Oneder

I agree about eating out, just don't do it as often if you do it a lot. I used to eat out at places like olive garden or carraba's every lunch and then go to a nicer dinner most nights. That put a huge amount of weight on quickly and I had to really cut back on how much I ate at lunch and how often I went to dinner as I got older and did not have the same metabolism.

raria

Thanks for the advice, but to me and probably others this idea of rewarding oneself with food due to a i) a promotion, ii) big day in the saddle, iii) some other success is what leads you to put on weight.

Some one on this forum has a great saying (I think its @Lazyass) with words to the effect "don't eat you spent calories as a reward". It's of course much more piffy than that but its a great message.

Brooke1687

FrenchFit 

That's about a thousand miles away from my thinking. There is no "work" about eating right and being fit. It's simply waking up from decades of bad information and habits that make other people money. USA, USA

But I was serious about sympathy for people who see the art and derive pleasure from making and eating food. Me, some tuna fish on a big salad and a Quest bar is a happy day.

Rootman

We've actually increased our dining out, but decreased the amount of food we eat.

We go out Friday nights order an entree and then eat half (or less) then take the rest home for meals on the weekend. One place we visit I actually get 5+ meals out of the entree that is normally eaten in one sitting. I find I care a lot more about the taste, value and the service than I do about the amount.

Milton Keynes

I used to work with a woman who I swear ate restaurant food for every meal. I'd always bring my meals in or else run home to eat something quick, she'd take a lunch break and go out to eat somewhere. She did put on a lot of weight during the time I knew her. I just don't know how she managed to afford eating out every day.

Milton Keynes

One thing I've noticed is that the more I eat smaller meals, the easier it is to feel full on less food. I don't know if my stomach has shrunk a bit or what, but feeling full longer is a positive benefit. Of course it could be that when I do eat I eat mainly protein and limit my carbs, so the food I do eat keeps me feeling full instead of a bunch of carbs which disappear an hour later and leave you feeling hungry for the rest of the day.

KraneXL

If you want to feel full then fat would be your go-to macro-nutrient. Also, you may want to rethink the multiple small meals approach. There are some schools of thought that believe it may do more harm, than good.

Milton Keynes

I do tend to eat more fat & protein and less carbs, which helps me stay full. I don't do multiple small meals, though. Breakfast is usually replaced with a protein shake, lunch is something small, and snacks are something healthy like baby carrots or other vegetables. Then dinner is whatever we prepare at home in the evening. But in general I'm eating less and will continue until I get down to my goal weight, then I will allow myself to eat a bit more but not pig out and eat all the time like I was before. I plan on switching from trying to lose weight to maintaining weight, and maintaining my good eating habits in order to not regain everything I've lost. And that includes smaller meals, not eating unless I'm really hungry, and if I need a snack eating something healthy and nutritious instead of junk food.

RubeRad

I totally get you. I'm only down 20lb myself (224 currently), and I have come to realize how much I enjoy eating, and in particular derive pleasure from overeating, from getting stuffed and being stuffed. The weight loss program I've been on has taught me that my body can be satisfied with less. So I am indeed eating less, and I am not even sitting around being hungry all the time.

But I am still sitting around thinking about food all the time. Always planning meals, sometimes days in advance. Reaching the diet-trained point of actual satisfaction (eating slowly, chewing thoroughly, doing whatever I can to maximize the duration and intensity of the eating experience), and still thinking, "that was nice, I can tell I've had enough, but it sure would be fun to keep eating"

There's so much food to eat, and I can't get to it all! If I have a portion that's bigger than it should be, then saving the rest for later means there's some other thing I was looking forward to eating that is going to have to get pushed further back in the schedule.

I described it on some other post as, it feels like I had a best friend who I spent time with constantly, and all of a sudden I stopped talking to them. And they're not gone, they're just standing there looking over my shoulder for everything I do, wondering why I won't play with them anymore.

It's nice to be more comfortable in my clothes. It's nice to suddenly be better at climbing hills. I'm glad I can be a little more attractive (less unattractive?) for my wife, and more healthy to make the long-term somewhat longer for my family.

But you know what's also great? Food. I love food. Food is delicious.

I'm sorry OP that I don't have any suggestions, but I hope that complete & total empathy helps at least a little.

DrIsotope

Negatives: I've lost the use of several pairs of bibshorts and a handful of jerseys, because they're just too big now. And some of the jerseys I do wear I have to roll the bottom up, so it doesn't just pooch out where my (bigger) gut used to be. But with those, too much weight in the pockets makes the whole jersey bounce around. There's a downside to everything.

