Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Lynayah

Your Tips For Easy Weight Loss?

Recommended Posts

PS to Erin:

I also want to thank you for the 1.5 grams of protein per pound of bodyweight tip. That's another good one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PS to Erin:

I also want to thank you for the 1.5 grams of protein per pound of bodyweight tip. That's another good one.

Also remember to keep you water intake up. I remember reading to divide your weight in half to get a good idea of how many ounces you need. Many times when I think I am hungry, I am actually thirsty. Also, I am ravenous for days after I've been accidentally glutened, probably because of the D the glutening caused. I'm actually a thin Celiac (probably from years of misdiagnosis) but carry weight in my tummy area....looking like a bird comes to mind :P Glad you are getting further tested for thyroid ect....keep up the good work, it will pay off!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also remember to keep you water intake up. I remember reading to divide your weight in half to get a good idea of how many ounces you need. Many times when I think I am hungry, I am actually thirsty. Also, I am ravenous for days after I've been accidentally glutened, probably because of the D the glutening caused. I'm actually a thin Celiac (probably from years of misdiagnosis) but carry weight in my tummy area....looking like a bird comes to mind :P Glad you are getting further tested for thyroid ect....keep up the good work, it will pay off!

Thank you, Kathy! I'm on my way for a glass!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been dx celiac for about 5 months now and so far I've lost about 20 lbs.I'm not eating sweets like I was.Definitely not eating bread like I was.I make a gluten free bread and it lasts me 2 weeks.I used to eat 2 loaves bread a week.I started eating alot healthier, with more veggies and less meat.Some of my diet is eating raw foods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've been dx celiac for about 5 months now and so far I've lost about 20 lbs.I'm not eating sweets like I was.Definitely not eating bread like I was.I make a gluten free bread and it lasts me 2 weeks.I used to eat 2 loaves bread a week.I started eating alot healthier, with more veggies and less meat.Some of my diet is eating raw foods.

Hey Leanne!

That's great-cutting out sweets, lessening bread intake and eating naturally gluten free whole foods is definitely a good way to go. Congratulations on your loss!! (sounds backwards-but true right ? :lol: )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks so much.

I intentionally juice in Vita-Mix for better GI absorption -- there some excellent info on this in a book entitled Eat for Life by Dr. Joel Fuhrman. Interesting stuff in there! When I follow the instruction on making a smoothie with a lot of greens, I really does wonders in getting enough green protein in and helping me get through the day. Pineapple juice (1/4 cup only) and a small apple gives it enough sweetness to make it palatable. Otherwise, as advanced as my whole-foods taste may be, yuck.

Then later, or throughout the day, I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erin: EXCELLENT STUFF! You are wonderful. Thanks, and I'll report back after I work through everything. Wow.

Menstral cycle: Way beyond that one due to my young-at-heart age, but hormones, that's another matter. Again, great point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey Lyn!

Thinking of you-how's it going?

Hi, Erin! How nice of you -- thank you for asking.

Still struggling here. I feel as though all I have to do is look at food and I gain! LOL!

This last week has been tough because I was accidentally glutened in a restaurant last week -- at least I THINK it was the restaurant that caused it. It will be a week tomorrow, and I'm hoping the symptoms will subside -- that's usually how long it takes for me.

My kidney test blood work came back fine (whoo-hoo!), although I think a urine test may also be in order (foamy urine -- sorry to be so blunt). I've called the doctor to ask about it and am waiting for a reply.

Anyway, life goes on. :)

I hope you are doing well! Again, thank you for asking. MUCH appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've actually lost weight since going gluten free. For me, it's been a combination of things. I've had hypothyroid for a long time, and before being diagnosed with celiac my thyroid was very difficult to regulate. With the gluten free diet, my meds are actually starting to get regulated.

