Week 64

Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my coming up with a goal - just took a
wild stab in the dark, based on where I started from and the ww charts. For my height ww suggested a
range of 124-155, my age added to the equation and that range lowered to 148-155. I set 150 as my
original goal, but as I approached the 150 mark I knew I wasn't going to be happy there, so made a
personal goal of 140. Then checked with my doctor also. I think you will know when you get
reasonably close to where you want to be. I could tell by how my clothes fit, how I looked and how I
felt. I also got into the cushion thinking (thanks Fred and Lesanne!) so have gone a bit lower than
the 140. I will tell you though, I honestly don't know if any of it is *easy* to keep off. It still
is a lot of work to keep the eating and munching under control, and I know I have to do that in
order to maintain.

Joyce

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a normal
weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an added allowance
for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I went
to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing another ten percent at WW so
I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion under the WW weight but am not
sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at goal would tell us the logic they used
for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots
<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI, but
the effort certainly paid off in a big way.

Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.

If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.

Prairie Roots

Miss Violette said:

I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing

it

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am

impressed

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I

am

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled

at

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee

How cool is that, we gave each other an NSV, I never thought I would be
discussing this either. One of the deciding factors for me will be what DH
thinks. As I have said before he has never said one word about my weight
but I think if I get too thin he would say something. He made the comment
that skinny women are for looking at but a woman with some meat on her bones
is for hugging. Anytime after I get to the WW goal and he thinks its enough
I think I will stop as he is a good judge of things. The only thing I have
actually figured out for sure is that I will do the maintenance part as WW
suggests and then worry about losing more after the six weeks are up. I
think I will need the support to help me determine and get through how many
points I need to eat to maintain. Beyond that I really have no other clues,
Lee
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Thanks for saying you don't know. I too am realizing that setting my goal weight might be trickier
than I originally anticipated. For my height, WW recommends a weight range between 116 and 145.
It's been at least 30 years since I last weighed in the 140s, so it hardly seemed possible last
February when I started that I could ever weigh that again. About 7 years ago, I got a doctor's
note setting my goal weight in the 170s. But I know that's not where I should be. Heck, I'm lower
than that now and don't feel ready to stop.

I've used the weight calculator at halls.mdbody.htmOpen ↗, which suggests 140
as my ideal weight. But other weight calculators I've used suggest 120, the weight my childhood
doctor said was my ideal weight.

In other words, I don't have any idea either how much more I have to go. Since I don't attend WW
meetings, I don't need the free meeting incentive for setting my goal at the high end. But without
anything else to go on, that's where I've set my goal weight, in which case, I've got "only" 22
lbs to goal. At the rate I'm losing, I've still got a few months to decide. Like you I'm trying
not to think to far ahead and instead, focus on my mini-goals.

Thanks again for sharing your thinking. I know we're not alone in wondering how to know when to
stop. I'm pinching myself that I'm even having this discussion!

Prairie Roots

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

been close to a normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I

will

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be 45 this year so there is an added allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least
32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I went

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing

another

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might

want

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a cushion under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if
some at goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking
you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.

Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.

If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.

Prairie Roots

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it

Quoted message said:

>on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am

impressed

Quoted message said:

>with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

am

Quoted message said:

>most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got

chilled

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at

Quoted message said:

>work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to

everyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>this week. Lee
>

I did wonder if setting the goal at the top would be too easy to settle for,
then I remembered as a female I am required to never be completely satisfied
so I think that part is not an issue for me. The part about how hard
staying at a goal is is interesting to me as perhaps one could trade a few
pounds for the ease of maintenance. I think there is no point to having a
perfect body if you have to be miserable to maintain it. So having a really
nice body that is less of a pain to keep seems a good compromise, thanks for
sharing, Lee
Fred <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

For you and Prairie: Clearly, going to meetings and wanting to not pay for a slight increase in
weight, there is the tendency to just pick an official goal at top of range. Then take it down
below that for one's clothing cushion (my terminology) or safety cushion or free-range so that a
slight gain will not put one too close to goal or rather going over goal.

As both of you mention, it seems so far away and unreachable for a while that it is hard to
decide. (I, too, had a doctor's note for
170) I know folks were urging me to stop about 20 pounds ago and that was OVER WW top. But in a
mirror I can see where even another ten pounds might create a more reasonable stomach/waist
profile but it also might be hard to hold onto - heck, holding onto this UNDER 160 is not
that easy. Now is that because it is just easier stopping now or getting the relief of being
THERE (that is at goal and safe) and why make oneself miserable or trying to push it even
lower. Did the artificial goal of 160 just kind of make me lose focus or interest or who the
hell knows what .....?

Muse on, you'll get there, too

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

been close to a normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I

will

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be 45 this year so there is an added allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least
32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I went

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing

another

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might

want

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a cushion under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if
some at goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking
you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.

Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.

If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.

