Funny!

Kirk Is wrote:
Dally wrote:
Now it might be a technicality, but you said "Any sentence that begins
with [...] Period." Maybe what you meant to say is "Any RESPONSE TO THAT
('eat less, exercise more') that begins with [...] Period."

Ah, I see. You're reading more into it than I intended. If I say, "why
don't you go for a run?" and you say, "That won't work for me because...
" I totally agree that you are not a FFID.

Yeah, the Historian and I might be Too Damn Literalist when it comes to
writing...

Why? I merely responded to what she wrote, and not what she meant to
write.

Neil
385/309/220

Kirk Is wrote:
Dally wrote:
It did not. You said, "depending on what 'that' is." But THAT was
clearly and explicitly, "Eat less and exercise more." If you start out
by explaining that you can't use THAT method then you're a FFID.

No, your original quote was

If you want to lose fat then you're going to have to eat less and
exercise more. Period. Any sentence that beings with, "that won't work
for me because..." means you're a FFID. Any sentence that starts with,
"It's not my fault because..." means you're a FFID.

Now it might be a technicality, but you said "Any sentence that begins
with [...] Period." Maybe what you meant to say is "Any RESPONSE TO THAT
('eat less, exercise more') that begins with [...] Period." It sounds like
a niggling point, but it's actually crucial, because, for instance, I've
chosen to ignore some somewhat reasonable advice about modifying my coffee
ritual, but since I'm NOT ignoring "eat less, exercise more", I'm not a
FFID, despite noise to the contrary.

The second thing is, the Historian *specifically* said that there were
some kind of *lower body exercise* that people suggested to him that he
wasn't able to do because of his knees.

Actually, I was "people" who suggested it. When I began I was 385
pounds and could barely walk a block. The treadmill would have been a
foolish, and painful, choice. Also I couldn't fit into the hip
induction machines. So I did what I could. And when I could do more, I
did it. Today I did a half-hour of lower body lifting and 37 minutes of
cardio. I can also row for two miles, as we all know. :-)

He wasn't a FFID, he tackled the
eating less and work on the exercise as it was appropriate to his
improving body type.

I was before January 3rd of this year. But not after. Thanks, Kirk, for
the spirited defense.

Neil
385/309/220

"Rachael Reynolds" wrote in message
...

"Annie Benson Lennaman" wrote in
message . ..


Kirk Is wrote:


But I have reason to think that there's another workable approach that
says "if things are going to be sustainable, if they're going to be a
permanent part of my WOL/WOE, they should be as inobtrusive as possible,
or else I'm going to be unhappy and drop it". Rather than a slippery
slope, this approach is more concerned about a sudden cliffdrop.

For what it's worth, this is the approach I've taken to my weight
loss. I love food that I know isn't so good for me. If I had to look
at a lifetime of never eating fried chicken, barbecued ribs, or french
fries again I know that I would get disheartened and just say "to hell
with this". I eat an occasional candy bar. I drink apple martinis. I
eat potato chips and cheetos.

But... I also eat much smaller portions of food than I used to on a
daily basis. I eat alot more food that is good for me than I used to,
and now rarely have the junk. Sure, I really enjoy it when I do, but
it's not a daily way of life eating for me anymore. I know that I can
eat the way I am eating now for the rest of my life and not feel overly
deprived. I might not be losing weight as fast as someone who is
maintaining a more rigid way of eating, but that's okay. I would much
rather keep it off forever than lose it quicker and then regain.

So yeah, I might have some bad food habits that I have no intentions
of quitting. Does this make me a FFID? Perhaps, I suppose. But I am
less of a Fat **** than I used to be, and still losing. I can live with
that. Forever.

--
Annie

As of 06-30-06: 258/189.5/140 Standing at 5 foot 4.

68.5 pounds lost. 49.5 left to go. Started February/07/05

Come visit my weight-loss web site, Annie Takes Off.
http://webpages.charter.net/lenny13/DietFrontPage.html

Yup, Annie, I agree. I don't want to be in the "food as fuel" camp. I
like to eat (and drink) and I need to fit my weight control around that.
So yes I eat "bad things" and some most days - a gin and (slimline) tonic
always goes down a treat. But I would probably not stick to a stricter
regime so it works for me. I've been maintaining at around 116 for nearly
18 months now so I hope I'm getting there!

