What's Wrong With Dieting? (doctor, low carb, lose weight, exercise)

[lemon&lime]

There must be something wrong with half of Hollywood.... last time I checked, most of them were following a diet. Hollywood A listers are usually the healthiest look, fittest & most attractive people around & if you read any current publication they are all following a diet. Jennifer Aniston, Angelina Holier, Brad Pitt, Renew Zellweger & Cameron Diaz do Atkins. [ Jennifer Lopez, Giselle, & Jessica Szhor do Dukan, etc.

Originally Posted by AnonChick

I'll have to re-word it then. Again:

If you are ALREADY healthy, then you don't need to do anything special to GET healthy. GETTING healthy, implies that you are currently NOT healthy. If whatever you are doing, is *maintaining* your health, then you are not "dieting." The OP's question, as posted in the subject matter, is "What's wrong with dieting?"

Dieting - is a word used to describe the act of losing weight. If you are maintaining your weight, then you're not dieting.

[syracusa]

It seems to me that lemon&lime has turned "dieting" into a an intense life focus and now is trying to convince the audience that constantly being on a diet is a correct lifestyle choice.

I don't care how physically healthy and thin she/he is - if she obsesses on a daily basis over food the way it transpires here, this is anything BUT healthy.

If you can never let go and are always in such tight control over every gram of "not OK" food, your life is anything but enviable. Making automatic healthy choices without giving it much thought (with the occasional indulgence, usually during social events), is one thing. Obsessing over science, techniques, tons of books written on the topic, and grams of carbs - FOREVER, is another thing.

What AnonChick was trying to say (with way more patience than I would have been able to muster) is that when you eat healthy for 10 years, maintain your weight and don't think twice about it, that is not "dieting" in the conventional sense of the word.

Forget about the pure definition in the dictionary. We all know what people mean when they say "I am on a diet".

Not only does this usually mean that they are TEMPORARILY restricting their caloric intake and selecting only specific nutrients to eat, but the state also has a psychological component: during that time, the person's energy, attention, focus, interests are predominantly directed towards the diet itself: watching types and amounts of food carefully, weighing often, checking out body in the mirror, constantly thinking about new clothes that would fit the visibly improving looks, always thinking about IT.

Lemon@lime, if you've been in this state for over 10 years (which it appears you have), you've been in Hell.

But hey, some people adjust even to Hell and then consider it home.

[syracusa]

Originally Posted by lemon&lime

There must be something wrong with half of Hollywood....

You're wrong. There is something wrong with MOST Hollywood, their lifestyle and diets included.

Healthy "looking" hardly means healthy.

The fact that you seem so enthralled with those plastic images says something about you.

[brooklynborndad]

"If you can never let go and are always in such tight control over every gram of "not OK" food, your life is anything but enviable. Making automatic healthy choices without giving it much thought (with the occasional indulgence, usually during social events), is one thing. Obsessing over science, techniques, tons of books written on the topic, and grams of carbs - FOREVER, is another thing.

What AnonChick was trying to say (with way more patience than I would have been able to muster) is that when you eat healthy for 10 years, maintain your weight and don't think twice about it, that is not "dieting" in the conventional sense of the word. "

some folks check their savings every day. some obsess about their car. Some worry about conspiracy theories. All in all, there are worse things to obses about than ones food intake.

And of course there are intermediate things. Some folks WILL need to track their calories or WW points FOREVER, but won't necessarily obsess about it. heck, I am tracking WW points now, to lose weight, and I dont obsess like SOME people do.

I do not know if I will be sufficiently able to make healthy choices with almost no thought, or if I will need to keep tracking after a few months on maintenance - time will tell. IF I DO have to keep tracking, that seems to me a worthwhile choice, given that keeping my weight under control will help me with certain health issues I have.

whether you call that dieting forever, isnt really my concern.

[syracusa]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

"

I do not know if I will be sufficiently able to make healthy choices with almost no thought, or if I will need to keep tracking after a few months on maintenance - time will tell.

Then you don't have a sufficient understanding of Nutrition in general or your taste buds/stomach fail you.

You can't tell in a heart-bit whether a given food is starchy, filling (hence more carbs in it) or not? You can't figure out what are sweet vegetables, hence higher on the glycemic index (say carrots, tomatoes) and what are not sweet?

