Low Carb Friends  
Netrition.com - Tools - Reviews - Faces - Recipes - Home


Go Back   Low Carb Friends > Eating and Exercise Plans > Weight Loss Plans > JUDDD
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-17-2011, 09:18 AM   #31
Why wait, just do it NOW!
 
Beeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: A REAL Jersey Girl!!
Posts: 12,062
Gallery: Beeb
Stats: Then: 162.4 Now: 158 :( Darn Holidays!!
WOE: No Diet = No Stress! Just eating healthy!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kissa View Post
And even more so at 64!
And if I can look like you, Pat or Sassie when I get to be in my 60s I will be in heaven!!
Beeb is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old 11-17-2011, 09:54 AM   #32
Way too much time on my hands!
 
Kissa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London UK
Posts: 18,932
Gallery: Kissa
Stats: 184/137/126 5'3" Age 67
WOE: JUDDD restart 8/25/2014
Start Date: 2001 Atkins -50 2011 JUDDD - 10
Well, how kind! Thank you.
Kissa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 10:03 AM   #33
Senior LCF Member
 
pjsam1156's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 497
Gallery: pjsam1156
WOE: JUDDD for life, baby!!
Start Date: Feb 2009; RESTART: Nov. 2011 as EX-LCer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandelio View Post
That all makes perfect sense Sophie!

I'm just still curious if there wouldn't be a point where the numbers you used for "weight loss" wouldn't end up your "maintenance numbers" at a given body weight.

Wait - where's the guy with all the charts -
Me too, Sandelio--I'm only 5'3" and 55 yrs. old. My numbers are 500/1700, so with them getting less and less as I get closer to goal, I figure when I get to maintenance, I won't be able to eat anything!!
pjsam1156 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 10:47 AM   #34
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
sazzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,291
Gallery: sazzie
Stats: Maintaining ±4 lbs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophiethecat View Post
Hi Sandello, no problem with any questions

For me, there is such a thing as too skinny. When I first started Metformin years ago, it messed with my appetite so much I almost didn't eat. I would take a few bites of something and feel stuffed, and I wasn't eating the most nutritious foods either. Had bathroom issues too.

During that time, I lost too much weight. I went from my normal range in the 140s down to below 125 before I went to the doctor and got my meds adjusted. On my adult frame, 125 is almost skeletal. That's what I weighed in junior high. I never wanna see that low of a weight again, lol. My doctor was alarmed at the weight loss and that my periods had stopped.

I might have still been losing fat during that time, but I think we NEED *some* fat on us and in us for a bit of padding and to look our best, as well as cushioning our insides. I don't know, but my body might have been cannibalizing my muscles at that point.

Another thing about losing too much (even 10# less than I am right now) is that it stops looking good on my body type/frame. My body seems to have a set-point for my adult self of in the 140s, and I think I look good here.

I CAN go down in the 130s and have done that a number of times in my adult life (nothing to do with the Rx), maybe to 135# and still looked and felt good. But it feels like that would be a little too thin to me now and now that I'm looking at 40, I'm not sure it would look good on my face. Plus I don't wanna have a too-big-looking head on a scrawny body!

However, I may reconsider how much to lose - I'm funny like that
^^^^^Wonderful and concise explanation!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kissa View Post

I so agree with this, I am much older than you and so have to watch the low weight even more carefully.
And I, even more than you!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeb View Post
Well, for me being any thinner then the 135 I am right now I start to look "old" and sickly (53 and skinny will do that). I have gotten down to 128 in the past, about 14 years ago, age 39 and even then people were asking me if I was sick. And I also know I can continue to lose, and at some point it will not be fat, but muscle. Fat loss stops somewhere, but it's doesn't mean we don't stop losing. Just look at anyone who has an extreme ED. They will be down to skin and bones and still lose weight, but it's not weight, it's their own body eating away at anything it can get it's hands on; muscle, organs, etc. We need calorie energy to survive and that has to come from some where. If we aren't eating up to the calories we need, I believe, and there is no more fat to fuel those needed calories, our bodies, again, finds the calorie energy from other parts of our bodies.

