From my perspective, one can overdo the exercise component, and I'm
pretty sure you'll agree with this. Expecting the average person to
spend two hours a day at the gym is a bit much, but hopefully exercise
can be fit into a daily, or at least a three time a week activity
schedule.

Yours truly,

Caleb

On Feb 4, 7:46 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
"The Queen of Cans and Jars" wrote in messagenews:1ht0z55.fetlsf16uxn0cN%dhrravr@ohatzha pu.bet...

teachrmama wrote:

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

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

You honestly think he *deliberately* regains weight? What makes you say
that?

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How dense are you???

Wait, don't answer that, I think we know the answer.

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

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!

"teachrmama" wrote:

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

You honestly think he *deliberately* regains weight? What makes you say
that?

For several years in a row he has planned in advance for his diet to
last
100 days and then quit. Simple cause and effect says if we go back to
eating the way that got us fat in the first place then we gain it all
back
again. So yes, he does in fact plan to gain the weight back again.
it's
why folks have issues with Caleb - He resists advice to try to convert
his
methods to sustainable.

So Caleb, What is your maintenance plan this time? You have learned
again and again that planning to quit equals planning to gain it all
back.
You have learned again and again that reducing your caloric intake
below
some point leads to your body requiring a refeed to the point you can
no
longer resist the urge. Are you this time following a milder loss
plan
that is slower to not trigger this refeed mandate? Do you have a
maintenance phase planned out in advance? If not, why are you trying
a fad diet again and again? If you gain it back of what use was the
losing?

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

I'm not going to suggest that you not discuss whatever you wish with Caleb.
I do wish you would take him up on his invite though.

Here are a few facts about all this. Maybe you'll see that it's not so
"minor" afterall.

Year after year Caleb comes back to ASD with the same 100 day diet plan. He
adopts an unbalanced low calorie diet and rigorous exercise plan so he can
lose as much weight as possible in 100 days. He then disappears until the
next year when he starts all over again.

The first year almost everyone tried to have a civil discussion with him
about the unhealthy way in which he was trying to lose weight.
The fact that finding a way of eating
that he could live with and follow for the rest of his life was so much
healthier in the long run, etc etc. He ignored everyone and for 100 days the
newsgroup basically degenerated into Caleb's group. Then he disappeared.

Now every year he comes back and finds one or two new people who will
support him and think they can be the one to set him on the path to a more
healthy way to lose weight and keep it off. And they rail against the
unsupportive attitude of everyone else. The fact is, he doesn't want to
discuss anything. He wants attention, any attention, even if it's negative
and he knows exactly which buttons to push to get it.

Why do you think he posted here? He has his own newsgroup that he set up.
Here's a hint. For 30+ days he's been posting his "progress" over on
asd.low-calorie and he wasn't getting the attention he wanted. Ask yourself
this..... if he really wanted to enter into a discussion why didn't he reply
to you when you asked him a question over there?

What's really sad is that he doesn't care who he hurts in the process of
getting what he wants. Remember Jenny with the eating disorder who posted
here for awhile? So many people tried so hard to get her to realize that
eating healthy at this point in her life was more important than starving
herself to reach 95 lbs. Well she's over there now. Caleb has just finished
congratulating her on her 703 calorie day and has assured her that with that
kind of calorie deficit she's sure to lose the weight she wants.
--�
Jeri