That settles it...

[jay]

I've already restarted workouts and skating over the past two weeks... I need to start skipping meals again. Must lose the 6-7 lbs I've regained since mid-July... When those close to me begin agreeing with me that I'm out of shape and not particularly physically attractive, that's time to fully mobilize. No breakfast for me ;).

Comments

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

Agreed.

The technique of skipping meals is quite likely one of the things that keeps you on this cycle. Your body will assume that you are starving, and lower your metabolism accordingly. Even for a guy, this is not a good thing. The result is that it's far easier to re-gain lost weight, far more difficult to keep it off, every time around the wheel. Far better is to reduce consumption slightly across the board instead. Example: Take one less piece of toast at breakfast, one less scoop of potatoes at lunch, a smaller serving of each thing at dinner, and skip dessert most nights. That in combination with your already re-started exercise campaign should do it without having to whack your metabolism again.

Is it easy? No. But it might save you having to do this ever again. (Well, that and eating fewer courses in Spain next summer!).


Alternatively, specifically for a guy as geeky and prone to charts as you are...

Maybe you should try the "red pen" method one of those "Live Simply" Books recommended. Chart your weight DAILY (each day the same time and place if possible) with a red pen on a paper next to your scale. When the mark is up one or two pounds, take appropriate action for the next several days until the mark is back down again. Because each correction is small, the actions needed are also small, and theoretically not difficult to do. (This method SUCKS for women, BTW, because of our natural weight fluctuations during the month.) The difficulty for you is to maintain the record when you are on the road. But you're clever; I'm sure you could figure it out.

[geekchick]

Since I suspect the data-gathering aspect will appeal to you, Brian, you should definitely try to weigh yourself in the same time frame on the same scale each time if you can; remember that your weight fluctuates over the course of the day. I've seen as much as 4 pounds difference between 8:30 AM and 8 PM, and then am back at the original number the next morning.

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

Yep. What she said. Ideally after any morning... erm... eliminations, and before breakfast, to give yourself the most consistent readings.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

(nods) good idea -- actually, I do this already, every morning just before I get into the shower.

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

In which case, lack of data is not your issue. What is stopping you from following through when the scale is up a pound or two, rather than up over 5? (Not fishing for particular answers... just wondering what stands in the way for you).

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Because I didn't have a scale in Spain, or on Devon Island? That's were I picked up -- three pounds at each. Day-to-day at home, I react when things change...

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

Because I didn't have a scale in Spain, or on Devon Island? That's were I picked up -- three pounds at each. Day-to-day at home, I react when things change...

Fair enough. I'd say then that the challenge is either to GET a scale for travelling, or to react quicker when you're home again. You WERE home between Devon Island and Spain, after all. :^D

[patgreene.livejournal.com]

You WERE home between Devon Island and Spain, after all. :^D

Not much. We had family vacation, and he had a business trip to D.C. in there as well. From July 20, when he left for Devon, and September 30, when he returned from Spain, he was home about two and a half weeks, cumulative.

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

Oh, right. Forgot about the family vacation in there. OTOH, that underlines that *IF* he decides to try this route, he needs to figure out some way of continuing to get the data and act on it, despite the MANY perturbations in his daily schedule. It's a challenge, no doubt.

And I'm not actually advocating any particular action, nor am I endorsing any particular view of Brian's attractiveness, either positive or negative. (Wow, that sounds awfully weaselly--maybe I need to consider a career in politics! ;^)

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

It's just boundary defense, not weaselly-ness here. :)

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

I've been steady at the same time of day (morning) since I got back from Spain, but need to pare down... I'm 20 lbs over my actuarial ideal weight (187 vs. 167). Before my birthday party, I was down to 181. Too much heavy cold-weather fare in the Arctic, then vacation, then all those two-plate meals in Spain... sigh.

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

The actuarial weight tables are flawed, BTW. They look at weight in isolation, and don't take into account a lot of other factors, including such obvious ones as muscle mass and bone density. Much better to assess your health on the basis of how you feel and function, than on your weight alone. As one women's mag I read put it, "don't weigh your self-esteem."

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Given that, I'd be happy in the 170s, which I was close to last summer. Otherwise, my clothing size hasn't changed in 15 years... in part because men's clothing has fewer gradations, I think.

[dawnd.livejournal.com]

Oh, and go look at this entry in firecat's journal:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/firecat/282976.html

She excerpted this bit, and I think it's spot-on:

"What is Normal?"
Johan Koeslag, Department of Medical Physiology, Tygerberg South Africa
excerpt from http://academic.sun.ac.za/medphys/normal.htm:

Conforming to a cultural norm.

Medical practitioners would probably be unanimous in condemning this definition [of "normal"] as the basis of their professional decision-making. But it is, in fact the only implied definition of normality in Dorland's Medical Dictionary. The norm, in this case, seems to be the immediate post-pubertal physical state. This applies particularly to the systemic arterial blood pressure, body fat content, glucose tolerance, and plasma lipid profiles, all of which change with age. Though these changes are the rule, they are seldom considered to be normal. Indeed there are, in Medicine, almost no unreservedly age-specific normal values for middle- and old-aged persons. All age-related deviations from the immediate post-pubertal state are considered degenerate, and abnormal.

Other cultures consider anyone under middle age as still in the immature, developmental stage. Their normal physiological values, if they were to compile them, would reflect the physiology of 50 year-olds, and relegate our culture's normal values to the Paediatric category.


Actuarial weight tables are "normalized" for 20-year olds. I think it's pretty obvious that neither you nor I are 20 anymore, and trying to achieve that "ideal" may be more damaging than healthful overall.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Not being obsessive, true... I'm less concerned with the net weight now than with the rate of change going upward over the summer, since that poses longer-term risks.

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

I hadn't heard of this method, but actually sometimes practice something similar, complete with wall graph and daily recording of calories consumed ;).

Exercise helps keep the metabolism from lowering, but it becomes a tug-of-war.

And Spain... that was one reason why I began refusing the first plates, or skipping postres in favor of just coffee over ice. Not to mention abiding with toast instead of eggs and bacon for breakfast. It was just too much...