On 3/11/2009 3:15 AM, Invisible wrote:
> It's finally happened. I'm old. :'(

Nah, you're mature.  It happens to everyone :)

It just means you have to lead a different lifestyle from when you were 
younger if you want to keep the same physical shape.

> ....but then I think "well, wouldn't I be more likely to keel over and
> die rather than lose weight?" I mean, AFAIK, it's impossible to lose
> weight, you can only gain it.

Bulshi*.  The reason most people don't lose weight is because they don't 
care enough.

They care more about eating that tasty donut than dieting.
They care more about playing video games than exercising.

It all comes down to choice, and most people aren't willing to choose to 
lose weight.  They are perfectly capable of doing so, if they cared enough.

> And then I start thinking really crazy things like "well, maybe if I
> spend 3 hours a day running round the block..." But that's not going to
> help either.

If you spend 3 hours a day running, you'll live an extra ten years... 
but you'll spend those ten years running!

-- 
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Chambers <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote:
> > ....but then I think "well, wouldn't I be more likely to keel over and
> > die rather than lose weight?" I mean, AFAIK, it's impossible to lose
> > weight, you can only gain it.

> Bulshi*.  The reason most people don't lose weight is because they don't 
> care enough.

  Losing a significant amount of weight (in a healthy way) is definitely not
easy, but completely possible. By far the major obstacle in this is the lack
of proper motivation.

  I lost 22 kg in 7 months by eating healthy and exercising. A medical
examination afterwards confirmed that all my physical stats (eg. blood
counts) were improved.

  I wrote about this in detail here:

http://www.bodybuildingforum.ie/fat-loss-diet/7-months-ago-t466.html

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 12 Mar 2009 05:58:00 -0400, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:

>  Losing a significant amount of weight (in a healthy way) is definitely not
>easy, but completely possible. By far the major obstacle in this is the lack
>of proper motivation.
>
>  I lost 22 kg in 7 months by eating healthy and exercising. A medical
>examination afterwards confirmed that all my physical stats (eg. blood
>counts) were improved.

Well done Warp that is a significant amount of weight to loose. I once lost a
similar amount in a similar time frame when I was in my twenties. I still have
the "stretch marks" on my arms. Healthy eating and a modicum of exercise is the
way to go. It was probably easier for me as there were not so many sources of
processed and fast food around in those days. Also I did not have a car so I had
to walk more than people do nowadays.
As for motivation, I found that the more weight I lost the greater my motivation
became. :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

> ...and that's when it hits you: YOU'RE A FAT ****ER!! o_O
> 
> I am seriously alarmed at this turn of events. My diet hasn't changed. 
> My lifestyle hasn't changed. 

OOC what does your diet and lifestyle (exercise) consist of?

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> ...and that's when it hits you: YOU'RE A FAT ****ER!! o_O
>>
>> I am seriously alarmed at this turn of events. My diet hasn't changed. 
>> My lifestyle hasn't changed. 
> 
> OOC what does your diet and lifestyle (exercise) consist of?

My diet is 80% cheese, 15% chocolate, and 5% other stuff. My lifestyle 
consists of spending hours sitting completely motionless in front of a 
computer, and also sleeping.

Given the above, I ought to be an eighty tonne walrus like my other. But 
I've always been a stick insect. But now, suddenly, I'm getting fat. If 
I'd *changed* something I could understand. But I haven't. The only 
difference I can think of is that I now do dance classes...

Post a reply to this message

>> OOC what does your diet and lifestyle (exercise) consist of?
>
> My diet is 80% cheese, 15% chocolate, and 5% other stuff. My lifestyle 
> consists of spending hours sitting completely motionless in front of a 
> computer, and also sleeping.
>
> Given the above, I ought to be an eighty tonne walrus like my other. But 
> I've always been a stick insect. But now, suddenly, I'm getting fat.

No, given the above continues you are likely to end up an eighty ton walrus 
in a few years.

That is exactly to be expected, when you are younger most people can eat 
what they like with little or no exercise and won't get fat.  Usually during 
your late 20s / early 30s that changes, it's just life.

Take some advice from Warp's reply before it's too late.  BTW it's not just 
the weight, having a diet and lifestyle like that is just not healthy and 
you'll increase the risk of all sorts of other problems later in life.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:

> That is exactly to be expected, when you are younger most people can eat 
> what they like with little or no exercise and won't get fat.  Usually 
> during your late 20s / early 30s that changes, it's just life.

I don't get it. I finished growing 10 years ago. Why the sudden change 
*now*?

> Take some advice from Warp's reply before it's too late.  BTW it's not 
> just the weight, having a diet and lifestyle like that is just not 
> healthy and you'll increase the risk of all sorts of other problems 
> later in life.

Well, if I'm not going to eat cheese any more, the question would be 
"what the heck am I going to eat?"

As for exercise... I only really have 3 hours a day that I can do 
anything with. I'm at work all day. My job involves sitting motionless. 
Can't really change that. I spent 2.5 hours per day sat motionless in a 
car. Can't really change that. That leaves 3 hours each evening.