Prairie Roots

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it

Quoted message said:

>on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am

impressed

Quoted message said:

>with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

am

Quoted message said:

>most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got

chilled

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at

Quoted message said:

>work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to

everyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>this week. Lee
>

Very interesting thoughts, which I've also been having. Hanging onto the 130-135 zone has not been
very difficult for me ... but sticking in the UNDER 130 has been very tough. Is it because of what I
am doing, or not doing ... or is it this damn female hormone thing ... or is it that it really
doesn't matter much to me? It is easier to stop now, don't push harder, don't have to think much
about what I am eating as much of it has become routine. I found I have survived very well with not
journaling for 3 weeks (although I did journal this week, trying to get back on track after the
holidays). If I REALLY want to stick in that UNDER 130 zone, then I have to put more work into it.
Maybe my head is telling me more than what I am hearing?

Joyce

Fred said:

For you and Prairie: Clearly, going to meetings and wanting to not pay for a slight increase in
weight, there is the tendency to just pick an official goal at top of range. Then take it down
below that for one's clothing cushion (my terminology) or safety cushion or free-range so that a
slight gain will not put one too close to goal or rather going over goal.

As both of you mention, it seems so far away and unreachable for a while that it is hard to decide.
(I, too, had a doctor's note for
170) I know folks were urging me to stop about 20 pounds ago and that was OVER WW top. But in a
mirror I can see where even another ten pounds might create a more reasonable stomach/waist
profile but it also might be hard to hold onto - heck, holding onto this UNDER 160 is not that
easy. Now is that because it is just easier stopping now or getting the relief of being THERE
(that is at goal and safe) and why make oneself miserable or trying to push it even lower. Did
the artificial goal of 160 just kind of make me lose focus or interest or who the hell knows
what .....?

Muse on, you'll get there, too

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a normal
weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an added
allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65
if I went to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing another ten
percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion under the WW
weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at goal would tell us
the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.

Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.

If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.

Prairie Roots

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing

it

Quoted message said:

>on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am

impressed

Quoted message said:

>with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I

am

Quoted message said:

>most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled

at

Quoted message said:

>work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee
>

thanks, it seems that it will always be a substantial amount of work to keep
those extra pounds away but I am hoping I don't have to fight just be
vigilant, Lee
Joyce <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my coming up

with a

Quoted message said:

goal - just took a wild stab in the dark, based on where I started from

and the ww

Quoted message said:

charts. For my height ww suggested a range of 124-155, my age added to

the

Quoted message said:

equation and that range lowered to 148-155. I set 150 as my original

goal, but as

Quoted message said:

I approached the 150 mark I knew I wasn't going to be happy there, so made

a

Quoted message said:

personal goal of 140. Then checked with my doctor also. I think you will

know

Quoted message said:

when you get reasonably close to where you want to be. I could tell by

how my

Quoted message said:

clothes fit, how I looked and how I felt. I also got into the cushion

thinking

Quoted message said:

(thanks Fred and Lesanne!) so have gone a bit lower than the 140. I will

tell you

Quoted message said:

though, I honestly don't know if any of it is *easy* to keep off. It

still is a

Quoted message said:

lot of work to keep the eating and munching under control, and I know I

have to do

Quoted message said:

that in order to maintain.

Joyce

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:11:03 -0600, "Miss Violette"

<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

been close to a normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I

will

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be 45 this year so there is an added allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least
32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I went

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing

another

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might

want

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a cushion under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if
some at goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking
you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.

Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.

If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.

Prairie Roots

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it

Quoted message said:

>on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am

impressed

Quoted message said:

>with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

am

Quoted message said:

>most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got

chilled

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at

Quoted message said:

>work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to

everyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>this week. Lee
>

Knowing my previous behavior post-weight loss, I will need to be as vigilant on maintenance as I am
now. Too many times I've had the "diet" mentality: once I've stopped dieting, I've returned to my
former food habits and regained all my weight plus more. My food problems stem from all the mindless
eating. Once I reach goal weight, it'll be all too tempting to stop journaling, and that's when I'll
be in real trouble. I tell myself that my goal weight is really secondary to developing an indelible
and irreversible habit of journaling my food. Awareness of what and how much I eat will be the
secret to making my weight loss permanent, regardless of my goal weight.

Prairie Roots

Joyce said:

Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my coming up with a goal - just took a
wild stab in the dark, based on where I started from and the ww charts. For my height ww suggested
a range of 124-155, my age added to the equation and that range lowered to 148-155. I set 150 as my
original goal, but as I approached the 150 mark I knew I wasn't going to be happy there, so made a
personal goal of 140. Then checked with my doctor also. I think you will know when you get
reasonably close to where you want to be. I could tell by how my clothes fit, how I looked and how
I felt. I also got into the cushion thinking (thanks Fred and Lesanne!) so have gone a bit lower
than the 140. I will tell you though, I honestly don't know if any of it is *easy* to keep off. It
still is a lot of work to keep the eating and munching under control, and I know I have to do that
in order to maintain.

Joyce

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a normal
weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an added
allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65
if I went to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing another ten
percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion under the WW
weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at goal would tell us
the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.

Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.

If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.