What I do now, is to still count every calorie (I use sparkpeople.com). I don't buy gluten-free substitutes (with the exception of Udi's bread for lunch sandwichs and vary occasionally gluten-free pasta). I also make sure I eat at least 3 times a day-seems obvious, but I was one of those people that only ate once a day-not to try to lose weight, but because I wouldn't have time to eat and then just wouldn't be hungry-which amazingly actually led to weight gain! And of course get regular excercise.

For excercise, I've found that using a heart rate monitor and keeping my heartrate around 70% or max makes a world of difference. Ironically, I found that I actually lose more weight with a fast walk/slow jog with my dogs than I do when running-as it turns out, when I was running, my heartrate would get too high and out of the "fat burning" zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good point about heart rate. I remember I used to monitor mine, but frankly, I had forgotten all about it until you mentioned it. I haven't done it in a long time. My exercycle has a built in one, but it has never worked very well.

Maybe I'll look into purchasing one. Any suggestions for brand? Price?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's a good point about heart rate. I remember I used to monitor mine, but frankly, I had forgotten all about it until you mentioned it. I haven't done it in a long time. My exercycle has a built in one, but it has never worked very well.

Maybe I'll look into purchasing one. Any suggestions for brand? Price?

Target has them at pretty reasonable prices, but don't overlook taking your heart rate on your own. It's free, and unless you are needing an uber accurate reading, as you get to know your body, you will know what your heart rate should be. I am part of an intense aerobic class (kickboxing) and we take our heart rate periodically throughout the class. It's amazing what you learn about your body when YOU listen to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several points:

>>I'm thinking that if I can do at least 15 min. on my exercise bike every day

Any less than 20 mins with your heart rate high enough and you will not see much in terms of weight loss.

15 mins is better than nothing but 30 mins every second day would be more effective and 60 mins even better.

Gliadin is a protein found inside of gluten .. what you are describing in tests is liely your anti-gliadin specific antibodies. IgA and IgG. As a explanation if you get flu your body produces 'anti-flu' anto bodies ...

If these are elevated then the chance is you are still getting gliadin in your diet although they do take time to reduce just like after a real viral or bacterial infection.

If you have elevated antibodies then you have celiac disease by one definition. A biopsy is a different definition... as an example if a alcoholic went to the Dr and asked for help, would the Dr refuse to admit the alcoholic had a problem if a liver biopsy came back negative for cirrhosis?

Humans should not produce antibodies against foods... it really doesn't matter much what you call it so much as how your body reacts.

However if your biopsy was negative then your villi should be OK and you should be digesting food properly and adsorbing the nutrients. If however your biopsy was messed up then you could be maladsorbing which would explain your constant hunger.

Dealing with hunger is tough but not impossible. This might sound horribly simple but just weigh out sufficient calories for your BMR and ignore it. Various appetite suppressants exist but if you are craving as badly as you say then these will not make a HUGE difference unless you start on potentially harmful stuff (amphetamines work... they just screw you up more).

I don't want to trivialise this or say it will be easy but you are just going to have to decide and do it!

The more exersize you do the less you will think about eating...

Stop even going to resto's.... especially when you can't control portions.

Don't eat moderate amounts of processed food, eat none!

Frankly (and I speak from experience) what worked when you were young doesn't always work later in life!

When you are young eating sensibly and moderately works, especially with exersize but as we get older two things happen:

1/ Our definition of 'moderate' tends to drift

2/ We need to work much harder to get the same effect...

The two of these together recreate the "The snow was whiter when I was young" quite easily and it is simple to fool ourselves.

When I was 16-21 I ran at least 10 miles a day and worked out 5-6 times a week on top. I didn't include cycling 20 miles each way to school as actual exersize or the 3 miles each way I ran to my karate club 5-6 times a week.

Back then it seemed 'sensible' now it sounds unbelievable yet I did it.

When I was 21 I ate NO processed foods at all, no ketchup etc. Now I say I eat no processed foods but ... well I mainly eat no processed foods if I am honest!

