The "psychology" of obesity?

[Rhonda in TX]

My DD has been overweight practically her whole life. You know how babies have those round tummies that they eventually grow out of? She never did. It has been a constant issue. As a parent, it's a difficult line to walk. I want her to be healthy, but harping on a child about their weight? It can be so, so hard to know how to handle. She is currently following her doctor's advice and making progress. Slowly, but getting there. I hate (HATE!) that she is dealing with this at such a young age, and will most likely fight it her whole life.

 

DD is very oral. I think that's part of the problem. My FIL (her grandfather) is an alcoholic, so I think there is an addiction element as well.

[Laurie4b]

On the physiology of obesity, the NYT recently published a fascinating article: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/magazine/tara-parker-pope-fat-trap.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=magazine

The amount of time and energy that people who have lost significant amounts of weight have to put into keeping it off is mind-boggling to me.

 

On the psychology of obesity, I found this book incredibly compelling. http://www.amazon.com/Passing-Thin-Losing-Weight-Finding/dp/B005ZOGIMU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1328676385&sr=8-1

 

Excellent article.

[elegantlion]

Excellent article.

 

That is an interesting article. Several years ago I lost 40lbs. I kept it off for a good period of time, I feel like I had reset my metabolism and felt good. Then I started fasting for religious reasons, once a month for a day, up to three days (daylight hours) at the longest. Then I started gaining weight. I've always believed that one day of starvation knocked my metabolism off whack again.

 

Now I'm working on losing weight again, but not by doing ultra low calorie dieting, it just messes with my body too much.

[Parrothead]

My DD has been overweight practically her whole life. You know how babies have those round tummies that they eventually grow out of? She never did. It has been a constant issue. As a parent, it's a difficult line to walk. I want her to be healthy, but harping on a child about their weight? It can be so, so hard to know how to handle. She is currently following her doctor's advice and making progress. Slowly, but getting there. I hate (HATE!) that she is dealing with this at such a young age, and will most likely fight it her whole life.

 

DD is very oral. I think that's part of the problem. My FIL (her grandfather) is an alcoholic, so I think there is an addiction element as well.

:grouphug: You are not alone in dealing with this. My dd is 12. She is 5'5" and 150 pounds. She will probably never be a skinny miss. If she maintains what she has she will always be a "medium" but if she ever eating habits change it will be very easy for her to go into "large" or even "extra large."

[regentrude]

I read the article. I am ready to believe that there is a genetic component, but that does NOT explain the rise in obesity rates over the last thirty years. The genes have not changed. The only thing that has changed is lifestyle.

Also, genetically there is very little difference between European immigrants in the US and people who stayed in Europe (simply because the few hundred years since the families came to the US are not enough to significantly alter genetic makeup.), yet obesity rates there are lower. So, clearly, genes can not explain that discrepancy.

I also read about the low carb thing all the time. Yet a traditional diet in my country of origin would typically be high carb (lots of bread and potatoes), because that was cheaper - meat on Sundays only was the norm for centuries. People could not afford a diet as high in protein as is consumed nowadays in developed countries. So, by the low carb theories, these people should have been fatter, which is clearly not supported by statistics.

 

ETA: If dieting sets up the body for inevitable weight gain, there should be a statistically significant observation for the generation of millions of people who were forced to subsist on an extremely low calory diet following WWII in Europe. My mother for example has childhood memories of going around begging for food. People were not on low rations for a few weeks; the near-starvation period lasted far longer. So, if the mechanism is that simple, obesity rates should have exploded in the 50s and 60s when people were again able to have enough food.. yet the rise in obesity has only been recorded in the last few decades.

Edited February 8, 2012 by regentrude

[laughing lioness]

Why is it a fail???

How come every serious mountaineer loses weight on a strenuous treck because he can't carry enough food to replace the thousands of calories used up by exercise? I do not know a single person who does not lose when put under conditions of *sustained* strenuous physical activity in the absence of enough food. I don't know any obese long distance hikers or mountaineers.

Even my overweight-in-sedentary-condition-friend loses- if the discrepancy between energy use due to physical activity and energy input from food is just large enough. It's just that humans are designed for far more physical activity than even avid gym goers achieve.

I completely agree that losing weight is hard.

But to tell me that no amount of physical activity is leading to weight loss simply is not true. Two+ weeks with only the food you can carry will make anybody lose.

 

I spent a month backpacking at age 17 and got all the way down to 145 (i'm tall). I was solid muscle, but still wore size 12 pants (I have german peasant hips:001_smile:- great for bearing children!)

 

I live on the great plains- no mountains in sight. I homeschool my kids among other things- no time to take off to carry only the food I can eat in my backpack. Under ideal conditions your solution would work. I don't live in ideal conditions. I hate that. ;)

 

I also have a genetic disorder called familial lipomatosis. My body creates tumors. Losing weight is HARD for my body because, while the tumors are benign they also act like tumors. So, when I lose weight I just want to get shot in the head cause I am de-toxing God knows what. I eat well, drink water, don't drink sugared drinks, am aware of portion control, ad neuseum but I am fighting against my B.O.D.Y. which collects fat and creates this obnoxious lumps all over me. I've had surgeries, and now deal with nerve damage, varicosities at the scar sites, etc.

 

I am not slothful, I am not lazy, I exercise and am concerned about health. I am not someone looking for quick solutions (like just buying a larger size of pants). I am someone who has had to grieve the loss of "beauty" and "normal" and make decisions about what I CAN do, what is reasonable, what I am willing to put up with and what I can do given the other responsibilities I've taken on in my life.

 

Also, there is a lot more chemicals, GMO's on the food, hormones, etc. We have messed with our food supply, end of story. There will be consequences to that. I also think our country is more sedentary- true. My kids are all strong, wirey and thin. 1/2 of the are basically vegetarians. My dh is strong, wirey and thin-ish (he's kissing 50) and he eats meat at every meal. When he doesn't he gets sick- colds, bronchial infections, etc. There is not a one size fits all solution to health and weight. It doesn't prove true in my own family.

Edited February 8, 2012 by laughing lioness

[regentrude]

I live on the great plains- no mountains in sight. I homeschool my kids among other things- no time to take off to carry only the food I can eat in my backpack. Under ideal conditions your solution would work. I don't live in ideal conditions. I hate that. ;)

 

I completely understand that this is not an everyday solution - I was merely addressing the claim that "moving more and eating less does not lead to weight loss." A statement like this simply is not true. Whether it is always possible to incorporate enough physical activity into a person's lifestyle is a separate issue.

[Parrothead]

I read this whole thread this morning. Not much has been said about the SAD being the culprit for much of the obesity in America. The saturated fats, salt and sugar sure do a number on people. Not to mention what we have been brainwashed to think of as a healthy portion size.

 

EM, maybe your friend just can't figure it out. We are told by those supposedly in the know that diet and exercise are the answer. Yet, how many on this thread have said that doesn't work? It is much more complicated.

 

We have allowed our food to be messed with to the point that half the time it isn't even real food. Take a look at some of those boxed foods. How many real ingredients are in there? Most of the time the list of ingredients is unpronounceable and unrecognizable. Yet we are encouraged on many fronts to put this junk into our bodies as a healthy way to eat. And if not healthy, at least quick.

