Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What passes for a normal weight these days is actually overweight and probably by 20 lbs. I think BMI is not a very good method to determine what you should weigh either so if you really want to know, you should probably pull up an old fashioned height/weight chart and check that. I'm talking about the ones that were out in the 70's and had separate categories for men and women and also for small/medium/large frames and even those had a range. If I can find one I'll post it. I can't even imagine why they replaced it with the BMI measure--seems like the info you get from docs and the govt is just so hazy these days.
Just did a little research on here and found out that the problems with the old tables, which were called the Metropolitan Life tables, is that they weren't very accurate for very short women, and laughable for women over average height. Go figure--I didn't pick up this b/c I'm 5'3". BMI is still a problem though b/c it leaves up too much to interpretation, and at least the older tables made categories for size of frame and gender and some even made separate categories for age. One of the oldest formulas said that a 5' tall woman should weigh 100 lbs and for every inch after that you'd add 5 lbs, so I should weigh 115 lbs. It's quite possible but I'd be glad to settle for 130 and at my age that would be more realistic. Interesting thing is that people say that at 150 lbs I look like I'm of normal weight and that's the dangerous thing--it's normal but not healthy.
I"m thinking though that back in those days when they started trying to calculate what people should weigh, women didn't appreciate muscle tone, but then they just naturally got a lot more exercise doing daily living so it's hard to say. Anyway, it's just as confusing as it ever was. Well the whole point of this whole exercise is to let you know that you'll probably have problems until you get your weight down to what's normal and that may be less than you think.
I'm 46 and around 5'5". I remember those old weight formulas and when I was younger I always made sure to stay at 125 or below. If I crept up above 125, I dieted.
These days, I just don't see me ever getting that low again. 140s would be awesome, though.
Well keep and eye on it. Fast loss can also be a sign of issue. I assume you do the little log book and all, right?
I've tightened up on my diet (little starch/sugar, lots of lean protein, veggies, low fat dairy) and resumed my trail hikes. So I know why the weight has come off.
I haven't been logging everything, but maybe I should.
I've tightened up on my diet (little starch/sugar, lots of lean protein, veggies, low fat dairy) and resumed my trail hikes. So I know why the weight has come off.
I haven't been logging everything, but maybe I should.
yes it can, read a guy called Bernstein, dr. Bernstein he I think invented the glucometer. He is a big advocate of reversing this and other things more serious like type 2 diabetes. He is in Long Island I think, but do a google search Dr. Bernstein and low carb it should come up and how he reveses patients diabetes problems. Also read a new book called Sugar Nation, many have reversed this.
I just found Dr. Bernstein , there is tons of info on it. This is the man and his plan to reverse all diabetes and sugar problems. He reversed his own, he was going blind and had kidney problems. He reversed it opened a strict practice where 1000 have reversed much more serious problems! Its a strict diet but does the job~!!!
I just found Dr. Bernstein , there is tons of info on it. This is the man and his plan to reverse all diabetes and sugar problems. He reversed his own, he was going blind and had kidney problems. He reversed it opened a strict practice where 1000 have reversed much more serious problems! Its a strict diet but does the job~!!!
Thanks! I'll check it out. I've never had diabetes but if I don't get this IR under control for good, that's where I'm heading.
I've tightened up on my diet (little starch/sugar, lots of lean protein, veggies, low fat dairy) and resumed my trail hikes. So I know why the weight has come off.
I haven't been logging everything, but maybe I should.
Yes...get on that.
He said he felt the difference before he tracked the difference. But that could just be because he wasn't getting head fog from his sugar going crazy.
He said he felt the difference before he tracked the difference. But that could just be because he wasn't getting head fog from his sugar going crazy.
Carbs always make me feel sharper and more energetic, at least when I don't overdo them and work out, too. I only run into trouble when I eat too many of the wrong carbs and get slack on my exercise. But I suppose that's true for just about everyone.
Location: Back in Melbourne.....home of road rage and aggression
402 posts, read 1,159,860 times
Reputation: 526
It's my understanding that there is no cure, per se, only management of the condition. Although I suppose if you manage it well, and don't have 'flare ups' (for lack of a better way of putting it), it's as good as a cure, I suppose.
IR sucks and it can be hard work if you have food and eating issues but it's manageable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