I still love to eat though. That will never go away.

cyclist2000

My negative is that I burn fewer calories on my normal ride, since I am pushing around less weight, it takes less effort. Then I decrease the weight loss unless I increase the time riding.

bikingbill

In 1986 my cholesterol was 240 and rising. I dropped meat and dairy and got that down to under 140 in weeks. BUT I didn't lose my weight until 1996 (lost over 140lbs) and have kept most of that off since (went from ~350 to 220, currently in the 240's, I'm over 6' 2").

Here's the scary stuff you need to recognize about weight loss. Far far harder to maintain a big weight loss than to lose the weight in the first place.

97 percent of dieters regain everything they lost and then some within three years.

So how do you do it?

Acceptance of the reality that yes, you'll have to restrict intake for the rest of your life and hunger will be a regular companion.

It's worth it. In 1996 my youngest child was born and I decided to lose that weight so I could be around for his college graduation. That was last Saturday.

Me in the 1980's:


(guy on the left)

1999:



Now:

Milton Keynes

I wonder if the 97% statistic of dieters who gain everything back is because they think "Well, I've lost the weight, now I can officially quit dieting and eat like I want to." I personally am determined to beat the statistics and maintain my weight. I know it's hard, what with all the family dinners and the lack of willpower I often suffer from, but I do know that I need to completely change all my eating habits, which I have done. But the second part is making sure I stick with them once I reach my goal weight. Right now I'm using MyFitnessPal to track my calories for weight loss, and plan to keep using it to maintain a lower weight, but I just hope that eventually I can learn what foods and how much I can eat in order to stay at a lower weight.

KraneXL

That's the main issue. But its compounded because they don't recognize the diet as the intro to changing their way of eating and how they think of food. If you go back to your old habits, you go back to your old body.

I love ice cream and cake but I realize that's not something I can eat on a regular basis. I consider it a treat...a special treat. I haven't eating either in over a year (and still no cravings), but if I go out on a special occasion I can have it without feeling guilty.

Sugar used to be my greatest weakness but I've managed to reduce it by 80%. My motto now is, do whatever it takes to stay motivated, and don't give up.

MRT2

As someone who has gained and lost 40 lbs or more 7 or 8 times over the years since I was 14, I can relate. The price of thinness is constant vigilance, and it isn't as if being thin solves all your problems. I have a friend who is significantly overweight and he once said, you would think the way people talk that the cemeteries are filled only with the morbidly obese. So no guarantees, there. But more to the point, you are feeling a sense of loss as food was a big source of enjoyment for you. I imagine recovering drug addicts, and alcoholics feel the same way, if they are honest. I am guessing it is the real reason lots of people, a majority in fact gain back weight. It is because they enjoy eating in a way their thinner friends do not.

winston63 

I think it's simply because most people haven't made sustainable life-style changes to achieve weight loss, they've adopted a diet that they really can't maintain long term.

I'm three years and counting after losing my weight, and yes, I do have to pay attention to my calories in and out. I have been using MyFitnessPal through the whole time, but I''m not strict about recording everything and I haven't been for well over a year.

But over time I've developed a pretty good sense of what quantities of food I can eat. I weigh myself quite regularly to make sure I'm still on target. If I go off the rails a bit, like I did at Christmas, I'm back on MyFitnessPal tracking everything until I very slowly get my weight back to where I want it.

KraneXL

As have I. And I think that's what keeps me within my weight limit. Its so basic a child could do it. Since most western portion are twice what we actually need, I simply divide everything by two. Same thing when I'm hungry (I rarely get to that point) and preparing my own meals. I think of what I'd like to eat, then divide by two and that's my actual meal.

We do disagree about weighing though (I used the mirror instead). The only time I do that is during my quarterly visit to see my doctor.

RubeRad

Sad.

(This post approved by President Trump)

bikingbill

More likely their metabolism has been permanently lowered.

See: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/02/h...ight-loss.html

Kevin Hall, a scientist at a federal research center who admits to a weakness for reality TV, had the idea to follow the “Biggest Loser” contestants for six years after that victorious night. The project was the first to measure what happened to people over as long as six years after they had lost large amounts of weight with intensive dieting and exercise.The results, the researchers said, were stunning. They showed just how hard the body fights back against weight loss.
“It is frightening and amazing,” said Dr. Hall, an expert on metabolism at the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, which is part of the National Institutes of Health. “I am just blown away.”