Prairie Roots

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing

it

Quoted message said:

>on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am

impressed

Quoted message said:

>with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I

am

Quoted message said:

>most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled

at

Quoted message said:

>work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee
>

My daughters keep their weight in the 125-130 range, and they're both slightly shorter than I am. So
I think 130 wouldn't be unreasonable for me. But I don't really know because I've never weighed 130
(except as I passed it on my way to my high school weight of 140). The idea of weighing less at 50
than I did in high school strikes me as absurd. Yet I'm feeling oddly challenged to try, and oddly
not panicked about the possibility. I think more is changing than my weight. My relationship with my
body is as well. Can't say what that's about. Maybe it's just that I'm finally getting old enough I
don't feel the need to throw my weight around, so to speak. I'll just be a cranky (and thin) old
woman. <G>

Prairie Roots

Fred said:

For you and Prairie: Clearly, going to meetings and wanting to not pay for a slight increase in
weight, there is the tendency to just pick an official goal at top of range. Then take it down
below that for one's clothing cushion (my terminology) or safety cushion or free-range so that a
slight gain will not put one too close to goal or rather going over goal.

As both of you mention, it seems so far away and unreachable for a while that it is hard to decide.
(I, too, had a doctor's note for
170) I know folks were urging me to stop about 20 pounds ago and that was OVER WW top. But in a
mirror I can see where even another ten pounds might create a more reasonable stomach/waist
profile but it also might be hard to hold onto - heck, holding onto this UNDER 160 is not that
easy. Now is that because it is just easier stopping now or getting the relief of being THERE
(that is at goal and safe) and why make oneself miserable or trying to push it even lower. Did
the artificial goal of 160 just kind of make me lose focus or interest or who the hell knows
what .....?

Muse on, you'll get there, too

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a normal
weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an added
allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65
if I went to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing another ten
percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion under the WW
weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at goal would tell us
the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.

Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.

If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.

Prairie Roots

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing

it

Quoted message said:

>on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am

impressed

Quoted message said:

>with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I

am

Quoted message said:

>most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled

at

Quoted message said:

>work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee
>

Glad you mentioned the AGE factor which WW permits or suggests. A friend asks why should "older"
people get off being less fit or fatter? If in fact, a higher weight means that when older? But it
is an interesting question and if we ever have a meeting again, I may try asking. Heck, I will
email my secretary right now.... (G) It would seem that a "sensible" weight would be sensible at
any age???

Joyce said:

Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my coming up with a goal - just took a
wild stab in the dark, based on where I started from and the ww charts. For my height ww suggested
a range of 124-155, my age added to the equation and that range lowered to 148-155. I set 150 as my
original goal, but as I approached the 150 mark I knew I wasn't going to be happy there, so made a
personal goal of 140. Then checked with my doctor also. I think you will know when you get
reasonably close to where you want to be. I could tell by how my clothes fit, how I looked and how
I felt. I also got into the cushion thinking (thanks Fred and Lesanne!) so have gone a bit lower
than the 140. I will tell you though, I honestly don't know if any of it is *easy* to keep off. It
still is a lot of work to keep the eating and munching under control, and I know I have to do that
in order to maintain.

Joyce

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a normal
weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an added
allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65
if I went to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing another ten
percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion under the WW
weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at goal would tell us
the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.

Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.

If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.

Prairie Roots

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing

it

Quoted message said:

>on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am

impressed

Quoted message said:

>with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I

am

Quoted message said:

>most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled

at

Quoted message said:

>work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee
>

You're right: having a serious discussion about determining goal weight--because it appears that we
will both face this dilemma--IS an NSV. I hadn't thought of it that way. COOL!

Prairie Roots

Miss Violette said:

How cool is that, we gave each other an NSV, I never thought I would be discussing this either. One
of the deciding factors for me will be what DH thinks. As I have said before he has never said one
word about my weight but I think if I get too thin he would say something. He made the comment that
skinny women are for looking at but a woman with some meat on her bones is for hugging. Anytime
after I get to the WW goal and he thinks its enough I think I will stop as he is a good judge of
things. The only thing I have actually figured out for sure is that I will do the maintenance part
as WW suggests and then worry about losing more after the six weeks are up. I think I will need the
support to help me determine and get through how many points I need to eat to maintain. Beyond that
I really have no other clues, Lee Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Thanks for saying you don't know. I too am realizing that setting my goal weight might be
trickier than I originally anticipated. For my height, WW recommends a weight range between 116
and 145. It's been at least 30 years since I last weighed in the 140s, so it hardly seemed
possible last February when I started that I could ever weigh that again. About 7 years ago, I
got a doctor's note setting my goal weight in the 170s. But I know that's not where I should be.
Heck, I'm lower than that now and don't feel ready to stop.

I've used the weight calculator at halls.mdbody.htmOpen ↗, which suggests 140
as my ideal weight. But other weight calculators I've used suggest 120, the weight my childhood
doctor said was my ideal weight.

In other words, I don't have any idea either how much more I have to go. Since I don't attend WW
meetings, I don't need the free meeting incentive for setting my goal at the high end. But
without anything else to go on, that's where I've set my goal weight, in which case, I've got
"only" 22 lbs to goal. At the rate I'm losing, I've still got a few months to decide. Like you
I'm trying not to think to far ahead and instead, focus on my mini-goals.