I guess I could spend 3 hours each day running. However, there are two 
problems:

1. I can't run for that long.

2. That isn't long enough to make any measurable difference to a 
person's fitness levels.

3. That's *insanely* boring.

I guess you could maybe add in the weekends too... I don't know.

The irony is, I took up dance classes partly because I thought it would 
be good exercise. Hell, it seems physical enough! Enough to get me very 
hot and tired anyway. But, apparently, it's having no effect at all...

Post a reply to this message

Invisible a écrit :
> The irony is, I took up dance classes partly because I thought it would 
> be good exercise. Hell, it seems physical enough! Enough to get me very 
> hot and tired anyway. But, apparently, it's having no effect at all...

Ah but you don't know what would have happened *without* the dance 
classes :-) How long have you been doing that by the way?

If you manage to cram a pair of two-hour classes of physical activity 
into your schedule, I believe it could only be for the better. And it 
does not absolutely have to be running ;-)

-- 
Vincent

Post a reply to this message

>> The irony is, I took up dance classes partly because I thought it 
>> would be good exercise. Hell, it seems physical enough! Enough to get 
>> me very hot and tired anyway. But, apparently, it's having no effect 
>> at all...
> 
> Ah but you don't know what would have happened *without* the dance 
> classes :-)

Damnit, I need a time machine. :-P

> How long have you been doing that by the way?

Since January.

> If you manage to cram a pair of two-hour classes of physical activity 
> into your schedule, I believe it could only be for the better. And it 
> does not absolutely have to be running ;-)

The classes are one hour, not two. One hour, once a week.


(Actually, on reflection, if I had a time machine I wouldn't use it to 
find out if I'd still get fat... More like, go back in time, bitch-slap 
myself, and radically alter a few life choices!)

Post a reply to this message

Invisible a écrit :
>> How long have you been doing that by the way?
> 
> Since January.
> 
>> If you manage to cram a pair of two-hour classes of physical activity 
>> into your schedule, I believe it could only be for the better. And it 
>> does not absolutely have to be running ;-)
> 
> The classes are one hour, not two. One hour, once a week.
> 

I wouldn't expect to see any effect in that short time span, not with 
only one hour a week... Perhaps you'll have to supplement that with some 
other form of sport.

-- 
Vincent

Post a reply to this message

> I don't get it. I finished growing 10 years ago. Why the sudden change 
> *now*?

Your metabolism probably changes as you get older, meaning more of what you 
eat gets stored as fat and less gets converted to energy.

> Well, if I'm not going to eat cheese any more, the question would be "what 
> the heck am I going to eat?"

Um do you see anyone else having a diet of 80% cheese?  Read this:

http://www.eatwell.gov.uk/healthydiet/eighttipssection/8tips/

Is it that you don't like anything other than cheese, or you can't think 
what else to eat?

> As for exercise... I only really have 3 hours a day that I can do anything 
> with.

Even 30 mins exercise a day will have a huge impact, believe me.  I doubt 
you could even run for 30 mins straight at the moment, I know I could only 
just about manage about 10 mins very slowly when I didn't do any exercise 
previously.

If you attempt to walk/jog/run for 30 mins every evening and eat healthier 
food you will have lower weight in a few weeks, it's almost guaranteed.

> 3. That's *insanely* boring.

Well find something that you enjoy more, roller blading, cycling, swimming 
etc.  Hey even get one of those cross-trainer exercise machines and watch a 
DVD at the same time, that's what I often do if the weather is particularly 
bad outside, the time goes so quickly.

Believe me, you'll prefer doing the above to being in hospital with a heart 
attack later in life, read up on cholesterol, how much is in cheese, and why 
you have heart attacks.  A diet of 80% cheese is going to lead to a 
disaster...

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> I don't get it. I finished growing 10 years ago. Why the sudden change 
>> *now*?
> 
> Your metabolism probably changes as you get older, meaning more of what 
> you eat gets stored as fat and less gets converted to energy.

Heh. Next I get to have all my hair fall out. Yay, me. :-/

Damnit, my life is almost over now, and I haven't even *done* anything 
yet! >_<

>> Well, if I'm not going to eat cheese any more, the question would be 
>> "what the heck am I going to eat?"
> 
> Um do you see anyone else having a diet of 80% cheese?

Heh, no. Mind you, most other people seem to eat stuff I wouldn't touch 
even if you paid me. :-P

> Read this:
> 
> http://www.eatwell.gov.uk/healthydiet/eighttipssection/8tips/

Mmm, interesting. I had no idea starch was so great. Well, at least I 
can still max out on pasta and potatoe wedges then! There's no way I'm 
going to willingly eat slimy fish though. :-P

> Is it that you don't like anything other than cheese, or you can't think 
> what else to eat?

Well, at work I have cheese sandwiches. Given that there are no food 
preparation facilities of any kind, I'm struggling to think what else I 
could possibly eat. Crisps? That hardly seems like an improvement.

