Horizon and losing weight

[Dibs-h]

I'm going with "exercise more and eat less",

Me too! :mrgreen: I stopped eating like a pig, i.e. eat until no more would fit in!

I made it about a third of the way through what I used to eat before I felt completely stuffed.

Went out for a meal with some mates last week and and a similar struggle. Pleasantly surprising.

Dibs

 

[Gill]

Gill, thank you , but I need recipes for 1 not 4...

It freezes very well if you portion it.

 

[riclepp]

Drink water and that helps to suppress your apitite and cleans out some of the rubbish we have in our bodies from what we eat. Don't forget you sweat 24 hours a day, even if it is cold. When you lose water your hunger increases, therefore you eat more and if you don't exercise you pile on the pounds. So water is a key element is any exercise/diet reigeme.

Cheers

Richard

 

[RogerS]

Cheshirechappie...no corns trodden on and I'm not deliberately taking a pop at you.

I will tell you where I am at.

Walk into any bookshop and you will see shelves full of the latest 'fad' diet. I am glad that Briffa's diet works for you and as you say, it is open to anyone to read his book if they want to.

But despite all your protestations, I see no evidence of any medical research...at least in the context that is generally accepted within the scientific and medical community. Just because he is a doctor and says it is so does not make it research. Looking at his website, the whole thing is all about his self-promotion and screams 'Snake Oil' at me.

The thread that I referred to ended up in a heated discussion between those who believed in the rigour of scientific and peer-reviewed research (as advocated by myself, StevieB (who actually specialises in body metabolism) and others) and those who did not. We had the same discussions there.

As I said in an earlier post, different bodies need/are responsive to different types of food. The Indian Ayurvedics had it sussed thousands of years ago. Some people thrive on high protein, some do not. Same goes for carbohydrates and fat. But as soon as I see anyone saying something like 'carbohydrates are bad for you' then I see red as that statement is totally without any scientific foundation...despite what Mr Snake Oil says.

 

[riclepp]

Cheshirechappie...no corns trodden on and I'm not deliberately taking a pop at you.

I will tell you where I am at.

Walk into any bookshop and you will see shelves full of the latest 'fad' diet. I am glad that Briffa's diet works for you and as you say, it is open to anyone to read his book if they want to.

But despite all your protestations, I see no evidence of any medical research...at least in the context that is generally accepted within the scientific and medical community. Just because he is a doctor and says it is so does not make it research. Looking at his website, the whole thing is all about his self-promotion and screams 'Snake Oil' at me.

The thread that I referred to ended up in a heated discussion between those who believed in the rigour of scientific and peer-reviewed research (as advocated by myself, StevieB (who actually specialises in body metabolism) and others) and those who did not. We had the same discussions there.

As I said in an earlier post, different bodies need/are responsive to different types of food. The Indian Ayurvedics had it sussed thousands of years ago. Some people thrive on high protein, some do not. Same goes for carbohydrates and fat. But as soon as I see anyone saying something like 'carbohydrates are bad for you' then I see red as that statement is totally without any scientific foundation...despite what Mr Snake Oil says.

Is that the old adage, you are what you eat?????

Cheers

 

[Gill]

Today is a fasting day so for lunch I made Beef in Oyster Sauce with cabbage and noodles for two. It only contained 166 calories per portion and tasted yummy even by the standards of a non-fasting day.

 

[Dibs-h]

Today is a fasting day so for lunch

Am I missing something here? :lol: :wink:

 

[Gill]

Could be .

Fasting is not the same as starving. On the 5:2 diet men are allowed a maximum of 600 calories per fasting day and women are allowed up to 500 calories.

 

[Steve Maskery]

Yes Dibs, you are!
In this context, fasting does not mean eating nothing, it means eating no more than 600 calories per day.

Nice one, Gill.

S
PS Beaten!

 

[Dibs-h]

Hey - good to know! Thanks for the clarification! :wink:

Dibs

 

[doctor Bob]

As they say in Dragon's Den, as far as this thread goes, I'm out.

I will tell you where I am at.

Just to clarify....are you "out" or "in".......

 

[sometimewoodworker]

A little background. 
I used to have a 32" waist, still do in my mind.  . But over time in my early 40s it got to be over 38" when I realised that on a holliday  I was so shocked I went on a diet and got back down to a 32". 

Some years roll by and up goes my weight and blood pressure. The Doc. puts me on a mild medication, I say if I loose 10kg will I still need the meds? He says no but you can't loose the weight. So I drop 12kg in 12 weeks and gradually drop the meds. No problem. 

A few years later up goes the weight BMI over 32! So I go back on my calorie and portion control diet and loose enough to not be fat. 

Fast forward to last year. My BMI gets to be over 30! I think OK  I'll go back on my calorie and portion control diet and loose weight. 4 weeks later I give up as it will not work. 
As my calorie count drops so does my metabolism. So I give up as the same diet that I used before to drop about 1 kg per week did nothing. 

This summer I have a checkup and in mid July. Weight 106kg BMI 33.8.  I also work with no shirt on during the summer as it is hot in Thailand. The pics my wife took show me that I am fat and it is ugly.
Enough is enough. 
Calorie control does not work for me now as the older you get the less it works. 
So no calorie control, I can't be bothered with portion control either, doesn't work for me. 
Over my 6 week holiday my weight is now dropping it is a diet that works for me and I am loosing weight.
Today, just over 7 weeks from starting my weight is down to just over 98kg and BMI to 31.4

I still have a long way to go as I hope to get my BMI down to under 28 and that is 13kg away. 

