S/O Simple Ways That You've Lost Weight

[Negin]

I would prefer to not hijack that thread any more than I've already done  :blush:. I've been doing some reading and would love any feedback, thoughts, comments, etc. from all.

I would particularly like to hear if anyone has experienced weight loss from this approach and if they're over the age of 40. :)

I'm in my late 40s and am at a point where emotional eating has become my middle name and any diet is a recipe for failure. I'm under tons of stress and the "d" word just makes me want to take a very long nap, if you KWIM. I wish it wasn't so, but that's where I am. Diets depress me. Exercise makes me happy and lifts my mood. :D

Thank you. 

----

 

I've been told that there was an article in Health Magazine several years ago that I wish I had access to. It said that to lose fat without dieting, a minimum of 90 minutes of cardio exercise every day was necessary.

I'm sure that gender and age make a huge difference when it comes to results. It seems that the older we get, the harder it becomes to lose weight through exercise alone. 

 

I've included some links below, basically here's the gist of some of them:

 

Moderate-intensity cardio exercise, such as brisk walking or cycling on a relatively flat route, is appropriate if you sustain a 90-minute session aimed at weight loss. This intensity gets your heart beating faster, but is still easy enough that you can speak a complete sentence.

 

Then I remembered reading about the Amish:

The average American takes 2,300 to 3,000 steps per day. This is a dismal rate compared to the Old Order Amish community, who take an average of 14,000-19,000 steps per day (maximum 10 miles per day). They have the lowest percentage of obese adults compared with the American population at large. The men have an obesity rate of 0% and the women's obesity rate is at 4%. 

 

Their diets are not extremely stringent, more like healthy. They eat carbs, etc. I'm sure they don't eat to excess, but they don't deprive themselves either. 

 

90 Minutes of Cardio a Day to Lose Weight

 

How Much Exercise Do You Really Need to Lose Weight

 

How Many Steps Per Day to Lose Weight

 

90 Minutes of Cardio a Day to Lose Weight

 

The Amish Diet

 

Walk Like the Amish

[Ravin]

Exercise for its own sake bores me or of my skull. Hard work at physical tasks accomplishes the same thing. I bicycle for much of my commute, or take the bus, which requires walking.

 

I also keep dieting simple by just looking at calories And otherwise trying to eat healthy. If I exercise (bike) I'll eat more that day.

 

Drinking a lot of water also helps.

[nevergiveup]

I find the advice on exercise equally as confusing and contradictory as the advice on dieting.

For instance--"they" are now saying that running can lead to cardiovascular disease, and is a poor form of exercise for health if the term 'health' involves the body being in a state without injury (since running leads to joint problems).

I think we are meant to be active and what many now deem "exercise" really isn't--we are not designed to sit around all day; we are supposed to be moving, so to count walking to your mailbox as exercise seems rather sad.

The current theory I am investigating is laid out in Body by Science, which advocates super slow weight lifting once every week to 10 days or so with regular activity in between, keeping in mind that by 'regular' they mean biking, walking, swimming, hiking--things we should be enjoying as a regular part of our lives (not sitting)--not jumping around to an aerobics tape, necessarily.

Done properly, weight lifting has all the benefits of cardio and fewer deleterious effects on the joints.  Plus, the cardio benefit is more global:  ever get good at doing 30 minutes on a tread mill and then try to run outside for 30 minutes?  It feels like you are dying (me at least).  Or riding a stationary bike, etc.  One gets good at that specific function but it does not translate into other real life activities.  The authors have a really compelling way of laying it all out--much better than I have done here!

 

 

[GailV]

I haven't read the articles you linked, but from your introductory comment it sounds as though the Amish don't exercise so much as they simply move a lot.  This reminds me of Katy Bowman's reasoning that we shouldn't exercise so much as we should attend to our movement patterns all day long.  Her analogy for exercise vs. movement is to diet -- you might think of an exercise session as the super-healthy salad of your day, but having ONE healthy item to eat in a day chock full full of doughnuts and french fries doesn't really mean you're have a healthy diet.  

 

I highly recommend her books, blog, and/or facebook for information on getting more "vitamin movement" into your life. She really does break down the science in an easy-to-understand way -- for example, I now understand why sitting is linked to heart attacks, I understand how blood flow during a cardio workout varies according to the workout, I'm aware of many movement patterns that I didn't consider important before (such as hanging from a bar). Plus I understand how gait varies from a treadmill vs. on the ground (ideally NOT level ground), and many more reasons why sunlight is important.  Frankly, I understand a lot more about the science of physiology.

 

And the more I understand about the science of physiology, the more I realize the problem of the varying diet advice is from poor reading and understanding of science. Which, by the way, is why I skip all the diet discussions on here.

[kiana]

The problem is that barring something insane like running daily marathons, there is no real way to out-exercise a bad diet. For many people, they exercise and then they eat back more than they've exercised off, and then they get frustrated because they aren't losing weight with all the exercise they're doing. People (including dieticians) are notoriously bad at overestimating their calories burnt and underestimating their intake.

 

I moved from 0 exercise to an average of 120 minutes a day, 7 days a week between the ages of 25 and 28. I got much fitter in a cardiovascular sense, but I did not lose a single pound or a single inch off my waist. I *had* to start tracking food for a while to lose weight.