I often have cheese on toast in the evening, but that's just because 
there's usually no "real" food in the building. When it's available, I 
tend to eat pizza (so... basically cheese then) or cook some chicken. Or 
some other kind of meat. Or maybe just noodles. (Not very filling though...)

>> As for exercise... I only really have 3 hours a day that I can do 
>> anything with.
> 
> Even 30 mins exercise a day will have a huge impact, believe me.

Don't believe you.

I spent 2 years of my life cycling over 2 hours per day. It made NO 
DIFFERENCE at all. And let me tell you, each day I arrived at my 
destination *exhausted*. Still it made no difference.

> I doubt you could even run for 30 mins straight at the moment

I agree. I'm a sprinter, I never could do long distances.

> If you attempt to walk/jog/run for 30 mins every evening and eat 
> healthier food you will have lower weight in a few weeks, it's almost 
> guaranteed.

Er, yeah, right. I know of people who have been doing that for decades 
and still can't lose weight.

>> 3. That's *insanely* boring.
> 
> Well find something that you enjoy more, roller blading, cycling, 
> swimming etc.

Like I said, I took up dance classes because I thought it might help. 
But apparently not. Likewise, I enjoy rock climbing (surely a serious 
workout?), but the local climbing wall purposely shuts 10 minutes before 
I arrive home just to annoy me. And then there's skiing. Again quite a 
good full-body workout, but *damned* expensive.

Or I could sign up to the local gym. For £50 *per month*.

> Believe me, you'll prefer doing the above to being in hospital with a 
> heart attack later in life, read up on cholesterol, how much is in 
> cheese, and why you have heart attacks.  A diet of 80% cheese is going 
> to lead to a disaster...

Well, I recently had a blood test specifically looking for cholesterol, 
and apparently they found nothing unusual. The 80% figure, like all 
statistics, is made up off the top of my head. I haven't actually 
*measured* it or anything, it just seems like about the right number.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> scott wrote:
> 
>> That is exactly to be expected, when you are younger most people can
>> eat what they like with little or no exercise and won't get fat. 
>> Usually during your late 20s / early 30s that changes, it's just life.
> 
> I don't get it. I finished growing 10 years ago. Why the sudden change
> *now*?

	I was just like you. For about 8 years, my weight remained at 60-62 kg.
I could eat whatever I wanted and it wouldn't make a difference.

	Then suddenly I was carrying extra weight around, and my trousers
wouldn't fit. Really bad sign.

	So I lost (some) weight. Basically just ate less - that's all.

-- 
"Strange, I don't remember suffering from memory loss."


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

> I was just like you. For about 8 years, my weight remained at 60-62 kg.
> I could eat whatever I wanted and it wouldn't make a difference.
>
> Then suddenly I was carrying extra weight around, and my trousers
> wouldn't fit. Really bad sign.

Ditto here, I was always around 70-75kg from about 16 years old up to 25 or 
so, my weight did not change hardly depending on if I ate three huge 
unhealthy meals a day with no exercise (while working over the summer 
months) or eating relatively little with a lot of exercise.  Then suddenly 
my weight started going up, trousers were tight and I rocked in at 83kg on 
the scales.  Since then I have to work quite hard with what I eat and 
forcing myself to find time to exercise to keep my weight below 80kg. 
Luckily my gf is quite a health food fanatic so that bit is relatively easy 
for me.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> I was just like you. For about 8 years, my weight remained at 60-62 kg.
>> I could eat whatever I wanted and it wouldn't make a difference.
>>
>> Then suddenly I was carrying extra weight around, and my trousers
>> wouldn't fit. Really bad sign.
> 
> Ditto here, I was always around 70-75kg from about 16 years old up to 25 
> or so, my weight did not change hardly depending on if I ate three huge 
> unhealthy meals a day with no exercise (while working over the summer 
> months) or eating relatively little with a lot of exercise.  Then 
> suddenly my weight started going up, trousers were tight and I rocked in 
> at 83kg on the scales.  Since then I have to work quite hard with what I 
> eat and forcing myself to find time to exercise to keep my weight below 
> 80kg. Luckily my gf is quite a health food fanatic so that bit is 
> relatively easy for me.

I've been 80 Kg for years...

Wait, how tall are you?

Post a reply to this message

> I've been 80 Kg for years...
>
> Wait, how tall are you?

179cm

If you divide your weight (in kg) by your height^2 (in metres) that should 
be between 20-25.  For me, 80kg corresponds to the upper end of the scale, 
so I try to keep under that.

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
>> I've been 80 Kg for years...
>>
>> Wait, how tall are you?
> 
> 179cm

OK, I'm quite a bit taller than you (188 cm).

> If you divide your weight (in kg) by your height^2 (in metres) that 
> should be between 20-25.  For me, 80kg corresponds to the upper end of 
> the scale, so I try to keep under that.

Hmm, so 80 / 1.88^2 = 22.63

Post a reply to this message

> Mmm, interesting. I had no idea starch was so great. Well, at least I can 
> still max out on pasta and potatoe wedges then! There's no way I'm going 
> to willingly eat slimy fish though. :-P

There are lots of different types of fish, not all are slimy.  Potato wedges 
are often not very healthy if they have been fried in bad stuff, check the 
packaging.