Can I do it? I think I may be able to. 
I don't aim to be fit. I find excersize is boring. But I do use the train instead of my motorcycle to go to work now. So I am getting at lest 30 mins walking in a day

 

[wobblycogs]

I'm glad you've found a regime that is working for you but you are wrong to say that calorie restriction won't / doesn't work for you. If you really believe it won't work try just drinking water for a couple of weeks (no food). You'll find, just like everyone else, that you lose weight.

Yes, your metabolism slows as you age, it doesn't let you break the laws of nature.

 

[Gill]

It's illuminating to follow this conversation and note other people's concerns (or otherwise ) about their diet and how it affects their quality of life. Although the title of the thread is "Horizon and losing weight", the Horizon programme itself wasn't really about losing weight; it was about how our bodies age and what we can do to minimise the damage we incur just through living longer.

Whilst the programme didn't prove that fasting will reduce exposure to debilitating conditions associated with aging, the evidence was sufficiently strong for Dr Mosley to change his eating habits. Steve and I have both chosen independently to do likewise and as a result (if I can presume to speak for Steve) we are feeling the benefits. Steve has lost weight, as have I, but that was not the reason why I chose to follow the 5:2 diet. My family has a history of diabetes and glaucoma, conditions which can be very debilitating if they are neglected. I don't have either condition yet so I'm hoping this diet will enable my body to repair itself on fasting days (that was the premise of the Horizon programme) and mean that I never suffer either condition. If the diet reduces my risk of suffering heart disease, dementia and other age-related conditions, then so much the better. I know I'm not going to live forever but I want the time I have here to be as good as possible for as long as possible. I'm not particularly bothered if I lose weight in the process, although it's a welcome side-effect .

 

[sometimewoodworker]

I'm glad you've found a regime that is working for you but you are wrong to say that calorie restriction won't / doesn't work for you. If you really believe it won't work try just drinking water for a couple of weeks (no food). You'll find, just like everyone else, that you lose weight.

Yes, your metabolism slows as you age, it doesn't let you break the laws of nature.

I am not wrong to say that calorie restriction won't / doesn't work for me. I have the emperical evidence. And it doesn't.

There is a difference between restriction and elimination and it is not just the spelling

I don't say that it won't work for others, it does, but not for me.

 

[wobblycogs]

If you agree that you would starve if you ate nothing then surely you must also agree that if you ate a very small amount (lets say a lettuce leaf a day) you would still starve. Extrapolate that until you get to the point where you are eating just enough to neither gain nor lose weight. Calorie restriction will work for you, I suspect the problem is that you'd need to eat an unacceptably small amount.

 

[Dibs-h]

Jerome

Buddy, how you doing? Long time or so it seems! LOL!

Might be an idea to change what you eat? You can eat plenty of things that are filling volume wise but have low calorie content and even tho your metabolism has slowed (a little) with age - I firmly believe being in a calorie deficit will result in weight loss.

You perhaps just need to find the "things" (i.e. food groups) that work for you.

For me cutting out the refined (simple) carbs & sugars has made a huge difference as well as tilting the diet so it is more in protein than it used to be - certainly not Atkins or close.

Protein - from what I've read & perhaps Steve (the other one - Mr PhD) can confirm, has a higher thermic effect, i.e. the energy used to consume\digest protein is higher than any other food group.

Regards

Dibs

 

[sometimewoodworker]

Jerome

Buddy, how you doing? Long time or so it seems! LOL!

Might be an idea to change what you eat? You can eat plenty of things that are filling volume wise but have low calorie content and even tho your metabolism has slowed (a little) with age - I firmly believe being in a calorie deficit will result in weight loss.

You perhaps just need to find the "things" (i.e. food groups) that work for you.

For me cutting out the refined (simple) carbs & sugars has made a huge difference as well as tilting the diet so it is more in protein than it used to be - certainly not Atkins or close.

Protein - from what I've read & perhaps Steve (the other one - Mr PhD) can confirm, has a higher thermic effect, i.e. the energy used to consume\digest protein is higher than any other food group.

Regards

Dibs

Hi Dibs

As I mentioned in my write up I have now found something that has let me drop at least 6kg in the last 2 months.

When I tried last year I was on a diet that was between 1,300 and 1,500 calories per day and with a very small portion size(My usual diet had been about 2500 cal per day) This didn't work for me although it had worked for me a couple of years before.

Now I've given up portion control I've given up calorie counting and I'm losing about 1 kg every week to 2 weeks. I eat as much as I want, I eat as often as I want but I don't find I want to eat that much.

I think a mistake that some people are making is to think that the same diets will work whatever age you are I found that they don't .

 

[Dibs-h]

Hi Jerome

Most things (I think) do work for most people. That obviously leaves some who have to try different things.

I don't think we are disagreeing! :wink:

With your "diet", for weight loss to be taking place - you must be in a calorie deficit. I can't see you being in a calorie surplus and loosing weight.

Dibs

 

[wobblycogs]

Don't forget the body is a complex machine, I have often wondered if by excluding certain food groups it's possible that you leave your body unable to extract all the useful energy from what you eat. That would leave you short of calories, and therefore losing weight, but apparently eating enough to put on weight. Since your gut is full of bacteria, which may be playing a role in this process, I don't think it's immediately obvious how you could test for it.

Having said that unless I see some really strong evidence indicating that's true I'm sticking with thinking that all diets work because you put less energy in than you use.