diet versus excercise -whats the best way to loose weight

I realize they're just guidelines. It's just that when you tell me,
"most days you're eating to maintain a weight of 100-110lbs", you're
making a statement about me personally that is demonstrably incorrect.
If you'd said, "The charts indicate that that would be a maintenance
level fo a typical 100-110 pound person." I would not disagree. But
your statement is plainly contrary to my demonstrated experience.

You re-phrased it very well. Sometimes it's not that easy to say exactly
what you mean on an e-mail, in conversation such misunderstandings are
easily clarified.

My guidance to anyone is to experiment and see what works for them,
not to get hung up on charts and averages.

Naturally. There can also be substantial differences amongst the figures
given by different sources and formulae tend to get skewed within certain
ranges. People who weigh 300lbs probably don't burn 3 times as many calories
as s/one who is 100lbs.

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:46:15 +0200, "Polar Light"
wrote:

Naturally. There can also be substantial differences amongst the figures
given by different sources and formulae tend to get skewed within certain
ranges. People who weigh 300lbs probably don't burn 3 times as many calories
as s/one who is 100lbs.

I think this is probably true. I ate at about the same calorie level
(roughly 1600/day) from 262 lbs. down to about 185, then dropped it a
little to maintain a loss rate of 1 lb/week or so. But I lost at
about the same rate from 262 to 185 while eating the same amount.

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

"Ignoramus6045" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 21:07:33 GMT, Chris Braun
wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:46:15 +0200, "Polar Light"
wrote:

Naturally. There can also be substantial differences amongst the figures
given by different sources and formulae tend to get skewed within certain
ranges. People who weigh 300lbs probably don't burn 3 times as many
calories
as s/one who is 100lbs.

I think this is probably true. I ate at about the same calorie level
(roughly 1600/day) from 262 lbs. down to about 185, then dropped it a
little to maintain a loss rate of 1 lb/week or so. But I lost at
about the same rate from 262 to 185 while eating the same amount.

Supposedly, fat does not require many calories per day to
maintain. So, if you were losing mostly fat, your calorie requirements
would not change much.

But some obese people do have a lot of muscle, only no-one gets to see it
buried under the fat. Chris probably had quite a bit too, given her weight
lifting history.

I was surprised to find out that the obese woman whose before/after pictures
we were looking at had a BMI of 60 but only 52% fat & a lean weight of
170lbs according to the tests she had prior to the bypass op. She must have
lost over 50lbs of lean mass along with the fat!

On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 23:35:22 +0200, "Polar Light"
wrote:


"Ignoramus6045" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 21:07:33 GMT, Chris Braun
wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:46:15 +0200, "Polar Light"
wrote:

Naturally. There can also be substantial differences amongst the figures
given by different sources and formulae tend to get skewed within certain
ranges. People who weigh 300lbs probably don't burn 3 times as many
calories
as s/one who is 100lbs.

I think this is probably true. I ate at about the same calorie level
(roughly 1600/day) from 262 lbs. down to about 185, then dropped it a
little to maintain a loss rate of 1 lb/week or so. But I lost at
about the same rate from 262 to 185 while eating the same amount.

Supposedly, fat does not require many calories per day to
maintain. So, if you were losing mostly fat, your calorie requirements
would not change much.

But some obese people do have a lot of muscle, only no-one gets to see it
buried under the fat. Chris probably had quite a bit too, given her weight
lifting history.

I was surprised to find out that the obese woman whose before/after pictures
we were looking at had a BMI of 60 but only 52% fat & a lean weight of
170lbs according to the tests she had prior to the bypass op. She must have
lost over 50lbs of lean mass along with the fat!


I have no doubt that I lost significant lean mass as well. And it's
certainly reflected in my reduced strength. But I'm still stronger
than most women my age and weight :-).

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004