Obviously it's not that simple is it. You had to dedicate a long and sustained effort to lose weight you didn't want! If it were simple it wouldn't have taken 50% extra body mass for you to act and learn how to lose weight.
I really do congratulate you, but let's not pretend this is an easy problem, or it simply wouldn't exist!
I never paid attention to what I ate, I ate until I was stuffed, I drank way too much beer, and I never exercised. Basically I was lazy and didn't give a shit. This was the normal lifestyle of most people I knew who were 16-22. The ramifications of being fat were not enough to overcome the perceptions of the difficulty of dieting and exercise I gleaned from most people, so I didn't even try. In fact, dieting was not difficult, so when I actually tried it with an established plan I had immense success.
If it takes even more than what I tried then I hardly believe it's even worth it. I'd rather live happily for one less year than never get to eat fulfillingly and live on a bootcamp exercise regimen.
One of the main problems people have with counting calories is accurately being able to do so. While I don't think counting calories is for everyone, if you do try again, try to weight everything you eat. Don't forget the teaspoon of olive oil in the salad and those kinds of small things that add up. Research has shown that comparing food logs of people that say they have a slow metabolism and that they count calories, when subjected to something I think is called, reverse isotope water (or similar), shows that they are not accounting for a lot of the things they eat.
Also, a month isn't a long time to notice changes even on the scale. It isn't uncommon to not drop weight due to water retention during a few weeks (depending where you start) when starting a diet.
Apparently my BMI is 'obese' but I don't feel or look 'obese', by whatever value of obese seems to be my intuition gained over time, oddly. Maybe overweight is so common that it looks normal.
BMI is not really accurate on the individual level. Most athletes will score on the 'overweight' range for example while athletes that play in weight division sports will be in the 'underweight' category a lot of the time (I was for example, but I doubt anyone would consider me underweight at the time).
You also don't have to live a bootcamp experience, since essentially all your weightloss will come from not eating too much. Calories are flexible though, if you note which foods you get most saity/calorie then it is better to go with those foods than others that may be "healthier". In my case the key turned out to be meat and higher fat content plus bread.
Your month may have sucked, but you can absolutely do it, you will live better for it and whether you die earlier or not your quality of life is going to be much, much better when you aren't fat. It isn't just a matter of dying earlier - that tradeof may seem worthwhile - but a matter of whether you will spend ten years in a wheel chair, whether you can reach your own butt to wipe yourself, whether you need a machine to make sure you don't die in your sleep, etc.
You can totally do this. I know because I have been down that route and yes, the payof is worth it. Email me.
The water/muscle sound like reasonable explanations.
My overweight relatives had reasonable mobility etc into their 80s while still being overweight, so maybe my genetics are fine for it, but being healthier might be a net positive as you say anyway. I'll consider it.
In the same way that some people drink massive amounts of alcohol in college and turn into alcoholics ruining their lives and liver, and others just 'phase' into a more healthy lifestyle, clearly some people find it harder to do what you did than you.
One conclusion is that they just don't try hard enough, and they're not as 'good' as those who do. They willingly choose to live a lesser life. Because they're lazy or whatever.
The other, more complicated (and I'd argue less arrogant and more empathic) conclusion is that the psychology of addiction is different for different people, and approaches that work for one person don't work for others. And rather than saying 'it's really that simple', we should research the problem and devise solutions that take into account the simple fact that some people apparently drink until their liver gives up and all that's good in their life is eventually gone, or that some people apparently eat and grow fat and hate themselves and live 'lesser' lives instead of getting in shape.
Having spent a lot of time with 'highly successful and driven' people, and having spent a lot of time with fuck-ups who suffered from a variety of addictions, I've come to the conclusion that being that hard to define 'good' has little to do with it. Instead, it seems that the difference is mostly upbringing and environment (where this environment was usually not a choice, but rather a circumstance).
I've been lucky to be surrounded by both happy, successful people and major 'fuck-ups', and as a result my life currently occupies a mostly happy space. But I have no illusions that this is primarily the result of my personal choices and willpower, as willpower itself is a result of upbringing and environment.
Sure, my will and choices matter. I don't want to remove personal agency entirely. But even if my current (happy) state of being is 50% a result of factors outside of myself, it's enough to realize that I'm fucking lucky, and those who fare worse than me need support and researched solutions rather than 'it worked for me, so it should work for you'.
Obesity appears to be highly heritable. For this reason a careful balance must be struck between encouraging people to control their weight and not blaming them for have been dealt worse cards than their naturally slim neighbors (until we have a cure).
Around the time I started my first bout exercising and eating normally, I worked with basically an entire office of developers who were fitness nuts. Guys who can run a 10K faster than I could dream at my height, and lift nearly 2 of me. Their secret? Watch what you eat, log it if you have to (you'll be surprised that you really don't know what in the hell you're consuming), and get some exercise. Surprisingly sitting in an office chair for 8 or more hours and living the startup life isn't all that great for your well being... Anecdotally, my latest job affords me great flexibility meaning I can get out and kayak every damn day when it suits me. It's great exercise to fight the current for hours at a time, I enjoy it immensely, and guess what? I don't have to hit the gym as often, maybe throw in some running/other strength exercise to "even things out".
