I can never think of good subject lines
Tuesday, 5 August 2008 11:05![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
earthbelow
Wow, I really haven't posted here in a while, have I? I guess because my life is really not that interesting right now.
The two big deals are my writing and my renewed attempts to lose weight. I'm thinking of doing a weight loss filter, but I'm not sure. It's not that the details of me trying to shed pounds is all that private, it's just that I know some people might now want to read about it.
I've started up keeping my food/exercise log again, and I'm sticking as faithfully as I can to my pledge to get at least 30 minutes of exercise a day, three or more times a week. I feel frustrated, because I've done this before and the weight comes off so excruciatingly slowly. It feels like I've been trying to take off the same five pounds forever.
Doesn't help that my mom thinks I should be dropping the weight much faster. Her theory is that I'm either very sick or I'm lying about how hard I'm trying to lose the weight and not doing what I say I'm doing.
Why, yes, that was the sound of part of spirit just shriveling up. Nothing makes you want to sob and curl up under the blankets and give up like your mom not believing you when you say you're doing your damndest. I don't think I'm sick, I just think I have insulin resistance and a godawfully slow metabolism and this is how I lose weight, bit by bit.
My mom gave me a bunch of Weight Watchers stuff before I left Florida, and I was somewhat appreciative. It's just that, well, in order to eat all the points they say I'm allotted, I'd have to consume more than my usual 1000-1200 calories a day. It is useful to have the guide though.
I think Weight Watchers is good for most people, but it wouldn't work for me. It doesn't take sugar into account, for one. And a lot of foods that are "lower fat" are that way because they take out the fat and pour lots of sugar in so it doesn't taste so awful. That's why there are no low fat *and* low sugar foods that are worth putting in your mouth. It's also why sugarfree foods aren't all that much healthier than anything else, because they have loads of calories and fat.
It also sucks when you realize how hard you have to exercise just to burn a few calories. For instance, my very brisk, sweat-drenched, pavement pounding 30 minute walk with bits of jogging inserted burned, maybe, two hundred calories. That's not even most of a Lean Cuisine or anything. Which makes me want to cry, because ZOMG, how am I supposed to take any weight off if I can't even burn off one crummy little diet lunch?
Not to mention the very, very depressing factoid that it takes 3,300 calories for you to gain a pound. Thus, you have to burn 3,300 calories to lose one. And if you have a metabolism like a hybrid car, then you burn through calories at a mindnumbingly slow rate.
But I will prevail (god willing and the creek don't rise). It's discouraging now, but I can be plucky. I can stick with it.
I try to think of the upsides, which are that I enjoy my walks. It gives me more energy, and helps charge up the creative fuel cells. Also? I'm not really depriving myself of any foods I like, I'm just going to eat less of them.
Also, in a weird way, it's a sign that I'm evolutionarily more fit than other people. Another weird factoid is that what we call a "slow" metabolism is actually a more efficient one. Back in the caveman days, where you got to eat maybe every two or three days if you were lucky, those who burned calories slowest were better off.
Which is why women are better than men, from an evolutionary standpoint. Women have more efficient calorie burning resources. Of course, that doesn't help when society prefers to us to be tall, blonde, and starving - but still. So, ladies be proud. Back in the Neanderthal days, women rocked. And men...just sort of hit things with rocks.
Things don't change much, do they? *ducks*.
The two big deals are my writing and my renewed attempts to lose weight. I'm thinking of doing a weight loss filter, but I'm not sure. It's not that the details of me trying to shed pounds is all that private, it's just that I know some people might now want to read about it.
I've started up keeping my food/exercise log again, and I'm sticking as faithfully as I can to my pledge to get at least 30 minutes of exercise a day, three or more times a week. I feel frustrated, because I've done this before and the weight comes off so excruciatingly slowly. It feels like I've been trying to take off the same five pounds forever.
Doesn't help that my mom thinks I should be dropping the weight much faster. Her theory is that I'm either very sick or I'm lying about how hard I'm trying to lose the weight and not doing what I say I'm doing.
