Week 64

I do seem to have a better grasp of healthy these days, but putting it into practice (lately) has
been more of an issue. Meals I do fine with, but those dang snacks. These phases do seem to be
hitting me a bit more often lately, guess just one more thing I need to do some soul-searching on.
But that comfort food thing is very hard to change, at least it has been for me. Somehow, apples and
veggies just aren't hitting me as comfort food - even after all this time. <G>

I also do believe in the *this too shall pass* phrase, it always does hold true and doesn't take
very long for things to look brighter. I think winter is just now starting to hit me (if that makes
sense). There was the push with the holidays, kept me busy ... January comes along, makes me think
spring isn't too far in the future - yet the days are gray and cold. Somehow, I need to push myself
past this stuff - I know I feel better when I do. I did notice though, you are 100% correct! Our
days are getting a bit longer, another positive. It was so nice to sit down to dinner the other day
and it was still reasonably light out.

Joyce

Prairie Roots said:

You've hit on a few issues for which there aren't easy or obvious answers. To the quandary of
knowing or accepting what's realistic v. plain and simple comfort, I'd also add knowing or
accepting what's healthy. As someone who doesn't have a personal sense of what's realistic OR
healthy, I've always opted for plain and simple comfort. Part of the journey for me is putting
realistic and healthy ahead of the comfort factor. Or searching for a new definition of comfort.

I'm sure our stories are different, but I do understand what you're saying about self-acceptance.
As you say, some days are worse than others. When I'm having a particularly bad day, I try to
remember one of my mother's stand bys: This, too, shall pass. I hope tomorrow is better than today.

Prairie Roots

Joyce said:

And that is the tough one, how do we know or accept what is realistic for us vs. plain and simple
comfort. I do like my snacks, and right now am able to fit them in very nicely. Yes, I could
probably drop that next 5 pounds (to hit 125) if I cut my dinner portions, cut out lunches out
with mom, some special treats that don't happen really very often .. as well as stepped up the
exercise regimen. But do I want to, or do I really need to? I am controlling things pretty dang
well where I am, up a few pounds, down a few pounds, always within the same 2-4 pound range. Then
again, at what point do we reach if increasing the exercise, that the number on the scale is
still going to stay the same due to muscle increase. So maybe I have to stop focusing on that
danged number and accept the fact that 130 isn't too damn bad for a 46 year old woman who weighed
228 pounds two years ago.

Acceptance is hard though, probably something else that I never have addressed well (with
myself). I don't think I have ever accepted myself as a worthwhile being. I always expect too
much of myself, never quite felt I fit into the mold that I cast. It's that danged self-
confidence (or lack of) thing. Today is not one of my best days. 🙁

Joyce

Fred said:

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

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 03:00:49 -0600, Joyce <[email hidden]> wrote:

>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
>
>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 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

It took a bit but as I do the laundry it seems to get easier. I think this
perception of the clothes being too small is part of the mindset that allows
us to get too large and deny it by avoiding mirrors and scales as we are on
the way up. We do have to realize and accept that we are too
large/unhealthy/unattractive at the big weight in order to lose. Now I
think the brain says, Hey wait I just got it that I am fat and now you want
me to change again. Lee
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I've finally cleaned out all my closets of ill-fitting clothes. That was what prompted my shopping
spree a couple of weeks ago. Literally, I had 2 pairs of pants left that weren't falling off of
me. I was kind of sad to let some of the large things go because I too purchased nice clothes in
the past, and I still liked them. But it's much easier now to go into my closet knowing that
everything in there fits me, and I don't have to guess whether I'm grabbing something that fits.
The funny thing though is that I'm still surprised that all the new smaller sizes still fit me.
Some part of my brain is having a tough time accepting that my weight loss isn't a Freaky Friday
kind of thing. I'm just waiting to fall on my head and I'll be returned to my "normal" body.
--
Prairie Roots

Miss Violette said:

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,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

wearing seeming too small when I hang them on a hanger. I think getting

rid

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to human life. So says my monkey mind that still can't believe I've

come

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

need to decide today, I'll continue to focus on getting to my next

mini-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

goal: 165.