Rachael
176/116/119

Put me in that camp too. I think about 90% of the time I do the food as
fuel thing. The rest of the time I go for taste and texture. I equate it
to getting dressed in silky nice clothing once in a while. It just feels
good. The strict thing didn't work for me and ended up causing more
problems for so long. Once I finally eased up I realized that the junky
stuff really doesn't appeal to me all that much.
--
the volleyballchick

Nunya B. wrote:
"Rachael Reynolds" wrote in message
...

I don't want to be in the "food as fuel" camp. I
like to eat (and drink) and I need to fit my weight control around that.
So yes I eat "bad things" and some most days - a gin and (slimline) tonic
always goes down a treat. But I would probably not stick to a stricter
regime so it works for me. I've been maintaining at around 116 for nearly
18 months now so I hope I'm getting there!

Put me in that camp too. I think about 90% of the time I do the food as
fuel thing. The rest of the time I go for taste and texture. I equate it
to getting dressed in silky nice clothing once in a while. It just feels
good. The strict thing didn't work for me and ended up causing more
problems for so long. Once I finally eased up I realized that the junky
stuff really doesn't appeal to me all that much.

I'm probably the biggest "food is fuel" person here, but I think there
are some misunderstandings about what that means. I don't eat
nutritious cardboard, I eat delicious food! I just choose delicious
food that is nutritious for my body. Luckily, I don't find cheetos
delicious, but if I did I wouldn't eat them, I'd choose something
different that was delicious.

And in the times when I *did* eat cheetos I wouldn't consider it "food",
because food is stuff I use to fuel my body, I'd consider it
"entertainment."

And eating for entertainment is something I have to be very careful
about doing. I got fat doing that. The Wendy's motto, "Do what tastes
right" is practically satanic advice to me. It's equivalent to "have
sex with anyone you fancy five times a day no matter where you are."
Just because it feels good doesn't mean it's appropriate to do. You've
got to bear in mind the consequences. You've got to act responsibly, as
grown-ups must. Cheetos are the condom-less hook-ups of "food."

HTH

Dally

Dally wrote:
And in the times when I *did* eat cheetos I wouldn't consider it "food",
because food is stuff I use to fuel my body, I'd consider it
"entertainment."

Calories is calories. There's some extra junk in there, but ain't none of
it toxic... you wouldn't want to live on it, or even have it crowd out the
good stuff, but I don't think it crippled, say, Willows diet plan. (Of
course that was a case of being VERY careful about portions, which is
probably rather rare among people eating Cheetos.)

And eating for entertainment is something I have to be very careful
about doing. I got fat doing that. The Wendy's motto, "Do what tastes
right" is practically satanic advice to me. It's equivalent to "have
sex with anyone you fancy five times a day no matter where you are."
Just because it feels good doesn't mean it's appropriate to do. You've
got to bear in mind the consequences. You've got to act responsibly, as
grown-ups must. Cheetos are the condom-less hook-ups of "food."

I think it's not too hard to think of foods significantly worse than
Cheetos. They don't appeal to me, but singling them out as the
"comdom-less hookup" is overstating the case.

--
QUOTEBLOG: http://kisrael.com SKEPTIC MORTALITY: http://kisrael.com/mortal
Frickin' god! He's such a goodie good.
--http://www.advancednet.net/objectcity/o.htm

"Dally" wrote in message
...
Nunya B. wrote:
"Rachael Reynolds" wrote in message
...

I don't want to be in the "food as fuel" camp. I like to eat (and
drink) and I need to fit my weight control around that. So yes I eat
"bad things" and some most days - a gin and (slimline) tonic always goes
down a treat. But I would probably not stick to a stricter regime so it
works for me. I've been maintaining at around 116 for nearly 18 months
now so I hope I'm getting there!

Put me in that camp too. I think about 90% of the time I do the food as
fuel thing. The rest of the time I go for taste and texture. I equate
it to getting dressed in silky nice clothing once in a while. It just
feels good. The strict thing didn't work for me and ended up causing
more problems for so long. Once I finally eased up I realized that the
junky stuff really doesn't appeal to me all that much.

I'm probably the biggest "food is fuel" person here, but I think there are
some misunderstandings about what that means. I don't eat nutritious
cardboard, I eat delicious food! I just choose delicious food that is
nutritious for my body. Luckily, I don't find cheetos delicious, but if I
did I wouldn't eat them, I'd choose something different that was
delicious.