When I was 18-26 I weighed 137.5 lbs (I never varied more than 1/2 lb my waist was under 26") At 27-28 I went from 137.5 to 189 lbs in a few months (waist was 38"). (This was just prior to diagnosis). I still ate healthily and I still ate moderately, just not quite so healthy and quite so moderate but by any normal metric it was healthy.

At 28 I was asked to take part in a raft race with my old Karate club ... I was so embarrassed, I used to be the person who ran to Karate then took the rest of the kick boxers running, did the training then ran home!

I tried moderate ... I tried 1hr a day exersize and the weight hardly budged.

Then I went either crazy or like I had been when I was healthy .... I couldn't run 10 miles, I couldn't run one mile but I did ride an exersize bike 1hr a day and row on a machine for 1hr. I cut out ALL processed food, reduced my calorie intake and as I lost weight started running to the gym.

The moderate stuff that had kept my weight down for years no longer worked. When I started I used to vomit every time I used the rowing machine... my 1hr started off in 10 mins then 5 mins rest then 10 mins etc. until after a few weeks it was one hour at 120 strokes/min without stopping (except to vomit).

Since then I have been moderately successful keeping off the weight and I now eat moderately. I'm probably 150-155lbs but then I'm 42 in a few weeks! Waist is about 30" or at least 30" jeans fit me!

Every so often the 30" jeans will get tight and I have to fight it off. Once it starts to go on nothing moderate works... I always have to get tough on myself and eat no processed food and no empty calories and exersize like hell!

As others have said food combining (or more accurately not combining) is not only good for loosing weight but also quite gluten friendly and on top of that easy on the stomach ... your hunger could well be one thing you are missing in your diet OR it could be one thing you are not adsorbing or your body does not process properly.

Sorry to be blunt but I think you need to take a step back...

You knew your body, you knew what worked ... sorry but the rules have obviously changed and you need to accept that. If you are half as stubborn as me that will be hard!

Sorry if this sounds tough ... I'm not the best at sugar coating :D

You are on the right track but I think you need to realize you and your body have changed and you need to address that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick couple things:

Food combining is not magic and means nothing if you are not in a caloric deficit.

You have to be in a caloric deficit to lose fat (using more calories than you take in) that is the most important component.

Heart rate is a great tool. However, there is no magic "fat burning zone." That is a myth that just won't die. You will use a combination of substrates to fuel your exercise at all levels of exertion. It's the proportion of energy systems that change.You may not be able to go as long at a higher heart rate, and then are not getting the same burn. The bottom line is total calories burned at the end of the day. (I'd guess that Jennifer was probably going longer at the lower heart rate and thus burning a higher total # of calories) You can go longer at a lower intensity, or shorter at a higher intensity. For most a bit of both is good. But again-calorie deficit is king.

Polar brand heart monitors are EKG accurate and the most inexpensive model is fine for most people, I think about $60.

And Lyn-I'm really glad your testing is coming back OK. :)

This is one instance where you for sure don't want to be the unique snowflake-I think that if we can get the hunger controlled you will really see some progress. And I agree with gfp-sometimes you just do have to suck it up and realize that hunger is part of losing fat. I do think that our gut hormones can be affected by celiac though, which may cause hunger perception to be amplified. Again though, nothing you can really do about it except understand it, accept it, and move on.

I'm cheering for you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A quick couple things:

Food combining is not magic and means nothing if you are not in a caloric deficit.

You have to be in a caloric deficit to lose fat (using more calories than you take in) that is the most important component.

Exactly what I would have said until I saw it! I am one of the most cynical people here and I very very rarely endorse anything I don't understand HOWEVER .. I have seen this work.

When it was introduced to me (by the wife of a friend with Chrons') I was very very skeptical. I was also as ill as many of us get ... and willing to try anything having been failed by conventional medicine.

50mg of ranitidine 4x a day for life or give it a go : my reflux was so bad I had problems breathing ...

I will say that if it is played with it doesn't work (or anything like as well) and all the cases I have seen it has been extremely effective have been done strictly.