--
Prairie Roots

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 19:02:33 -0800, Fred wrote:
> 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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> WW accommodates - why is it absurb? It might be but it it by some definition?
>
> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 18:57:10 -0600, Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
> >My daughters keep their weight in the 125-130 range, and they're

both

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >as I passed it on my way to my high school weight of 140). The idea

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >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]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >wrote:
> >
> >>For you and Prairie: Clearly, going to meetings and wanting to

not

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>not that easy. Now is that because it is just easier stopping now

or

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>getting the relief of being THERE (that is at goal and safe) and

why

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have

Quoted message said:

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

that

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I will

Quoted message said:

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

what I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

can

Quoted message said:

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

I

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

went to

Quoted message said:

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

doing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

another

Quoted message said:

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

might want

Quoted message said:

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

keep

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

off.

Quoted message said:

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

used

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

for

Quoted message said:

> >>>arriving at "enough" off, Lee, and thinking you are not nosy at

all

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>>Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> >>>"]news:[email hidden]...
> >>>> What a fabulous way to start off the new year. Sounds like you

had

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to

Quoted message said:

> >>>> work to get to your WI, but the effort certainly paid off in a

big

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>>> way.
> >>>>
> >>>> Fabulous progress to date. You're like the Energizer bunny; you

just

Quoted message said:

> >>>> keep going and going.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you're willing to say, how close are you to goal? I know

you've

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> >>>> been thinking ahead and beginning to plan for maintenance. Just

being

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

doing

Quoted message said:

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

am

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

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

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

one I

Quoted message said:

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

got

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

chilled

Quoted message said:

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

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

everyone

Quoted message said:

> >>>> >this week. Lee

I grew up hearing that I should learn to control my weight while I was young, because it would be
that much harder when I got older. I'm not necessarily finding that to be the case, but that could
be because my psychology has been a greater enemy than my physiology.

Whether I'll reach 130 is not the driving force in my weight loss. I'm thrilled to be in the 160s
for the first time in 20-plus years with no desire to stop here. The high end of WW weight range
seems reachable, and I'm going to try to get there. Just a few months ago when I started, I thought
157 seemed impossible. So I've made significant progress in my thinking. For me breakthrough is as
monumental as the actual weight loss.

165, here I come. (Though probably not at tomorrow's WI.) Prairie Roots

Fred said:

Thanks for the leg, well, finger work. I guess so - that weight gain at both ends of life is
intended to provide additional survival stores.

I guess one aspect of the info - upping running distance from 10 miles per week to 24, if I
recall, really is telling on how much affect aging appears to have. And at 50+ it would have been
even more - yikes!

So once again, are we fighting some innate and very hard to reverse trend/genetics/age-factor????
No, I'm not yet going to throw in the towel (or more food) due to this info. It is possible to
control it but it does take work

Again, thanks.

Fred

Prairie Roots said:

When I did my Google search on weight and age, more results came up for women than for men. The
whole menopause thing, don't you know. I kept digging until I found something that discussed
weight gain in men, since you were the one asking. The most common search result related to
weight gain in babies and young children. So it would seem that at both ends of life weight gain
is associated with survival/longevity.

Prairie Roots

Fred said:

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)

On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 22:30:22 -0600, Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote:

>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.
>
>On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:55:24 -0800, Fred wrote:
>> 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???
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 02:51:15 -0600, Joyce <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>> >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 am realizing that more of my issues are head issues rather than physiology
issues, even though the second caused some of the first, Lee
Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I grew up hearing that I should learn to control my weight while I was young, because it would be
that much harder when I got older. I'm not necessarily finding that to be the case, but that could
be because my psychology has been a greater enemy than my physiology.

