Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 68 of 68
  1. #51
    Senior Member tony_merlino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Northeastern NJ - NYC Metro Area
    Posts
    795
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by kevrider View Post
    yes, that was my point, let me rephrase.... usually, when people 'diet' there is a timeframe involved. to lose it can keep it off one has to make permanent changes to their thought processes and daily operations. fat is stored in cells, when weight is lost the cells get smaller. but they are still there and have to same purpose, which is to store energy. so they just hang out for the rest of your life waiting for extra glucose to come by. feed them or don't.
    I agree with you. But how many people do you know who have successfully made this lifetime change, and sustained it for a prolonged period of time - say 20 years?

    I don't think it ever becomes second nature. It's something you have to focus on all the time, particularly when "triggering" events happen - periods of stress, anxiety, boredom, peer pressure... And most of us don't manage to maintain that focus when we're distracted by life.

    I just was talking to a friend of mine yesterday, a psychotherapist, and I asked him how his diet was going. He said, "Oh, I can't deal with that right now ...", and he went on to tell me about all the stress he's dealing with. I don't blame him, but it did occur to me that, even if he had already dropped the weight, if his focus would shift whenever life got stressful or other things took priority, he'd be gaining that weight right back again. And I know what that's like - probably most of us do.

    I'm great at losing weight - I've probably lost more than a thousand pounds over the course of my lifetime. Keeping diet a priority and not letting that "lifestyle change" slip back to that "lifestyle same-old, same-old", after the scale isn't moving anymore and I'm at a good weight... not so much.
    L'asino di Buridano...

  2. #52
    Neil_B
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Rowan View Post
    It's not obsession that keeps the weight off, it's habit as Tony points out and as jimnolimits also does in another current thread on this forum.

    Losing weight is NOT painful. How could that possibly be? Compared with the pain of obesity itself, the act of losing weight cannot cause pain. It might cause hunger pangs and psychological distress. But pain? I don't think so. Yet is it portrayed as being yet another excuse or demotivator for people to lose weight; in this case, it is more outright than the veiled "obsession" excuse.

    Over-eating is a habit. Eating the right amount and exercising are habits. There are people who are going to make both into obsessions, but they are probably predisposed to obsessive behaviour anyway.
    +1

  3. #53
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rowan View Post
    It's not obsession that keeps the weight off, it's habit as Tony points out and as jimnolimits also does in another current thread on this forum.

    Losing weight is NOT painful. How could that possibly be? Compared with the pain of obesity itself, the act of losing weight cannot cause pain. It might cause hunger pangs and psychological distress. But pain? I don't think so. Yet is it portrayed as being yet another excuse or demotivator for people to lose weight; in this case, it is more outright than the veiled "obsession" excuse.

    Over-eating is a habit. Eating the right amount and exercising are habits. There are people who are going to make both into obsessions, but they are probably predisposed to obsessive behaviour anyway.
    +1 on this.

    For me, tracking my calorie intake was essential. I knew I was eating too much (based on my weight), but my understanding of how many calories various things had was WAY off. It wasn't until I started tracking my food intake that I could see just how many calories I was consuming, and in addition to that I needed help understanding what the correct amount of calories should be for me. I found those answers using an app on my iPhone called LoseIt!, along with the related website LoseIt.com. The app/site is based on calories in vs calories out at the macro level and allows you to set a plan to lose weight slowly over time. I started using the app in Jan 2011 at 5' 6", 224 lbs, set a plan of losing 1.5 lbs per week, and the app calculated a daily calorie budget for me. As I lost weight, my calorie budget decreased gradually as fewer calories were required at my new, lower weight. I could eat any type of food I wanted, so long as I had room in the calorie budget, so I didn't feel like I was depriving myself. If I wanted a burger, I had a burger - well, usually 1/2 a burger. Over time, I made better choices - fewer burgers, and more fruits/vegetables, etc. I found that I would much rather have 170 calories of FOOD over a full sugared soda, so I weaned myself off of soda (mostly to water, with some diet sodas). One nice feature of the LoseIt app is that doing exercise would ADD calories to your budget. So if I rode the bike for an hour, I'd 'earn' an extra 400 calories for the day, which would often allow me to have the WHOLE burger I was craving.

    It's December now, and I've lost 60 lbs by following this program. It can be a hassle to track every last morsel I consume, but the results are worth it. I'm no longer on BP or Cholesterol meds. I feel better, look better, have more energy, etc.

    When I reach my goal weight (total of 75 lbs lost), I'll switch the app to 'maintenance' mode (the calorie budget is set to maintain your current weight, not provide you with a calorie deficit for losing weight) and continue to track my calories until I'm confident my habits will keep me from overeating.

    I've changed my lifestyle quite a bit over the past year, and will continue to do so to make sure I do NOT become one of the many that regain what they've lost. I'm done with being a 'fat guy'.