Thanks again for sharing your thinking. I know we're not alone in wondering how to know when to
stop. I'm pinching myself that I'm even having this discussion!

Prairie Roots

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

been close to a normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I

will

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be 45 this year so there is an added allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least
32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I went

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing

another

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might

want

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a cushion under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if
some at goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking
you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>
> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>
> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>
> Prairie Roots
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it
> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
impressed
> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

am
> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got

chilled

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at
> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to

everyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >this week. Lee
> >
>

That is another good summation. How much work, discipline or discomfort to hold a certain weight -
unrealistic? Possibly. Do I want to really give up some fun snacks to get to 150-155. Can I do a
better job of getting DAILY exercise as opposed to the weekend warrior stuff. Certainly, to stay at
155 means less points/calories which means giving up something or getting that more exercise. Is
that reasonable. You know - maybe it is NOT reasonable. 157-160 allows me snacking with what I will
call reasonable meals. Maybe I could cut down the portions at dinner and cut a bit at breakfast and
not notice those slight point subtractions to keep the snacks (this thought just occurred to me). I
think lunch is about as low as I care to push it. Carefully measuring cereal/milk might help and
shrinking to 3/4 cup or whatever could be possible. Similarly, only eating half a sweet potato or
1/2 or 3/4 cut kasha might also work and shrinking the fish a bit......

Of course, now that I think about it, WW does purposely provide a RANGE. In other words, certain
weights may not be reasonable for all body types. More muscle mass, larger bone size or density.....
So where I fall in that range might be just where I am "intended" to be??

I will think about the breakfast/dinner portions but I do know that right now, it is not impossible
just the way it is going. Hard somedays - snacks, darn them (g)

Fred

Joyce said:

Very interesting thoughts, which I've also been having. Hanging onto the 130-135 zone has not been
very difficult for me ... but sticking in the UNDER 130 has been very tough. Is it because of what
I am doing, or not doing ... or is it this damn female hormone thing ... or is it that it really
doesn't matter much to me? It is easier to stop now, don't push harder, don't have to think much
about what I am eating as much of it has become routine. I found I have survived very well with not
journaling for 3 weeks (although I did journal this week, trying to get back on track after the
holidays). If I REALLY want to stick in that UNDER 130 zone, then I have to put more work into it.
Maybe my head is telling me more than what I am hearing?

Joyce

Fred said:

For you and Prairie: Clearly, going to meetings and wanting to not pay for a slight increase in
weight, there is the tendency to just pick an official goal at top of range. Then take it down
below that for one's clothing cushion (my terminology) or safety cushion or free-range so that a
slight gain will not put one too close to goal or rather going over goal.

As both of you mention, it seems so far away and unreachable for a while that it is hard to
decide. (I, too, had a doctor's note for
170) I know folks were urging me to stop about 20 pounds ago and that was OVER WW top. But in a
mirror I can see where even another ten pounds might create a more reasonable stomach/waist
profile but it also might be hard to hold onto - heck, holding onto this UNDER 160 is not
that easy. Now is that because it is just easier stopping now or getting the relief of being
THERE (that is at goal and safe) and why make oneself miserable or trying to push it even
lower. Did the artificial goal of 160 just kind of make me lose focus or interest or who the
hell knows what .....?

Muse on, you'll get there, too

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a normal
weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an added
allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65
if I went to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing another ten
percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion under the WW
weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at goal would tell us
the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>
> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>
> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>
> Prairie Roots
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing
it
> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
impressed
> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I
am
> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled
at
> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee
> >
>

Oh, you'll make a dandy cranky THIN old woman! (G)

I did like the fact that you and Lee both realized even discussing goal and maintenance was a NSV.
Somewhere I discussed the age factor WW accommodates - why is it absurb? It might be but it it by
some definition?

Prairie Roots said:

My daughters keep their weight in the 125-130 range, and they're both slightly shorter than I am.
So I think 130 wouldn't be unreasonable for me. But I don't really know because I've never weighed
130 (except as I passed it on my way to my high school weight of 140). The idea of weighing less at
50 than I did in high school strikes me as absurd. Yet I'm feeling oddly challenged to try, and
oddly not panicked about the possibility. I think more is changing than my weight. My relationship
with my body is as well. Can't say what that's about. Maybe it's just that I'm finally getting old
enough I don't feel the need to throw my weight around, so to speak. I'll just be a cranky (and
thin) old woman. <G>

Prairie Roots

Fred said:

For you and Prairie: Clearly, going to meetings and wanting to not pay for a slight increase in
weight, there is the tendency to just pick an official goal at top of range. Then take it down
below that for one's clothing cushion (my terminology) or safety cushion or free-range so that a
slight gain will not put one too close to goal or rather going over goal.