> Well, at work I have cheese sandwiches. Given that there are no food 
> preparation facilities of any kind, I'm struggling to think what else I 
> could possibly eat. Crisps? That hardly seems like an improvement.

I have no food preparation facilities here either, but there are much 
healthier things to eat than cheese sandwiches (I guess you are having white 
bread still, right?).  First make sure you're eating brown bread and not 
white, then you can have soup with it (there are millions of different 
flavours and viscosities, don't tell me you hate all of them), salad with 
chicken or tuna, even just cutting out half the cheese and replacing it with 
some salad will be a good start.  If you prepare food in the evening then 
make a little more and take it to eat cold the next day if suitable (do you 
have a microwave at work?).

> I often have cheese on toast in the evening, but that's just because 
> there's usually no "real" food in the building.

What, you're incapable of stopping in a supermarket on the way home from 
work?

> When it's available, I tend to eat pizza (so... basically cheese then) or 
> cook some chicken. Or some other kind of meat. Or maybe just noodles. (Not 
> very filling though...)

Get some of those big packets of frozen chopped up mixed vegetables from the 
supermarket, whilst not as good as the fresh stuff it's much faster to 
prepare and is almost as good.  Then throw a bit of chicken in the oven, 
boil some noodles/rice/pasta, heat up some tomoato-based sauce (or make your 
own if you are getting in to it) and you've got a really healthy, tasty and 
quick meal.

> I spent 2 years of my life cycling over 2 hours per day. It made NO 
> DIFFERENCE at all.

Perhaps because you weren't having a weight problem back then?  I did a huge 
amount of exercise at university too and it didn't affect my weight at all. 
But then neither did junking out for 3 months with no exercise so it doesn't 
really prove anything.

> And let me tell you, each day I arrived at my destination *exhausted*. 
> Still it made no difference.

But I bet at the end of the 2 years you could make that journey way faster 
than at the beginning, if not you are not human!

> I agree. I'm a sprinter, I never could do long distances.

It's just practise.  Do 1 minute longer each day, that's definitely possible 
to sustain for a few weeks, also don't start out sprinting, start out 
thinking you're going to sustain this for 30 minutes - it makes a 
difference.

> Er, yeah, right. I know of people who have been doing that for decades and 
> still can't lose weight.

While eating healthily the whole time? Don't believe you unless they have 
some medical condition.

> Well, I recently had a blood test specifically looking for cholesterol, 
> and apparently they found nothing unusual.

Young people who are not obese rarely do, but you're on the slipperly slope 
now and the longer you go without acting the harder it will become...

Post a reply to this message

>>> I've been 80 Kg for years...
>>>
>>> Wait, how tall are you?
>>
>> 179cm
>
> OK, I'm quite a bit taller than you (188 cm).
>
>> If you divide your weight (in kg) by your height^2 (in metres) that 
>> should be between 20-25.  For me, 80kg corresponds to the upper end of 
>> the scale, so I try to keep under that.
>
> Hmm, so 80 / 1.88^2 = 22.63

See, perfect! So what's your weight now then, given that you've been 80 for 
years and you've recently gained a load?

Post a reply to this message

>> Hmm, so 80 / 1.88^2 = 22.63
> 
> See, perfect!

Heh. Well considering that I've always been skin and bones, you'd hope 
so. ;-)

> So what's your weight now then, given that you've been 80 
> for years and you've recently gained a load?

This is the operative question...

Post a reply to this message

>> Mmm, interesting. I had no idea starch was so great. Well, at least I 
>> can still max out on pasta and potatoe wedges then! There's no way I'm 
>> going to willingly eat slimy fish though. :-P
> 
> There are lots of different types of fish, not all are slimy.

Perhaps. But the guidelines specifically call for slimey fish.

> Potato 
> wedges are often not very healthy if they have been fried in bad stuff, 
> check the packaging.

If we're making our own, usually vegetable oil. If they're bought... who 
knows?

>> Well, at work I have cheese sandwiches. Given that there are no food 
>> preparation facilities of any kind, I'm struggling to think what else 
>> I could possibly eat. Crisps? That hardly seems like an improvement.
> 
> I have no food preparation facilities here either, but there are much 
> healthier things to eat than cheese sandwiches (I guess you are having 
> white bread still, right?).

What can I say? White bread has a nicer texture. :-P

> First make sure you're eating brown bread 
> and not white, then you can have soup with it

Mmm, cold soup... :-S

[Sure, I could use packet soup instead. But I fail to believe that 
eating redydrated soup dust is more healthy than eating a cheese sandwich.]

> salad with chicken or tuna

Cold meat. Yay. :-/

> even just cutting out half the cheese and 
> replacing it with some salad will be a good start.

Hey, why not just go the whole hog and eat bread on its own?

> If you prepare food 
> in the evening then make a little more and take it to eat cold the next 
> day if suitable (do you have a microwave at work?).