 

I no longer track food because I've reaccustomed my body to a lower intake, and I am much slimmer now. I also don't exercise anywhere near as much.

 

Now, exercise can certainly *help*, and it certainly won't hurt to add it to your daily life. But if you're not losing weight after you add exercise, you may need to investigate some form of cutting intake, whether it's cutting carbs, tracking calories alone, or following something like no-S.

[Sandragood1]

My experience is that 90-120 minutes of walking at a moderate pace for four days per week did not help me to lose weight. I was 45 when I spent the entire summer walking around a local 4.5 mile lake on M, W, F, and Saturdays. I felt great. My ankle, which I had badly broken a few years previously, finally stopped swelling all the time. But my weight did not budge. I was neither dieting nor pigging out. I was reasonably active every day ( gardening). So I don't think that "gentle" exercise is going to help weight. Maybe if you are a stress eater the lower stress would help?

For myself, I find that losing weight requires that all the portions of my life where I serve others need to be routine and under control before I have the mental/emotional energy to consider making dietary changes. And it does, for me at least, require dietary changes to lose weight. Btw I am considered obese.

[Annie G]

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/the-amish-obesity-studies

 

A normal Amish day begins with Breakfast that typically includes a stack of pancakes with syrup, scrambled eggs, sausages, hash browns, bread, butter and pie. Lunch: a taco salad with potato crisps, ground beef, shredded cheese, beans and canned peaches. And dinner: beef, gravy, potatoes, bread and butter, more gravy, followed by chocolate pie. The average person would not last a week on this diet without putting on weight.

The typical Amish diet would be way too many carbs for me, but I'm not working like they are. 

I think the Amish WORK HARD all day long.  There's a big difference between spending 90 minutes on a treadmill and spending all day long working hard.   There's also a difference between accumulating 10,000 steps while you're out leisurely shopping vs when you're briskly walking long enough to obtain some cardiovascular benefits.  

 

What I find tough about losing weight is that what works beautifully for one person might not work for me.   For me, fairly low carb, elliptical/cycle/treadmill 30 minutes a day, and also 30 minutes a day of either HIIT or weight training is what's working to lower my body fat and alter my weight.  Once cycling season starts I'll be back to that instead of spending so much time in the gym, but even though I cycle 1.5-2 hours a day from spring-fall, I won't lose any weight doing that.     If I lived the life of an average Amish housewife, I would likely be  thinner because I would be working much harder.   

 

[fairfarmhand]

The reason the Amish don't blow up on those diets is likely not due to one factor, but rather a combination of factors.

 

1. Genetics.

 

2. They don't eat a ton of PROCESSED carbs...crackers, chips, snack cakes. They eat things that someone baked/cooked/prepared.

 

3. They don't just go turn up the thermostat to get warm. They have to go gather and chop wood, stuff it in the stove, and tend it all day. They don't just turn on a faucet for hot water. They have to get it (perhaps hauling it the old fashioned way or piping it into the house with a pump) and then heat it. They walk to neighbor's homes or they have to go get the horses and then hitch them up, etc. It's not one activity that they do, it's that every task that they perform requires more effort that "modern" Americans.

[Soror]

Um, just a thought, have you looked real close at the Amish women? Most aren't what we'd call slim, they have more of a farmer's wife build. Not that their unhealthy but I don't think most American women aspire to look like Amish women. They are not overweight but not really slim either. So, I guess I would take that into consideration when looking at their diet. I think that our population would be doing well to take after them in many aspects but a lot of what they do is not easily replicable in our lives. I know with the fitbit I can reach Amish levels of activity during a regular busy day but I don't hit those levels every day.

 

I'm not over 40 so I cannot speak to that. My mom is in her 50s and what seems to work for her to lose is a low carb/low calorie diet (I think it is on the unhealthy end at times but it works), exercise doesn't seem to figure in much but she is also generally very active when the weather is decent at all. I don't think there is anyone recipe however, eating real foods and being active in a manner that works for you- carb/protein/fat levels varying.

[Joyofsixreboot]

I agree that the Amish here are sturdily built and shop at Walmart. 

I only have a study of one so YMMV. The gentle exercise I started with made me feel better which I think made healthier food choices seem worthwhile when I started. Walking and such had no effect on my weight, however.  I had to make diet changes (I still love to eat but switched from a candy bar to an apple, etc) to start things moving.  Once I reached decent shape and kicked the exercise up the weight moved much faster.  I read somewhere that inactivity doesn't make us heavy, being heavy leads to inactivity. I'm pretty sure tht every person has a different mix of diet and exercise that will work for them, the trick is to find it.  For me 60 minutes of intentional exercise with as much extra movement as I can get and a diet of mostly plants with lean protein thrown in works. I'm 52 so who knows what I will say in 10 years. I mostly want to stay feeling energetic, avoid diseases of age, and stay reasonably strong.

[fairfarmhand]

What's frustrating in the "You don't need to exercise, just move more all day" camp is that for most people, you can't just say "I am going to move more." and get enough activity to stay healthy.  When you consider that most folks' jobs are indoors and they HAVE to be there a certain number of hours per day, they may not live in an area where it's safe to walk, in winter it gets dark around the time that people get home from work, etc. Well, it boils down to yes, you do probably need to actively seek movement in the form of an elliptical machine, a fitness class, or a gym.