 

Americans like things fast. Fast cars, fast service, fast food. Five ingredients and you can have an entire meal in 5 minutes. Never mind that it is chemical laden carp. Who has time to chop a veg? Don't bother to peel that orange. Here, have a 100 calorie snack pack. It is faster.

 

Then there is the glamor of food. We have an entire TV channel dedicated to food. Food is cool. Who stops and thinks that the $5 cup from Starbucks has a bajillion calories? It tastes good and it is cool. Being a foodie is cool. Knowing what a caper is and how to properly use it is cool.

 

We are damed if we do (processed fast junk) and we are damed if we don't (whole foods cooked by real people in a real kitchen).

 

According to the CDC 33% of Americans are obese. 34% are overweight. So the total percentage of Americans with a weight problem is 67%.

 

Astronomical amounts of money are spent on weight loss.

 

I certainly don't know what the answer is. A year ago I had 10 pounds to lose to get comfortably back in my jeans. (my goal weight was 160.) Now a year later I have 18 pounds to lose to get to that same goal.

 

I've cut all soft drinks from my diet. I've limited processed foods. Cut carbs, cut sugar, cut meats. I practically live on veggies and nothing much else. I've gone from mostly sedentary to exercise classes for at least 60 minutes 3 evenings a week. I run now, where as a year ago I couldn't run half a block without being out of breath.

 

Still I quietly sit here and gain weight.

[Amy in TX]

I also read about the low carb thing all the time. Yet a traditional diet in my country of origin would typically be high carb (lots of bread and potatoes), because that was cheaper - meat on Sundays only was the norm for centuries. People could not afford a diet as high in protein as is consumed nowadays in developed countries. So, by the low carb theories, these people should have been fatter, which is clearly not supported by statistics.

 

 

The theory isn't that anyone who eats bread and potatoes will be overweight. It's that everyone has their own level of tolerance for carbs. Some people can tolerate more than others. If you go over your own tolerance, it affects your body's insulin regulation, which affects fat storage. (I may be wording this inaccurately). But the amount of carbs that causes weight gain may be different from person to person.

 

This book is exhaustively researched and very scholarly (don't be fooled by the title and hype on Amazon). It's a very persuasive explanation of the theory that fat storage is regulated by carb intake rather than by caloric intake.

 

(Your reference to your country of origin reminded me of something I read once, I think maybe in the book A Woman in Berlin. There was a reference to meat shortages, and how people were getting stout because all they had to eat were noodles and potatoes.)

[Laurie4b]

Thanks for the helpful responses.

 

I think we speak different languages here, though. I generally speak a different language than most people.

 

I think that I miss, conceptually, some fine points between "coercion" and "self-control". I have been wrestling with this for years. In a nutshell, I tend to think that if there is no outside coercion involved, and no factor of ignorance (not knowing what things are like, what leads to what, etc.), everything is essentially a question of "self-control", because on a very basic level, it boils down to the subject's choice of the course of action.

Most people that I know consider this to be a simplistic concept which misses the psychological gradation of things, so people tell me that I call "choices" also things which most other people would call consider choices only on the most literal level, but would in reality recognize that there are external factors there which affect the person's capacity to fully "make" that choice. Here is where I clash with people, because I somehow do not digest that idea very well. So because of that, I may use the language which is rather impalpable for most people - I have become more aware of it in the past years, trying to adapt that, but I keep stumbling upon difficulties of elaborating my thoughts in what is not my conceptual framework. I would be open-minded to make it my conceptual framework if I were convinced things were so, but so far, I am still stuck.

 

I am not selective in applying that way of thinking. I am not being judgmental by asking, "So, OK, you know this is wrong, nobody is 'making' you do it and you still do it?" - I apply that to everyone, included myself, for almost all issues that can arise. It is my general framework and I cannot seem to let go of it in favor of an idea that there is a psychological gradation there, that not all choices are "equal". That is also why I do not understand psychology, in spite of having read pretty much the equivalent of a degree over the years on various topics, because my conceptual rigidity appears not to allow for some fine distinctions.

 

What I am looking for, and really open-mindedly looking for, and sad that I cannot seem to express myself in ways that would both be representative of how I actually think within my framework and palpable for others, are resources which help me understand that gradation that I cannot seem to grasp. I am lacking in this camp. I would like somebody to spell out for me, like to somebody who genuinely has difficulties processing those ideas, the inner mechanism of weight problems, of addiction that might be a part of the picture, and what motivates what, psychologically. I have not found such resources, not even when in hindsight I attempted to understand my own past issues. I have never found what would be to me a "psychologically authentic" description of what I was going through, and I have NO language of explaining it. Likewise, I cannot understand this situation, or a myriad of other situations - in which things are apparently more complex than "simply making bad choices", but in ways that I cannot fully understand.

 

I was really hoping I would be able to go through this discussion without explicating all of the above, because I hate that conceptual mismatch which makes it difficult for me to talk to other people on some topics. I am really not trying to be obnoxious. I am not asking rhetorical questions. I am not trying to offend people. I am trying to wrestle with some nuances of human inner functioning which, even if they are applicable to me too, have never been explained to me in a language I can understand. If any of this makes sense. That is why I need resources, and descriptions, and being pinpointed what are those additional factors and what causes what, precisely, if I want to understand something, and this is something I would like to understand. The physiology part I can understand to an extent if I catch DH in a mood to explain it to me. I am interested in the psychology part, in the inner reality of that experience, because this is where things often genuinely do not make sense to me.

 

Now I am sad and frustrated because I have obviously managed to create an upheaval about a topic, so instead of helping myself understand something, it seems that I have only managed to vex another ten people. I am sorry. It was probably a bad idea. I did not imagine it this way.

 

I do truly appreciate, however, everyone's effort in sharing their stories, some of them very personal, and other resources which I will try to have a look at now.

 

This is interesting because I've observed this in other of your posts, though you've never stated it before that I recall. I think that it's possible is that you are describing a problem with cognitive empathy (as opposed to affective empathy.) Difficulty with cognitive empathy would be a neurological difference but without this insight that you've given in this post, the result could be equally explained by hubris and judgmental attitude, which is why your posts provoke responses you weren't expecting. A person can have affective empathy (feeling bad that someone else is feeling bad) and lack cognitive empathy (understanding how others' minds/emotions work). Psychopaths lack affective empathy and yet often have a high level of cognitive empathy (ie they can understand very well how people think and what makes them tick; this enables them to manipulate people. They just don't care how people feel.)

 

If the person in question is your daughter, which is the only way I think you would know for sure if there is no medical issue, I would think the best thing you could do is accept her as she is. (Same if she's not your daughter, but it would be critical to your daughter to have your acceptance, not as critical to someone else.) Once a person is obese, to regain a normal weight is something only a very small number of people achieve and at the cost of total obsession with food and exercise for the rest of their lives. They must fight constantly against a body creating hormonal and other chemical changes aimed at regaining the weight. Doctors are fond of telling patients to lose weight, but the medical profession does not have a way of counteracting the body's physiological determination to stay at the highest weight it's achieved, unless that weight was transient. Read everything you can about the physiology of weight loss/regain. The NYT article someone else posted is excellent.

 

As to whether something in her environment prompted the obesity in the first place, I would just work to become a person she isn't worried about judgment from, even if it doesn't seem like judgment to you. Again, be accepting.

