World's Heaviest woman loses 98 lbs. from marathon sex sessions!

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by olympic, Jul 11, 2012.

  1. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,367
    I think the only solution is not to diet. :p And to really embrace exercise.

    Exercise seems to be the lever that you can pull to both be heather at your current weight (whatever that is) and it's one of the few ways that you can maintain a significant loss because it seems to help reset the body's set point. Or something. We don't really understand the mechanism yet just that exercise, lots of it, not 30 min of moderate exercise 3x a week like some experts say is all we need, can make a difference in the certain circumstances even if, in others, it doesn't lead to weight loss.)

    I will give you an example from figure skating about why I hate dieting and think it's a major contributor to our obesity problem:

    I have seen literally 600 little girls grow up over a period of 10 years. Many, many of them go through a period where they get chunky, especially in the middle. It happens somewhere in the 8-12 year range. (i.e., when they are in pre-puberty -- the state women's bodies go through prior to getting our menses) Then some of them just grow out of it. You see them at 16 and they weigh the same that they did when they were 12 and chunky but now they are 6 inches taller and so their weight is completely normal for their height. They may even be slender!

    But other little girls end up with a weight problem. A life-long weight problem.

    There seem to be two differences between the group. One is genetics. But the other is that the group that ends up not slimming down once they get past puberty are the ones getting a fuss made about their weight, which almost always leads to dieting.

    Not that I'm going to argue against educating people as to what healthy eating is or banning soda from schools. Those are good things too. They can help create the right supportive atmosphere.

    And while we're at it, let's reeducate ourselves as to what a normal portion size is!

    But it stems from the same cause. Your body's set point is low and your body fights you be a "ridiculously" thin weight. While another person's body fights them to be a ridiculously high weight. But the struggle is the same.
     
  2. shine

    shine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2002
    Messages:
    4,400
    Dude, good for you.
     
  3. Anita18

    Anita18 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,158
    I agree that "dieting" or generally treating food as some kind of negative control thing is bad. You need to eat. You can't live without food. And if you mess up your relationship with food, it can definitely mess your body up in the long run because of what you decide to put in it, or not put in it.

    And I agree that exercising, or movement in general, is the bar that we should set for health. If you're overweight but can kick serious ass in kickboxing, those extra pounds don't matter much. I think my personal threshold for thinking that someone is "too big" is when they have visible trouble walking because of their size.

    But I'm still having trouble understanding how someone's body could even have that set point be at such a ridiculously high weight (I'm talking obese BMI) to begin with, unless they inherited it from somewhere. The thing about the obesity epidemic is how recent it is. I just have trouble imagining that say, their grandparents' bodies really wanted to be obese as well, but there simply wasn't enough food available so they spent their entire lives figuratively starving....
     
  4. Japanfan

    Japanfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    12,881
    Interesting. And what do you mean by "lots of it"?

    I probably exercise 5-6 hours a week, which includes weight-training, the odd session on the eliptical trainer, hiking whenever I can fit it in, and a wee bit of kayaking (wish I could do more but it is not logistically possible). I've maintained this routine for about 10 years and have still gained 5-10 pounds without changing my diet, but look at it from the viewpoint that I'm holding and am fairly strong. I'm within a healthy weight range I would guess, for my age of 53. Some of the women I know in my age range have just ballooned, seemingly like magic. . .

    In truth I'm a lazy worker-outer. I read books between sets and enjoy conversation and nature while hiking/walking. I burn 500 calories an hour on the trainer, whereas other around me burn double and sweat like crazy (I don't like to sweat). Exercise is more about mental than physical benefits for me.

    But I wonder what I would have to do to lose five-ten pounds just through exercise? I get that I have to 'change it up' and get my heart rate up, but don't know what that means in terms of time/type of exercise/amount of sweat.
     
  5. Anita18

    Anita18 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,158
    I'm no expert (I only know what pertains to me :lol: ) but I imagine it has to do with heart rate. If you get your heart and breathing rate high for a sustained period of time, I bet that burns calories like whoa. And yes, that does involve sweating. :lol:

    I came back from the gym tonight and I swear I could feel myself losing 5 lbs just watching other people sweat away doing circuit training. :lol:

    Like you, I don't like to sweat much. Cardio makes me feel pukey, so I don't do cardio. I guess I'm screwed if I'm being chased by a bear, or zombies. But weightlifting makes me feel fantastic, so that's what I do. And considering my already-small frame and my mother developing osteoporosis before she turned 50, I think weightlifting is the way to go for me.