As both of you mention, it seems so far away and unreachable for a while that it is hard to
decide. (I, too, had a doctor's note for
170) I know folks were urging me to stop about 20 pounds ago and that was OVER WW top. But in a
mirror I can see where even another ten pounds might create a more reasonable stomach/waist
profile but it also might be hard to hold onto - heck, holding onto this UNDER 160 is not
that easy. Now is that because it is just easier stopping now or getting the relief of being
THERE (that is at goal and safe) and why make oneself miserable or trying to push it even
lower. Did the artificial goal of 160 just kind of make me lose focus or interest or who the
hell knows what .....?

Muse on, you'll get there, too

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a normal
weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an added
allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65
if I went to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing another ten
percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion under the WW
weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at goal would tell us
the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>
> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>
> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>
> Prairie Roots
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing
it
> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
impressed
> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I
am
> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled
at
> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee
> >
>

Here's a link to an article I found on weight issues for middle age men.
lbl.govspare tire.htmlOpen ↗

For both men and women, as hormones change with age, metabolism slows. We should exercise MORE to
compensate for our slowing metabolism yet we typically become less active.

Fred said:

Glad you mentioned the AGE factor which WW permits or suggests. A friend asks why should "older"
people get off being less fit or fatter? If in fact, a higher weight means that when older? But it
is an interesting question and if we ever have a meeting again, I may try asking. Heck, I will
email my secretary right now.... (G) It would seem that a "sensible" weight would be sensible at
any age???

Joyce said:

Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my coming up with a goal - just took a
wild stab in the dark, based on where I started from and the ww charts. For my height ww
suggested a range of 124-155, my age added to the equation and that range lowered to 148-155. I
set 150 as my original goal, but as I approached the 150 mark I knew I wasn't going to be happy
there, so made a personal goal of 140. Then checked with my doctor also. I think you will know
when you get reasonably close to where you want to be. I could tell by how my clothes fit, how I
looked and how I felt. I also got into the cushion thinking (thanks Fred and Lesanne!) so have
gone a bit lower than the 140. I will tell you though, I honestly don't know if any of it is
*easy* to keep off. It still is a lot of work to keep the eating and munching under control, and
I know I have to do that in order to maintain.

Joyce

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a
normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an added
allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as
65 if I went to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing another ten
percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion under the WW
weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at goal would tell
us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>
> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>
> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>
> Prairie Roots
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing
it
> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
impressed
> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I
am
> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled
at
> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee
> >
>

the journalling seems to be the key for me. It has become readily apparent
to me that unless I am documenting it I am probably eating too much and too
wrong, Lee
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Knowing my previous behavior post-weight loss, I will need to be as vigilant on maintenance as I
am now. Too many times I've had the "diet" mentality: once I've stopped dieting, I've returned to
my former food habits and regained all my weight plus more. My food problems stem from all the
mindless eating. Once I reach goal weight, it'll be all too tempting to stop journaling, and
that's when I'll be in real trouble. I tell myself that my goal weight is really secondary to
developing an indelible and irreversible habit of journaling my food. Awareness of what and how
much I eat will be the secret to making my weight loss permanent, regardless of my goal weight.

Prairie Roots

Joyce said:

Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my coming up

with a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

goal - just took a wild stab in the dark, based on where I started from

and the ww

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

charts. For my height ww suggested a range of 124-155, my age added to

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

equation and that range lowered to 148-155. I set 150 as my original

goal, but as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I approached the 150 mark I knew I wasn't going to be happy there, so

made a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

personal goal of 140. Then checked with my doctor also. I think you

will know

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

when you get reasonably close to where you want to be. I could tell by

how my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

clothes fit, how I looked and how I felt. I also got into the cushion

thinking

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(thanks Fred and Lesanne!) so have gone a bit lower than the 140. I will

tell you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

though, I honestly don't know if any of it is *easy* to keep off. It

still is a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

lot of work to keep the eating and munching under control, and I know I

have to do

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that in order to maintain.

Joyce

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:11:03 -0600, "Miss Violette"

<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

been close to a normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I

will

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be 45 this year so there is an added allowance for that. From what I

can

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I went

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing

another

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might

want

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a cushion under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep

off.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It would be nice if some at goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off,
Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>
> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>
> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>
> Prairie Roots
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it
> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
impressed
> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the

one I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

am
> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got

chilled

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at
> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to

everyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >this week. Lee
> >
>

cranky is good , just ask ME, Lee
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My daughters keep their weight in the 125-130 range, and they're both slightly shorter than I am.
So I think 130 wouldn't be unreasonable for me. But I don't really know because I've never weighed
130 (except as I passed it on my way to my high school weight of 140). The idea of weighing less
at 50 than I did in high school strikes me as absurd. Yet I'm feeling oddly challenged to try, and
oddly not panicked about the possibility. I think more is changing than my weight. My relationship
with my body is as well. Can't say what that's about. Maybe it's just that I'm finally getting old
enough I don't feel the need to throw my weight around, so to speak. I'll just be a cranky (and
thin) old woman. <G>

Prairie Roots

Fred said:

For you and Prairie: Clearly, going to meetings and wanting to not pay for a slight increase in
weight, there is the tendency to just pick an official goal at top of range. Then take it down
below that for one's clothing cushion (my terminology) or safety cushion or free-range so that a
slight gain will not put one too close to goal or rather going over goal.