 

With regard to the bolded, you may need to take a leap of faith and believe based on what others are telling you and let go of the need to have it "make sense" to you based on the way your mind operates because apparently it operates in a way that most people's minds do not, so it's not going to be that helpful to ask how you yourself would feel, what choices you yourself would make, etc. and compare. Try to let go of self-referencing and even trying to understand (because you might not be able to) and just accept others.

[Laurie4b]

I read the article. I am ready to believe that there is a genetic component, but that does NOT explain the rise in obesity rates over the last thirty years. The genes have not changed. The only thing that has changed is lifestyle.

Also, genetically there is very little difference between European immigrants in the US and people who stayed in Europe (simply because the few hundred years since the families came to the US are not enough to significantly alter genetic makeup.), yet obesity rates there are lower. So, clearly, genes can not explain that discrepancy.

I also read about the low carb thing all the time. Yet a traditional diet in my country of origin would typically be high carb (lots of bread and potatoes), because that was cheaper - meat on Sundays only was the norm for centuries. People could not afford a diet as high in protein as is consumed nowadays in developed countries. So, by the low carb theories, these people should have been fatter, which is clearly not supported by statistics.

 

ETA: If dieting sets up the body for inevitable weight gain, there should be a statistically significant observation for the generation of millions of people who were forced to subsist on an extremely low calory diet following WWII in Europe. My mother for example has childhood memories of going around begging for food. People were not on low rations for a few weeks; the near-starvation period lasted far longer. So, if the mechanism is that simple, obesity rates should have exploded in the 50s and 60s when people were again able to have enough food.. yet the rise in obesity has only been recorded in the last few decades.

 

I think a point you missed in the article is that the body is determined to maintain the highest weight it's had time to get used to. So people starving for a period of time don't end up obese unless they were obese before they started starving. If their body was not damaged during the time of food deprivation, they end up back at the weight their body thinks it should be based on highest weight achieved (or proportionate to that for a developing child) , plus perhaps a few extra pounds for good measure. ( I mean a few literally: 3-8, somewhere in that range) It could well be that the initial weight gain is prompted by different lifestyles now, but once gained, everything is physiologically stacked against permanently losing that weight. The trick is not to gain the weight in the first place. For many, they are beyond that and we don't know any way to help that lasts reliably without a lifetime of extreme vigilence/obsession with food/exercise that in itself affects quality of life.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Laurie4b

[Amy in TX]

I think a point you missed in the article is that the body is determined to maintain the highest weight it's had time to get used to. So people starving for a period of time don't end up obese unless they were obese before they started starving. If their body was not damaged during the time of food deprivation, they end up back at the weight their body thinks it should be based on highest weight achieved (or proportionate to that for a developing child) , plus perhaps a few extra pounds for good measure. ( I mean a few literally: 3-8, somewhere in that range) It could well be that the initial weight gain is prompted by different lifestyles now, but once gained, everything is physiologically stacked against permanently losing that weight. The trick is not to gain the weight in the first place. For many, they are beyond that and we don't know any way to help that lasts reliably without a lifetime of extreme vigilence/obsession with food/exercise that in itself affects quality of life.

 

The bold is very well stated. Here is one big reason, for those who wonder, why people may not do what they need (or think they need) to do in order to lose weight.

[LibraryLover]

Maybe we need to go back to smoking. ;) Now that I think about it, my mother reached for cigarettes instead of chips. Most of the moms smoked in those days. The newborn baby i mentioned did develop asthma, although it was eventually outgrown.

Edited February 8, 2012 by LibraryLover

[regentrude]

The trick is not to gain the weight in the first place.

 

Completely and utterly agree.

That was what my earlier question referred to (to which I only got snarky answers): how is the psychology not of obesity, but the psychology of the first 5-10 pounds?

Why is the weight creep accepted by the person? I hear everybody telling me that beyond 40 I just have to resign to getting fat because the metabolism slows down - but I don't want to! I certainly do notice the trend, and I want to nip it in the bud, precisely because I know how much harder it is to lose weight that has piled up. I just don't want to "give in" to the idea that there is nothing I can do because I am now middle age. I want to fight this tooth and nail. I want to be fit to climb mountains with my teenage children, not be outpaced by them anytime soon. I want, like my mother, to wear my wedding dress on my silver anniversary.

So what I want to know is: how it works psychologically that people accept weight slow gain. What are the pitfalls. What do people do who successfully fight back right from the outset, without starting the slow slide up the numbers of pant sizes.

Maybe I did not express myself well when I first phrased the question.

I just refuse to be told that weight gain is inevitable.

[Bluegoat]

I read the article. I am ready to believe that there is a genetic component, but that does NOT explain the rise in obesity rates over the last thirty years. The genes have not changed. The only thing that has changed is lifestyle.

Also, genetically there is very little difference between European immigrants in the US and people who stayed in Europe (simply because the few hundred years since the families came to the US are not enough to significantly alter genetic makeup.), yet obesity rates there are lower. So, clearly, genes can not explain that discrepancy.

I also read about the low carb thing all the time. Yet a traditional diet in my country of origin would typically be high carb (lots of bread and potatoes), because that was cheaper - meat on Sundays only was the norm for centuries. People could not afford a diet as high in protein as is consumed nowadays in developed countries. So, by the low carb theories, these people should have been fatter, which is clearly not supported by statistics.

 

ETA: If dieting sets up the body for inevitable weight gain, there should be a statistically significant observation for the generation of millions of people who were forced to subsist on an extremely low calory diet following WWII in Europe. My mother for example has childhood memories of going around begging for food. People were not on low rations for a few weeks; the near-starvation period lasted far longer. So, if the mechanism is that simple, obesity rates should have exploded in the 50s and 60s when people were again able to have enough food.. yet the rise in obesity has only been recorded in the last few decades.

 

 

I think the big change is really in children. Our diet and lifestyle has begun, probably since the introduction of laboratory foods, to produce more and more children whose bodies don't ever regulate themselves properly. Since kids activity levels have gone down it's become even worse.

 

They may start off as only slightly overweight as kids, but as adults they pack on pounds more easily and they cannot lose weight without serious, sustained effort which is also required to maintain the new weight.

 

And that kind of vigilance about diet won't even always work well if they are given bad advice or if circumstances make it difficult to spend energy on food or exercise.

 

In the long term, almost everyone has times when that kind of effort and attention is just not available - there are other things going on in life.

 

And honestly, if you are in a position of simply having to cut out all the foods you really love, who wants to live like that all the time?

[Bluegoat]

Completely and utterly agree.

That was what my earlier question referred to (to which I only got snarky answers): how is the psychology not of obesity, but the psychology of the first 5-10 pounds?

Why is the weight creep accepted by the person? I hear everybody telling me that beyond 40 I just have to resign to getting fat because the metabolism slows down - but I don't want to! I certainly do notice the trend, and I want to nip it in the bud, precisely because I know how much harder it is to lose weight that has piled up. I just don't want to "give in" to the idea that there is nothing I can do because I am now middle age. I want to fight this tooth and nail. I want to be fit to climb mountains with my teenage children, not be outpaced by them anytime soon. I want, like my mother, to wear my wedding dress on my silver anniversary.

So what I want to know is: how it works psychologically that people accept weight slow gain. What are the pitfalls. What do people do who successfully fight back right from the outset, without starting the slow slide up the numbers of pant sizes.

Maybe I did not express myself well when I first phrased the question.

I just refuse to be told that weight gain is inevitable.