[...]
> Broke up, started eating less, working out more.
> Around the time I started my first bout exercising and eating normally, I worked with basically an entire office of developers who were fitness nuts. Guys who can run a 10K faster than I could dream at my height, and lift nearly 2 of me.
So you broke up with a (in this context) toxic girlfriend, and found yourself surrounded by fitness nuts.
I truly applaud the fact that you used your situation to get in shape, but at the same time it's important to realize that you used your situation. I know many people who are not working with fitness nuts, or who for various reasons are still in relationships with 'toxic' partners. And that is all the difference.
I don't mean to start an argument, by the way. I just want to point out that this is a thorny problem. I often feel that the best way to help people in unhealthy environments is to remove them from that environment. But I've also experienced that this is hella difficult, because as social creates many of us are terrified of losing our SO, family, or familiar environment. And that is sometimes the primary impediment to a better, healthier, and happier life.
It's like watching City of God or The Wire and hearing that the average age of death is in the twenties. I found myself almost screaming at the characters on screen to just fucking move and find a better place. And yet, as shown in The Wire, even the characters that had a chance to move to a better place eventually came back, because this 'other' place was just too weird and lonely and unfamiliar.
I guess what I'm getting at is, sans biological issues, all one needs is to exercise and to watch what they eat. Hell, watching what you eat is very important regardless. Of course being a good developer, I realize there are edge-cases out the ass. We're people, not machines.
All that said, the mental aspect is always gonna be the toughest part to overcome. You have to be willing to break the habits, and commit to your change. Not everyone has the mental acuity to a) comprehend their shortcomings and b) commit to fixing them. How much of that blame lies on the individual and how much on upbringing/society/etc. is up in the air, largely on a person-to-person basis. I'm just lucky enough to have grown up around enough toxic activities to be able to see things for how they are, and to have the acuity/strength to change things if need be.
'Normal' (non-overweight) people usually don't have to pay attention to what they eat either, still they don't gain weight.
As someone who's tried to lose weight (with on and off success) for years. Once you are in this place, you have to apply much tighter heuristics. Your body isn't giving you the right messages about food. (e.g. Can I have 3 slices of pizza today, is this salad actually lower calorie than that slice of pizza, which one will make the rest of the day easier.) Your body dopes you with Serotonin every time you eat. trying to lose weight has many withdrawal like aspects to it.
Suddenly you find yourselves with a new job and are now driving to work, and week by week you gain weight until you wake up one day and think fuck.
This is sort of like someone who makes $500,000 a year claiming that getting out of debt is easy because they were able to do it after they finally stopped buying mansions and sports cars left and right.
such a tired excuse
96% of the population is in the range of 1680-2320kcal daily
http://examine.com/faq/does-metabolism-vary-between-two-peop...
This is where you come in and say, "Oh well, the person with the lower metabolism should eat less." So now the person with the lower metabolism has to eat a meal's worth of food less than the other person just to maintain their weight to say nothing of losing it. And I'd wager the person providing their body with 1600kcal is probably feeling sluggish and depressed all day. Which is why I include willpower.
not for fatties, that's an entree's worth
Not particularly. If I had a high metabolism I would not have put on the weight easily in the first place.
> and abundant energy and willpower. Not overeating requires willpower every waking moment... forever.
In my opinion, successful dieting isn't a willpower issue, it's a systems issue. I have designed a straight forward system which works for me: Every morning I wake up and plan my meals in accordance with my diet plan. I then only eat those meals. I schedule in time to go the gym and follow my schedule. When I arrive I do my prescribed exercise routine and I leave. There are no decisions to be made on food choices or exercise throughout the day because I have already made the decisions without any internal conflict before I start my day. The emotional component is completely abstracted away and very little willpower is necessary to maintain adherence.
I think this is one of the biggest problems with people's mentality on dieting and getting in shape. They think they need to force themselves to be adherent against their will. In reality you only need to discover and set up systems which facilitate good behavior. There is very little willpower involved on a day to day basis if this is done, and in fact, the more success you have the more you will want to adhere.
>In my opinion, successful dieting isn't a willpower issue.... I wake up and plan my meals in accordance with my diet plan. I then only eat those meals.
Imagine a recipe for overcoming drug addiction. In the morning, you decide not to take drugs. Then you don't take drugs that day. This is nonsense.
When you're hungry and low on energy, it's a constant battle. You have a burning awareness that any moment you could go get something to eat. I'm glad it doesn't work that way for you, seriously.
>Not particularly. If I had a high metabolism I would not have put on the weight easily in the first place.
Sure you would. Eating a surplus is easy. You already said you ate until you were stuffed, didn't exercise, and consumed too much beer. This is why I used the money example. You can make a huge amount of money and still burn it.