Posts by poofyball

Unfortunately, these "alarm clocks" also have snooze buttons, designed to allow the owner to slam them and go back to sleep. I don't think it's the logistics that are the problem with waking up earlier.

You don't have to walk the "down" interval, you can do a slower jog. That would probably average out to about the same rate of speed.

I guess high intensity is subjective if you're comparing to other people. But for just yourself, a sprint is a sprint, isn't it? I don't think it's actually high intensity unless you're running at 80% at least. I like to do HIIT on a track too, but I do it by 200s. I don't think I could sprint a full lap more than twice.

I refrigerate everything. I refrigerate my peanut butter and freeze peanuts that aren't going to be used soon.

I don't know if PB molds or anything obvious like that. But I do know that, whether it's only in my mind or not, when I left my peanut butter in the cupboard for a few months, it tasted different.

Original Post by candicebauer:

correction 3500 cals for a lb of fat

 It's just an estimate. And the estimate is often 3500-3600.

Original Post by gsutiger2:

^^ Wow - Blunt or just plain Rude? 

 Really, I think it was just blunt, and hardly that. If the OP really ate that much, I think he/she probably did gain a bit from all of that.

Original Post by dollldecay:

I think it's weird that they say no woman should ever eat less than 1200 a day, but this website says in order for me to lose weight I can safely eat only 1300 a day even though I'm 5'5" and 170 lbs. That's just 100 calories more than the "no man zone" women are told not to cross. But I am willing to bump up my intake a few hundred calories, since I see this thread has resulted in a visceral reaction from a few people, maybe there really is a reason for it. It just seems so counter-intuitive to me to eat more for once instead of less, lol, especially with no real sense of hunger. 

The way I figure it, why should I limit myself to below 1000 calories when I can eat 1300 calories and lose the same weight? If you can get doctor or nutritionist supervision to do a sub-1000 calorie diet, then you lessen your risk. But to me, it just seems like a painful way to do something that has a much less painful alternative - eating at a reasonable deficit.

BTW, I thought the post saying you are either stupid or ignorant was very rude too.

There's a Krispy Kreme drive-through entrance right next to the freeway entrance, and I usually accidentally miss the freeway entrance and hit the drive-through instead. I think I'll make an accidental swerve today too...

Original Post by vesnaneresna:

I agree with your dietitian. Mostly because I learned from my own experience that low fat versions don't satisfy me. If, for example, I'm craving ice cream and have a small serving of my favorite one, I'm fine. But if I try to substitute it for a low fat version, I'm not satisfied and I keep searching and nibbling on other things that don't satisfy me until I get frustrated, go out and buy my fave ice cream and have it. So in the end, I consumed way more calories and spent way too much time obsessing over it for nothing.

I find that, many times, not only am I okay with just a small serving of my favorite full-fat things, I can't exceed a small serving. Especially with ice cream - I can't put away a full container of Dove's Unconditional Chocolate in one sitting(which is good, I guess, because when I can't finish it, someone else does...). I think a lot of full-fat things are richer than their low-fat/no-fat counterparts, and that helps me with portion sizes.

Original Post by prinzessin_naseimbuch:

Original Post by littleshellys:

 If you can read while doing cardio you are not getting your heart rate up!

I beg to differ.  This past spring at school I had a class that had a whole lot of required reading.  I took my textbooks to the school's gym with me and read it on a treadmill cuz that's the only way I could focus on doing the reading (too many temptations--tv, computer) at home.  I put myself on an incline (5deg first, then 10 after I got used to 5) at 3.5 miles per hour and read for an hour.  I broke a sweat...it ran down the sides of my face and my shirt was soggy afterwards.  My heart rate was in the upper 140's...that might not be high for you but it felt high to me.

 I agree, I always read a book while on a stationary bike. I do my running outside, which is fun enough to not need a book (though I've seen a neighbor walking/running outside while reading...)

I probably could not read while running on a treadmill though... Treadmill running is pretty boring. I used to run backwards in intervals, but I think any type of interval would help relieve the boredom.

Forget the weight, just get some exercise in. I lost 5 pounds from being sick, and I feel the exact same that I did 5 pounds heavier. What makes me feel and look slimmer is getting in exercise, even while eating maintenance calories. Do some HIIT and lift some heavy weights. It's a lot less torturous than an hour of stairs.

Original Post by mrsbenona:

"muscle weighs more than fat" Isnt fully true. A pound it a pound no matter what. What is correct is that muscle takes up less volume than fat does.

I'm getting a little tired of reading this sentence everywhere. Are you saying that any phrase indicating that "something weighs more than something" is not fully true? Or is this only in the case of muscle and fat? If I say that a car weighs more than a banana, is that not fully true? Because a ton of car weighs the same as a ton of banana? I don't see how it's incorrect to say that muscle weighs more than fat. What is relative weight but difference in density?

Original Post by ilisa:

1200 calories/day requirement wasn't calculated for a 100 lb 5'0" woman. It was for a 100 lb 5'2" woman. 3 inches less of height is a big difference.

No, 1200 is the calculated BMR for a 5'0" tall, 100 lb woman over the age of 35, and sedentary.

Original Post by apophenia:

I'm with chrissy.  Why screw up a perfectly good weight for the sake of a few vanity pounds?  Instead, focus on being strong and fit and happy.  You're already at a healthy and attractive weight.

I'm 5'1", and if I get below 115, I start looking like I need to be hooked up to an IV.  I am not exaggerating.  I look sick below 115, so much that the last time I was at that weight, people would ask me all the time if I was sick, even complete strangers.  PLUS, to even get to 115 and maintain, I have to enter eating disorder-type territory as far as food & exercise go.  Not good!  120 is my goal, where I'm strong, happy, and look totally kick-ass!

 Not everybody has the same "perfectly good weight." My sister is 5'1" and can't break 100 lbs. She looks fine, eats fine, but has a small frame.

Original Post by hanumandas:

but whats normal for the general population could be reasonably recommended to the general population. some people cant drink milk so should we stop telling people to drink milk? its ridiculous...

 That assumes that 2x a day is normal, or even the mode, for the general population. Which I doubt.

Original Post by dkiesser:

Aha Ha! My son just learned this in school.  I thought: How do they get this information! Is there like some kind of secret bathroom survey I forgot to fill out? Was it in the national census?

 lol that's what I was thinking

Did he just say that a single donut brought your metabolism to a halt?

And it does not make a difference that you add "in chronic cases" to the end of the sentence while responding to posts. People neither know nor care what "in chronic cases" means, they will still fixate on "40 pounds in the colon."

Telling people they "can" hold up to 40 pounds of waste in their colon (even "in chronic cases") is irrelevant and misleading.

flybee - that's an interesting link. I was wondering about the water thing too, but eringilbert's explanation makes a lot of sense. I just thought we would hold a little more of the water we take in.