And in the times when I *did* eat cheetos I wouldn't consider it "food",
because food is stuff I use to fuel my body, I'd consider it
"entertainment."

Depending on what it is I'm eating I do the same - I realize it's
entertainment now as opposed to food which is a good thing. Like when I
choose to have dessert at a nice restaurant. Last week I had a chocolate
mousse served in a hand crafted edible dark chocolate container and covered
with lots of fresh berries. I didn't get it because of the berries IYKWIM


And eating for entertainment is something I have to be very careful about
doing. I got fat doing that. The Wendy's motto, "Do what tastes right"
is practically satanic advice to me. It's equivalent to "have sex with
anyone you fancy five times a day no matter where you are." Just because
it feels good doesn't mean it's appropriate to do. You've got to bear in
mind the consequences. You've got to act responsibly, as grown-ups must.
Cheetos are the condom-less hook-ups of "food."

HTH

I wouldn't go that far in denouncing Cheetos if it's someone's idea of
entertainment and they can use portion control. I used to like Doritos,
well actually I used to think I liked Doritos. I don't eat them anymore
because I don't really like them. I like crunchy corn flavored things so
popcorn with a little cheese powder works fine. My idea of good food
doesn't include anything smothered in cheese anymore because my tastes have
changed.

I believe that rather than be food specific one needs to be food aware. I'm
aware these days when I'm putting something in my mouth that has little or
no nutritive value and it's a conscious decision to do so tempered by the
situation and whether or not I really want it. I don't equate food with sex
since as a married woman I get to have condomless sex as much as I want and
really don't want anything but what I've got at home.
--
the volleyballchick

Kirk Is wrote:

Dally wrote:

And eating for entertainment is something I have to be very careful
about doing. I got fat doing that. The Wendy's motto, "Do what tastes
right" is practically satanic advice to me. It's equivalent to "have
sex with anyone you fancy five times a day no matter where you are."
Just because it feels good doesn't mean it's appropriate to do. You've
got to bear in mind the consequences. You've got to act responsibly, as
grown-ups must. Cheetos are the condom-less hook-ups of "food."


I think it's not too hard to think of foods significantly worse than
Cheetos. They don't appeal to me, but singling them out as the
"comdom-less hookup" is overstating the case.

Things worse than cheetos wouldn't be what I consider "food". If it has
no nutritious value, no benefit to fueling my body other than possessing
pure calories, I don't consider it food. "Entertainment" perhaps, or in
situations involving exercising for more than two hours "calories for
fuel." But if it meets no nutritional requirements then it isn't really
appropriate to put in my mouth with any intent other than to entertain
myself (or fuel the third hour of exercise.)

Would you disagree?

I'm not against using some of my calorie budget for entertainment
purposes from time to time. But when I do, I choose really entertaining
foods, things that are WORTH the calorie cost.

Eat unrestrainedly for entertainment, mouth feel, the joy of having the
taste on my tongue, is what got me fat. I'm too aware of that now to
feel like junk food is a good habit for me. Because I don't want to be
fat or malnourished, and those are the choices for me.

Dally

Nunya B. wrote:

I wouldn't go that far in denouncing Cheetos if it's someone's idea of
entertainment and they can use portion control.

I'd equate portion control to using a condom in this analogy.

I believe that rather than be food specific one needs to be food aware. I'm
aware these days when I'm putting something in my mouth that has little or
no nutritive value and it's a conscious decision to do so tempered by the
situation and whether or not I really want it.

Right. You're conscious of the reason you're eating it and use judgment
about whether you can handle it or not. That's good enough for me.
It's not like I don't ever eat for entertainment, it's just that I try
to be responsible about how often I use my mouth to entertain me, since
the whole body pays the price. The old chestnut "a moment on the lips,
a lifetime on the hips" rings true to me.

I don't equate food with sex
since as a married woman I get to have condomless sex as much as I want and
really don't want anything but what I've got at home.

I'd equate that with nutritious food. ;-)

Dally

Kirk Is wrote:
I think it's not too hard to think of foods significantly worse than
Cheetos.

I had one of those significantly worse foods over the weekend -
Twinkies with Vegemite

"Beverly" wrote in
oups.com:


Kirk Is wrote:
I think it's not too hard to think of foods significantly worse than
Cheetos.

I had one of those significantly worse foods over the weekend -
Twinkies with Vegemite


Good God, woman!!!

You ate vegemite?!?!?



Andy