Whether I'll reach 130 is not the driving force in my weight loss. I'm thrilled to be in the 160s
for the first time in 20-plus years with no desire to stop here. The high end of WW weight range
seems reachable, and I'm going to try to get there. Just a few months ago when I started, I
thought 157 seemed impossible. So I've made significant progress in my thinking. For me
breakthrough is as monumental as the actual weight loss.

165, here I come. (Though probably not at tomorrow's WI.) Prairie Roots

Fred said:

Thanks for the leg, well, finger work. I guess so - that weight gain at both ends of life is
intended to provide additional survival stores.

I guess one aspect of the info - upping running distance from 10 miles per week to 24, if I
recall, really is telling on how much affect aging appears to have. And at 50+ it would have
been even more - yikes!

So once again, are we fighting some innate and very hard to reverse trend/genetics/age-
factor???? No, I'm not yet going to throw in the towel (or more food) due to this info. It is
possible to control it but it does take work

Again, thanks.

Fred

Prairie Roots said:

When I did my Google search on weight and age, more results came up for women than for men. The
whole menopause thing, don't you know. I kept digging until I found something that discussed
weight gain in men, since you were the one asking. The most common search result related to
weight gain in babies and young children. So it would seem that at both ends of life weight
gain is associated with survival/longevity.

Prairie Roots

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 22:25:00 -0800, Fred <[email hidden]> wrote:

>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)
>
>On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 22:30:22 -0600, Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>Here's a link to an article I found on weight issues for middle age

men.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>lbl.govspare tire.htmlOpen ↗
>>
>>For both men and women, as hormones change with age, metabolism

slows.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>We should exercise MORE to compensate for our slowing metabolism yet

we

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>typically become less active.
>>
>>On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:55:24 -0800, Fred wrote:
>>> 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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> an interesting question and if we ever have a meeting again, I may

try

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> asking. Heck, I will email my secretary right now.... (G) It

would

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> seem that a "sensible" weight would be sensible at any age???
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 02:51:15 -0600, Joyce <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my

coming up with a

Quoted message said:

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:

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:

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:

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:

Quoted message said:

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

you will know

Quoted message said:

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:

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:

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:

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:

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:

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:

>>> >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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> >>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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> >>> 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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> >>> 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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> >>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 was sure that I was predisposed to heavy and that I was fighting some genetics. While that
may be the case, I was able to exercise more willpower than I imagined to gain control this
time and so far.

I cannot predict the future but hope that I can control it

Prairie Roots said:

I grew up hearing that I should learn to control my weight while I was young, because it would be
that much harder when I got older. I'm not necessarily finding that to be the case, but that could
be because my psychology has been a greater enemy than my physiology.

Whether I'll reach 130 is not the driving force in my weight loss. I'm thrilled to be in the 160s
for the first time in 20-plus years with no desire to stop here. The high end of WW weight range
seems reachable, and I'm going to try to get there. Just a few months ago when I started, I thought
157 seemed impossible. So I've made significant progress in my thinking. For me breakthrough is as
monumental as the actual weight loss.

165, here I come. (Though probably not at tomorrow's WI.) Prairie Roots

Fred said:

Thanks for the leg, well, finger work. I guess so - that weight gain at both ends of life is
intended to provide additional survival stores.

I guess one aspect of the info - upping running distance from 10 miles per week to 24, if I
recall, really is telling on how much affect aging appears to have. And at 50+ it would have been
even more - yikes!

So once again, are we fighting some innate and very hard to reverse trend/genetics/age-factor????
No, I'm not yet going to throw in the towel (or more food) due to this info. It is possible to
control it but it does take work

Again, thanks.

Fred

Prairie Roots said:

When I did my Google search on weight and age, more results came up for women than for men. The
whole menopause thing, don't you know. I kept digging until I found something that discussed
weight gain in men, since you were the one asking. The most common search result related to
weight gain in babies and young children. So it would seem that at both ends of life weight gain
is associated with survival/longevity.