 

Lots of reasons I think, if it happens as an adult. One is just not noticing - it happens very gradually over time. Or it happens in relation to something else - pregnancy, or an injury, which makes it hard to do anything about right away. Or a lot of people don't much care about 10 lbs either - I mean I honestly could not care less if I were a size 8.

 

With kids, obviously it is up to parents to notice. But sometimes it can be hard to see if a kid is a bit chunky or is just naturally gaining some weight as part of a growth cycle.

 

Also - I wonder with kids if their bodies can't suffer the effects of the bad diet while remaining fairly normal looking, but those effects come out later. They eat the junk and maybe don't get much exercise, and the junk affects their metabolism. But because they are growing up so fast they don't really look fat. That is just my thought though.

[Rebecca VA]

Here's another clue: exhaustion, which causes the body to feel that it needs more food to make energy. But the problem isn't lack of food; it's low blood count, or lack of sleep, or lack of invigorating exercise, or stress.

[regentrude]

One is just not noticing - it happens very gradually over time. Or it happens in relation to something else - pregnancy, or an injury, which makes it hard to do anything about right away. Or a lot of people don't much care about 10 lbs either - I mean I honestly could not care less if I were a size 8..

 

I get the pregancy one - but I don't see how one could otherwise not "notice". I mean, I certainly do notice that there is a pair of jeans that fit fine when I lived in Europe two years ago and walked everywhere but is now tight.

I don't care a bout a number on the scale - but I will.not.buy.bigger.pants.

[Amy in TX]

I get the pregancy one - but I don't see how one could otherwise not "notice". I mean, I certainly do notice that there is a pair of jeans that fit fine when I lived in Europe two years ago and walked everywhere but is now tight.

I don't care a bout a number on the scale - but I will.not.buy.bigger.pants.

 

For me, I can gain 10-15 pounds or so without really noticing--I'm tall and my weight tends to go on above the waist. I usually wear low-rise jeans. :)

[usetoschool]

Completely and utterly agree.

That was what my earlier question referred to (to which I only got snarky answers): how is the psychology not of obesity, but the psychology of the first 5-10 pounds?

Why is the weight creep accepted by the person? I hear everybody telling me that beyond 40 I just have to resign to getting fat because the metabolism slows down - but I don't want to! I certainly do notice the trend, and I want to nip it in the bud, precisely because I know how much harder it is to lose weight that has piled up. I just don't want to "give in" to the idea that there is nothing I can do because I am now middle age. I want to fight this tooth and nail. I want to be fit to climb mountains with my teenage children, not be outpaced by them anytime soon. I want, like my mother, to wear my wedding dress on my silver anniversary.

So what I want to know is: how it works psychologically that people accept weight slow gain. What are the pitfalls. What do people do who successfully fight back right from the outset, without starting the slow slide up the numbers of pant sizes.

Maybe I did not express myself well when I first phrased the question.

I just refuse to be told that weight gain is inevitable.

 

I didn't notice any snarky answers but if you don't seem to be able to get your point across maybe it is because your statements appear to be "I can do it, why can't you". You don't have the same upbringing, genetics, life experiences, nutritional history, or any of the exact same combination of factors that many of the people who struggle with fat storage have experienced. Why does it happen in the first place? I think this thread has shown that there a 100's of reasons and many of them occur before you even have any say about your life and the choices you make. People that are overweight don't just put on a few pounds out of the blue one day after living a perfectly normal healthy life and say, oh, well, so what, bring it on, i don't care. Someone up the thread made the point to EM about different kinds of empathy and I tried to say the same thing in a much less educated way - the difference between knowing with your head and knowing with your heart. It isn't always about science and facts and information.

 

This sounds annoyed and frustrated and angry, but I promise it absolutely is not in any way. I said it all with a smile on my face and in an effort to understand the difference between people talking to each other from their head and facts and people expressing emotions and experience. And, no, I do not think the two are mutually exclusive and I don't think that cognitive people are sociopaths without emotion :). I just read threads here and am amazed by how hard it is to really communicate and not talk past each other.

Edited February 8, 2012 by jcooperetc

[Carrie Sue]

I don't have time to read this whole thread, but I wonder if anyone's mentioned that our genetically modified plants are having an affect on us? This whole "Whole Wheat is good for you" mantra is likely one of the things that is hurting Americans trying to lose weight. Read "Wheat Belly" by Davis and see what you think. It is likely that we are trying to eat low fat diets and in doing so, eat too many wheat products, which increase our genuine hunger and add cravings in to the mix. Keep that cycle going for awhile and see where it gets you.

 

I've struggled with obesity since childhood. I weighed 120 in 7th grade and had already done 2 diet programs before then. I did weight watchers the summer between 8th/9th grade and lost 9 lbs. I was probably 140 by the time I graduated high school and thought I was enormous (I'm very short). I'm just now getting a handle on it (I'm now 178 after losing 50 lbs and that wasn't even my highest). But, to get the weight to go, I had to go starch and gluten free and rethink the whole "low fat" idea. It's hard.

[Bluegoat]

I get the pregancy one - but I don't see how one could otherwise not "notice". I mean, I certainly do notice that there is a pair of jeans that fit fine when I lived in Europe two years ago and walked everywhere but is now tight.

I don't care a bout a number on the scale - but I will.not.buy.bigger.pants.

 

I don't wear the same size pants at any one time, so going up or down a bit isn't that obvious. Different manufacturers. Many people buy new clothes more often than needed so changes in size are not obvious. Also, some people change shape without changing weight, or both at the same time. Some people vary a lot based on things like retaining water.

 

And most people are not wedded to one size. Your determination not to buy bigger pants may be rather unusual. In general many people are ontent to change a bit as they age and it never goes beyond that, it is just when it gets out of control they worry.

[Sputterduck]

Completely and utterly agree.

That was what my earlier question referred to (to which I only got snarky answers): how is the psychology not of obesity, but the psychology of the first 5-10 pounds?

Why is the weight creep accepted by the person? I hear everybody telling me that beyond 40 I just have to resign to getting fat because the metabolism slows down - but I don't want to! I certainly do notice the trend, and I want to nip it in the bud, precisely because I know how much harder it is to lose weight that has piled up. I just don't want to "give in" to the idea that there is nothing I can do because I am now middle age. I want to fight this tooth and nail. I want to be fit to climb mountains with my teenage children, not be outpaced by them anytime soon. I want, like my mother, to wear my wedding dress on my silver anniversary.

So what I want to know is: how it works psychologically that people accept weight slow gain. What are the pitfalls. What do people do who successfully fight back right from the outset, without starting the slow slide up the numbers of pant sizes.

Maybe I did not express myself well when I first phrased the question.

I just refuse to be told that weight gain is inevitable.

 

For me, it didn't creep up. I ballooned very fast. I didn't buy different sized clothes as I had no money to do so. I just walked around in clothes that I looked ridiculous in.

 

I was already working out frequently (6 days a week) and I wasn't eating very much at all. Mine was a medical issue, though, so I can't attest to what happens when it's a psychology issue. I did fight tooth and nail, but it didn't matter. I needed a special diet and medication.

[elegantlion]

I get the pregancy one - but I don't see how one could otherwise not "notice". I mean, I certainly do notice that there is a pair of jeans that fit fine when I lived in Europe two years ago and walked everywhere but is now tight.

I don't care a bout a number on the scale - but I will.not.buy.bigger.pants.

