Tuesday, June 29, 2010

Bright and Early

I woke up at 5:33am and thought "yay! I get to sleep another hour..." I woke up again at 6:08 and thought "Sigh, I'd better get up and finish packing boxes before the floor guys arrive." So I got up - but then I decided to take a walk since it was beautifully cool for about five minutes. I have to map my route. I have been doing a mile walk and really need to start making it longer. Yesterday I lapped some of the courts along the way - so that helped, but I am not sure how much. I decided to do a different route, but I don't actually know if it was longer or shorter. It took me slightly longer - but I was feeling very NOT energetic this morning, so I was probably walking slower.

I got back to the house, took a shower, and began moving stuff from the dining room and living room. I had moved quite a bit over the weekend, but there was more to do. The guys got to the house at about 7:35, and I really DID get quite a bit more done before they arrived.

In the mean time I weighed myself twice. The first time (right out of bed, eyes barely focusing) I was only down .6 from last week (if you will recall last week I was down nothing). So I was REALLY pissed off because that means I had a net loss for the past two weeks of a half a pound! That doesn't fit within the formula AT ALL!! I have had an average calorie deficit of 848.71 per day over the last seven days. The week before that it was 907.14 (Katie's birthday messed me up this week). So - if it really IS burn more than you consume, I should have lost a pound and a half each week. So I should be THREE pounds down - not half a pound!!!!

When I got back from my walk I weighed myself again and I had gone down an additional 1.2 pounds. Since this was more in line with what I wanted - 1.8 pounds since last week - I decided to keep that as my official weight - even though it probably isn't accurate. This also gets me down below 250 (barely!) and it brings me to 6 pounds lost since June 1st. Keep in mind however, that my June 1st weight was probably somewhat inflated by my period. BUT - that means that my weight this week may be slightly inflated from my period also - or maybe that won't be until next week, in which case I will lose all of the progress I made...

OR - I may lose all of the progress I have made because I am now eating Fischer's caramel popcorn!

4 comments:

Julie S said...

The book I am reading argues that weight loss does not occur simply by having a calorie deficit.

I'll disclaim again that I am trying to keep an open mind with this book and that I am not sure I buy into everything 100%. As far as this particular statement, I do think there is at least some validity to it. When I did Weight Watchers a few years ago, I would consistently meet my point value for the day, and often times be under. But my weight loss was mediocre at best; I might have lost 10 lbs total. What I am realizing now is that I was so focused on foods with low point values that I didn't eat a diverse enough diet and often would overload on certain food categories in one day, to only neglect that group completely the next.

The books says that the type of foods we eat, even though they may be low in calories or fat, are also low in nutrition and therefore hinder our ability to lose weight because even though we are consuming calories we are not getting the proper balance of vitamins, minerals, fats, etc from the food and our body stays in a conservation mode. The one chapter title is something very similar to what you posted about having a deficit but not actually seeing a drop in weight.

The book would most likely give a thumbs up to Fisher's popcorn, as long as there is no high fructose corn syrup in it. It advocates all "real" foods in moderation, so when I ate my single serving tub of Ben & Jerry's last night, I was still on the plan for better eating since it is made of milk, sugar and eggs.

Emily said...

That's still a calorie deficit formula! Eating the wrong foods means you burn calories at a lower rate, so even if your intake is lower your outgo is also lower: ergo, less weight lost than you'd get if you ate the same number of calories using whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, lean meats and nuts, etc. Weight loss DOES occur with a calorie deficit -- but it's harder to recognize/calculate that deficit if your metabolism is dropped into low gear by the foods you eat.

Julie S said...

Exactly--the rate of weight loss is dependent on the type of calories, not just by the deficit alone. I can't recall if we discussed this idea in a previous blog post or if this was a conversation somewhere else, but the whole idea that if you went on an all cookie diet (or all ice cream, pick a food) that even staying within the calorie limits wouldn't yield great weight loss results. Not to mention I think I'd feel like total crap if I ate only one type of food.

If I were more of a schemer just out for a quick buck, I'd write a book that advocates some sort of eat every other day type diet. LOL. I bet it would be a best seller.

Amy said...

Oh! I completely believe that! I know that from the beginning of this blog my weight loss was NOT in line with how much I had reduced my intake - however, I think his premise about need a balance of foods - while sounding good in theory - is still faulty. The primary way I reduce my calories is by improving the quality of my intake. I have alway been pretty good at choosing the "right" foods - whole grains, good fats, lean proteins. I do check the ingredients. I add salt to nothing. My weakness is sugar - but I am not a soda drinker (the primary source of HFCS for most Americans). I do drink alcohol - but not in great quantities, and not regularly. Yes, when I do binge it is almost always on something sweet, but I don't binge all that often (thus qualifing as a "binge" and not regular eating patterns...). I do know that I was lacking on the vegetable front, but I have had a salad for lunch every day for the past month (not always on weekends...). Just so you all understand - that means I have had more salads in this past month than I think in my whole life before.

And - BTW - even if the Fisher's popcorn would be OK'd by your book - the calories alone in it screwed up my whole day on Tuesday!!!