|09-18-2011, 11:08 AM||#1|
Senior LCF Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: New Jersey
Stats: Doesn't matter/its a number/healthy
Start Date: November 2011
Is there the concept of 'one golden shot' on JUDDD?
I know doing low-carb, there is the concept that your first try is the 'golden' one, and if you fall off and try to get back on, your body will lose slower on subsequent attempts. I'm wondering if it would be the same for JUDDD. I'm not *planning* on going off, but if I had a week where my DD's just weren't as down as they should be, how will that effect me in the long term?
|09-18-2011, 11:46 AM||#2|
Way too much time on my hands!
Join Date: Feb 2003
I think the entire *Golden Shot* concept is flawed. And I could certainly be wrong, but here is what I think is at least partly what happens...
I think the longer we are overweight, and the more overweight we are, the more our bodies are damaged by it. Specifically, the more our metabolisms are damaged by it.
We already know and understand that usually/normally our metabolisms will slow down as we age. Every year that passes will mean that a metabolism will be running at a bit slower pace. (All else being equal.) So if you go off plan, expect your body to be a bit more sluggish in releasing fat stores a couple of years from now than it is right now. It's usually easier to lose weight if you are younger, if you aren't close to menopause, or past that age and are now post menopausal. It doesn't have anything to do with a Golden Shot as much as the fact that usually your metabolism will be slower.
When you are younger, you are more apt to go out dancing at the clubs, as example. Not so much when you're several years older and just too tired to care all that much. LOL The truth of the matter is, as you age you often pursue fewer energetic activities and are happier on the sidelines or participating in quieter activities. Again, things that don't burn calories and fuel as readily.
So dieting for awhile might go well, and then if you stop and don't get back to the dieting for a couple of years, you may well not be in the same health/activity situation as you were earlier in your life.
Plus, there are so many other things than can affect your rate of weight loss that can have now taken hold in your body. Right off the top of my head is that women often have thyroid slow downs as they age. The incidence of this increases as we increase in age, so you run into the possibility/probability of sluggish thyroid interfering with weight loss if you put it off. You can medicate the sluggish thyroid, but that doesn't bring your ability to lose weight back up, sadly. If it were that easy, they could develop a pill to jolt the thyroid into upping the metabolism, and we'd all be able to take a pill and have the fat melt away.
So I don't truly believe in the Golden Shot concept. But I do believe that weight loss often gets increasingly difficult to achieve as the years go by, for many reasons, and one would be encouraged to get that weight loss taken care of... the sooner, the better! It's not going to get any easier!
And if one doesn't take care of it now, it's not only not going to get easier, it's probably going to just get worse, as we grow even larger than we are presently! Sad probable truth.
Best wishes, Pat
Last edited by SoHappy; 09-18-2011 at 11:48 AM..
|09-18-2011, 12:32 PM||#3|
Major LCF Poster!
Join Date: Apr 2002
WOE: Low Carb
Start Date: This time: 12/17/14
SoHappy, I think you are onto something there with your comments about thyroid. I think that is a much more pervasive problem than many people (including doctors) understand.
|09-18-2011, 01:29 PM||#5|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Stats: lost 130 lb so far, and miles to go before I sleep
WOE: low carb controlled calorie
Start Date: June, 2009
I agree that what people are interpreting as a "golden shot" is something different. As time goes on people metabolisms get worse for a variety of reasons. People who have stressed them by trying to lose weight and regaining over and over have the worst time of it. It's hardly surprising that people are more successful losing weight when they are younger, is it?
I saw recently that Gary Taubes refers to this as a "deranged metabolism." Great term, huh?
You are where you are, metabolism wise. If you diet and regain, it's going to get worse yet. Your only sensible choices are to either get a grip and get your eating controlled or make it a point to try to stay where you are, neither gaining nor losing, until you are ready to tackle it.
Often I don't come back to read threads where I've posted. If you want me to see something, please send me a private message. Thanks!
|09-19-2011, 07:09 AM||#6|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Stats: 204/124.6/110 49%/27.4%/20% 5'2"
WOE: Atkins/hHcg/Optimal whatever works
Start Date: restart March '10
I think the Golden Shot is probably true but not for JUDDD. It seems our bodies get used to a WOE and after losing about 25% of our total weight, lots of people's weight loss halts. I've had that happen both on WW and Atkins. People seem to get it moving again by switching WOEs and changing their macronutrient ratios and they seem to lose best their very first time on a WOE.
I think you'd be fine sticking some maintenance weeks into JUDDD. In fact I'm planning that myself for the Thanksgiving/Christmas season. I think maintaining my weight then will be a nice break and probably good for me. I'm sure the constant up/down on JUDDD keeps our metabolism perking along a lot better than plans which attempt constant downward motion!
2010 Atkins 204/191.6 HCG/hHCG 191.6/176/165.4/156.4/147.8 (4 rounds)
2011 hHCG 148.6/140.8/134.8/129.2 (3 rounds) JUDDD 125.6 (sept-dec)
2012 lowish Optimal calories, June25th 132.6/124.6/110