As both of you mention, it seems so far away and unreachable for a while that it is hard to
decide. (I, too, had a doctor's note for
170) I know folks were urging me to stop about 20 pounds ago and that was OVER WW top. But in a
mirror I can see where even another ten pounds might create a more reasonable stomach/waist
profile but it also might be hard to hold onto - heck, holding onto this UNDER 160 is not
that easy. Now is that because it is just easier stopping now or getting the relief of being
THERE (that is at goal and safe) and why make oneself miserable or trying to push it even
lower. Did the artificial goal of 160 just kind of make me lose focus or interest or who the
hell knows what .....?

Muse on, you'll get there, too

Miss Violette said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

been close to a normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I

will

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be 45 this year so there is an added allowance for that. From what I

can

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I went

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing

another

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might

want

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a cushion under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep

off.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It would be nice if some at goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off,
Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>
> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>
> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>
> Prairie Roots
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it
> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
impressed
> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the

one I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

am
> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got

chilled

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at
> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to

everyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >this week. Lee
> >
>

one explanation is that as we age we are more susceptible to serious illness
and they may have determined that a little more storage is needed to fight
those things, Lee just guessing
Fred <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Glad you mentioned the AGE factor which WW permits or suggests. A friend asks why should "older"
people get off being less fit or fatter? If in fact, a higher weight means that when older? But it
is an interesting question and if we ever have a meeting again, I may try asking. Heck, I will
email my secretary right now.... (G) It would seem that a "sensible" weight would be sensible at
any age???

Joyce said:

Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my coming up

with a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

goal - just took a wild stab in the dark, based on where I started from

and the ww

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

charts. For my height ww suggested a range of 124-155, my age added to

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

equation and that range lowered to 148-155. I set 150 as my original

goal, but as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I approached the 150 mark I knew I wasn't going to be happy there, so

made a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

personal goal of 140. Then checked with my doctor also. I think you

will know

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

when you get reasonably close to where you want to be. I could tell by

how my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

clothes fit, how I looked and how I felt. I also got into the cushion

thinking

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(thanks Fred and Lesanne!) so have gone a bit lower than the 140. I will

tell you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

though, I honestly don't know if any of it is *easy* to keep off. It

still is a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

lot of work to keep the eating and munching under control, and I know I

have to do

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that in order to maintain.

Joyce

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:11:03 -0600, "Miss Violette"

<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

been close to a normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I

will

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be 45 this year so there is an added allowance for that. From what I

can

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I went

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing

another

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might

want

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a cushion under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep

off.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It would be nice if some at goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off,
Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>
> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>
> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>
> Prairie Roots
>
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it
> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
impressed
> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the

one I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

am
> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got

chilled

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at
> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to

everyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >this week. Lee
> >
>

I like this definition of absurd: having no rational or orderly relationship to human life. My
weighing 130 has no rational relationship to human life. So says my monkey mind that still can't
believe I've come this far and doubts that any of my weight loss is real in the first place. The
same monkey mind that despairs that I've nothing to wear because all my fat clothes are stuffed in
bags and only my new size 10s are hanging in my closet. (Go ahead, say it. It's my monkey mind that
has no rational or orderly relationship to human life. <G>😉

In truth, my weighing 130 probably isn't absurd. However, since I don't need to decide today, I'll
continue to focus on getting to my next mini- goal: 165.

--
Prairie Roots

Fred said:

Oh, you'll make a dandy cranky THIN old woman! (G)

I did like the fact that you and Lee both realized even discussing goal and maintenance was a NSV.
Somewhere I discussed the age factor WW accommodates - why is it absurb? It might be but it it by
some definition?

Prairie Roots said:

My daughters keep their weight in the 125-130 range, and they're both slightly shorter than I am.
So I think 130 wouldn't be unreasonable for me. But I don't really know because I've never
weighed 130 (except as I passed it on my way to my high school weight of 140). The idea of
weighing less at 50 than I did in high school strikes me as absurd. Yet I'm feeling oddly
challenged to try, and oddly not panicked about the possibility. I think more is changing than my
weight. My relationship with my body is as well. Can't say what that's about. Maybe it's just
that I'm finally getting old enough I don't feel the need to throw my weight around, so to speak.
I'll just be a cranky (and thin) old woman. <G>

Prairie Roots

Fred said:

For you and Prairie: Clearly, going to meetings and wanting to not pay for a slight increase in
weight, there is the tendency to just pick an official goal at top of range. Then take it down
below that for one's clothing cushion (my terminology) or safety cushion or free-range so that a
slight gain will not put one too close to goal or rather going over goal.

As both of you mention, it seems so far away and unreachable for a while that it is hard to
decide. (I, too, had a doctor's note for
170) I know folks were urging me to stop about 20 pounds ago and that was OVER WW top. But in a
mirror I can see where even another ten pounds might create a more reasonable stomach/waist
profile but it also might be hard to hold onto - heck, holding onto this UNDER 160 is not
that easy. Now is that because it is just easier stopping now or getting the relief of
being THERE (that is at goal and safe) and why make oneself miserable or trying to push it
even lower. Did the artificial goal of 160 just kind of make me lose focus or interest or
who the hell knows what .....?