Don't have a microwave. The only thing we have is boiling water for 
making tea.

>> I often have cheese on toast in the evening, but that's just because 
>> there's usually no "real" food in the building.
> 
> What, you're incapable of stopping in a supermarket on the way home from 
> work?

I won't bore you with the political details. Suffice it to say that if I 
was living by myself, it would be a total non-issue. I'd buy the food I 
want to eat, and I'd eat it. The problem is my mother... Let's not even 
go into that one.

>> When it's available, I tend to eat pizza (so... basically cheese then) 
>> or cook some chicken. Or some other kind of meat. Or maybe just 
>> noodles. (Not very filling though...)
> 
> Get some of those big packets of frozen chopped up mixed vegetables from 
> the supermarket, whilst not as good as the fresh stuff it's much faster 
> to prepare and is almost as good.  Then throw a bit of chicken in the 
> oven, boil some noodles/rice/pasta, heat up some tomoato-based sauce (or 
> make your own if you are getting in to it) and you've got a really 
> healthy, tasty and quick meal.



>> I spent 2 years of my life cycling over 2 hours per day. It made NO 
>> DIFFERENCE at all.
> 
> Perhaps because you weren't having a weight problem back then?

No, but you would have *thought* I'd get at least slightly fitter, no?

>> And let me tell you, each day I arrived at my destination *exhausted*. 
>> Still it made no difference.
> 
> But I bet at the end of the 2 years you could make that journey way 
> faster than at the beginning, if not you are not human!

Travel time at the start of my course: 1.2 hours.
Travel time at the end of my course: 1.2 hours.

Nope. No measurable difference.

(Let us not even go into the fact that 1.2 hours to travel 4.6 miles is 
an average speed of something like 5 MPH, which is pretty slow for a 
bicycle...)

>> I agree. I'm a sprinter, I never could do long distances.
> 
> It's just practise.  Do 1 minute longer each day, that's definitely 
> possible to sustain for a few weeks, also don't start out sprinting, 
> start out thinking you're going to sustain this for 30 minutes - it 
> makes a difference.

I think the key here is to find something that I can realistically stick 
at. I mean, currently I have barely enough time each evening to do the 
stuff I *want* to do! So cutting out a huge chunk of that time to do 
something mind-blowingly boring and probably futile isn't going to be easy.

>> Er, yeah, right. I know of people who have been doing that for decades 
>> and still can't lose weight.
> 
> While eating healthily the whole time? Don't believe you unless they 
> have some medical condition.

Well, my mum seems to eat nothing _but_ dead plants. And she's still huge...

(It's quite amusing to be told "you eat so unhealthily, you're going to 
get really ill" by a woman who eats nothing but supposedly "healthy" 
food and is never the less criplingly unhealthy...)

Post a reply to this message

Invisible a écrit :
> I think the key here is to find something that I can realistically stick 
> at. I mean, currently I have barely enough time each evening to do the 
> stuff I *want* to do! So cutting out a huge chunk of that time to do 
> something mind-blowingly boring and probably futile isn't going to be easy.

You'd have to find something that you find interesting even just on the 
intellectual level, I believe. That way you'll get exercise without 
being bored...

For me it's been martial arts. I think anything that has a complex 
technical component would fit the bill though... Not necessarily 
something very violent, take aikido for example. Something technical 
enough that it keeps your brain working a bit. Plus you'll learn some 
Japanese :-) Plus there are more girls in aikido than in other arts :-D

-- 
Vincent

Post a reply to this message

Invisible a écrit :
>> So what's your weight now then, given that you've been 80 for years 
>> and you've recently gained a load?
> 
> This is the operative question...

Hey maybe you've not gained weight but just lost density :-)

-- 
Vincent

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> My diet is 80% cheese, 15% chocolate, and 5% other stuff. My lifestyle 
> consists of spending hours sitting completely motionless in front of a 
> computer, and also sleeping.

This is great to gain weight and loose metabolism, you go slowly and 
silently down to a road of physical misfit. And from the above you eat a 
lot of fatty food, change that, go to a Nutritionist to eat balanced and 
healthy.

> Given the above, I ought to be an eighty tonne walrus like my other. But 
> I've always been a stick insect. But now, suddenly, I'm getting fat. If 
> I'd *changed* something I could understand. But I haven't. The only 
> difference I can think of is that I now do dance classes...

This should be helping since is physical exercise.

Post a reply to this message

Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
> > My diet is 80% cheese, 15% chocolate, and 5% other stuff. My lifestyle 
> > consists of spending hours sitting completely motionless in front of a 
> > computer, and also sleeping.

> This is great to gain weight and loose metabolism, you go slowly and 
> silently down to a road of physical misfit. And from the above you eat a 
> lot of fatty food, change that, go to a Nutritionist to eat balanced and 
> healthy.

  Actually modern nutritionist knowledge is slowly changing the classical
notion of fats&cholesterol = bad.