    Also, for what it's worth, I think it's better physically to be a little overweight when you're older, than too thin.
     
  6. antmanb

    antmanb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    3,397
    I can't recommend enough getting a personal trainer, even just for an hour or two to talk to you about your own body, routine, likes/dislikes and design a programme for you to follow. If you can see them regularly like once a week, it makes an incredible difference.

    Everyone is different and I think getting someone to work with you is the best way.

    Personally for me the best way to lose weight is a combination of strength (weight) training and cardio. Surprisingly (to me anyway) skewing more time towards strength training over a week than cardio has better results than skewing more towards cardio, which is what I would have thought made better sense for fat burning, but we've tried and tested many different combinations and it seems my body reacts really well to the ratio we have now which is slightly more strength than cardio.
     
  7. Andrushka

    Andrushka New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2004
    Messages:
    3,114
    Go her! Now 400+more lbs to go!
     
  8. numbers123

    numbers123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    30,765
    When I was in college, my nutrition class had us do a food diary for 3 weeks (gotta remember that this was 1972 or so, before people found obsessive food diaries through WW or On line).

    I was totally amazed that there were days that I consumed 3,000 or more calories. I weighed 110 pounds at the time. That was before fast food super sizes or even many fast food restaurants. Of course, I was working 2 jobs and going to school - running from class room to class room - burning up a lot of those calories.

    I imagine that it wouldn't be too hard to consume that many calories a day. It's reported that Michael Phelps eats 12,000 calories-a-day while in training. Many professional sports players consume that or more - a reason why some sports players gain so much weight post their professional careers is because they do not have a sense of what they actually need to consume a day vs. what they are used to consuming.
     
  9. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,112
    I agree that's unlikely, but what else has changed in our environment since our grandparents' childhoods? Does our food contain more soy, MSG, corn syrup, artificial coloring and other modern additives that may impact one's thyroid, appetite and insulin levels? What common medications that can cause weight gain--various antibiotics, psychotropic medicines, sleeping medications, oral contraceptives and other hormonal drugs--were not even on the market in our grandparents' youth? Could recent pesticides and other chemicals in our environment affect metabolism?

    It's easy to call today's young'ins lazy and gluttonous, but such talk ages the accuser considerably. Not that you were tossing those epithets, but those who do aren't going to bring about solutions to the problem.
     
  10. Anita18

    Anita18 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,158
    3,000 is still less than halfway to 7,000. You'd have to be eating more than twice your daily normal intake to get up to what some of these people are eating. Unless of course you never ate to fullness. Then it might be easy. :lol: YMMV.

    And Michaels Phelps famously only swims, sleeps, and eats when he's training. Eating that many calories must be considered a job at that point, unless you're literally inhaling your food.

    I actually think there's less MSG, corn syrup, hormones, artificial coloring, trans fats, etc, than there was back in say, the 60s and 70s. (Although there might be more soy...the pushback on soy has been much more recent.) Because we know about those additives now and what they can do. And yet people are getting fatter still...
     
  11. overedge

    overedge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    17,783
    I see what you mean about "diet" and the potential problems with portion control, balance of foods, etc. (and the mindset that goes along with that). But OTOH no matter what your physiology, I think it's a pretty safe bet that someone who eats mostly junk food and processed crap is going to gain more weight than someone who eats mostly vegetables and healthy food.
     
  12. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,367
    I find that I can't eat more than about 4000 a day and even that is pushing it -- which means on days I do things like a Century Ride and burn more than 5000, I have to eat up for a few days to catch up.

    But that's just me. OTOH, I'm sure Michael Phelps has to work pretty hard to get in 12,000 a day. I know a few professional athletes who say they have to work hard not to lose weight when training.

    Well, you'd think that but in fact there are plenty of thin people who eat like crap. But, if they do things like go to McDonalds and get a Double Quarter Pounder with a Large drink and Fries, they might not eat anything else for the rest of the day.

    I see my son and his friends eat like that all the time and most of them are underweight.
     
  13. overedge

    overedge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    17,783
    But that doesn't mean they wouldn't weigh less if they didn't eat crap.
     
  14. Anita18

    Anita18 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,158
    Right. Michael Phelps isn't "accidentally" eating 12K calories a day. He's very methodically eating that much, and probably on a schedule to remind himself. Like I mentioned, it must be another job.