I tweak to stay where I am. I don't want to lose anymore weight. I am happy and healthy, feeling wonderful and looking the best I have in years at this 135 weight. In order to do this, I need to tweak, up or down, those calories I eat everyday now. And you can put on weight eating this way, if your calories are not set at a good gap, I feel, or lose too much eating this way because, as in my case, my metabolism is running as it did when I was in my early teens/20s so I need to watch that I'm eating enough now. I can feel it, and I see how it working because when I eat now, at the right JUDDD calories for maintenance I stay the weight I like. When I lower them a bit I start to lose again, very quickly. My metabolism is just and I need to keep it that way, but not let it make me a "skinny old looking lady" which will happen by just eating the calories I did to lose. I will continue to lose, I've proven it already.

Thus I tweak and adjust.
You've got your head on straight with a lot of common sense......you know what is best for overall good health, and you're right on track.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kissa View Post
And even more so at 64!
OK......Kissa, how much more for 71!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeb View Post
And if I can look like you, Pat or Sassie when I get to be in my 60s I will be in heaven!!
You have a very generous spirit. Thank you!!
************************************************** ********

In recent months I weighed 128 and although I loved looking at that number on the scale, I came to terms with the reality of it, and decided that a higher range would be best for me. I had a sentimental reason for choosing 128 as that was the weight I carried when I married my dh 44 years ago.
During that time, I gained, lost and gained again after the births of each of my 4 children. But it is 'now' that counts, not the memory of once was.

Anyway, I do agree wholeheartedly that a sensible weight would be one that encompasses a healthy body, a glowing face and good muscle tone!
We each have to determine what that number is!
__________________
Gracie




Gracie's Journal

Last edited by sazzie; 11-17-2011 at 10:54 AM..
sazzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 11:42 AM   #35
Senior LCF Member
 
melissaconatser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: KY
Posts: 121
Gallery: melissaconatser
WOE: Giving JUDDD a try!
I have a friend who lost weight, not with JUDDD, but with restricting her calories, food choices and no food after 5. About 3 years ago, she was nearly 300 pounds. She has been down around 140-150 for over a year now. She has actually said that it is more of a struggle for her to maintain and not go lower, than it was to lose all the weight.
melissaconatser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 11:52 AM   #36
Senior LCF Member
 
2muchme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: southwestern pa
Posts: 256
Gallery: 2muchme
WOE: HCG, then atkins, now JUDDD, then JUDDD again
Start Date: Atkins, summer 2011: JUDDD, 10/24/2011
Sophie, you're perfect just the way you are!!
2muchme is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 12:07 PM   #37
Senior LCF Member
 
Sandelio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 573
Gallery: Sandelio
Stats: 199/184/160
WOE: JUDDD
Buuuuuuuuut - you're all missing my original point/question.

I'm not talking about how skinny is too skinny.

Let me try again:

Using someone's example of 500 DD/1700 UD, wouldn't there be a point in their weight loss where THAT is their body's natural maintenance numbers?

Even if they CHOSE to change it because the want to stay "up" a few pounds, it would only go SO far down if they didn't tweak, right?

Sandelio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 12:15 PM   #38
Senior LCF Member
 
2muchme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: southwestern pa
Posts: 256
Gallery: 2muchme
WOE: HCG, then atkins, now JUDDD, then JUDDD again
Start Date: Atkins, summer 2011: JUDDD, 10/24/2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandelio View Post
Buuuuuuuuut - you're all missing my original point/question.

I'm not talking about how skinny is too skinny.

Let me try again:

Using someone's example of 500 DD/1700 UD, wouldn't there be a point in their weight loss where THAT is their body's natural maintenance numbers?

Even if they CHOSE to change it because the want to stay "up" a few pounds, it would only go SO far down if they didn't tweak, right?

So, where's the balance? I see! I don't know the answer but I now understand the question.
2muchme is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 12:27 PM   #39
Blabbermouth!!!
 
paulabob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,544
Gallery: paulabob
Stats: 204/124.6/110 49%/27.4%/20% 5'2"
WOE: Atkins/hHcg/Optimal whatever works
Start Date: restart March '10
You won't stabilize unless you never change your down day numbers or your metabolism reduces by 25%.

For example my ratio is 600/1600 (that's 37.5% reduction every other day or an average 30% off my total each day). Now, I would currently be stable at eating 1600 everyday. Indeed before beginning JUDD, the last month of stabilization of my hcg round I averaged 1695 calories per day and maintained my weight.

Now say when I reach goal I will be stable at 1500. So I would need to maybe go 1000/2000 or something or I would continue to lose weight.

If I stayed at 600/1600, I would continue to lose until my metabolic needs were 25% or so less than when I started.