Prairie Roots

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 22:25:00 -0800, Fred <[email hidden]> wrote:

>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)
>
>On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 22:30:22 -0600, Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>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.
>>
>>On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:55:24 -0800, Fred wrote:
>>> 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???
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 02:51:15 -0600, Joyce <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>> >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 hope you are right.

Yesterday, as I was tracking along on a flat and rolling and uphill ski trip and feeling strong I
did think about it long and hard. It felt so good to be moving steadily and not huffing and puffing
that I wondered how I allowed myself to gain and hold that weight. I was trying to hold onto that
feeling and try remembering it when food seems to be singing a different song!!!

Brenda Hammond said:

I think that predisposition to being heavy is something that many of us overweight people think we
are. I have in the past, don't so much now, because I've lost weight and know I can lose more, it's
just a matter of having the willpower and wanting it bad enough to stay OP.

The control to stay where you are is a biggie and I'm sure that you have the necessary tools to do
that Fred. I don't think being FAT again is in your future!

It is not exactly easy, at least, for me. Maybe some people do find it easy. I really like the way I
feel and the way hiking, skiing and biking are going but you know I really do think the SCALE
dropping was a more tangible reward then "just" feeling great - sad but true.

Brenda Hammond said:

I know what you mean. I keep trying to think that being thin would feel better than food tastes,
but many times the food wins....<G> I've had trouble getting into the right mindset to eat totally
OP. I'm trying to figure out how to stay there once I'm there.

"Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I hope you are right.

Yesterday, as I was tracking along on a flat and rolling and uphill ski trip and feeling strong I
did think about it long and hard. It felt so good to be moving steadily and not huffing and
puffing that I wondered how I allowed myself to gain and hold that weight. I was trying to hold
onto that feeling and try remembering it when food seems to be singing a different song!!!

Brenda Hammond said:

I think that predisposition to being heavy is something that many of us overweight people think
we are. I have in the past, don't so much now, because I've lost weight and know I can lose
more, it's just a matter of having the willpower and wanting it bad enough to stay OP.

The control to stay where you are is a biggie and I'm sure that you have

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

necessary tools to do that Fred. I don't think being FAT again is in

your

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

future!

I think that predisposition to being heavy is something that many of us overweight people think we
are. I have in the past, don't so much now, because I've lost weight and know I can lose more, it's
just a matter of having the willpower and wanting it bad enough to stay OP.

The control to stay where you are is a biggie and I'm sure that you have the necessary tools to do
that Fred. I don't think being FAT again is in your future!

--
Brenda
209/178/150 RafL goal 165

"Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I was sure that I was predisposed to heavy and that I was fighting some genetics. While that
may be the case, I was able to exercise more willpower than I imagined to gain control this
time and so far.

I cannot predict the future but hope that I can control it

Prairie Roots said:

I grew up hearing that I should learn to control my weight while I was young, because it would be
that much harder when I got older. I'm not necessarily finding that to be the case, but that
could be because my psychology has been a greater enemy than my physiology.

Whether I'll reach 130 is not the driving force in my weight loss. I'm thrilled to be in the 160s
for the first time in 20-plus years with no desire to stop here. The high end of WW weight range
seems reachable, and I'm going to try to get there. Just a few months ago when I started, I
thought 157 seemed impossible. So I've made significant progress in my thinking. For me
breakthrough is as monumental as the actual weight loss.

165, here I come. (Though probably not at tomorrow's WI.) Prairie Roots

Fred said:

Thanks for the leg, well, finger work. I guess so - that weight gain at both ends of life is
intended to provide additional survival stores.

I guess one aspect of the info - upping running distance from 10 miles per week to 24, if I
recall, really is telling on how much affect aging appears to have. And at 50+ it would have
been even more - yikes!

So once again, are we fighting some innate and very hard to reverse trend/genetics/age-
factor???? No, I'm not yet going to throw in the towel (or more food) due to this info. It is
possible to control it but it does take work

Again, thanks.