Muse on, you'll get there, too

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:11:03 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a
>normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an
>added allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as
>much as 65 if I went to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing
>another ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion
>under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at
>goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are
>not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>"]news:[email hidden]...
>> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
>> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>>
>> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>>
>> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
>> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>>
>> Prairie Roots
>>
>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing
>it
>> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
>impressed
>> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I
>am
>> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled
>at
>> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee
>> >
>>
>

Thanks but since I noticed it is almost 7 years old, where is the companion study that is mentioned
for women.

What is interesting is that I used to subscribe to Bicycling Magazine. In it, there would be the
occasional lament by the former youthful jocks who were its editors and regular contributors saying
that as much as they thought they were riding, they still did seem to be getting spare tires around
the middle.

I sent the article to the friend who was suspicious of the AGE factor. And SHE probably would want
to see the women's study (g)

Prairie Roots said:

Here's a link to an article I found on weight issues for middle age men. lbl.govspareOpen ↗
tire.html

For both men and women, as hormones change with age, metabolism slows. We should exercise MORE to
compensate for our slowing metabolism yet we typically become less active.

Fred said:

Glad you mentioned the AGE factor which WW permits or suggests. A friend asks why should "older"
people get off being less fit or fatter? If in fact, a higher weight means that when older? But
it is an interesting question and if we ever have a meeting again, I may try asking. Heck, I will
email my secretary right now.... (G) It would seem that a "sensible" weight would be sensible at
any age???

Joyce said:

Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my coming up with a goal - just took a
wild stab in the dark, based on where I started from and the ww charts. For my height ww
suggested a range of 124-155, my age added to the equation and that range lowered to 148-155. I
set 150 as my original goal, but as I approached the 150 mark I knew I wasn't going to be happy
there, so made a personal goal of 140. Then checked with my doctor also. I think you will know
when you get reasonably close to where you want to be. I could tell by how my clothes fit, how I
looked and how I felt. I also got into the cushion thinking (thanks Fred and Lesanne!) so have
gone a bit lower than the 140. I will tell you though, I honestly don't know if any of it is
*easy* to keep off. It still is a lot of work to keep the eating and munching under control, and
I know I have to do that in order to maintain.

Joyce

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:11:03 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I have been close to a
>normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I will be 45 this year so there is an
>added allowance for that. From what I can figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as
>much as 65 if I went to the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing
>another ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might want a cushion
>under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep off. It would be nice if some at
>goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are
>not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>"]news:[email hidden]...
>> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
>> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>>
>> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>>
>> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
>> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>>
>> Prairie Roots
>>
>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be doing
>it
>> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
>impressed
>> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the one I
>am
>> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got chilled
>at
>> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to everyone this week. Lee
>> >
>>
>

I thought about that - a bit more of the reserves to get folks through

Miss Violette said:

one explanation is that as we age we are more susceptible to serious illness and they may have
determined that a little more storage is needed to fight those things, Lee just guessing Fred
<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Glad you mentioned the AGE factor which WW permits or suggests. A friend asks why should "older"
people get off being less fit or fatter? If in fact, a higher weight means that when older? But
it is an interesting question and if we ever have a meeting again, I may try asking. Heck, I will
email my secretary right now.... (G) It would seem that a "sensible" weight would be sensible at
any age???

Joyce said:

Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my coming up

with a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

goal - just took a wild stab in the dark, based on where I started from

and the ww

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

charts. For my height ww suggested a range of 124-155, my age added to

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

equation and that range lowered to 148-155. I set 150 as my original

goal, but as

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I approached the 150 mark I knew I wasn't going to be happy there, so

made a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

personal goal of 140. Then checked with my doctor also. I think you

will know

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

when you get reasonably close to where you want to be. I could tell by

how my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

clothes fit, how I looked and how I felt. I also got into the cushion

thinking

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(thanks Fred and Lesanne!) so have gone a bit lower than the 140. I will

tell you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

though, I honestly don't know if any of it is *easy* to keep off. It

still is a

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

lot of work to keep the eating and munching under control, and I know I

have to do

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that in order to maintain.

Joyce

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:11:03 -0600, "Miss Violette"

<[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

wrote:

>I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since I

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>been close to a normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that I

will

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>be 45 this year so there is an added allowance for that. From what I

can

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I went

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing

another

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I might

want

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>a cushion under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep

off.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>It would be nice if some at goal would tell us the logic they used for arriving at "enough"
>off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>"]news:[email hidden]...
>> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had to work to get to your WI,
>> but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>>
>> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you just keep going and going.
>>
>> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
>> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just being nosy.
>>
>> Prairie Roots
>>
>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>it
>> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
>impressed
>> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the

one I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>am
>> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got

chilled

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>at
>> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to

everyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> >this week. Lee
>> >
>>
>

