Stitch on 1/8/2008 at 17:56

---

Exactly.

See, that's the problem with dieting: it's inherently difficult to sustain. What's important is to take a good look at what you're putting into your body and make smart choices that you can be satisfied with. J&T is correct that genes play a large role, but there's still no excuse for not being healthy and reasonably fit, if not thin.

Matthew: You basically have a willpower issue, so my first suggestion would be to remove the supply. You can't suck down candy bars at work if there aren't any available, but unless you're self employed this might not be a feasible solution.

What I'd suggest then is buying some baby carrots for when you get the munchies and then going completely without candy for a month. Anyone can do that, right? It's only a month, no need to make lifelong decisions here. Going a month without should remove (or replace) candy from your habit-forming daily routine while weaning your body off the sugar dependency. After the month has passed feel free to work candy back in, but do it carefully and in moderation. You may also find that a single piece of candy packs more of a wallop after a month away and therefore less will do the trick.

Jennie&Tim on 2/8/2008 at 04:17

---

Oh foo, I should double check my memories before posting. I went back to find that study people seemed interested in, and it wasn't diabetics, it was obese people:

(http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/25384.php)

I'm almost certain I originally saw it on sciencedaily, as that's where I visit most frequently; but their search engine is lousy and I can't find it there now. Okay, to rephrase the groups as requested: they divided them into people given standard advice about calorie counting, restricting calories, reading food labels, the benefits of exercise and on keeping food diaries, vs. people encouraged to listen to their hunger cues, given advice on how to accept being larger, and how to enjoy exercising despite negative self-images.

I don't want to say that people have to be a certain weight or they die; but I used to participate in a weight loss thread with a woman who got terribly frustrated that despite bettering her diet and exercising, she didn't lose weight. She got angry and depressed, and eventually quit. I'd like people to focus on how the better food and exercise is improving their health even if they don't lose weight. If you lose weight fine, but if you don't, you still benefit from making healthy changes.

This article is mildly interesting, eating at least three meals regularly reduces your chances of getting metabolic syndrome (pre-diabetes). It's only a correlation, so perhaps what's happening is that people with the genes for getting metabolic syndrome just don't get hungry in the same way as people without them, so they don't eat meals as regularly. On the other hand, perhaps skipping meals stresses some part of the metabolism to make the genes express themselves differently. Either way, you'd see the same data. I could even speculate on still more mechanisms. Bodies are complicated.

(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080722090056.htm)

And limiting fructose may help a bit too, though this study only measures short-term responses and not whether it would help over time or not:

(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080724064824.htm)

Essentially, as little as 50% fructose raises the chances of fat formation, and later storage of fat vs. burning of fat.

Lhet on 20/8/2008 at 16:24

---

I found the best way to start bicycling on a regular basis is to make sure that you have no other means of transportation (When I started, I simply didn't purchase a bus pass, and made sure I wouldn't have enough cash to pay for parking/bus fare). Then just make sure a bicycle and gear are kept up to date (tire pressure, nothing loose, probably should wear a helmet, pantleg straps, etc.). I commuted on a crappy mountain for about 6 months, then switched to a fixed gear road bike, which is much better for both fitness and speed. My commute is rather hilly and 8.5 miles round trip, and although I haven't timed my speed in forever, I think it's around 18 minutes to my campus and around 30 minutes back.
So yeah, just remove the alternative and it shouldn't be that hard to switch over if you can handle the first few weeks.

As far as weight loss, if you want a really simple solution, eat only when you're hungry, and only until you're not hungry anymore, also try to eat somewhat healthy. That worked for me kinda, 5 years ago I was 6` 180 lbs, now I'm ~145 an about the same height (I'm sure exercise helped a bit too).

Also, I dunno if anybody's mentioned this, but 1 pound is 3500 calories, so just get that deficit to lose a pound. You can use this (http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/) to find out what your body needs at it's current weight, then just subtract from 500 up to 1000 calories to find out what you should eat. I still think the eat only when you're hungry works well, but this can help show what you should/can eat when you're hungry

D'Juhn Keep on 21/8/2008 at 12:12

---

no it isn't?

Thirith on 21/8/2008 at 13:38

---

One of the things that makes exercise much less tedious: watch an episode of a series you like while you're doing it. Most US series have episodes that are between 45 minutes and an hour long - perfect for a session on the home trainer. If I didn't have that distraction, I would have stopped working out a long time ago...