 

I'm that way. I refuse to go up anymore than I already am. I have smaller clothes, because I used to be there, but I'm not buying larger. Even though I am overweight I have not gained in the last few years. I don't even own a scale.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I get the pregancy one - but I don't see how one could otherwise not "notice". I mean, I certainly do notice that there is a pair of jeans that fit fine when I lived in Europe two years ago and walked everywhere but is now tight.

I don't care a bout a number on the scale - but I will.not.buy.bigger.pants.

 

I didn't notice because at the time I was going to university, taking 18 credits a quarter, working 3 part time jobs, and I was extremely busy and stressed. How I fit in my pants was not even on my radar. When it did encroach on my consciousness because I had to get another size clothing, it was easier to find the time to buy the new clothes rather than to find the time to do something about the weight. I look back and think that I should have paced things out more with more view to my long term health but I was young and didn't think long term, and there was pressure to get things done on a certain time line because of financial issues.

[Joanne]

Completely and utterly agree.

That was what my earlier question referred to (to which I only got snarky answers): how is the psychology not of obesity, but the psychology of the first 5-10 pounds?

Why is the weight creep accepted by the person? I hear everybody telling me that beyond 40 I just have to resign to getting fat because the metabolism slows down - but I don't want to! I certainly do notice the trend, and I want to nip it in the bud, precisely because I know how much harder it is to lose weight that has piled up. I just don't want to "give in" to the idea that there is nothing I can do because I am now middle age. I want to fight this tooth and nail. I want to be fit to climb mountains with my teenage children, not be outpaced by them anytime soon. I want, like my mother, to wear my wedding dress on my silver anniversary.

So what I want to know is: how it works psychologically that people accept weight slow gain. What are the pitfalls. What do people do who successfully fight back right from the outset, without starting the slow slide up the numbers of pant sizes.

Maybe I did not express myself well when I first phrased the question.

I just refuse to be told that weight gain is inevitable.

 

 

I also think that it needs to be said that a discussion of weight, especially from a psychological standpoint, is entirely different between men and women. It is NOT even the same issue.

[kiana]

Completely and utterly agree.

That was what my earlier question referred to (to which I only got snarky answers): how is the psychology not of obesity, but the psychology of the first 5-10 pounds?

 

 

I never wore jeans as a young adult due to sensory issues. I always wore elastic-waist pants and for work I dressed in scrubs. It's possible to gain a significant amount of weight and still not be unable to wear elastic-waist pants.

 

My weight has a specific spot it likes to sit, and it's been there since I was about 19. I can drop, but it requires tracking my food and exercise religiously. As soon as I quit tracking (I maintained for a few years) it springs right back to where it was, and stays there.

[Ester Maria]

This is interesting because I've observed this in other of your posts, though you've never stated it before that I recall. I think that it's possible is that you are describing a problem with cognitive empathy (as opposed to affective empathy.) Difficulty with cognitive empathy would be a neurological difference but without this insight that you've given in this post, the result could be equally explained by hubris and judgmental attitude, which is why your posts provoke responses you weren't expecting. A person can have affective empathy (feeling bad that someone else is feeling bad) and lack cognitive empathy (understanding how others' minds/emotions work).

A pretty good explanation. :)

 

I do not have problems with emotions, empathy as such, with recognizing other people's emotional states (IRL, as online it is typically close to impossible), feeling for others, OR adjusting my reactions and what I do / say based on other people's perceived emotional states (which is why the way I talk on the boards is often *not* representative of how I would talk IRL, since here I do not have those other factors, just an abstraction of a situation).

If the person in question is your daughter, which is the only way I think you would know for sure if there is no medical issue, I would think the best thing you could do is accept her as she is. (Same if she's not your daughter, but it would be critical to your daughter to have your acceptance, not as critical to someone else.)

Her parents shared that information, and general information on her lifestyle. I am not ruling out an option that there are issues even they do not know of, because she is legally an adult. But if they are asking around for advice from anyone even tangentially related to them, you can imagine that it worries them. It is also because of this why I know that she has the options, time, and knowledge to change. She just does not do it, which in my mind translates to the following options: (i) either she does not recognize the problem (highly unlikely, being an outlier in a population she circles around for her age), (ii) either she does not recognize it as a problem (highly unlikely too, her parents hinted at something in that direction too), (iii) there are underlying physiological factors which make it impossible, (iv)she does not want to change, because if she wanted, she would already be on her way of accomplishing this - and thus my question, what kind of psychology blocks a person provided (i) and (ii) and absence of (iii).

 

Her lifestyle seems to be supporting it, I do not think it is all fundamentally physiological. I did gain weight after kids, major life stresses and just getting older, getting from the low end to a normal range, but I can see very clearly which behaviors make me gain or lose weight, so in my mind, if I see that connection and have different kinds of options and still go with this option as opposed to the other ones, it is a consciously self-destructive choice. I do not think I ever had the *physiology* of a person who genuinely cannot gain weight, despite having been borderline underweight most of my life, but I certainly had a lifestyle (physically active if constantly hurried around, not caring to eat many times even if hungry so skipping meals, a culture of small portions and "real food", etc.) and, in some periods, a psychology of a person who wants to be underweight. While I do tend to feel full after comparatively small portions, because I am *used* to it (American portions are just overwhelming to me), I am also okay with the slight discomfort of being hungry if I have other priorities at the moment. I am not sure I ever experienced a feeling that I *must* eat right now, for example. My middle daughter, who is the fattest person in our immediate family (still within the normal range), is more along those lines, but she had general issues with self-restraint as a child, needing to have good habits because she is a "person of a habit" (difficult to function outside her habits), distractability, grazing when bored, problems with delayed gratification as a child, etc. My eldest daughter, on the other hand, is like me, for the good and for the bad :glare:, she does not assimilate habits so deeply so she finds it easier to break off her functioning patterns, does not care particularly about food, and it creeps me out if I notice her playing the same control games that I did when I was her age and older, and rarely "loses it" (she has a temperament just like I do, but this is a separate issue). So even within my family, I see two different forms of psychological functioning which affect the relationship with food too. With one child I have to keep an eye that she eats enough, with the other child I have to occasionally keep an eye that she does not take it overboard. If I do a thought experiment, I can imagine my middle daughter in another family overweight, if I add other factors which are currently absent (culture of big portions, more processed food, etc.). My eldest though, I cannot, but I doubt it is for physiological reasons - I think her psychological functioning is simply such that if she had a problem of those proportions, she would find it relatively easy to break off her patterns of functioning and establish new ones.

 

Now, I am NOT trying to establish this as a general pattern. These are simply insights into my own family. But I was wondering if there were resources which deal especially with this: what type of personal disposition, other than in the fundamental physiological sense, bends itself to some types of problems with food, and in this case, to obesity, if we can reasonably eliminate other factors, or say that even with those factors, there must be a strong disposition which cannot be reduced to physiology only. I ask questions such as, is it a generalized problem of internalizing habits too strongly, so finding oneself less capable of breaking off bad habits than other people? Is it a problem of needing instant gratification and finding it hard to function with long-term goals in one's mind, which would prevent one from committing to a lifestyle which would not bear results right away, but only with time bring about the dissolution of these problems? Are those control issues, being overwhelmed by life and unpredictability (especially in those early years of adulthood, with all the problems of settling about a life one wishes), so to exercise control in things like food? Is it a control or a lack of control that is at stake here? etc. Those were the kind of questions I was hoping to get some insight into.

