How to lose weight - it's simple

dktreesea

People also underestimate the calorific value of their treats over time. The guy across from us has a couple of biscuits, he was telling me, usually chocolate digestives, with his afternoon tea. Even if that were only 10 a week, i.e. just when he is at work, that's still an extra 840 calories a week. One month later and that works out to an extra pound of weight. he says he eats healthily, even goes to the gym, but in the ten years he's live up here he has put on 25 kilos which is proving so hard to shift he even thought of joining Slimming World.


So much weight, all from eating two biscuits a day and only working off one of them. That's all it took. It's not his overall diet, which sounded quite reasonable. It's one, just one, small snack that he treated himself to most days.


I know portion size can be an issue, but over time I really believe that people's weight gain is due to no more than the occasional treat. A couple of beers on the weekend? That's 6kgs of extra weight a year. Or how about a glass of wine with a meal at night? That's an extra 12 kilos a year you could be piling on. Don't drink but have a can of coke (not diet coke) instead? Gift yourself 14 kilos a year.

baby_lemonade

FBaby

I know portion size can be an issue, but over time I really believe that people's weight gain is due to no more than the occasional treat. A couple of beers on the weekend?

I very much agree with this, especially as indeed, this little 'extra' becomes much harder to shift as we get older when somehow it didn't make much of a difference in our 10/20s.

I think it is also very easy to 'forget' some of the calories we ingest because they are not 'true' calories. That is particularly the case with the 'extra glass of wine' that we rather forget about.

In my case, it was the cups of teas. I don't have sugar but plenty of milk, and up to 6 cups a day, I conveniently forgot about the 'extra' 150 calories, which is about 8% of what my total calories intake should be, so quite a lot!

dktreesea

People who are overweight, faced with, say, 10kg of weight to shift, could probably achieve their goal in a relatively short time frame of 3 to 4 months, just by reducing portion sizes, reducing sweets and/or alcohol and fizzy drinks consumption and going to the gym three or four times a week.


That's a different challenge to someone who is 60 kg overweight. The 10kg overweight person can almost see the light at the end of the tunnel from the day they start. A 60kg overweight person could be as much as two years away from achieving their goal. What if they go to the gym and get injured? E.g. groin strain, pulling some other muscle, impact injury to their knee or hip, Achilles heel injury, doing their back in. That's not just more likely to happen if you are exercising and obese (versus someone with a few kilos to shift). There's a fear element as well to overcome.

OneLeggedPig

I posted this on another forum. I think it's good advice, about how to lose weight without being hungry all the time.

http://www.jeffnovick.com/RD/Articl...Common_Sense_Approach_To_Sound_Nutrition.html

"Calorie density is simply a measure of the amount of calories in a given weight of food, most often expressed as calories per pound. A food high in calorie density provides a large amount of calories in a small weight of food, whereas a food low in calorie density has much fewer calories for the same weight of food. Therefore, for the same number of calories, one can consume a larger portion of a food lower in calorie density than a food higher in calorie density. On a day-to-day basis, people generally eat a similar amount of food, by weight. Therefore, choosing foods with a lower calorie density allows us to consume our usual amount of food (or more) while reducing our caloric intake.



Foods low in calorie density also tend to be higher in satiety so by consuming foods lower in calorie density, one can fill up on much fewer calories without having to go hungry. In addition, the foods that are lower in calorie density (fruits, veggies, starchy vegetables, intact whole grains and legumes) are also the foods highest in nutrient density. Therefore, by following a diet lower in calorie density, one also automatically consumes a diet higher in nutrient density. "

dktreesea

It's not just the calories that matter though. Nuts, animal products and oils have low carbohydrate levels, so don't get easily converted to glucose and then to fat in the body. When it comes to fruits, not all fruits are created equal. Bananas, for instance are certainly preferable to chocolate when it comes to getting potassium, but they also have a relatively high carbohydrate count of 20 gms per 100 gms.

fireblade28

dktreesea wrote: »

It's not just the calories that matter though. Nuts, animal products and oils have low carbohydrate levels, so don't get easily converted to glucose and then to fat in the body. When it comes to fruits, not all fruits are created equal. Bananas, for instance are certainly preferable to chocolate when it comes to getting potassium, but they also have a relatively high carbohydrate count of 20 gms per 100 gms.

In terms of gaining and losing weight though the type of food doesn't make much difference as long as the energy value is the same.

There are many studies that have shown that.

Different foods do affect the body differently but they still have to abide by the energy rules.

CloughiesBrewerArmy

Anoneemoose wrote: »

Not at all. I am about 4 stone overweight. I was slim most of my life, up until a few years ago where I put weight on. I can't exercise as I have chronic illness.

I have tried calorie counting and it is just another form of dieting, or restriction. And it leads to binge eating behaviour. Even when I was able to calorie count and exercise, I still didn't lose weight. So no, I am not to blame. It really is not that simple.

I can't reply to all posts, so i'll use this one, if I may just because you were thr first post I related too on this thread.

I've been a healthy weight all of my life - in fact, I was a gym goer 5 days a week minimum until three years ago when I was diagnosed with a health condition. Since then, I have been diagnosed with three more, so I feel your pain and others too.

Earlier this year, I started being strict with what I ate - I can't exercise too much, although physio and other factors mean my legs are working better than what they were, albeit sore and I can now take brisk walks again.

Then I was hit with news that I was on the edge of diabetes and that my local health centre were going to help me try and stop me getting full blown diabetes. I became stricter with what I ate and lost around 8lbs in 3-4 weeks but then one of my other illness flared up and the medication with a side effect of weight gain made me pile it all back on.

Since then, I returned to my diabetes nurse and came off the other medication and i've lost 11lbs in 5 weeks through diet and brisk walks and will continue the regime.

I am extremely strict now. I haven't touched an unhealthy bit of food for the full 5 weeks (on Sunday).

Whilst I agree with the OP that for some it's as easy as eating less and exercising more, it's certainly not the case for many and we shouldn't judge an overweight person (and i'm certainly not huge at 12st 13lbs) in the same way we shouldn't judge people for any reason without knowing their full story.

It makes sense to eat a healthy diet and exercise as much as possible, but sadly other factors have to be taken into account as well.

Everyone is different and should be treated as so. One size does not fit all.

Money_maker

That sort of weight for me (female, average 5'5") would probably be classified as obese.


The knock on effects of my frame trying to hold that weight would be where the problems lie. Just the struggling to move around without exerting too much effort must take a huge toll on the body. Hats off to those who join a gym or take classes at that weight, you can do it if you try but it'll take an awful lot of blood, sweat and tears.

gemmajenkins0208

I work in a manual job where I am constantly on my feet for 6-8 hours every day. I have 1 milky coffee with 2 and a half sugars for breakfast as I'm never hungry enough but know I need something. I have 1 brown bread sandwich with ham and no spread for lunch and a fresh, homemade cooked meal when I get in the door every evening and I carry a litre bottle of water around with me all day which is empty by the time I get home.

So, please, explain to me why I am 3 stone overweight...?!

Not quite a simple as "eat less move more", is it really?