It has to do with resting metabolism, which determines how many calories a person burns when at rest. When the show began, the contestants, though hugely overweight, had normal metabolisms for their size, meaning they were burning a normal number of calories for people of their weight. When it ended, their metabolisms had slowed radically and their bodies were not burning enough calories to maintain their thinner sizes.


Researchers knew that just about anyone who deliberately loses weight — even if they start at a normal weight or even underweight — will have a slower metabolism when the diet ends. So they were not surprised to see that “The Biggest Loser” contestants had slow metabolisms when the show ended.

What shocked the researchers was what happened next: As the years went by and the numbers on the scale climbed, the contestants’ metabolisms did not recover. They became even slower, and the pounds kept piling on. It was as if their bodies were intensifying their effort to pull the contestants back to their original weight.

Mr. Cahill was one of the worst off. As he regained more than 100 pounds, his metabolism slowed so much that, just to maintain his current weight of 295 pounds, he now has to eat 800 calories a day less than a typical man his size. Anything more turns to fat.

-------

For me, it's around 500.

ColonelSanders

I wonder how much of that slowing metabolism has to do with losing weight relatively quickly?


If they had taken 3 years to lose the weight instead of 6 months or whatever it is, would their metabolisms not be affected like this?


And can a metabolism be speeded up?

KraneXL

If it can be slowed down, it can be sped up. Metabolism is chiefly a function of diet and exercise -- though environment, genetics and body composition does play a role. They failed to make sufficient continuous modifications to their changing physiologies.

Milton Keynes

Yep, I realize that I'm going to have to avoid sugar even though I totally love sweet stuff. I do give myself a sweet treat here and there, like one Hershey's miniature chocolate, or one cookie. Not the stack of cookies like how I used to eat. I'm sure I can do this as long as I keep conscious about how much I eat. A couple weeks ago it was rough because we celebrated my birthday with a blueberry pie, and aside from one piece, nobody else ate any of the pie so I finished it off over the next week or so. One of my main issues is that I absolutely hate to see food go to waste, especially if it's something I really like. So instead it goes to waist. I did gain a couple pounds but lost it again. I both feel guilty about throwing food away and from eating it so it won't have to be thrown out. I think it's still a leftover from being raised by parents who in turn were raised during the Depression when food just absolutely wasn't wasted.

Rght now I'm 2 1/2 lbs. away from being "obese" to "overweight" on the BMI scale. I'll be excited when I cross that threshold, and hope to celebrate with an entire pizza and a cake! Just kidding, I'm going to remain strict with myself and stay dedicated to reaching my goal of 200 lbs. or less. But right now my weight is the lowest it's been in 20 years or so.

CliffordK

Alcoholism may be a good comparison, but you can't abstain from food either.

You didn't say how much exercise you're currently doing. But there are a couple of benefits of exercise.

One is that HDL is at least somewhat tied to exercise, so get up to several thousand miles a year on your bike, and perhaps a few marathons, and your HDL may well start becoming a more significant factor than the LDL.

The other benefit gets one back to food. I'm perhaps not a big foodie. But, after a hard ride, I can eat just about anything in sight.

I don't do hard rides every day, but ride 150+ miles, and toss in a few mountains to climb, and the calorie estimates go through the roof... perhaps in the range of 5000 calories. I'm not sure one could do that on an empty stomach, but even so, one eats everything in sight.

So, go out and enjoy your big meal, on the day before or after a double century, and just don't worry about any repercussions.

Oh, and go out on a few hikes... and enjoy the outdoors. Think of the mountain that you are able to climb at 175 lbs that you couldn't climb at 300 lbs.

There are lots of things that are playing the long game. How were your knees and feet before the weightloss? How are they after? Perhaps it is the long game, and you were able to successfully avoid any problems.

bikingbill

I'm not sure it can.

I took a year to drop the ~150lbs in 1996. That was a 5000mile year and they were hard miles.

1997-1999 were 8000mile years and I was competing in time trials (did a 31:05 20km in 1999).

I still believe, based on food diaries etc. and my doctor at the time (Bariatric Physician of some note: Ken Fujioka (oft quoted in the media) came up with the 500 calorie deficit measurement.

Now this may have to do with my low resting HR ... not sure.

The good news? I can ride distance without having to eat much.