I have done food combining whilst eating decent portions and decent calories and reasonable amounts of fats and seen very good and more importantly maintainable results.

Most importantly is the difference over extreme calorie controlled diets where actually getting sufficient vitamins and trace elements each day is either impossible or next to impossible.

Why does it work? I wish I knew... but I have seen it work.

Digestion and ana/cata-bolic processes are more complex than calories consumed and calories burned in exersize.

There are several medical explanations all of which are flawed. It has been said that people naturally don't eat as much or healthier and therefore calories are reduced. This is blatantly false as I know for a fact what my calorific intake has been.

The digestive process of MCT's shows that calories in/out is a false assumption. The calorific value from combustion of long-chain and medium chain is not significantly different whereas the adsorbtion (direct from the GI tract) shows that the human body utilises the calories differently.

The relevance of the above being the very incomplete knowledge of the human digestive system.

I have seen it work BUT only when adhered to strictly. It is also very compatible with a gluten-free diet, it doesn't rely on a leaf of lettuce on a rye cracker!

Calorie controlled diets can and do work... however they often work temporarily and regress and/or fail to provide sufficient nutrients. They can lead to a famine response when overdone and the ability of an individual to determine their BMR is pretty unlikely as this will doubtless change as they lose weight or exersize more.

>

Heart rate is a great tool. However, there is no magic "fat burning zone." That is a myth that just won't die. You will use a combination of substrates to fuel your exercise at all levels of exertion. It's the proportion of energy systems that change.You may not be able to go as long at a higher heart rate, and then are not getting the same burn. The bottom line is total calories burned at the end of the day. (I'd guess that Jennifer was probably going longer at the lower heart rate and thus burning a higher total # of calories) You can go longer at a lower intensity, or shorter at a higher intensity. For most a bit of both is good. But again-calorie deficit is king.

Jennifer didn't say she was going longer at the lower heart rate but that she was aiming to exersize for (at least) 15 minutes. My advice was twice as long (and if that means going slower then go slower).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding heartrate:

I honestly don't know if it has anything to do with weight loss or not, so I'm not going to try to go there, but I DO know that if I stay within a certain range I am more likely to be able to exercise longer and to look forward to exercising again, so that's something. My heart rate monitor died, but I like the "not breathing so hard that you can't talk but not so easy that you can sing" method. I found that was dead on when the heart rate monitor still worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what the definition of food combining may be -- any links that show how it works?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Several points:

>>Sorry to be blunt but I think you need to take a step back...

You knew your body, you knew what worked ... sorry but the rules have obviously changed and you need to accept that. If you are half as stubborn as me that will be hard!

Sorry if this sounds tough ... I'm not the best at sugar coating :D

You are on the right track but I think you need to realize you and your body have changed and you need to address that.

Your bluntness is fine and much appreciated, please do not be sorry. :) You are right. My body is responding to everything differently now -- oh so much differently!

Even a year back, my metabolism was acting differently -- it was definitely more sluggush, and of course I was sick as heck, but oh my goodness, the weight loss challenge now makes me feel as though I am in the Twilight Zone.

Yes -- I am in a new territory, and I need a new understanding as well as a new set of directions. (For the record, I am 56.) I haven't quite found it yet, but I know I will.

I've started working out 25 - 40 min a day. No weight loss progress yet, but it feels good. I also keep reminding myself how much better I feel overall, weight aside.

I really appreciate all the information everyone is giving here -- more than you know. This is a great group of very intelligent, sharing people . . . and an excellent discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your bluntness is fine and much appreciated, please do not be sorry. :) You are right. My body is responding to everything differently now -- oh so much differently!

Even a year back, my metabolism was acting differently -- it was definitely more sluggush, and of course I was sick as heck, but oh my goodness, the weight loss challenge now makes me feel as though I am in the Twilight Zone.

Yes -- I am in a new territory, and I need a new understanding as well as a new set of directions. (For the record, I am 56.) I haven't quite found it yet, but I know I will.