part of the reason, as I said in some other thread, that I started going
through closets was to find something, anything to wear. I found that yes,
I have purchased nice clothes in the past. that they were right where I
left them on the way up, and now a whole load of them are too big... When I
got down to just what fit and what was too small I found that I was much
more at ease about what was available to wear. it actually relieved the
stress. It also seems to have helped with the feeling of the clothes I am
wearing seeming too small when I hang them on a hanger. I think getting rid
of the larger ones disallowed me to keep associating my body with those
clothes. I guess that sounds weird but it is much easier now, Lee
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I like this definition of absurd: having no rational or orderly relationship to human life. My
weighing 130 has no rational relationship to human life. So says my monkey mind that still can't
believe I've come this far and doubts that any of my weight loss is real in the first place. The
same monkey mind that despairs that I've nothing to wear because all my fat clothes are stuffed in
bags and only my new size 10s are hanging in my closet. (Go ahead, say it. It's my monkey mind
that has no rational or orderly relationship to human life. <G>😉

In truth, my weighing 130 probably isn't absurd. However, since I don't need to decide today, I'll
continue to focus on getting to my next mini- goal: 165.

--
Prairie Roots

Fred said:

Oh, you'll make a dandy cranky THIN old woman! (G)

I did like the fact that you and Lee both realized even discussing goal and maintenance was a
NSV. Somewhere I discussed the age factor WW accommodates - why is it absurb? It might be but it
it by some definition?

Prairie Roots said:

My daughters keep their weight in the 125-130 range, and they're both slightly shorter than I
am. So I think 130 wouldn't be unreasonable for me. But I don't really know because I've never
weighed 130 (except as I passed it on my way to my high school weight of 140). The idea of
weighing less at 50 than I did in high school strikes me as absurd. Yet I'm feeling oddly
challenged to try, and oddly not panicked about the possibility. I think more is changing than
my weight. My relationship with my body is as well. Can't say what that's about. Maybe it's
just that I'm finally getting old enough I don't feel the need to throw my weight around, so to
speak. I'll just be a cranky (and thin) old woman. <G>

Prairie Roots

On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 22:10:50 -0800, Fred <[email hidden]> wrote:

>For you and Prairie: Clearly, going to meetings and wanting to not pay for a slight increase
>in weight, there is the tendency to just pick an official goal at top of range. Then take it
>down below that for one's clothing cushion (my terminology) or safety cushion or free-range so
>that a slight gain will not put one too close to goal or rather going over goal.
>
>As both of you mention, it seems so far away and unreachable for a while that it is hard to
>decide. (I, too, had a doctor's note for
>170) I know folks were urging me to stop about 20 pounds ago and that was OVER WW top. But in
> a mirror I can see where even another ten pounds might create a more reasonable
> stomach/waist profile but it also might be hard to hold onto - heck, holding onto this
> UNDER 160 is not that easy. Now is that because it is just easier stopping now or getting
> the relief of being THERE (that is at goal and safe) and why make oneself miserable or
> trying to push it even lower. Did the artificial goal of 160 just kind of make me lose
> focus or interest or who the hell knows what .....?
>
>Muse on, you'll get there, too
>
>On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 21:11:03 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>I am honestly not sure what I have to go. It has been so long since

I have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>been close to a normal weight that I just don't know. To add to that

I will

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>be 45 this year so there is an added allowance for that. From what I

can

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>figure I have at least 32 more pounds to go and as much as 65 if I

went to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>the five pounds below my minimum on the WW scale. I just keep doing

another

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>ten percent at WW so I don't get overwhelmed. I also know that I

might want

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>a cushion under the WW weight but am not sure what I can easily keep

off.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>It would be nice if some at goal would tell us the logic they used

for

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at all Prairie Roots
>><[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
>>> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you had

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> work to get to your WI, but the effort certainly paid off in a big way.
>>>
>>> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you

just

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> keep going and going.
>>>
>>> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know you've been thinking ahead and
>>> beginning to plan for maintenance. Just

being

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> nosy.
>>>
>>> Prairie Roots
>>>
>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:26:26 -0600, "Miss Violette" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I weighed today still early but until everything settled I will be

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>it
>>> >on Tuesday. I lost 2.8!!!! This makes a total of 83.7 and I am
>>impressed
>>> >with myself. I have lost more but for some reason this one is the

one I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>am
>>> >most pleased with. It was so cold and I was sick because I got

chilled

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>at
>>> >work so I guess losing made it really worth going. Good luck to

everyone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> >this week. Lee
>>> >
>>>
>>

Well, the weight gain was probably irrational or absurd (altho, adsurb might do (G)) and so I would
not worry about what the next value judgment will be at this point.

Just get to the next minigoal

Prairie Roots said:

I like this definition of absurd: having no rational or orderly relationship to human life. My
weighing 130 has no rational relationship to human life. So says my monkey mind that still can't
believe I've come this far and doubts that any of my weight loss is real in the first place. The
same monkey mind that despairs that I've nothing to wear because all my fat clothes are stuffed in
bags and only my new size 10s are hanging in my closet. (Go ahead, say it. It's my monkey mind that
has no rational or orderly relationship to human life. <G>😉

In truth, my weighing 130 probably isn't absurd. However, since I don't need to decide today, I'll
continue to focus on getting to my next mini- goal: 165.