Why, yes, that was the sound of part of spirit just shriveling up. Nothing makes you want to sob and curl up under the blankets and give up like your mom not believing you when you say you're doing your damndest. I don't think I'm sick, I just think I have insulin resistance and a godawfully slow metabolism and this is how I lose weight, bit by bit.
My mom gave me a bunch of Weight Watchers stuff before I left Florida, and I was somewhat appreciative. It's just that, well, in order to eat all the points they say I'm allotted, I'd have to consume more than my usual 1000-1200 calories a day. It is useful to have the guide though.
I think Weight Watchers is good for most people, but it wouldn't work for me. It doesn't take sugar into account, for one. And a lot of foods that are "lower fat" are that way because they take out the fat and pour lots of sugar in so it doesn't taste so awful. That's why there are no low fat *and* low sugar foods that are worth putting in your mouth. It's also why sugarfree foods aren't all that much healthier than anything else, because they have loads of calories and fat.
It also sucks when you realize how hard you have to exercise just to burn a few calories. For instance, my very brisk, sweat-drenched, pavement pounding 30 minute walk with bits of jogging inserted burned, maybe, two hundred calories. That's not even most of a Lean Cuisine or anything. Which makes me want to cry, because ZOMG, how am I supposed to take any weight off if I can't even burn off one crummy little diet lunch?
Not to mention the very, very depressing factoid that it takes 3,300 calories for you to gain a pound. Thus, you have to burn 3,300 calories to lose one. And if you have a metabolism like a hybrid car, then you burn through calories at a mindnumbingly slow rate.
But I will prevail (god willing and the creek don't rise). It's discouraging now, but I can be plucky. I can stick with it.
I try to think of the upsides, which are that I enjoy my walks. It gives me more energy, and helps charge up the creative fuel cells. Also? I'm not really depriving myself of any foods I like, I'm just going to eat less of them.
Also, in a weird way, it's a sign that I'm evolutionarily more fit than other people. Another weird factoid is that what we call a "slow" metabolism is actually a more efficient one. Back in the caveman days, where you got to eat maybe every two or three days if you were lucky, those who burned calories slowest were better off.
Which is why women are better than men, from an evolutionary standpoint. Women have more efficient calorie burning resources. Of course, that doesn't help when society prefers to us to be tall, blonde, and starving - but still. So, ladies be proud. Back in the Neanderthal days, women rocked. And men...just sort of hit things with rocks.
Things don't change much, do they? *ducks*.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 5 Aug 2008 15:33 (UTC)no subject
Date: 5 Aug 2008 16:16 (UTC)tho if you're looking to lose numbers (pounds), it may not happen. inches tho are where its at anyway.
out of curiosity, have you tried eating more than 1000 calories a day? with lots of protein and vegetables and some complex carbs (no white bread/pasta/rice, that sorta thing). some people hit that shocky point where their bodies refuse to lose weight (and will even gain it) a lot higher than others (600 calories is the bare minimum but for people who have dieted a lot over the years, who've got certain health problems such as insulin resistance , or just the luck of the draw. for most people, especially those committed to being moderately active, 1800-2200 cal/day is a really reasonable goal. i remember one woman years ago when i was doing the assistant dietitian thing had to up her caloric intake to 2000/day in order for her to lose weight. she lost weight easy after that.
plus you've got the added complication of keeping your blood sugar regulated, while eating so few calories and walking all over the place. that'll also throw stuff off since your body wants to hoard energy to keep your blood sugar up.
oh, and even though it takes that much to put on a pound, it actually doesn't take exactly that many calories to lose a pound. and the exercise isn't that futile-- just having a slight caloric deficit is often enough to stimulate your body into thinking "oh okay! let's burn fat!" and you exercising like you do may actually be burning more than it seems like you're burning, because the effects arent all immediate. you're working harder than the average walker from the sounds of it, plus it's hot out (more calories burned), *and* just you saying you have more energy? having more energy means you're using more energy. which is totally good news, since that's your goal.
also, with all due respect to your mom, i do think it's kinda shitty of her not to be more supportive. yes, i know she has your best health in mind, but it sounds to me like you're working your ass off, while possibly even cheating yourself out of some food/calories, on top of having the roadblocks of PCOS *and* birth control pills... so, i'm just sayin'. it makes me sad she's not more supportive of your successes and doesn't put less weight on any shortcomings (which i don't even see, i just see successes, as should you). so there you go. probably over the line, but i said it.