You can't tell how breads, potatoes, rice, you name it, fill you up (and make many people happy in the process, while they're at it)? Well...that's because they are very high in carbs and high on the glycemic index.

It really isn't rocket science. Just Nutrition science. Much easier for me, much, much easier. I have no idea why people have to keep such tight track of every bite and turn everything into an obsession when some reading, your taste buds and stomach should help you make the right decision on the spot (assuming your will doesn't fail when faced with that hot-out-of-the-oven pizza).

When I hear about food journals, calorie counting, etc I always wonder whether these people have a life and how it is even possible to live with such level of obsession.

Checking your savings is nothing compared to what such people do.

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by syracusa

Then you don't have a sufficient understanding of Nutrition in general or your taste buds/stomach fail you.

You can't tell in a heart-bit whether a given food is starchy, filling (hence more carbs in it) or not? You can't figure out what are sweet vegetables, hence higher on the glycemic index (say carrots, tomatoes) and what are not sweet? .

I know vegetables fill me up, etc. If I never ate anything but fruits vegetables, and lean proteins, I probably wouldnt need to track.

but sometimes I want a beer. Or ice cream. Or whatever. And tracking lets me now HOW MUCH of that item I can have, in context of what else Ive eaten that day/week. It allows me to live a LESS austere lifestyle than if I ONLY ate the "best" foods.

Maybe you are better than me, or have different culinary interests than I do.

I can only say that I decided to make wiser choices about two years ago. I lost about 15 pounds or so in 18 months. My wife started on WW in Sept, which impacted what I ate and my exercise, but I didnt track. I lost about 5 pounds in 3.5 months.

I started tracking in late December. In 8 weeks I have lost about 10 pounds. It has simply been more effective for me - and the tracking is kinda fun, actually.

[Ohiogirl81]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

Some folks WILL need to track their calories or WW points FOREVER, but won't necessarily obsess about it.

Need ... want ... It doesn't matter. I feel more comfortable doing it than not doing it. I don't know what the big freakin' deal is, nor do I care any longer that some folks have problems with definitions of basic English words. Do what you need to do to be successful, and then to maintain that success.

I do not know if I will be sufficiently able to make healthy choices with almost no thought, or if I will need to keep tracking after a few months on maintenance - time will tell. IF I DO have to keep tracking, that seems to me a worthwhile choice, given that keeping my weight under control will help me with certain health issues I have. .

Exactly. Do what's best for you, and what best keeps you on track. Screw everyone else.

Originally Posted by syracusa

Then you don't have a sufficient understanding of Nutrition in general or your taste buds/stomach fail you.

And apparently you don't have a sufficient understanding of why, when and how people overeat, fall off the wagon, and yo-yo diet. Knowledge of nutrition has nothing to do with it.

It really isn't rocket science. Just Nutrition science.

Wrong again. It's hard work. Losing is hard, maintenance is really really really hard.

When I hear about food journals, calorie counting, etc I always wonder whether these people have a life and how it is even possible to live with such level of obsession.

Maybe you shouldn't obsess so much about what helps other people stay on track. It takes me about 5 minutes, maybe 10, to make entries in my food diary. The food diary is a learning tool, a validation, sometimes even a deterrent. Anything but an obsession.

[syracusa]

Originally Posted by brooklynborndad

It has simply been more effective for me - and the tracking is kinda fun, actually.

OK.

[brooklynborndad]

for example, elsewhere you posted this (sorry if its out of context)

If you have to have carbs in the morning, I'd rather have some oatmeal than a bagel

Now sometimes i want oatmeal. But bagels and lox on Sunday morning are something I have enjoyed since I was a teen - a life without them would be a life missing something I value. I COULD just swear them off (or at least the bagel) What I do instead is track - which generally means I eat ONLY one bagel, and I have to limit what other stuff I eat to account for the points.

I would RATHER go through the minor annoyance of tracking, then face a life of never eating another bagel with lox. Thats my choice. You may make a different choice.

[brooklynborndad]

Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81

The food diary is a learning tool, a validation, sometimes even a deterrent. Anything but an obsession.

and if you have a cooperative SO, or better, an SO on the same plan, its a fun activity to do together.