    How old is your son? I know of many, many young men in their early 20's who are very thin and lanky no matter what junk they eat. They usually fill out as they approach their 30s.

    I'm still waiting on my fiance, who turned 30 this year and still looks like a high schooler because he's so slight. :lol:
     
  15. numbers123

    numbers123 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    30,765
    1 Mc Donalds' Deluxe Breakfast = 1,220 calories
    1 large OJ = 250 calories

    2 Big Mac = 1120 calories
    2 order big fries = 1140 calories

    1 large triple thick chocolate shake = 1,160 calories
    2 large colas = 620 calories

    This alone would be 5510. Would not include snacks or even an evening meal.

    just sayin' - Not that I could eat that much, but probably not too far off for someone to do. Just because most of us couldn't do that, doesn't mean that there is not a group of people who don't do something like that on a daily basis. it is amazing what you might observe at an "all you can eat" buffet
     
  16. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,112
    I suspect the usage in the US is higher but possibly less likely to be openly disclosed. For example, MSG can be listed under 42 euphemisms such as "yeast extract" so that the typical consumer doesn't recognize it. Maybe the Whole Foods crowd is somewhat aware of what to avoid, but your average Piggly Wiggly consumer may not be so savvy.
     
  17. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,367
    But, if they are a normal weight, why would they want to weigh less?

    And I still think it isn't true. Our bodies have a set point, a weight they want to be at, and they fight to be at that weight.

    Well I hope he fills out. But not as much as Mr. Mac did when he got older. ;)
     
  18. overedge

    overedge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    17,783
    I didn't say they wanted to weigh less. I said nothing about their motivations for eating whatever they eat. When I'm talking about "diet" I mean whatever kind of food someone consumes, not "diet" as in planning food consumption to lose weight.

    If someone is eating junk food with all its "extra" calories, they are more likely than not going to gain more weight than if they are eating healthy food with less calories. The amount of weight might be relative depending on their body type, but I really don't see how you can argue that junk food doesn't cause more weight gain than healthy food.
     
  19. Japanfan

    Japanfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    12,881
    In general, I agree with you - healthy eating makes for more conscious eating usually, which includes an awareness of weight/calories. But it depends on what particular 'junk' and 'healthy' food you eat to a certain extent and how much of it you eat. Avocados and mangoes are healthy, but fairly high in calories. Cheese is arguably healthy too. Olive oil is healthy, but it is a fat. Those soy milk drinks 'So Nice' and 'So Good' are named because they are indeed tasty - with lots of sugar and calories.

    In contrast, a bag of microwave popcorn can be relatively low calorie.

    I know someone who is a rather plump health nut and vegetarian (dairy eating). She is quite healthy but rather plump. She makes her own breakfast cereal and takes a ton of supplements, but her consumption of nutella and other health snacks like baked potato chips/cheesies could be part of the reason, though she also doesn't exercise. And she both puts a lot of energy/attention into her food, as well as enjoying it.

    A person who eats junk food may be less focused on food - just eat when hungry, for example, whatever is at hand.
     
  20. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,367
    I don't think studies really support the idea that eating healthy food helps you weigh less. For the most part, people weigh what their set point is. There are junk food diets that people lose weight on and there are plenty of people who eat healthy food but too much of it. The reality is that we gain weight when we eat more calories than we burn. And you can do that with any kind of food.
     
  21. Anita18

    Anita18 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Messages:
    11,158
    Do you have any theories as to why someone's set point would be so unhealthily high? And why obese-level set points seem to be getting more and more common?

    The only option I can see is that their grandparents' set points wanted to be obese-level high as well, but for some reason or another they never had the chance to eat that much food, and thus were "starving" all their lives. Do you think that's accurate?

    I mean, set points the way you describe it have to be genetic, and I can't think of a reason why so many people would be obese nowadays according to that theory unless they inherited it from somewhere. I mean, I have come across quite a number of people who are overweight despite everything they do, and I believe that some people are meant to weigh more than others. But there's quite a difference between overweight and morbidly obese, and more and more people are getting morbidly obese.
     