 

For some people with some lives, no formal exercise isn't needed, but for others, yes, it is needed.

[Wildiris]

My experience is that 90-120 minutes of walking at a moderate pace for four days per week did not help me to lose weight. I was 45 when I spent the entire summer walking around a local 4.5 mile lake on M, W, F, and Saturdays. I felt great. My ankle, which I had badly broken a few years previously, finally stopped swelling all the time. But my weight did not budge. I was neither dieting nor pigging out. I was reasonably active every day ( gardening). So I don't think that "gentle" exercise is going to help weight. Maybe if you are a stress eater the lower stress would help?

For myself, I find that losing weight requires that all the portions of my life where I serve others need to be routine and under control before I have the mental/emotional energy to consider making dietary changes. And it does, for me at least, require dietary changes to lose weight. Btw I am considered obese.

 

I found the above to be true for me too, and it is one of the reasons I started swimming, but swimming laps is not the same as swimming with a coach who is pushing you to meet intervals. I never knew a person could sweat while swimming until I started doing masters swimming. Has it helped with weight loss? Yes and no. I have lost most of the belly fat a woman gets after menopause, and cardiovascularly I am fit. I do not get winded when hiking up from the beach to the cliff top, but the scale has not budged. I spend over 200 min. swimming a week/3+hrs. I've added weights on the off days. I walk around the land a lot gardening, firewood, animals, etc.

 

Over the age of 50, taking off the extra weight is hard if you're borderline overweight. An obese friend was successful on the Paleo Diet. She lost over 50 pounds by cutting out carbs, and she has kept that weight off.  My MIL 70+ has kept slim by eating very few calories. She eats only one meal a day-a salad. DH slimmed down and has kept if off by surfing and eating one and a half meals a day. He drinks lots of water and eats lots of seeds and nuts, and he's hungry most of the time.

 

My take-away on the weight loss conumdrum: After 50 exercise is great for keeping your body fit, but without scaling back your diet and making every calorie count, a person will have a difficult time losing weight.

[Soror]

What's frustrating in the "You don't need to exercise, just move more all day" camp is that for most people, you can't just say "I am going to move more." and get enough activity to stay healthy.  When you consider that most folks' jobs are indoors and they HAVE to be there a certain number of hours per day, they may not live in an area where it's safe to walk, in winter it gets dark around the time that people get home from work, etc. Well, it boils down to yes, you do probably need to actively seek movement in the form of an elliptical machine, a fitness class, or a gym.

 

For some people with some lives, no formal exercise isn't needed, but for others, yes, it is needed.

If people have time to get to the gym they have time to add more movement in their day though, without taking the extra time sitting on their butts driving to the gym. Of course some people prefer going to the gym (for a number of reasons) but I don't think it is an issue of time.  Adding in movement doesn't have to be all at once it is more about the little stuff, like the often mentioned taking the stairs, parking further away, getting up ever hour here and there. I do hope that we are at the beginning of a movement that realizes our human bodies need to move to be healthy and employers will realize that setting up the workplace in ways that are more accommodating to movement is a positive for everyone. However, I think most people have an opportunity to add at least some movement to their day if they are motivated but the more you sit the more you want to sit.  It may not be an ideal amount of moment, some people need to drastically reorder their life in order to move enough but going to the gym for 30 min or an hour isn't going to cure that. 

 

As a homeschool mom I don't see it as an issue of time either, I'm able to set up our day and life in the way I want, which when I'm feeling well includes plenty of activity. I can get 5000 steps before breakfast just getting things done around here. I think with moms in general it is more of an issue with the fact that we don't prioritize ourselves.

 

Fwiw as a person who is an advocate of natural movement it is just saying that being healthy with our movement levels just isn't about working out but our whole lives but one should be active in any way that works for them, some get a thrill from being in an exercise class with others, some running by themselves or others keep busy in their daily lives with any variety of things (there is always plenty to do around here that gets up my heart rate up plenty).

[VaKim]

Ime, after menopause (mine was surgically induced), I absolutely cannot lose weight without going hungry most of the time. If I eat enough to even be satisfied (doesn't matter what kind of food), I will either maintain or gain a tad. And I can eat a truck load of broccoli (whatever vegetable) and be hungry a half hour later. So that does not work either.

[ILiveInFlipFlops]

As a homeschool mom I don't see it as an issue of time either, I'm able to set up our day and life in the way I want, which when I'm feeling well includes plenty of activity. I can get 5000 steps before breakfast just getting things done around here. I think with moms in general it is more of an issue with the fact that we don't prioritize ourselves.

 

How on earth do you manage that? I've had days where I feel like I haven't sat down all day with the exception of teaching time, and when I look at my Fitbit, I've walked maybe 4000 steps for the day!!! It drives me insane! Our house isn't huge, but it's a good size. It even has stairs!

 

Even on days when I've gone out to run errands and traveled from place to place, I've not managed more than 8,000 steps in a day. And I can't go out shopping every day, because that causes a whole host of other problems! I completely agree with you that we all need more constant general movement and activity in our days, but I haven't yet figured out how to manage that, ESPECIALLY as a HSing mom, without an hour or so dedicated to regular exercise. 