 

As far as acceptance is concerned, I accept her. :) I can (emotionally, with my heart) accept and love a person who does not make sense to me (cognitively, how they function and what motivates them). I have never asked her about this, all of this is strictly in my mind. We are not close, so this is one of the topics I would never open myself. It does worry me, though, because I do not think this is a case of parental exaggeration. Even if I can or ought do nothing, I was simply interested in trying to understand it - my attempt at understanding, even if it clashes with how I typically reason, does not affect my warmth and love towards the person.

[Jenny in Florida]

Oh boy.

 

I see others are already beating you up about some of your wording. So, I won't bother to brag on my own intelligence. (See what I did there?)

 

Here's the thing: I've been overweight my entire life. That's not an exageration. Not one picture of childhood me exists in which I am not at the very least "plump." My whole life, I heard how I was built "solidly," but that's just not true. Any time I have approached my healthy weight, it becomes very obvious that I'm actually pretty tiny. (For example, even though I am currently a good 25 pounds over my ideal weight, I am wearing t-shirts that are size extra small.)

 

I would say -- have said, many times -- that my weight is the single thing that has consistently caused me the most sadness in my life. It's gotten in my way and made me feel worthless. I know this.

 

I'm a smart, capable person. I can do pretty much anything I decide to do.

 

Except lose weight and keep it off.

 

I've yo-yo dieted since adolescence. My weight has fluctuated by as much as 90 pounds over the years. (Keep in mind that I'm not quite 5'2".)

 

In my family of origin, food was the cure for everything. It meant someone loved you. It alleviated boredom. It salved sadness. I don't think we ever went anywhere for any kind of outing of more than about 90 minutes without stopping for food.

 

On top of that, I suspect I have done serious damage to my metabolism with the crazy dieting I did for so many years. There was a period before I got married and had kids when I was eating fewer than 500 calories a day and also taking "natural" pills to enhance my metabolism, while also working out three times a week. That was the only time in my life I have ever been able to even temporarily maintain my "ideal" weight.

 

I've done similar regimes for months at a time at least three other times in my life.

 

After that before-married episode, I decided I should probably start eating more healthfully because we wanted to have a baby. I began eating something like a normal person does and gained 20 pounds in a month.

 

So, bottom line, I do know I should be more careful about my weight. I'm (not to toot my own horn) very, very smart. I know where my weight issues originated, and I know what I have to do to keep my weight in a healthy range.

 

None of it makes that any less hard.

[vmsurbat]

Why is the weight creep accepted by the person? I hear everybody telling me that beyond 40 I just have to resign to getting fat because the metabolism slows down - but I don't want to! I certainly do notice the trend, and I want to nip it in the bud, precisely because I know how much harder it is to lose weight that has piled up. I just don't want to "give in" to the idea that there is nothing I can do because I am now middle age. I want to fight this tooth and nail. I want to be fit to climb mountains with my teenage children, not be outpaced by them anytime soon. I want, like my mother, to wear my wedding dress on my silver anniversary.

So what I want to know is: how it works psychologically that people accept weight slow gain. What are the pitfalls. What do people do who successfully fight back right from the outset, without starting the slow slide up the numbers of pant sizes.

Maybe I did not express myself well when I first phrased the question.

I just refuse to be told that weight gain is inevitable.

 

I can only relate *my* experience. I gained 50 pounds over the course of my childbearing years (5 kids), so definitely a creep. I didn't notice until I weaned the last one (now 16). How could that happen? Well,

 

1. I was incredibly busy with life and 5 small children.

 

2. I usually wore dresses with plenty of give for my at-that-time normal state of being pregnant and/or nursing.

 

3. I rarely bought new clothes....I might receive some as a gift but I rarely shopped at all during those lean (but happy) years.

 

4. My hubby never made any negative comments about my weight gain (and neither did anyone else). We had no full-size mirrors either, just a small one in the bathroom that showed face and up only. (We live in south-central Europe). So, I literally didn't SEE my weight gain.

 

5. I got in the habit of eating for two...while appropriately so most of the time, I overdid it here and there, but never where I could point a finger at myself and say "AHA! This is the reason for your weight gain!"

 

6. I like cooking, and we ate "healthy" (little purchased junk food) and, for a long time, I couldn't understand WHY I was gaining.

 

However, I don't believe my 50lb gain was inevitable, as in "there is nothing I could have done." I think if I had been more mindful, I could have nipped it in the bud.

 

And neither do I think I'm doomed to a miserable life to keep myself at a healthy weight. I've successfully lost 50 pounds and am keeping it off all the while enjoying life, family, and good food that I love. I relearned some basic good eating habits (see http://www.nosdiet.com for those habits) and became convinced that moving more (not necessarily HARD exercise) every day was essential (there are some fascinating studies that show a couch potato who works out 3-5 hours a week is still basically a couch potato health-wise), so I bought myself a pedometer and USE it every day.

 

HTH,

[Jean in Newcastle]

I didn't notice because at the time I was going to university, taking 18 credits a quarter, working 3 part time jobs, and I was extremely busy and stressed. How I fit in my pants was not even on my radar. When it did encroach on my consciousness because I had to get another size clothing, it was easier to find the time to buy the new clothes rather than to find the time to do something about the weight. I look back and think that I should have paced things out more with more view to my long term health but I was young and didn't think long term, and there was pressure to get things done on a certain time line because of financial issues.

 

I'm quoting myself because I was thinking of this through the morning and wanted to add to this. During this time, I did not overeat but often underate. And when I did eat, it was often 11 pm at night when I would suddenly realize that I had eaten nothing all day and was starving. Of course at that time of night the campus dining hall etc. were closed and my only options were 7-11 and fast food places, so when I did eat, it was not the healthiest. I also exercised quite a bit during this time because I didn't have a car and walked everywhere. So I would attribute the weight gain to bad eating habits, a cycle of starving myself, lack of sleep and stress. It was not because I had bad self control and was stuffing myself (in fact I could make a case for a high degree of self control in order to get all my studies and work done.)

[Jenny in Florida]

Why is it a fail???

How come every serious mountaineer loses weight on a strenuous treck because he can't carry enough food to replace the thousands of calories used up by exercise? I do not know a single person who does not lose when put under conditions of *sustained* strenuous physical activity in the absence of enough food. I don't know any obese long distance hikers or mountaineers.

Even my overweight-in-sedentary-condition-friend loses- if the discrepancy between energy use due to physical activity and energy input from food is just large enough. It's just that humans are designed for far more physical activity than even avid gym goers achieve.

I completely agree that losing weight is hard.

But to tell me that no amount of physical activity is leading to weight loss simply is not true. Two+ weeks with only the food you can carry will make anybody lose.

 

Sigh.

 

Sure, if I went hiking for two weeks with only the food I could carry, I'd lose some weight. I wouldn't lose as much as another person, but I'd lose some.

 

[How do I know I wouldn't lose as much? One summer when I was in junior high, my parents sent me to a weight loss camp. We were told to expect losses of two or three pounds per week. Unlike most of the other girls, I participated in EVERY activity offered. I also ate less (mostly because I was picky, but also because my incipient vegetarianism was kicking in by that point). I was lucky to lose one pound per week. All of the girls in my group lost MORE than we had been told to expect, while I lost half as much.]