  It is becoming more and more clear that fats+carbohydrates, especially
when the latter is unhealthily abundant, is the killer combination. Fats
in themselves are not that bad, but when you combine them with tons and
tons of carbohydrates, that's when the body starts really storing the stuff.

  The reason is simple: The main energy source for the body is carbohydrates.
When you eat a balanced diet, you get approximately the right amount of
carbohydrates for your energy needs, and your body then neither consumes
nor increases its fat reserves. When your weight is normal, this is the
optimal situation.

  The problem with eating tons of carbohydrates is that now your body is
getting a lot more energy than it needs. This triggers the body to start
storing those fats. (Also some of the extra carbs are also *converted*
into fats and stored, besides the actual fats you are eating.)

  If you eat tons of fat but only some carbs, your body is actually not
getting extra energy (the body converts fats into energy very slowly, so
eating tons of it is almost as if you were not eating them at all, assuming
you are not eating tons of carbs as well). Thus those extra fats are not
stored, but ejected by your body.

  Of course this doesn't mean that eating tons of fat and no carbs is
healthy either. Fats can start building up on your artery walls and other
such nasty stuff, so it's not really a good idea to hog on tons of fat.
The other extreme: Not eating fats almost at all, is also not very healthy
because the body *needs* fats for many things.

  Also eating meat/fats and no carbs (the so-called Atkins diet) has proven
to be unhealthy in the long run because the body needs carbs as well. So
the most healthy diet is always balanced: Some carbs, some fats, a good
amount of proteins, and a healthy amount of other nutrients.

  The problem with the modern western eating culture is that most foods
contain tons and tons of processed carbohydrates which digest fast. Not
only does this overwhelm your energy needs (triggering the fat storing
processes of your body), but it gets you "sugar highs", getting you
basically addicted to these carb rushes. When you get addicted enough,
it will be *very* difficult to stop. This is the worst possible situation.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Also eating meat/fats and no carbs (the so-called Atkins diet) has proven
> to be unhealthy in the long run because the body needs carbs as well.

I saw an interesting documentary once about the diet of Eskimos. (As in, 
native americans inhabiting places where it's always snowy.) Their only 
source of food is fish, seals, and so on - basically fatty meat. One of the 
investigators lived on such a diet for a couple of years and found very 
little unhealthy effects.

This has been an interesting anecdote, not science. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
   unable to read this, even at arm's length."

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
>> If you prepare food
>> in the evening then make a little more and take it to eat cold the next
>> day if suitable (do you have a microwave at work?).
> 
> Don't have a microwave. The only thing we have is boiling water for
> making tea.

Wow, we do have a microwave and I'm sure we're a way smaller company than
you :)

>>> I spent 2 years of my life cycling over 2 hours per day. It made NO
>>> DIFFERENCE at all.
>> 
>> Perhaps because you weren't having a weight problem back then?
> 
> No, but you would have *thought* I'd get at least slightly fitter, no?

Maybe you avoided getting fatter? You say it made no difference, but this
time again, you don't know what would have happened if you *didn't* cycle.

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> I was just like you. For about 8 years, my weight remained at 60-62 kg.
> I could eat whatever I wanted and it wouldn't make a difference.

The doctor says I'm underweight. With the amount of exercise I do (ha),
you'd expect I'd be a fat ball of fat!

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   The problem with the modern western eating culture is that most foods
> contain tons and tons of processed carbohydrates which digest fast. Not
> only does this overwhelm your energy needs (triggering the fat storing
> processes of your body), but it gets you "sugar highs", getting you
> basically addicted to these carb rushes. When you get addicted enough,
> it will be *very* difficult to stop. This is the worst possible situation.

The "digest fast" part is important too. Food that can get digested fast
makes your digestive system use less energy. Less energy = less carbs used.

Post a reply to this message

> What can I say? White bread has a nicer texture. :-P

And I like eating chocolate better than vegetables, doesn't mean I eat it 
the whole time though.

> Cold meat. Yay. :-/

What, you have never enjoyed a good ploughmans?

> Don't have a microwave.

Can't you buy one, I got one for our office here, they're only like 40 quid 
and can be easily put somewhere (no plumbing or gas required, just a mains 
outlet).

> No, but you would have *thought* I'd get at least slightly fitter, no?

I expect you did.

> (Let us not even go into the fact that 1.2 hours to travel 4.6 miles is an 
> average speed of something like 5 MPH,

Hehe sounds like you weren't really pushing yourself then, dude people can 
WALK 4.6 miles in 1.2 hours!  In a bike, even if you're totally unfit you 
should be able to do 4.6 miles in under 30 minutes, after a year of training 
under 20 or even 15 minutes no problem.

> I think the key here is to find something that I can realistically stick 
> at. I mean, currently I have barely enough time each evening to do the 
> stuff I *want* to do! So cutting out a huge chunk of that time to do 
> something mind-blowingly boring and probably futile isn't going to be 
> easy.

Nobody said it was going to be easy.

> Well, my mum seems to eat nothing _but_ dead plants. And she's still 
> huge...

How much exercise does she do per week?