Fred

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 07:13:48 -0600, Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote:

>When I did my Google search on weight and age, more results came up for women than for men.
>The whole menopause thing, don't you know. I kept digging until I found something that
>discussed weight gain in men, since you were the one asking. The most common search result
>related to weight gain in babies and young children. So it would seem that at both ends of
>life weight gain is associated with survival/longevity.
>
>Prairie Roots
>
>On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 22:25:00 -0800, Fred <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>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.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>And SHE probably would want to see the women's study (g)
>>
>>On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 22:30:22 -0600, Prairie Roots <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>>Here's a link to an article I found on weight issues for middle age

men.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>lbl.govspare tire.htmlOpen ↗
>>>
>>>For both men and women, as hormones change with age, metabolism

slows.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>We should exercise MORE to compensate for our slowing metabolism yet

we

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>typically become less active.
>>>
>>>On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 17:55:24 -0800, Fred wrote:
>>>> 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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>> an interesting question and if we ever have a meeting again, I may

try

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>> asking. Heck, I will email my secretary right now.... (G) It

would

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>> seem that a "sensible" weight would be sensible at any age???
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 02:51:15 -0600, Joyce <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >Logic? I don't think there was ever any logic involved in my

coming up with a

Quoted message said:

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:

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:

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:

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:

Quoted message said:

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

you will know

Quoted message said:

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:

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:

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:

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:

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:

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:

>>>> >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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>> >>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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>> >>> 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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>> >>> 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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>> >>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 know what you mean. I keep trying to think that being thin would feel better than food tastes, but
many times the food wins....<G> I've had trouble getting into the right mindset to eat totally OP.
I'm trying to figure out how to stay there once I'm there.

"Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I hope you are right.

Yesterday, as I was tracking along on a flat and rolling and uphill ski trip and feeling strong I
did think about it long and hard. It felt so good to be moving steadily and not huffing and
puffing that I wondered how I allowed myself to gain and hold that weight. I was trying to hold
onto that feeling and try remembering it when food seems to be singing a different song!!!

Brenda Hammond said:

I think that predisposition to being heavy is something that many of us overweight people think
we are. I have in the past, don't so much now, because I've lost weight and know I can lose more,
it's just a matter of having the willpower and wanting it bad enough to stay OP.

The control to stay where you are is a biggie and I'm sure that you have

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

necessary tools to do that Fred. I don't think being FAT again is in

your

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

future!

I think that once I get to goal I'll be feeling the same way. Of course feeling and being healthier
will be a bonus too, but not the same as seeing those scales at a *normal* weight. I don't know what
it is about the scales....

"Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

It is not exactly easy, at least, for me. Maybe some people do find it easy. I really like the way
I feel and the way hiking, skiing and biking are going but you know I really do think the SCALE
dropping was a more tangible reward then "just" feeling great - sad but true.

Brenda Hammond said:

I know what you mean. I keep trying to think that being thin would feel better than food tastes,
but many times the food wins....<G> I've had trouble getting into the right mindset to eat
totally OP. I'm trying to figure out how to stay there once I'm there.

"Fred" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I hope you are right.

Yesterday, as I was tracking along on a flat and rolling and uphill ski trip and feeling strong
I did think about it long and hard. It felt so good to be moving steadily and not huffing and
puffing that I wondered how I allowed myself to gain and hold that weight. I was trying to hold
onto that feeling and try remembering it when food seems to be singing a different song!!!

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 06:10:02 -0800, "Brenda Hammond" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>I think that predisposition to being heavy is something that many of

us

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>overweight people think we are. I have in the past, don't so much

now,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>because I've lost weight and know I can lose more, it's just a matter

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>having the willpower and wanting it bad enough to stay OP.
>
>The control to stay where you are is a biggie and I'm sure that you

have

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the

Quoted message said:

>necessary tools to do that Fred. I don't think being FAT again is in

your

Quoted message said:

>future!