 

It's just another reason that I hate living in the burbs. We have to get in the car to go anywhere, there's no real natural space that I can just send the kids out to (or go out to myself), I'm limited in the size of my yard and garden, I can't have animals of any kind, so there's no work associated with that, etc. I find it extremely difficult to find ways to get my body moving outside of time on the treadmill or time spent walking in circles around the same blocks over and over. 

[hornblower]

The problem is that barring something insane like running daily marathons, there is no real way to out-exercise a bad diet. For many people, they exercise and then they eat back more than they've exercised off, and then they get frustrated because they aren't losing weight with all the exercise they're doing. People (including dieticians) are notoriously bad at overestimating their calories burnt and underestimating their intake.

 

:iagree:  THIS.

 

Most people cannot outrun a bad diet. It is way too easy to eat 200 or 500 excess calories. It is hard to burn them. And many are not fit enough to be able to burn them in any reasonable time to make it part of their daily routine...

 

 

[Soror]

How on earth do you manage that? I've had days where I feel like I haven't sat down all day with the exception of teaching time, and when I look at my Fitbit, I've walked maybe 4000 steps for the day!!! It drives me insane! Our house isn't huge, but it's a good size. It even has stairs!

 

Even on days when I've gone out to run errands and traveled from place to place, I've not managed more than 8,000 steps in a day. And I can't go out shopping every day, because that causes a whole host of other problems! I completely agree with you that we all need more constant general movement and activity in our days, but I haven't yet figured out how to manage that, ESPECIALLY as a HSing mom, without an hour or so dedicated to regular exercise. 

 

It's just another reason that I hate living in the burbs. We have to get in the car to go anywhere, there's no real natural space that I can just send the kids out to (or go out to myself), I'm limited in the size of my yard and garden, I can't have animals of any kind, so there's no work associated with that, etc. I find it extremely difficult to find ways to get my body moving outside of time on the treadmill or time spent walking in circles around the same blocks over and over. 

I am a busy bee and walk quickly, our house is average size 1650 IIRC, we have a downstairs but I don't go down a ton. There is always plenty to do, for me it is more an issue of energy and motivation and staying off the computer :)

[NorthwestMom]

I find the advice on exercise equally as confusing and contradictory as the advice on dieting.

For instance--"they" are now saying that running can lead to cardiovascular disease, and is a poor form of exercise for health if the term 'health' involves the body being in a state without injury (since running leads to joint problems).

I think we are meant to be active and what many now deem "exercise" really isn't--we are not designed to sit around all day; we are supposed to be moving, so to count walking to your mailbox as exercise seems rather sad.

The current theory I am investigating is laid out in Body by Science, which advocates super slow weight lifting once every week to 10 days or so with regular activity in between, keeping in mind that by 'regular' they mean biking, walking, swimming, hiking--things we should be enjoying as a regular part of our lives (not sitting)--not jumping around to an aerobics tape, necessarily.

Done properly, weight lifting has all the benefits of cardio and fewer deleterious effects on the joints.  Plus, the cardio benefit is more global:  ever get good at doing 30 minutes on a tread mill and then try to run outside for 30 minutes?  It feels like you are dying (me at least).  Or riding a stationary bike, etc.  One gets good at that specific function but it does not translate into other real life activities.  The authors have a really compelling way of laying it all out--much better than I have done here!

 

Where did you see that?

[Laura Corin]

What's frustrating in the "You don't need to exercise, just move more all day" camp is that for most people, you can't just say "I am going to move more." and get enough activity to stay healthy.  When you consider that most folks' jobs are indoors and they HAVE to be there a certain number of hours per day, they may not live in an area where it's safe to walk, in winter it gets dark around the time that people get home from work, etc. Well, it boils down to yes, you do probably need to actively seek movement in the form of an elliptical machine, a fitness class, or a gym.

 

For some people with some lives, no formal exercise isn't needed, but for others, yes, it is needed.

 

Well.... I'm new at trying to move more, so take this with a pinch of salt, but I also work in an office so I can talk about this problem.

 

I started the day by standing on one leg while I brushed my teeth (Mom-Ninja tip) then did various stretches while driving to work (circling my shoulders, wrists and left foot, plus arching and curving my back and doing my pelvic floor exercises).  I dropped off at the supermarket on the way to work, parked at the other end of the car park, and picked up a basket rather than a cart/trolley.  When I spotted that my normal dishwasher tablets were 50% off, I picked up a second basket to spread the weight.  Then carried the bags from the checkout back to the car.  

 

At lunch time I walked up and down a hill for fifteen minutes, then went back to the office for a fifteen-minute soup.  All day, any time I was photocopying or waiting for the kettle to boil, I did a variety of stretches.  When I went to get the post, I ran up and down the stairs.

 

After work, I was ten minutes early to pick up Hobbes from school, so I walked rather than sitting in the car.  I got home and walked the dog for two miles up and down some hills (yes, in the dark).  Now that I am back, I am relaxing with the boards, but I'm standing up with my laptop on the kitchen counter and doing hip circles while I type.

 

After supper, I might do some yoga in front of the telly, or I might just sit on the floor in various positions.