I've started working out 25 - 40 min a day. No weight loss progress yet, but it feels good. I also keep reminding myself how much better I feel overall, weight aside.

I really appreciate all the information everyone is giving here -- more than you know. This is a great group of very intelligent, sharing people . . . and an excellent discussion.

Thanks Lynayah, the last thing I wanted to do was offend but I also felt sometimes you have to take off the sugar coating. It has been a hard thing for me to accept but you only need to look at the countless super-fit professional athletes who have thought the same way. (Pick your own sport but you will countless find many who 'let themselves go'.

My theory is really not quite so tough as 'letting themselves go' but people who worked out all the time and knew their bodies and as their body and life balanced changed didn't accept that difference. I'm convinced that people who used to work out in a really planned manner find it more difficult to adjust to the fact their body no longer responds in the same way.

The other side of the story though is all those that do get back in control.

Food combining goes by many names and has as many variations:

The basics are you eat food that has the same digestive needs together.

This really means that the starchy carbs and proteins are eaten separately. Things like vegetables (excepting potatoes) are in the middle group and can be eaten with either.

Scientifically people struggle to say why it works, yet those that do it are usually very vociferous supporters.

I was introduced by a 'Californian New Age' book called 'Fit for Life'. Frankly it's a little too Californian New Age for me... although the author's are vegetarian they don't impose that and say that is their choice.

Scientifically though my ex-wife is a food analytical chemist and she said that the ways foods are prepared for analysis is exactly the same as the diet. The prep for analysis's is extensively documented and scientifically tested as this is basically the method to get the most accurate results.

The most accurate results means extracting the maximum of whatever is being analyzed from the food ... in other words it is like an artificial pre-digestion.

The book I found most useful is one called 'The Kensington Diet' but that said I only needed a look.

I chose that book because the author (famous clients) was on a day-time TV program and the interviewer was having a go at different diets. The thing that surprised me was that people in the audience were really ready to defend the diet against the presenter and guest dietician.

(Sideline: The presenter is a guy called Killroy-Silk, politician and heart-throb to a certain generation of ladies)

Most of the ladies in the audience just dreamily agree with everything he say's, he is sorta a male model in his 60's Oprah ... yet very exceptionally for his program 4-5 people in the audience disagreed and continued to disagree ... and the one thing they kept saying was "I don't care what the dietician say's, it works for me".

As you might spot the Atkins diet is a sub-set of food combining. Food combining is much older, Henry Ford had it in all his orphanages and did it himself. The paleolithic diet is another variation with the same roots.

The basic roots are: When we were hunter gatherers we did one at once.

That is we went out and brought back a stag and ate stag, we foraged and found berries and ate berries etc. What we didn't do was eat stag stewed with potatoes and other starchy foods.

(If for no other reason pottery wasn't invented and we had no pots to stew)

The theory is that starchy foods and protein rich foods don't digest as well when eaten together.

Both are fine with the neutral foods (Carrots, leafy vegetables etc.)

Here is the Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_combining

There are various theories why it works including the fact that food combining leads to a lower calorie diet. The only study I know doesn't test this: olay A, Allaz A, Ybarra J, Bianchi P, Saraiva S, Mensi N, Gomis R, de Tonnac N (2000). "Similar weight loss with low-energy food combining or balanced diets". Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 24 (4): 492

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jennifer didn't say she was going longer at the lower heart rate but that she was aiming to exersize for (at least) 15 minutes. My advice was twice as long (and if that means going slower then go slower).

Actually, I didn't give a time. When I walk, it's usually for about an hour-3 miles. When I was running it was for 2.5miles~30min.

Both are pretty close in calories burned. When I was running, I would alternate 1 day run, 1 day walk, so I do something everyday.

Jennifer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am trying sooooo hard to lose weight (the gluten challenge I went through was killer for me, and I gained 15 pounds).