 

But when I got home, I would gain it back. I could deny myself goodies and even regular food until I was passing out from hunger, but once I ate, the weight would creep back on.

[Jenny in Florida]

Completely and utterly agree.

That was what my earlier question referred to (to which I only got snarky answers): how is the psychology not of obesity, but the psychology of the first 5-10 pounds?

 

Well, for me, I gained that five or 10 pounds well before I even noticed I was fatter than other kids. I've been overweight -- let me say it again -- My. Whole. Life.

 

My parents are both fat.

 

I never knew my father's parents, but both of my mother's parents were fat.

 

Honestly, the holier-than-thou attitude of a couple of posters in this thread makes me want to go eat a cookie!

 

(And, as someone else said, I'm willing to bet I might actually be better at a few things than some of the folks so proud of their waistlines.)

 

As far as your attitude about fighting fat tooth and nail, all I can say is that we must differ in our priorities. There are lots of things demanding my attention and energy that I consider more important than fitting into a particular dress.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Jenny in Florida

[justamouse]

I read the article. I am ready to believe that there is a genetic component, but that does NOT explain the rise in obesity rates over the last thirty years. The genes have not changed. The only thing that has changed is lifestyle.

 

Also, genetically there is very little difference between European immigrants in the US and people who stayed in Europe (simply because the few hundred years since the families came to the US are not enough to significantly alter genetic makeup.), yet obesity rates there are lower. So, clearly, genes can not explain that discrepancy.

 

I also read about the low carb thing all the time. Yet a traditional diet in my country of origin would typically be high carb (lots of bread and potatoes), because that was cheaper - meat on Sundays only was the norm for centuries. People could not afford a diet as high in protein as is consumed nowadays in developed countries. So, by the low carb theories, these people should have been fatter, which is clearly not supported by statistics.

 

 

With the bolded, I totally agree. What I DO think has happened, is the carp that we've allowed into the food industry (GMO corn being fed to our cows, pork, chicken, antibiotics in everything, HFCS) has changed our epigenetics and 'switched off' our fat burning genes/changed our genetics to the point that we now have an obesity epidemic. I do, truly believe that people have a hard time loosing it. I think they reason that we, perhaps don't, is that we ate very clean as children (as did our parents), and never had that 'switch' go off.

 

Added to that is America's total lack of portion control.

 

 

I don't consider monitoring my food intake to be a lifetime of hassle. I know I can't stuff myself at the buffet and I should be responsible for my intake, despite what the triathlon males at the same buffet are eating. It is to my body's benefit to accept that my gas tank is full before theirs, not eye their plates and wish I could do the same.

 

I completely agree. I see the effects of obesity all around me. I do not want that. I don't want to be older and incapacitated. I want to be as healthy as I possibly can until the day I die. Sadly, my income allows that possibility for me, whereas a less fortunate person wouldn't have those choices.

 

Completely and utterly agree.

That was what my earlier question referred to (to which I only got snarky answers): how is the psychology not of obesity, but the psychology of the first 5-10 pounds?

 

Why is the weight creep accepted by the person? I hear everybody telling me that beyond 40 I just have to resign to getting fat because the metabolism slows down - but I don't want to! I certainly do notice the trend, and I want to nip it in the bud, precisely because I know how much harder it is to lose weight that has piled up. I just don't want to "give in" to the idea that there is nothing I can do because I am now middle age. I want to fight this tooth and nail. I want to be fit to climb mountains with my teenage children, not be outpaced by them anytime soon. I want, like my mother, to wear my wedding dress on my silver anniversary.

So what I want to know is: how it works psychologically that people accept weight slow gain. What are the pitfalls. What do people do who successfully fight back right from the outset, without starting the slow slide up the numbers of pant sizes.

 

Maybe I did not express myself well when I first phrased the question.

I just refuse to be told that weight gain is inevitable.

 

I think if you have good genes, it won't be inevitable for you. My mom and Aunt are slim, 72 and 60, respectively, and both are amazingly active. My 72 yo aunt goes to curves three days a week, is in her garden club and her library club, gardens every year and just about runs everywhere. Same with my mother. My grandmother cooked everything from scratch-so did my aunt and mom, never introducing HFCS or preserved foods to our family tables. They ate organic out of necessity-it all came from their gardens. Our switches might have never been flicked.

 

I'm that way. I refuse to go up anymore than I already am. I have smaller clothes, because I used to be there, but I'm not buying larger.

:iagree:

 

I will wear a pair of jeans until they fall off me and I loose the weight before I go out and buy another bigger pair. No way in hell. I'm tough on myself, all the time. I eat stuff that tastes horrible because I know it's good for me. I read books that I don't prefer, because I know I should. I take walks all the time because I know I need to. I don't particularly like doing them, but I know that I will benefit, and do, and hopefully it will continue. I truly believe that if I work past the dislike of something hard, I will learn to enjoy it and it won't be so terrible. :D

[Lang Syne Boardie]

.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Tibbie Dunbar
broke my New Year's Resolution again! d'oh!

[TranquilMind]

I can only speak for my self, as a 5'3 size 16 woman. I am lazy. I am spoiled. I do not like to tell myself "no." I have never had to really work for anything in my life so I don't have a drive that I see a lot of other people have. I know how I should eat. I feed my family well balanced meals. They are all at a healthy weight. My girls will snack on carrots, celery and some ranch. I have never ate a raw veggie in my life, but I will sit and eat way to many chips at one time. I was the youngest child and I got babied a lot. My husband still babies me. So I am just used to the ... I want what I want and I want it now. As I am getting a little older I am slowly trying to gain some self control and not be so impulsive with everything including food.

I love you! I love your honesty. Yes, I used to look like a fashion model myself, but hey, I like to eat, so now I don't. But I could again (well, an OLD one!), if I decide that the value of being very thin exceeds the desire I have to munch. Right now, I'm just ok. Mom-like, as my kids say.

 

I did have a recent surgery and lost 13 pounds quickly. Eating almost nothing will do that to you. I nearly died, they said.

 

I'm not going back to former way of eating because I want to live. But I still like to munch. But since chips make me feel bad (side hurts!), it's time to move to nuts, or whatever.

 

Let's go out to dinner! ;)

[TranquilMind]

Now my question would be: why does it take so much time for some to "wake up" to a problem? I completely understand that it is hard to lose weight if one is 100lbs overweight. But why do people wait this long? Why are people content buying larger and larger clothes -why do the *accept* this?

I know that when my jeans get tight I will.not.buy.new.pants. Period. I will not give in, but will do what is needed to fit into them comfortably. I simply would not consider it an option for *myself* to become overweight.

So, how does it all start? Before changed body composition makes it much much harder to lose?

I admire you for not buying new pants!

 

The answer, in my opinion: people, myself included, are LAZY and hate to change habits. It is just hard. But if you have to change them to live, often you will, unless you have just given up.

 

God really helps pull you along too, in my view, when you get serious.

[TranquilMind]

Why is it a fail???

How come every serious mountaineer loses weight on a strenuous treck because he can't carry enough food to replace the thousands of calories used up by exercise? I do not know a single person who does not lose when put under conditions of *sustained* strenuous physical activity in the absence of enough food. I don't know any obese long distance hikers or mountaineers.