 

Out of all that, the only thing that took more time than a 'normal' day was an extra five minutes for parking at the other end of the car park.

[nevergiveup]

Where did you see that?

Actually, I just saw reference to it in the news recently, but the authors of the book I mentioned site some references, too.

The Mayo clinic has a paper on the potential adverse effects of excessive endurance exercise (key word in their paper is "excessive") but the more recent news report I saw made it sound like one does not have to be a marathon runner:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/03/running-too-much-health-study_n_5079707.html

This isn't the one I saw, but it mentions running only 20 miles per week as reducing one's life span.

[Joyofsixreboot]

Actually, I just saw reference to it in the news recently, but the authors of the book I mentioned site some references, too.

The Mayo clinic has a paper on the potential adverse effects of excessive endurance exercise (key word in their paper is "excessive") but the more recent news report I saw made it sound like one does not have to be a marathon runner:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/03/running-too-much-health-study_n_5079707.html

This isn't the one I saw, but it mentions running only 20 miles per week as reducing one's life span.

I don't buy it but not running would make me cry and make my children force feed me wine to mellow out.

 

Okay, back from reading the article. Since most of us aren't running 7 minute miles we're probably good ;)

[nevergiveup]

I don't buy it but not running would make me cry and make my children force feed me wine to mellow out.

 

Okay, back from reading the article. Since most of us aren't running 7 minute miles we're probably good ;)

Ahhh--you must be one who gets a runner's high... :001_smile:

Only thing I got from running was a baker's cyst and the thought,"When will this hell end???"

Still, 20 miles per week did not sound like much--my friends who run do more than that.

[Reefgazer]

I lost a significant amount of weight at 48 by cutting carbs to 4-5 servings a day and exercising moderately.  I replaced the carbs with protein.  The key was weighing and measuring my food, since otherwise I underestimated my portions and there was no loss when I went over my pre-determined calorie limit for the day (which was about 1600 calories/day).  Exercise didn't determine if I lost weight or not; I can lose weight without exercising.  But exercise tones and helps health.

[Reefgazer]

...and I bet those meals have reasonably sized portions, too.

The reason the Amish don't blow up on those diets is likely not due to one factor, but rather a combination of factors.

 

1. Genetics.

 

2. They don't eat a ton of PROCESSED carbs...crackers, chips, snack cakes. They eat things that someone baked/cooked/prepared.

 

3. They don't just go turn up the thermostat to get warm. They have to go gather and chop wood, stuff it in the stove, and tend it all day. They don't just turn on a faucet for hot water. They have to get it (perhaps hauling it the old fashioned way or piping it into the house with a pump) and then heat it. They walk to neighbor's homes or they have to go get the horses and then hitch them up, etc. It's not one activity that they do, it's that every task that they perform requires more effort that "modern" Americans.

 

[source of joy]

I would prefer to not hijack that thread any more than I've already done  :blush:. I've been doing some reading and would love any feedback, thoughts, comments, etc. from all.

I would particularly like to hear if anyone has experienced weight loss from this approach and if they're over the age of 40. :)

I'm in my late 40s and am at a point where emotional eating has become my middle name and any diet is a recipe for failure. I'm under tons of stress and the "d" word just makes me want to take a very long nap, if you KWIM. I wish it wasn't so, but that's where I am. Diets depress me. Exercise makes me happy and lifts my mood. :D

Thank you. 

----

 

I've been told that there was an article in Health Magazine several years ago that I wish I had access to. It said that to lose fat without dieting, a minimum of 90 minutes of cardio exercise every day was necessary.

I'm sure that gender and age make a huge difference when it comes to results. It seems that the older we get, the harder it becomes to lose weight through exercise alone. 

 

I've included some links below, basically here's the gist of some of them:

 

Moderate-intensity cardio exercise, such as brisk walking or cycling on a relatively flat route, is appropriate if you sustain a 90-minute session aimed at weight loss. This intensity gets your heart beating faster, but is still easy enough that you can speak a complete sentence.

 

Then I remembered reading about the Amish:

The average American takes 2,300 to 3,000 steps per day. This is a dismal rate compared to the Old Order Amish community, who take an average of 14,000-19,000 steps per day (maximum 10 miles per day). They have the lowest percentage of obese adults compared with the American population at large. The men have an obesity rate of 0% and the women's obesity rate is at 4%. 

 

Their diets are not extremely stringent, more like healthy. They eat carbs, etc. I'm sure they don't eat to excess, but they don't deprive themselves either. 

 

90 Minutes of Cardio a Day to Lose Weight

 

How Much Exercise Do You Really Need to Lose Weight

 

How Many Steps Per Day to Lose Weight

 

90 Minutes of Cardio a Day to Lose Weight

 

The Amish Diet

 

Walk Like the Amish

I exercised until I couldn't exercise anymore due to injuries, I didn't want to see another d word ever again either.  I ruined my feet and developed bursitis in my hips....I hardly lost any weight at all...