  22. danceronice

    danceronice Corgi Wrangler

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    6,474
    People have more and more access to calorically-dense foods and less reason to do heavy physical labor. Our genes date back tens of thousands of years and are programmed to seek out and store fat. They had much less chance to do it, and usually didn't live long enough to get obese (or have diet-related diseases.) Our grandparents DIDN'T, generally speaking, have the chance to eat the amount of food or the TYPES of food that most people have access to today nor were they culturally-conditioned to eat huge portions. It's not something that just happens in the first world--look at Polynesian cultures where being large is a desirable trait-people seek out and eat high-fat, high-calorie foods and gain weight when they do, even without those foods being "fake."

    Our bodies are VERY good at storing fat. Given half a chance, most will. Some will go overboard. A few are not, and tend to be superthin. That is probably ALSO more common now than it used to be, as that particular trait in our ancestors would have been detrimental-someone who couldn't gain weight would be more prone to sickness, more susceptible to food shortage-related starvation, and females with very low body fat are less likely to successfully reproduce. We can get around those problems now. It's harder to get around our bodies being good at storing fat if the society encourages sedentary lifestyles. (Though we ARE better at keeping people with both underweight- and overweight-related diseases alive so the general lifespan is still longer.)
     
  23. manleywoman

    manleywoman podcast mistress

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    7,829
    Low-calorie, maybe. But not healthy.
     
  24. danceronice

    danceronice Corgi Wrangler

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    6,474
    Unless you get the kind loaded with extra butter/fake butter and salt, it's not UNhealthy either. It's technically a whole grain and it's low fat, and if you leave off the fake flavors, not that high-sodium, either.

    Could you live on it? Of course not. Is it UNhealthy? Not especially.
     
  25. Japanfan

    Japanfan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    12,881
    Isn't it all loaded with chemicals? The few times I've had microwave popcorn its tasted heavily of chemicals. No comparison to making it on the stove the old-fashioned way, which I still do.
     
  26. olympic

    olympic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    7,031
    ^ Popcorn? I love popcorn. But my BF hates the smell of it. Thus, I only eat it when he's away. Otherwise, I never hear the end of it.
     
  27. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,112
    That's interesting, because I've generally seen Polynesians, especially Native Hawaiians and Samoans, blaming their obesity issues on whitey's introduction of processed food, especially Spam, to their shores.

    Pretty jealous, however, that Hawaiians can still buy fried pies at McDonald's. The baked ones on the mainland are so lame.
     
  28. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,367
    I suspect you haven't read the whole thread because I've gone on about this quite a bit. :lol:

    Dieting, in people genetically programmed to be obese, causes their set point to rise as a reaction to something called the Famine Effect. The diet of most in Western Society is full of high calorie food so lots more people are getting 10, 20 even 30 pounds overweight without paying attention and then going on diets. For those with the right genetic tendencies, going on a diet triggers a lifetime of weight struggles.

    Actually the set point isn't genetic. What is genetic is the tendency to react to calorie restriction by regaining all the weight plus 10 pounds. That changes your set point.

    So, you have someone whose natural eating put them 10 or even 20 pounds over what they think they should be. So they go on a diet. They lose the weight but then they gain it back plus about 10 pounds. Now their set point is 10 pound higher. They get disgusted with themselves -- how did I 'let myself' get fat again? I can't believe I 'went back to my old habits.' So they diet again. And this time maybe they don't lose quite all the weight they wanted but they lose a lot of it. But then their body raises their set point and they gain it all back plus another 10 pounds.

    If you do this enough, you can "diet" your way up to 200+.

    Even if you don't diet enough to get up to 200-300 pounds by raising your set point 10 pounds at a time, at some point, for many, the body goes a bit nuts after a while and just continually raises the set point so you gradually gain weight even if you've stopped actively dieting.

    The Famine Effect, btw, tends to kick in around 20-25 pounds lost which is why a lot of people who go on a diet often quit at around that point. Because that's when ghrelin rises dramatically and the body starts fighting back against the loss.

    Well microwave popcorn is a processed food. But you can make regular popcorn yourself and it's actually reasonably healthy as you note. Heck, even the microwave stuff is healthier than a lot of other choices people make instead because they are convinced popcorn is evil. :p
     
  29. MacMadame

    MacMadame Internet Beyotch

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    16,367
    When I lived in HI, you could get things like ramen soup at McDonald's. Do they still have stuff like that on the menu?
     
  30. heckles

    heckles Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,112
    Yes, they call it saimin, and it's generally served with Spam or some similarly processed meat floating at top.