Post a reply to this message

> I saw an interesting documentary once about the diet of Eskimos. (As in, 
> native americans inhabiting places where it's always snowy.) Their only 
> source of food is fish, seals, and so on - basically fatty meat. One of 
> the investigators lived on such a diet for a couple of years and found 
> very little unhealthy effects.

Hehe, everytime I go to Japan I always lose weight, a diet of fish and rice 
seems to do the job for me!

Post a reply to this message

>> Cold meat. Yay. :-/
> 
> What, you have never enjoyed a good ploughmans?

I hate cold meat. It's just not very nice cold.

>> (Let us not even go into the fact that 1.2 hours to travel 4.6 miles 
>> is an average speed of something like 5 MPH,
> 
> Hehe sounds like you weren't really pushing yourself then

Every morning I arrived so exhausted I could barely stand up. How is 
that "not pushing myself"?

> dude people can WALK 4.6 miles in 1.2 hours!

Er, yeah, right.

As I recall, last time we want on a school trip that was a 5 mile walk, 
it took an entire day to walk it. (But then, that *was* 5 Mr Martin 
miles...)

> In a bike, even if you're totally 
> unfit you should be able to do 4.6 miles in under 30 minutes, after a 
> year of training under 20 or even 15 minutes no problem.

Yeah, well... my sister could probably do that. But not me.

>> Well, my mum seems to eat nothing _but_ dead plants. And she's still 
>> huge...
> 
> How much exercise does she do per week?

Does whinging count as "exercise"?

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> > dude people can WALK 4.6 miles in 1.2 hours!
>
> Er, yeah, right.

Well I used to walk to work at my last job, that was almost 2 miles and I could
do it in under 25 mins if I pushed it.

> As I recall, last time we want on a school trip that was a 5 mile walk,
> it took an entire day to walk it. (But then, that *was* 5 Mr Martin
> miles...)

I once walked almost 20 miles in a day. Over hills. 10 miles is a good distance
for a day walk.

> Does whinging count as "exercise"?

Depends on the volume ;-)

Post a reply to this message

On 3/12/2009 2:58 AM, Warp wrote:
>    I lost 22 kg in 7 months by eating healthy and exercising. A medical
> examination afterwards confirmed that all my physical stats (eg. blood
> counts) were improved.
>
>    I wrote about this in detail here:

Good job!  How are you doing at keeping it off?

Personally, I haven't yet motivated myself to lose weight, despite 
"knowing" that I need to.  I currently weigh 253, but I just have to 
many other things to worry about at the moment.  It's a lazy excuse, I 
know, but it's how I feel.

-- 
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

On 3/12/2009 6:33 AM, Invisible wrote:
> The classes are one hour, not two. One hour, once a week.

One hour, 3 times a week is better.  Or 30 minutes, 5 times a week, but 
recent research suggests the first is healthier.

> (Actually, on reflection, if I had a time machine I wouldn't use it to
> find out if I'd still get fat... More like, go back in time, bitch-slap
> myself, and radically alter a few life choices!)

Ever see the movie Daywatch?  There's a line in there I love... a 
villain is offered the opportunity to correct any of his past mistakes, 
which he declines.  His associate asks him, "You don't make mistakes?" 
to which he replied, "I don't regret them."

Fact is, if you had made different choices, you wouldn't understand the 
necessity of those choices.  It's the act of making mistakes that 
teaches you not to; to quote conventional wisdom, "it's the burnt hand 
that teaches best."

-- 
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

>> (Actually, on reflection, if I had a time machine I wouldn't use it to
>> find out if I'd still get fat... More like, go back in time, bitch-slap
>> myself, and radically alter a few life choices!)
> 
> Ever see the movie Daywatch?  There's a line in there I love... a 
> villain is offered the opportunity to correct any of his past mistakes, 
> which he declines.  His associate asks him, "You don't make mistakes?" 
> to which he replied, "I don't regret them."
> 
> Fact is, if you had made different choices, you wouldn't understand the 
> necessity of those choices.

No, I wouldn't. But I'd be *happy* instead of being miserable. I think I 
could live with being happy but not knowing why. :-P

> It's the act of making mistakes that 
> teaches you not to; to quote conventional wisdom, "it's the burnt hand 
> that teaches best."

Being killed is a *really* ineffective way to learn about the dangers of 
landmines. :-P

Post a reply to this message

>> dude people can WALK 4.6 miles in 1.2 hours!
>
> Er, yeah, right.

4.6 miles in 1.2 hours is 3.8 MPH, that is brisk walking pace, I guarantee 
you that most people would be able to manage that WALKING with no prior 
training.  That is unbelievably slow for a bike, are you sure you got those 
figures correct?

Post a reply to this message

>>> dude people can WALK 4.6 miles in 1.2 hours!
>>
>> Er, yeah, right.
> 
> 4.6 miles in 1.2 hours is 3.8 MPH, that is brisk walking pace, I 
> guarantee you that most people would be able to manage that WALKING with 
> no prior training.  That is unbelievably slow for a bike, are you sure 
> you got those figures correct?