 

I'm also over 40 years of age and I just listened to this book:  http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Get-Fat-About/dp/0307474259/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425341152&sr=1-1&keywords=why+we+get+fat  It's NOT a diet book and I didn't want another diet book ever...diets stress me out and every time I've tried one of late, I gain more weight because I totally obsess about food when I'm on a diet...This book was very encouraging and enlightening...It talks about the myth of how calories in does NOT equal calories out and how too much exercise may even jeopardize weight loss because of how exercise increases your hunger levels.  He's not against exercising, he just doesn't believe in using it as a main weight loss/management source IYKWIM....etc...He talks about enzymes and hormones involved in our digestive system and how they can all inhibit or help with weight loss/gain.  As always, I take things like this latest book with a grain of salt since I don't agree with everything he says but it's definitely helping me rethink how I can change my lifestyle to better health without obsessing about it so much.

 

Best of luck on your journey...

[kiana]

...and I bet those meals have reasonably sized portions, too.

 

Not really, they eat enough that if we ate like that we'd blow up. It is more the lifestyle difference and the amount of manual labor done.

[Negin]

Thank you all so much :). You've given me lots to think about.

I go through phases where I love to plan and re-plan my workouts, etc. It's the bit of the OCD in me. Overly stringent dieting is not a possibility for me at this point in my life. Pretty much any dieting, actually. It's frustrating. Dh reminds me to just be happy and enjoy life. I know that he's right. Just hard to follow at times. 

 

2. They don't eat a ton of PROCESSED carbs...crackers, chips, snack cakes. They eat things that someone baked/cooked/prepared.

 

Neither do I. I seldom eat junk. Don't get me wrong, I love food and sweet things, but don't over-indulge and seldom buy rubbish. 

 

I'm also over 40 years of age and I just listened to this book:  http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Get-Fat-About/dp/0307474259/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425341152&sr=1-1&keywords=why+we+get+fat  It's NOT a diet book and I didn't want another diet book ever...diets stress me out and every time I've tried one of late, I gain more weight because I totally obsess about food when I'm on a diet

 

Best of luck on your journey...

Thank you so much. I have his book and read it a few years ago. I tried to follow his approach, if you can call it that - closest approach would be Atkins, I think. I can't do it now. I wish I could. 

 

Thank you all so much for understanding. Keep the helpful posts coming. 

[fairfarmhand]

How on earth do you manage that? I've had days where I feel like I haven't sat down all day with the exception of teaching time, and when I look at my Fitbit, I've walked maybe 4000 steps for the day!!! It drives me insane! Our house isn't huge, but it's a good size. It even has stairs!

 

Even on days when I've gone out to run errands and traveled from place to place, I've not managed more than 8,000 steps in a day. And I can't go out shopping every day, because that causes a whole host of other problems! I completely agree with you that we all need more constant general movement and activity in our days, but I haven't yet figured out how to manage that, ESPECIALLY as a HSing mom, without an hour or so dedicated to regular exercise. 

 

It's just another reason that I hate living in the burbs. We have to get in the car to go anywhere, there's no real natural space that I can just send the kids out to (or go out to myself), I'm limited in the size of my yard and garden, I can't have animals of any kind, so there's no work associated with that, etc. I find it extremely difficult to find ways to get my body moving outside of time on the treadmill or time spent walking in circles around the same blocks over and over. 

I know! I have a farm. 43 acres with lots of work to be done on it. I'm active.

 

Even in the summer though, with tending the house, the garden and the animals, my pedometer wouldn't make 10K without my going jogging for at least 2 miles.

 

So I do know that keeping an eye on my diet is crucial because just normal activity isn't enough for my situation. I have to be cautious in my eating and exercise

[fairfarmhand]

Do you think though that our perception of being a healthy weight is skewed? I mean we naturally do put on weight as we age as our metabolism slows. Perhaps we're not intended to be the size we were in our 20s when we are 50? Is this one place where culture is shifting our mindset? I'm not talking about blowing up to 250 pounds. I'm talking about being at a heavier, but still healthier weight.

[flyingiguana]

Um, just a thought, have you looked real close at the Amish women? Most aren't what we'd call slim, they have more of a farmer's wife build. Not that their unhealthy but I don't think most American women aspire to look like Amish women. They are not overweight but not really slim either. So, I guess I would take that into consideration when looking at their diet. I think that our population would be doing well to take after them in many aspects but a lot of what they do is not easily replicable in our lives. I know with the fitbit I can reach Amish levels of activity during a regular busy day but I don't hit those levels every day.

 

I'm not over 40 so I cannot speak to that. My mom is in her 50s and what seems to work for her to lose is a low carb/low calorie diet (I think it is on the unhealthy end at times but it works), exercise doesn't seem to figure in much but she is also generally very active when the weather is decent at all. I don't think there is anyone recipe however, eating real foods and being active in a manner that works for you- carb/protein/fat levels varying.

 

My grandmother -- who was also a farmer's wife (actually, maybe she was just a farmer) -- was moving a lot every day all day long into her 90's.  She didn't eat junk, hardly any processed food, mostly ate out of her garden, etc.  But she was never slim.

 

I find that as I approach the age I first knew her at that my body shape is looking pretty similar to hers.  It's not model-skinny, despite exercise.  LOTS of exercise and dieting don't do a thing to change that.  And all weight lifting I've done has only put on pounds.  I have managed to get blood pressure and cholesterol and blood sugar down to healthy levels.  And I feel a lot better.  But, I've only put on weight with this regimen.