Now that might work if you are starting from 25% above your goal weight (and assuming metabolic needs reduce that fast, but I don't think they do because of lean body mass).

You could be completely correct depending on a) how far above goal weight you start and b) will you keep your numbers the same and begin to lose extremely slowly until you plateau? I think most folks will change their numbers.

I know the first round of hcg I did 18 months ago my daily maintenance number was much higher - 2000 calories back when I had first lost to 176 pounds. I am 50 pounds lighter now (or 28% weight loss) and use about 20% less food.

Since this is one of the few weight loss methods that doesn't seem to occur a metabolic penalty where your metabolism crashes and you stop losing weight, it's probably a good idea to begin adding in calories back in at some point - whatever point you choose.
__________________
Paula
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

Last edited by paulabob; 11-17-2011 at 12:30 PM..
paulabob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 12:35 PM   #40
Senior LCF Member
 
Sandelio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chicago Suburbs
Posts: 573
Gallery: Sandelio
Stats: 199/184/160
WOE: JUDDD
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulabob View Post
Now say when I reach goal I will be stable at 1500. So I would need to maybe go 1000/2000 or something or I would continue to lose weight.

If I stayed at 600/1600, I would continue to lose until my metabolic needs were 25% or so less than when I started.

DING-DING-DING-DING!!!

THERE'S the logic my brain was seeking! Thanks Paula!

And it wasn't about "what I'm going to do" - it was just kinda of a brain teaser for me - and couldn't figure it out!

Sandelio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 01:18 PM   #41
Why wait, just do it NOW!
 
Beeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: A REAL Jersey Girl!!
Posts: 12,062
Gallery: Beeb
Stats: Then: 162.4 Now: 158 :( Darn Holidays!!
WOE: No Diet = No Stress! Just eating healthy!
Now I get the question and understand better by Paula's explanation. It was what I was trying to say, but just don't have the "scientific" mind to put it into words.

Thanks Paula and good "food for thought" subject, Sandy!!
Beeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 01:20 PM   #42
Very Gabby LCF Member!!!
 
sazzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,291
Gallery: sazzie
Stats: Maintaining ±4 lbs.
Aah, OK...........I understand the question now, and thank you Paula for your clear explanation!!!
sazzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2011, 01:39 PM   #43
Way too much time on my hands!
 
Kissa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London UK
Posts: 18,932
Gallery: Kissa
Stats: 184/137/126 5'3" Age 67
WOE: JUDDD restart 8/25/2014
Start Date: 2001 Atkins -50 2011 JUDDD - 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulabob View Post
You won't stabilize unless you never change your down day numbers or your metabolism reduces by 25%.

For example my ratio is 600/1600 (that's 37.5% reduction every other day or an average 30% off my total each day). Now, I would currently be stable at eating 1600 everyday. Indeed before beginning JUDD, the last month of stabilization of my hcg round I averaged 1695 calories per day and maintained my weight.

Now say when I reach goal I will be stable at 1500. So I would need to maybe go 1000/2000 or something or I would continue to lose weight.

If I stayed at 600/1600, I would continue to lose until my metabolic needs were 25% or so less than when I started.

Now that might work if you are starting from 25% above your goal weight (and assuming metabolic needs reduce that fast, but I don't think they do because of lean body mass).

You could be completely correct depending on a) how far above goal weight you start and b) will you keep your numbers the same and begin to lose extremely slowly until you plateau? I think most folks will change their numbers.

I know the first round of hcg I did 18 months ago my daily maintenance number was much higher - 2000 calories back when I had first lost to 176 pounds. I am 50 pounds lighter now (or 28% weight loss) and use about 20% less food.

Since this is one of the few weight loss methods that doesn't seem to occur a metabolic penalty where your metabolism crashes and you stop losing weight, it's probably a good idea to begin adding in calories back in at some point - whatever point you choose.
Glad you wrote that! I get it but could never have said it1 Thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeb View Post
Now I get the question and understand better by Paula's explanation. It was what I was trying to say, but just don't have the "scientific" mind to put it into words.

Thanks Paula and good "food for thought" subject, Sandy!!
Precisely!

Quote:
Originally Posted by sazzie View Post
Aah, OK...........I understand the question now, and thank you Paula for your clear explanation!!!
Whew! Yes.
Kissa is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:17 PM.


Copyright ©1999-2014 Friends Forums LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
LowCarbFriends® is a registered mark of Friends Forums, LLC.