It might be 4.2 miles or 4.8 miles or something, but it was definitely 
just under 5 miles. And the time might not be exactly 1.2 hours, but it 
was a little over 1 hour.

I specifically remember computing my average speed and being 
dissapointed by it. (Especially since during the downhill parts, my 
speedometer registered 20 MPH or more.)

Indeed, every morning I'd get out of bed, have my breadfast, and be out 
of the door while my little sister lay sound asleep in bed. Half an hour 
later I'd cycle past her school and she'd be there on her bike chatting 
to her friends. I never could figure out how the hell she got there so 
fast, or how she got in front of my without passing me.

I think the problem is that the route is uphill in both directions. 
(Despite this obviously being physically impossible.) Perhaps it *would* 
in fact be faster to walk it. Cycling uphill is absurdly hard.

Post a reply to this message

On 12-3-2009 10:58, Warp wrote:
>   I lost 22 kg in 7 months by eating healthy and exercising. A medical
> examination afterwards confirmed that all my physical stats (eg. blood
> counts) were improved.

YKYHBRTTL when you try to loose exactly pi kilo's per month.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:15:02 +0100, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:

>On 12-3-2009 10:58, Warp wrote:
>>   I lost 22 kg in 7 months by eating healthy and exercising. A medical
>> examination afterwards confirmed that all my physical stats (eg. blood
>> counts) were improved.
>
>YKYHBRTTL when you try to loose exactly pi kilo's per month.

LOL Nicely spotted. 
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

andrel wrote:

> YKYHBRTTL when you try to loose exactly pi kilo's per month.

Most people just try to loose the pie kilos. ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
> Ever see the movie Daywatch? 

Daywatch and nightwatch were fabulous movies. So totally non-Hollywood in 
their execution. I never got around to looking up what the russian words 
written in chalk were saying - I'll have to watch that again.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
   unable to read this, even at arm's length."

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> Hehe, everytime I go to Japan 
Nice, I wish I could say the same, lucky you :-)

Post a reply to this message

Interesting, I'll keep this handy, thx for the info Warp :-)

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> I think the problem is that the route is uphill in both directions.
> (Despite this obviously being physically impossible.) Perhaps it *would*
> in fact be faster to walk it. Cycling uphill is absurdly hard.

Not impossible according to Murphy's Law. Both directions are uphill and
against the wind.

Post a reply to this message

On 3/13/2009 9:23 AM, Darren New wrote:
> Chambers wrote:
>> Ever see the movie Daywatch?
>
> Daywatch and nightwatch were fabulous movies. So totally non-Hollywood
> in their execution. I never got around to looking up what the russian
> words written in chalk were saying - I'll have to watch that again.

I just have to mention a few more things...

First, they included the best use of subtitles I have ever seen, 
*anywhere*.  The stylization made reading the subtitles *enjoyable*, for 
crying out loud!

Second, the movies were made for about $4M US each!  In other words, 
each one cost less than half the original Star Wars, 30 years later!

-- 
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

On 3/12/2009 9:10 AM, Invisible wrote:
> I won't bore you with the political details. Suffice it to say that if I
> was living by myself, it would be a total non-issue. I'd buy the food I
> want to eat, and I'd eat it. The problem is my mother... Let's not even
> go into that one.

http://www.citybaseapartments.com/
http://www.metroroommates.com/city_rentals/city_intl_rentals.asp

For the second one, scroll down to the bottom and you'll see the UK 
split up by city.

I don't mean to be rude by suggesting you move out, but you've brought 
up your mother before, and it seems that you'd be happier living on your 
own.

-- 
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

On 3/13/2009 2:09 AM, Invisible wrote:
>> dude people can WALK 4.6 miles in 1.2 hours!
>
> Er, yeah, right.

I'm a bit(ha!) chunky, and almost every day I walk 0.8 miles in under 15 
minutes.  That's on pace for 1.4 hours.

When I was in shape, I could have gone faster...

-- 
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

One other thing to know is that different types of carbs digest at different 
speeds. There's a "glycemic index", where 100 is glucose (aka cane sugar), 
<100 digests slower, >100 digests faster. Obviously you want low numbers.

Some surprising thought-to-be-healthy foods actually will screw with your 
digestion as much or more than drinking a soda. Rice (at least white rice), 
carrots, and a few others are worse than a spoon of sugar. Fructose actually 
has a very low glycemic index, altho I don't know if the kind they use in 
manufacturing is better than regular sugar. But if you want something 
natural to scoop into your tea, fructose is much better for you that regular 
sugar and tastes the same, for example.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   My fortune cookie said, "You will soon be
   unable to read this, even at arm's length."

Post a reply to this message

>> Hehe, everytime I go to Japan
> Nice, I wish I could say the same, lucky you :-)

Unfortunately I've never been able to spend more than 1 or 2 days actually 
doing enjoyable things there, like travelling around for fun or 
sight-seeing, the last couple of times I've been there have been various 
reasons why I couldn't stay longer or go earlier to try and enjoy the 
country.  One day though :-)

Post a reply to this message