also, i don't mind hearing about weight loss stuff, and i don't know if it was my recent post that might make you think that, it's just "there's a time and a place" and all that. i read my friends' journals for updates about their life and thoughts and everything. that includes stuff like weight loss and health.
no subject
Date: 5 Aug 2008 16:16 (UTC)no subject
Date: 5 Aug 2008 19:55 (UTC)BTW, I haven't ever tried lifting weights before, because I always heard it bulked you up. But maybe I do need to. Thanks for the suggestion.
no subject
Date: 5 Aug 2008 20:11 (UTC)The best thing to do is to get a personal trainer, even for a few months, who can work with you on fitness goals.
And cardio is an every day thing, no matter what they tell you.
:-)
no subject
Date: 5 Aug 2008 20:18 (UTC)I don't go strictly by numbers. I use them as a guide. I also use the way my clothes fit as a guide. But I do know that your clothes are getting any looser and the scale is only giving it up one pound at a time, that you're not losing that much.
probably over the line, but i said it.
It's not over the line. You're not saying my mom is shitty, just that she said something that isn't so great. We all say shitty things from time to time. I think it is rooted, mostly, in her concern and love for me, which is good. I just also think that part of it is a reflection of some of the issues she has with her own weight.
I agree, and when she said it, it really hurt actually. Because it felt like she was invalidating all that I was doing, and for me, this whole weight loss thing is fraught with emotional issues and I have to keep my enthusiasm and motivation pretty high or I will just give up.
And I don't want to do that. I mean, I'm trying to get skinny. I just want to get to a weight where my body is comfortable and I'm comfortable with my body.
I just want to be able to be in pictures with my size 4 sister and not think "wow, that'd be a much prettier picture if the big fat hog-woman got out of it!" I don't aspire to be size 4, as well. Just maybe not 16 entire sizes bigger than her.
don't know if it was my recent post that might make you think that, it's just "there's a time and a place" and all that.
Well, a little bit it was. And not because I thought you'd be all "ZOMG! Weight loss stuff, I'm so defriending you!!! One eleventy!111!" I just figured it wasn't a topic in which you'd be as interested as, say, kink or me and Andrew's wedding stuff or whatever.
It was also because there are some people on my other journals I'm THISCLOSE to defriending because I'm getting tired of reading their twitters or other tedious stuff. And I realize that weight loss can get tedious to read about. :)
no subject
Date: 5 Aug 2008 20:21 (UTC)Ah. I guess that rules that being able to do any kind of at-home version of it. Because I can't really afford that right now. Plus, I don't even think there are any gyms near us.
This is to say nothing of the fact that I have distinct gym-phobia.
The best thing to do is to get a personal trainer, even for a few months, who can work with you on fitness goals.
When I finally get another job and some money, I'll try to make that priority. I think for now I'm gonna have to tough it out with soup cans (like
And cardio is an every day thing, no matter what they tell you.
Oh, now somebody tells me. *headdesk*. :)
no subject
Date: 5 Aug 2008 22:32 (UTC)no subject
Date: 6 Aug 2008 13:30 (UTC)Take Care
no subject
Date: 6 Aug 2008 14:05 (UTC)no subject
Date: 6 Aug 2008 14:08 (UTC)I've often wondered that, although I've never really had a problem with dairy as far as processing it or anything, not so far as I know. Although, wheat might be something to watch out for.
I do know that sugar in and of itself is a problem for me, but maybe carbohydrates in general are an issue?
no subject
Date: 6 Aug 2008 14:56 (UTC)no subject
Date: 7 Aug 2008 02:02 (UTC)I also agree about weight training. Look into it. It's helped me. Even though I'm not yet back to my weight from December, I'm healthier. I can run farther than I did then. Numbers on a scale aren't everything.
no subject
Date: 7 Aug 2008 18:19 (UTC)You're a doll. Just hang in there and treat yourself well.
no subject
Date: 13 Aug 2008 08:28 (UTC)I'm just sayin'.
Anyway good to see you post. I've missed you, glee-filled one.