 

So while I think lots of exercise and a good diet are the healthy way to go, none of it may ever help one to lose weight on the scale.  Genetics are going to have more to say about it than the calorie count in and out.  And getting more muscular will increase one's weight without really reducing inches.

[flyingiguana]

I don't buy it but not running would make me cry and make my children force feed me wine to mellow out.

 

Okay, back from reading the article. Since most of us aren't running 7 minute miles we're probably good ;)

 

My impression was that there weren't that many high intensity runners in the study who actually died, so the poor outcome associated with lots of running was based on a small sample size.

 

So my take on the study was that you don't have to do hours and hours of fast running to get the benefits of running.  And that the results aren't as clear for people who run a lot.  They need more data for the high intensity group.  (But, I'm not seeing the sample size now in the posted article)

 

[MyLittleBears]

Okay, so I'm 38. Close enough?  Trim Healthy Mama.  ;)

In short it is a low glycemic/ diabetic diet. It works. I've gotten to the point where I don't even think about how to eat this way anymore and I've lost 15 pounds. I did not have too much to lose before but I could put it on quite easily. I almost gave up trying. Exercise only ever brought me so far and now it's just for the sake of staying healthy. I think weight is 90% diet and 10% exercise. I've never had so much energy in my life nor felt so great.  Now I have more of a hard time keeping the weight on because I've revved up my metabolism. It's quite a switch and honestly the easiest thing I ever tried!

[kiana]

Do you think though that our perception of being a healthy weight is skewed? I mean we naturally do put on weight as we age as our metabolism slows. Perhaps we're not intended to be the size we were in our 20s when we are 50? Is this one place where culture is shifting our mindset? I'm not talking about blowing up to 250 pounds. I'm talking about being at a heavier, but still healthier weight.

 

Yes.

 

A matronly figure is not to be despised. 

[Sun]

Mid 40s here, and I lost 43 pounds last year. I probably did "diet," though; I tracked what I ate (or, more accurately, I usually planned it ahead of time to fit my calorie limits) and used exercise to burn extra calories on heavier-eating days and to lift my mood. Once I got in the swing of things, I found it pretty easy and very satisfying and empowering, and I stopped thinking that I was just unable to lose weight. I'm happy to talk about how I did it via PM, if you'd like.

 

You can definitely lose weight just by doing lots of exercise because weight really is a matter of calories in vs. calories out. If you expend more than you eat, you will lose weight. The larger the difference, the faster you'll lose--or gain if your calories eaten exceed what you expend. The problem is that it takes a lot of exercise done consistently to burn enough calories to start showing up as a consistent loss, and studies have shown that a lot of people unknowingly eat more to compensate for their extra exercise, thus undoing their calorie deficit. Also, trying to figure out the actual calories you've burned is difficult, and many (most?) online calculators seem to greatly overestimate burns.

 

 

[MIch elle]

Actually, I just saw reference to it in the news recently, but the authors of the book I mentioned site some references, too.

The Mayo clinic has a paper on the potential adverse effects of excessive endurance exercise (key word in their paper is "excessive") but the more recent news report I saw made it sound like one does not have to be a marathon runner:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/03/running-too-much-health-study_n_5079707.html

This isn't the one I saw, but it mentions running only 20 miles per week as reducing one's life span.

 

Yes, watch this video: 

[Starr]

The reason the Amish don't blow up on those diets is likely not due to one factor, but rather a combination of factors.

 

1. Genetics.

 

2. They don't eat a ton of PROCESSED carbs...crackers, chips, snack cakes. They eat things that someone baked/cooked/prepared.

 

3. They don't just go turn up the thermostat to get warm. They have to go gather and chop wood, stuff it in the stove, and tend it all day. They don't just turn on a faucet for hot water. They have to get it (perhaps hauling it the old fashioned way or piping it into the house with a pump) and then heat it. They walk to neighbor's homes or they have to go get the horses and then hitch them up, etc. It's not one activity that they do, it's that every task that they perform requires more effort that "modern" Americans.

 

 

I'm not so sure about the processed foods. By the looks of the grocery carts that's changing.

[hornblower]

 

 

A matronly figure is not to be despised. 

 

I wouldn't say it's to be despised but I'm still in favour of the bmi scales. If throughout your life you go from the low end of the bmi to the high end of the bmi, that's one thing.

 

At my height, I can be in normal BMI with a range of 115-154 lbs. That's a lot of wiggle room for middle age spread, slowing metabolism & sweet rolls ;)

 

But if you actually start consistently straying into the overweight range, then I think it's time to re-assess.

[kiana]

I wouldn't say it's to be despised but I'm still in favour of the bmi scales. If throughout your life you go from the low end of the bmi to the high end of the bmi, that's one thing.

 

At my height, I can be in normal BMI with a range of 115-154 lbs. That's a lot of wiggle room for middle age spread, slowing metabolism & sweet rolls ;)

 

But if you actually start consistently straying into the overweight range, then I think it's time to re-assess.

Yes and no.

 

If your BMI says that you're obese, you probably are. (95% of men and 99% of women -- and if you are in that small percentage, you probably exercise enough to know it). But there are a lot of people where BMI says that they're merely overweight or even in a normal range who are actually obese (35%+ bodyfat) -- so an okay BMI shouldn't be interpreted as "I'm ok". (source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2877506/)We absolutely *should* try to stay out of that range, especially if we measure bodyfat.