Honey, I hear ya. I've tried tons of meal replacement diets that claim to be gluten free but they make my body react horribly. I found a good product that worked really well the first time - Kaeng Raeng (http://www.kaengraeng.com) It's a fruit based meal replacement that makes you feel really full and "cleanses" your system. It might be worth a try. It's sort of expensive, but if you google Kaeng Raeng coupons you can find it for at least 20% off. It definitely felt the best the first time and then I had ok results when I did it a second time.

Hope that helps! Good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Lyn checking in!

So good to hear that you are starting to feel better. And exercising consistently is a great start. The best exercise and diet plan is the one you can be the most consistent about, bottom line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Lynayah, the last thing I wanted to do was offend but I also felt sometimes you have to take off the sugar coating. It has been a hard thing for me to accept but you only need to look at the countless super-fit professional athletes who have thought the same way. (Pick your own sport but you will countless find many who 'let themselves go'.

My theory is really not quite so tough as 'letting themselves go' but people who worked out all the time and knew their bodies and as their body and life balanced changed didn't accept that difference. I'm convinced that people who used to work out in a really planned manner find it more difficult to adjust to the fact their body no longer responds in the same way.

The other side of the story though is all those that do get back in control.

Food combining goes by many names and has as many variations:

The basics are you eat food that has the same digestive needs together.

This really means that the starchy carbs and proteins are eaten separately. Things like vegetables (excepting potatoes) are in the middle group and can be eaten with either.

Scientifically people struggle to say why it works, yet those that do it are usually very vociferous supporters.

I was introduced by a 'Californian New Age' book called 'Fit for Life'. Frankly it's a little too Californian New Age for me... although the author's are vegetarian they don't impose that and say that is their choice.

Scientifically though my ex-wife is a food analytical chemist and she said that the ways foods are prepared for analysis is exactly the same as the diet. The prep for analysis's is extensively documented and scientifically tested as this is basically the method to get the most accurate results.

The most accurate results means extracting the maximum of whatever is being analyzed from the food ... in other words it is like an artificial pre-digestion.

The book I found most useful is one called 'The Kensington Diet' but that said I only needed a look.

I chose that book because the author (famous clients) was on a day-time TV program and the interviewer was having a go at different diets. The thing that surprised me was that people in the audience were really ready to defend the diet against the presenter and guest dietician.

(Sideline: The presenter is a guy called Killroy-Silk, politician and heart-throb to a certain generation of ladies)

Most of the ladies in the audience just dreamily agree with everything he say's, he is sorta a male model in his 60's Oprah ... yet very exceptionally for his program 4-5 people in the audience disagreed and continued to disagree ... and the one thing they kept saying was "I don't care what the dietician say's, it works for me".

As you might spot the Atkins diet is a sub-set of food combining. Food combining is much older, Henry Ford had it in all his orphanages and did it himself. The paleolithic diet is another variation with the same roots.

The basic roots are: When we were hunter gatherers we did one at once.

That is we went out and brought back a stag and ate stag, we foraged and found berries and ate berries etc. What we didn't do was eat stag stewed with potatoes and other starchy foods.

(If for no other reason pottery wasn't invented and we had no pots to stew)

The theory is that starchy foods and protein rich foods don't digest as well when eaten together.

Both are fine with the neutral foods (Carrots, leafy vegetables etc.)

Here is the Wikipedia entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_combining

There are various theories why it works including the fact that food combining leads to a lower calorie diet. The only study I know doesn't test this: olay A, Allaz A, Ybarra J, Bianchi P, Saraiva S, Mensi N, Gomis R, de Tonnac N (2000). "Similar weight loss with low-energy food combining or balanced diets". Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 24 (4): 492

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Lyn checking in!

So good to hear that you are starting to feel better. And exercising consistently is a great start. The best exercise and diet plan is the one you can be the most consistent about, bottom line.

Thanks . . . and by the way, I want what YOU'RE HAVING! You look amazing! Great photo. Wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...