  4. #54
    Neil_B
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by tony_merlino View Post
    This is why, ALMOST WITHOUT EXCEPTION, people who lose significant amounts of weight through diet and/or exercise, gain the weight back within a few years.
    More fat acceptance language. And even if it were true, what does "gain the weight back" mean? Every ounce? Even your own example you didn't reach your previous highs.

    Your comparing the metabolism of a 20 year old to that of a man in his fifties is another matter.....

  5. #55
    Senior Member shawmutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Greencastle, PA
    My Bikes
    2010 Jamis Aurora, 2005 Trek 7500
    Posts
    255
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by tony_merlino View Post
    I've been trying to imagine a program where the (1) diet and exercise program are permanently sustainable, i.e. right from the beginning, you eat the maintenance diet for the weight you want to be, do the amount of exercise you can sustain permanently (e.g. 45 minutes to 1 hour per day), EVEN THOUGH this means you lose weight more slowly, (2) you measure success one day at a time, based on whether you were faithful to the process that day, and (3) when you fall off the wagon, you get back on ASAP, once again taking it a day at a time, not focused on the scale, but on sticking to the process.

    A calorie/exercise monitoring program could be useful to get you started, but shouldn't be necessary after a while, as you get used to gauging what you're doing.
    There is an entire podcast and website devoted to this philosophy called Fat2Fit Radio. One of the hosts went from nearly 300 lbs down to around 200 lbs just by following that advice.
    My lifestyle change journey can be found here: The Skeptical Loser

  6. #56
    Senior Member goldfinch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Minnesota/Arizona and between
    My Bikes
    Trek Madone 4.7 WSD, 1969 Schwinn Collegiate, Cannondale Quick 4, Terry Classic, Gary Fisher Marlin, Dahon Jetstream XP
    Posts
    3,893
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This is what gaining weight back might mean:

    By searching online databases and reviews of diet
    studies (Anderson, Konz, Frederich, & Wood, 2001; Astrup
    & Rossner, 2000; Black, Gleser, & Kooyers, 1990;
    Foreyt et al., 1981; Jeffery et al., 2000; Leon, 1976; Perri,
    1998; Perri & Fuller, 1995; Saris, 2001), we were able to
    locate 14 studies that followed participants for at least four
    years after a diet (see Table 1 for the features of these
    studies). The average weight loss on these diets was 14 kg
    (30.8 lb), and by the long-term follow-up, participants had
    gained back all but 3 of those kilograms (6.6 lb).
    Eight of the studies reported (or made it possible to
    compute) the percentage of participants who weighed more
    at follow-up than before they went on the diet. These rates
    averaged 41% and ranged from 29% (Pekkarinen & Mustajoki,
    1997) to 64% (Wadden, Sternberg, Letizia,
    Stunkard, & Foster, 1989), including one study that found
    that 50% of the participants weighed more than 5 kg (11 lb)
    above their starting weight by five years after the diet
    (Foster, Kendall, Wadden, Stunkard, & Vogt, 1996). Of
    note, studies always report the percentage of participants
    who manage to keep off some percentage of the lost
    weight, but only a subset reported on participants for whom
    the diet was counterproductive, even though this percentage
    is typically larger than the percentage who kept off
    substantial weight.

    Although the findings reported so far give a bleak
    picture of the outcomes of diets, there are four reasons why
    the actual effectiveness of diets is even worse. First, the
    studies have very low follow-up rates, and this is especially
    true for the longer term follow-ups. Second, many of the
    participants in these studies self-reported their weight over
    the phone or by mail. Third, most of the studies confound
    effects of the diet with effects of exercise. Fourth, a substantial
    percentage of participants in these studies have
    been on other diets since the studied diet ended. Each of
    these methodological problems biases the studies toward
    showing more effective maintenance of the lost weight.


    http://janetto.bol.ucla.edu/index_fi...etal2007AP.pdf


    I do not intend to be subversive when I talk about the difficulties in maintaining your weight after weight loss. And whether this means "fat acceptance" depends on whether you want to accept your weight. I did not want to accept my weight and lost the weight. Knowledge of how hard it is to maintain weight loss helps me in my a single-minded pursuit (better words than obsession? ) of weight maintenance and exercise. There is evidence that exercisers are more likely to keep it off than non-exercisers. We have that going for us. There are other things a person can do to improve their odds. That is all I want to do, improve my odds.
    Last edited by goldfinch; 12-03-11 at 02:20 PM.