 

That being said, I think we have unrealistic expectations of where people should be based on where we see Hollywood stars and other people who get paid to look good. We shouldn't expect that a woman at 50 who's had 4 children should have the same slim waist as an 18-year-old, and she should expect to gain a pants size or two. (Now, if she *does* stay slim, great for her! Some people *are* naturally slim!) But it's totally okay (assuming the height makes these sizes reasonable) to have been a size 8 at 18 but a size 12 at 50.

 

I'm still not sure if I'm making any sense, but I think that the unrealistic aspirations actually help feed the obesity epidemic. When people feel as if they've failed unless they get back into their 18-year-old jeans (at least in my unscientific anecdotal evidence) they're quite likely to say "to hell with it" and head for the Twinkies.

[hornblower]

Yes and no.

 

If your BMI says that you're obese, you probably are. (95% of men and 99% of women -- and if you are in that small percentage, you probably exercise enough to know it). But there are a lot of people where BMI says that they're merely overweight or even in a normal range who are actually obese (35%+ bodyfat) -- so an okay BMI shouldn't be interpreted as "I'm ok". (source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2877506/)We absolutely *should* try to stay out of that range, especially if we measure bodyfat.

 

That being said, I think we have unrealistic expectations of where people should be based on where we see Hollywood stars and other people who get paid to look good. We shouldn't expect that a woman at 50 who's had 4 children should have the same slim waist as an 18-year-old, and she should expect to gain a pants size or two. (Now, if she *does* stay slim, great for her! Some people *are* naturally slim!)

 

I'm still not sure if I'm making any sense, but I think that the unrealistic aspirations actually help feed the obesity epidemic. When people feel as if they've failed unless they get back into their 18-year-old jeans (at least in my unscientific anecdotal evidence) they're quite likely to say "to hell with it" and head for the Twinkies.

 

I like what you've said here & I think you raise a good point about shape & whether people just give up....

[NorthwestMom]

Yes, watch this video: 

 

Ok, I *have* heard of cardiovascular damage due to extreme endurance running, but since this thread is titled "Simple Ways That You"ve Lost Weight", I would hate for anyone considering starting a simple running plan to think that running a few miles a few times per week cases cardiovascular damage. It does not. I have run about 10 miles per week for about the past 10 years - I didn't start until well into my 30s - and my cholesterol improved and my weight is stable and healthy. The old ticker is fine. :) I think regular exercise is one of the best things you can do to keep your body healthy at any weight.

[Pam in CT]

Ok, I *have* heard of cardiovascular damage due to extreme endurance running, but since this thread is titled "Simple Ways That You"ve Lost Weight", I would hate for anyone considering starting a simple running plan to think that running a few miles a few times per week cases cardiovascular damage. It does not. I have run about 10 miles per week for about the past 10 years - I didn't start until well into my 30s - and my cholesterol improved and my weight is stable and healthy. The old ticker is fine. :) I think regular exercise is one of the best things you can do to keep your body healthy at any weight.

 

:iagree: There's a TED talk running around -- I forget the name of the female life coach type person who does it -- along the lines of

 

"Simple....

but not easy."

 

 

I've kind of adopted it as a mantra.

 

Losing weight requires sorting out eating patterns that work for the long haul for us and a pattern of exercise that works for the long haul for us.  What works for me won't necessarily work for my sister-in-law, and vice versa; or for Negin or the next person.  Because. Different.

 

Also, sadly, what (more or less) works for me now is different than what used to work for me when I was in my 30s.  Because. Metabolism.

 

It's definitely not easy.  

It's not especially complicated, though.  Sustainability is all.  One small healthy step (say, giving up coffee sweetener) that seems like OK, that's a small thing, I can do that most the time for the rest of my life.  Then, once that habit is settled, another small thing (say, doing a set of push-ups while the coffee is brewing).  If something you try truly makes you miserable, it's not sustainable! Try a different small step.  Keep on plugging until you have worked out a reasonable eating pattern (not "diet") and a healthy movement pattern (which for some people will be a formal "exercise program" and others not) that leaves you feeling good.  

 

Even then we are unlikely to look like we did when we were 30.  Because. Aging.  That's OK.

[Slache]

Hi Negin.  :seeya:

 

I didn't read any of the other responses. I've been exercising regularly since I was 25, I'm now 29, and I believe I've lost over 100 pounds in the past 4 years including 9 months (4 very hard) of pregnancy, and 9 months of PPD causing me a loss of around a year of fitness.

 

I don't diet. I recommend the grapefruit diet, but dieting is not me. I do suffer from depression and tend to scarf down bags of candy during hard times, but it seems that the more I exercise the less candy I seem to "need". Also more exercise = more sleep = happier Slache.

 

Fitness is how I've lost the weight. I've definitely made changes in my diet which have made me healthier, but if I didn't exercise I would just be a healthier 270 pound person. I didn't want that. I think that cardio burns more fat (in my experience), but weight lifting changes the shape of your body. I think a proper fitness program should include both. I think that if you work out 90 minutes a day you will burn out. Can you try 90 minutes every other other day and do yoga or swimming the rest of the time?