Even my overweight-in-sedentary-condition-friend loses- if the discrepancy between energy use due to physical activity and energy input from food is just large enough. It's just that humans are designed for far more physical activity than even avid gym goers achieve.

I completely agree that losing weight is hard.

But to tell me that no amount of physical activity is leading to weight loss simply is not true. Two+ weeks with only the food you can carry will make anybody lose.

Because when the conditions are imposed from outside, the will to live comes forth, and people do it because they are hard-wired to live. (Examples, mountain-climbers, refuges, people escaping from somewhere, in camps, etc).

 

When the conditions are imposed by us, we are flexible with them. Ask me how I know.

[TranquilMind]

But to tell me that no amount of physical activity is leading to weight loss simply is not true. Two+ weeks with only the food you can carry will make anybody lose.

 

Agreed. The Biggest Loser show works for every single person who goes on it.

 

But staying that way after the show is over is all on the person, not imposed by the show.

[regentrude]

As far as your attitude about fighting fat tooth and nail, all I can say is that we must differ in our priorities. There are lots of things demanding my attention and energy that I consider more important than fitting into a particular dress.

 

It is not actually about the dress - it is about everything that comes with the weight gain, most importantly the loss in fitness. When I rock climb, five extra pounds are noticeable. When I backpack, those are five more ponds that I have to carry - were they in my pack, boy would I notice immediately.

It slows me down. Already I have to work to keep up with my very fit (pre)teens when we are hiking and DS decides to run along the trail.

I am not willing to give up activities that are enjoyable only if I am in shape. I want to be able to go on the long distance hike with DH when we're are old enough to retire. In order to get there, I can not allow myself now to get fat.

Being able to do the things I love is a huge priority for me. It is not about the dress. It is about a lifestyle I would hate to give up. The dress is just a substitute for the scale I refuse to buy.

[Amy in TX]

Agreed. The Biggest Loser show works for every single person who goes on it.

 

But staying that way after the show is over is all on the person, not imposed by the show.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but on The Biggest Loser, they work out 4-6 hours a day with scary trainers and have chefs who prepare starvation rations? If that's what it takes to lose, then of course they regain when they return to anything resembling a normal life.

 

I'm sure in prolonged, extreme situations like tv shows and two weeks mountaineering with only what they can carry, people can lose through exertion and starvation. But that's not possible or desirable for most people in everyday life, surely?

 

What posters have mentioned several times on this thread is that calories in<calories out, even if it works at very extreme levels, doesn't (for many, many people) when practiced at more moderate levels.

[Jean in Newcastle]

You know what, I'm very glad that there are some very fit ladies on this board who have encouraged me and treated all my weight loss questions and frustrated vents with compassion. They truly understand what people have tried to explain over and over again on this thread and have been nothing short of wonderful. For those of you who don't want to change your prejudices, have at it.

[Jenny in Florida]

You know what, I'm very glad that there are some very fit ladies on this board who have encouraged me and treated all my weight loss questions and frustrated vents with compassion. They truly understand what people have tried to explain over and over again on this thread and have been nothing short of wonderful. For those of you who don't want to change your prejudices, have at it.

 

Well said.

[Cassy]

It is not actually about the dress - it is about everything that comes with the weight gain, most importantly the loss in fitness. When I rock climb, five extra pounds are noticeable. When I backpack, those are five more ponds that I have to carry - were they in my pack, boy would I notice immediately.

It slows me down. Already I have to work to keep up with my very fit (pre)teens when we are hiking and DS decides to run along the trail.

I am not willing to give up activities that are enjoyable only if I am in shape. I want to be able to go on the long distance hike with DH when we're are old enough to retire. In order to get there, I can not allow myself now to get fat.

Being able to do the things I love is a huge priority for me. It is not about the dress. It is about a lifestyle I would hate to give up. The dress is just a substitute for the scale I refuse to buy.

 

:iagree: I've never been overweight, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. Even after each of my four babies were born, I was only ever about 10 pounds heavier than my average, although with each of them that 10 pounds did hang around for a year or two :tongue_smilie:. I have always been careful about my weight, though. I grew up eating three healthy meals a day, never snacking, enjoying 'treats' as pudding, in moderation. If I ate what I wanted, when I wanted, I probably would be much heavier. However, I have horribly painful joints, especially my knees, so much so that some days I can hardly move. I really, really don't need to add any more stress in the form of excess weight to them. Like Regentrude, I've always enjoyed strenuous, outdoor activities, and I'd like to be able to attempt to enjoy them for as long as I can.

 

Best wishes

 

Cassy

[cindergretta]

You know what, I'm very glad that there are some very fit ladies on this board who have encouraged me and treated all my weight loss questions and frustrated vents with compassion. They truly understand what people have tried to explain over and over again on this thread and have been nothing short of wonderful. For those of you who don't want to change your prejudices, have at it.

 

:grouphug: I think the whole "I did this so why can't you" only goes so far. If everyone could do everything that everyone else did, who would be great at anything? We all have strengths and weaknesses. If something is a strength of ours, I guess we just assume everyone else should/could be strong there, too. <sigh> If only, yes?

 

(I have a friend who had a c-section a week or so ago. My other friend has been stressing to her to rest and heal and do as little as absolutely possible to encourage healing and discourage lengthening recuperation. Of course, this new mom also has plenty of "helpful" people telling her their amazing feats of childbirth by c-section during a cross-country move while homeschooling 5 other children while their husbands were elsewhere... You get the idea. <sigh again> "I'm not superior. I am just a normal person who does XYZ and if I can, you should, too.")

[Liz CA]

I am taking refresher classes for crisis counseling and I learned now that many obese people were se**ally abused and as a result have packed on pounds to make themselves physically less attractive.

This was a "whoa" concept to me. Have any of you who are working in the field of psychology any experience with this?

[ThatCyndiGirl]

I am taking refresher classes for crisis counseling and I learned now that many obese people were se**ally abused and as a result have packed on pounds to make themselves physically less attractive.

This was a "whoa" concept to me. Have any of you who are working in the field of psychology any experience with this?

 

Yes, it is very common. As others on this thread have pointed out, that does not mean that EVERY overweight person has that history, but, yes, many have.

[TranquilMind]

You know what, I'm very glad that there are some very fit ladies on this board who have encouraged me and treated all my weight loss questions and frustrated vents with compassion. They truly understand what people have tried to explain over and over again on this thread and have been nothing short of wonderful. For those of you who don't want to change your prejudices, have at it.

See, I find honesty very refreshing and encouraging in itself.

 

Yes, it is hard to lose weight. But you will do it if you 1) eat right (which means little, especially the older you get, and REAL food, not prepackaged chemicals that cause weight gain and hunger and 2) move a lot.

 

Honestly, few of us in America are doing both of these things. Not even on The Biggest Loser, where they work out for hours a day, but eat chemical garbage from manufacturers who are sticking informercials in the show.

 

That's why a lot of them gain weight when they stop.

 

As a woman over 50, you must eat like 500 calories a day to lose weight. Seriously. That metabolism just ain't what it used to be.

[Big Buckin' Longhorn]

As a woman over 50, you must eat like 500 calories a day to lose weight. Seriously. That metabolism just ain't what it used to be.

 

I can't tell . . . serious or joking? That sounds insane and extremely unhealthy, at any age.

[TranquilMind]

I can't tell . . . serious or joking? That sounds insane and extremely unhealthy, at any age.

Oh, I'm exaggerating, but only a little.