  7. #57
    Senior Member goldfinch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Minnesota/Arizona and between
    My Bikes
    Trek Madone 4.7 WSD, 1969 Schwinn Collegiate, Cannondale Quick 4, Terry Classic, Gary Fisher Marlin, Dahon Jetstream XP
    Posts
    3,893
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by shawmutt View Post
    There is an entire podcast and website devoted to this philosophy called Fat2Fit Radio. One of the hosts went from nearly 300 lbs down to around 200 lbs just by following that advice.
    I think this strategy makes a lot of sense. Slow and steady, eating as if you are the weight you want to be. It would be nice to see if that strategy improves the odds of keeping the weight off.

  8. #58
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,793
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    OP, I lost almost 10lb. over the summer, dropping my weight under 230 for the first time since 1996. I thought it was sweet, felt good, all that.

    I'm back over 230 again, now that winter is coming; I've gained weight over the winter every year I can remember, going back to high school, and it was never an issue. My health numbers, and my fitness on the bike, ARE the issue. They remain very good, and my issue with on-bike performance has to do with a deteriorating spine.

    I think it's time for: A.) YOU to decide if fitness, training, and performance goals are the center of your cycling life, or being fit and enjoying your cycling life, are the center of it; and B.) EVERYONE ELSE TO STFU ABOUT 'DEFEATISM'.

    "Excuses" and "defeatism" are watchwords for the fanatic trainer, who swallows the whole fitness mantra, at the expense of joy in life. They impose their own goals and life-view on others, for no good reason, other than THEY see it as the way to go.

    Fanatics: I DON'T CARE if you can pass me, on flats or hills. It doesn't make you "more man" than me, or more "worthy". It just means you'll have a different outcome to your ride than me. Personally, for me to pedal where I want to go, enjoying myself on the way, and enhancing my health in the process, is all that matters.

    I guess what I'm saying is, choose between the two: TRAIN, or LIVE YOUR LIFE.

  9. #59
    Neil_B
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by DX-MAN View Post
    "Excuses" and "defeatism" are watchwords for the fanatic trainer, who swallows the whole fitness mantra, at the expense of joy in life. They impose their own goals and life-view on others, for no good reason, other than THEY see it as the way to go.
    Hmm. Generalize much?

  10. #60
    Senior Member tony_merlino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Northeastern NJ - NYC Metro Area
    Posts
    795
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil_B View Post
    More fat acceptance language. And even if it were true, what does "gain the weight back" mean? Every ounce? Even your own example you didn't reach your previous highs.
    Sure I did. My all-time high was 230, and yes, I never hit that again. But I've been in the 215 - 225 range a couple of times since my first major weight loss - and lost it again. I'm brushing against the 215 mark right now. And just a year ago, I was 175.

    But it isn't "fat acceptance language". I just know myself well enough to know that, if I don't make keeping weight off an obsession, as Goldfinch put it, I won't keep the weight off. And experience has also taught me that, in nearly 40 years of riding this see-saw, that I don't know how to sustain that obsession. Does that mean that I'm not going to lose this weight? Of course not. As I said, better to be thin for as many years as I can manage, than to be fat for that entire time.

    Your comparing the metabolism of a 20 year old to that of a man in his fifties is another matter.....
    Honestly, I haven't found that my metabolism has changed all that much. It's still pretty much calories in, calories out in a pretty deterministic way. I read some of the posts with great interest - they seem to violate the law of conservation of energy. My body, I'm sometimes happy and sometimes not so happy to say, obeys the laws of physics pretty well.
    L'asino di Buridano...

  11. #61
    Senior Member raydog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Reno, Nevada
    My Bikes
    Pinarello, Cannondale Team Scalpel, Raleigh
    Posts
    266
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Wow! I just ck'd back after a day and this conversation has really evolved. I must say, although there are opposing viewpoints abounding in this strand, I find a lot of truth in most all of the posts. I do think, however, that sometimes we enable ourselves to NOT reach that next level by "accepting ourselves just the way we are". Sounds intelligent and open minded but I think it's largely caving to one's bad eating habits because it's fun, soothing and satisfying to chow down on great food. I know I justify food consumption by how intensly I train.
    The good news for me is.....I just had a long talk with a riding buddy who's an ER Doc (and incredibly versed in fittness). He has me still putting in the mileage BUT ONLY in a narrow heartrate range....where fat burning exists. I'm not going to get into all the research and scientific data here because I'm just starting and very much a student of this approach. I will say, however, that my max allowed HR is 129 and usually I ride at 150-172 bpm! I did 40 miles like that yesterday and it wasn't too bad, just not up with the front group. My friend says it's hard to get that "you have to go slower to ultimately go faster"(especially for those of us that train so hard). I'll be doing this for about 4 weeks so I'll surely post the results, if any, re: weight loss. (I won't change my diet so as to focus on the riding change effect only).

  12. #62
    Senior Member Gravity Aided's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    2,557
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sounds like a good idea.
    Best of luck with your training.

  13. #63
    Neil_B
    Guest
    I had a good day yesterday. I went to the gym and exercised a little, because I'm obsessed. After all, that's part of pushing my body "past what's normal for it" - meaning 400 pounds and stationary. Of course we now know obsession means "Tracking what you eat. Weighing yourself. Exercising more than most people exercise."



  14. #64
    Senior Member raydog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Reno, Nevada
    My Bikes
    Pinarello, Cannondale Team Scalpel, Raleigh
    Posts
    266
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    [QUOTE=Neil_B;13562065]I had a good day yesterday. I went to the gym and exercised a little, because I'm obsessed. After all, that's part of pushing my body "past what's normal for it" - meaning 400 pounds and stationary. Of course we now know obsession means [B][B][B]"Tracking what you eat. Weighing yourself. Exercising more than most people exercise."


    Great way to state the "self enabling" point of view! Same deal happened to me over in the "over 50" forum....I suggested pushing oneself to new heights through altering the training regimen and you would think I was suggesting that home invasion robbery is a good way to make a living! It's perfectly OK if someone wants to "just ride rollers at 12 mph" but can some of us please be allowed to push the physical fittness envelope without being told we aren't enjoying life? I love this sport and to suggest my experiences are somehow less is insulting and incredibly without foundation. Raydog

  15. #65
    Senior Member Mithrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    My Bikes
    2012 Surly LHT, 1995 GT Outpost Trail
    Posts
    2,283
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by raydog View Post
    The good news for me is.....I just had a long talk with a riding buddy who's an ER Doc (and incredibly versed in fittness). He has me still putting in the mileage BUT ONLY in a narrow heartrate range....where fat burning exists. I'm not going to get into all the research and scientific data here because I'm just starting and very much a student of this approach. I will say, however, that my max allowed HR is 129 and usually I ride at 150-172 bpm! I did 40 miles like that yesterday and it wasn't too bad, just not up with the front group. My friend says it's hard to get that "you have to go slower to ultimately go faster"(especially for those of us that train so hard). I'll be doing this for about 4 weeks so I'll surely post the results, if any, re: weight loss. (I won't change my diet so as to focus on the riding change effect only).
    I've read that this isn't as productive as you would think.

    So for example if you exercise real hard it's supposed to burn less fat. But you're only burning less fat as a percentage, maybe 50% instead of 60%. Keep in mind that you're still burning more calories overall, so 50% of X will still be more than 60% of Y.

  16. #66
    Senior Member redvespablur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    369
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dx-man View Post
    op, i lost almost 10lb. Over the summer, dropping my weight under 230 for the first time since 1996. I thought it was sweet, felt good, all that.

    I'm back over 230 again, now that winter is coming; i've gained weight over the winter every year i can remember, going back to high school, and it was never an issue. My health numbers, and my fitness on the bike, are the issue. They remain very good, and my issue with on-bike performance has to do with a deteriorating spine.

    I think it's time for: A.) you to decide if fitness, training, and performance goals are the center of your cycling life, or being fit and enjoying your cycling life, are the center of it; and b.) everyone else to stfu about 'defeatism'.

    "excuses" and "defeatism" are watchwords for the fanatic trainer, who swallows the whole fitness mantra, at the expense of joy in life. They impose their own goals and life-view on others, for no good reason, other than they see it as the way to go.

    Fanatics: I don't care if you can pass me, on flats or hills. It doesn't make you "more man" than me, or more "worthy". It just means you'll have a different outcome to your ride than me. Personally, for me to pedal where i want to go, enjoying myself on the way, and enhancing my health in the process, is all that matters.

    I guess what i'm saying is, choose between the two: Train, or live your life.
    htfu

  17. #67
    Senior Member redvespablur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    369
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The trick is not to diet. The trick is to change your habits. The slower it comes off the more permanent the loss is (IMHO).

    No point making any change to your eating habits unless you are willing to make that change for your the rest of your life.

  18. #68
    Senior Member raydog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Reno, Nevada
    My Bikes
    Pinarello, Cannondale Team Scalpel, Raleigh
    Posts
    266
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mithrandir View Post
    I've read that this isn't as productive as you would think.

    So for example if you exercise real hard it's supposed to burn less fat. But you're only burning less fat as a percentage, maybe 50% instead of 60%. Keep in mind that you're still burning more calories overall, so 50% of X will still be more than 60% of Y.
    Well, my understanding is that it (riding in level 2 of heart range for long distances) does MUCH MORE to body chemistry than just the caloric math you refer to. I can't speak to it now since I am but a humble learner, like I said, I'll post my results in a month to 6 weeks. I should mention that the program for me includes reintegration of intervels and threshold work at the end. I have the luxury of having access to a SpinScan and Computrainer so my personal comparo should be quite accurate over this time period. Raydog

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •