It claims the key to staving off the rebound part of any calorie restriction induced weight loss cycle [the calorie-weight deficit/restoration of calorie-weight deficit is all ONE cycle] is exercise.
"Hope"Hope and I do not agree on the viability of cal res, but we both agree it's time to move on with endless portentous repetition of nothing. It's the professionals who don't want to. They are the ones wanting to keep going round and round in their circles as long as they can, postponing that inevitable moment when science must stop being pseud.
I wish the NYTimes would make room for other types of articles on health, providing us with indepth insight into various genetic illnesses, diseases, and other conditions. These constant articles about studies of how to lose weight and keep it off are tiresome. Diet and exercise works, don't we know that by now? Let's move on.
On average, those who managed to maintain a significant weight loss had 80 minutes a day of moderate activity, like walking, or 35 minutes a day of vigorous exercise, like running.Compare this with stopping smoking. This is of course, after spending the weight. This is a life sentence of the wrong means to achieve ends.
On average is not for everybody though,
More thanFor the four years after the show, he exercised more than two and a half hours a day and gained back just 40 pounds.Then the injuries began, forcing him to cut back his workouts to one and a half hours a day. His weight crept up to 235 pounds.The next year, “my body just started breaking down,” he said. “I had a foot injury, a wrist injury. I couldn’t keep it up.” And he was exhausted.
Physically breaking down under the strain of exercise purging, with injury piling upon injury to the point where you have to stop - usually comes towards the hospitalisation end of a thin/slim person's anorexia nightmare.
It's also calls to mind neurological weight loss diet burnout, where your nervous system is unable to tolerate the provocation of restriction and you just can't. I say that not to be fancy, but because you want to keep dieting, but something has changed, your body blocks you, it's a rather eerie discovery.
Yet this too is perceived as failure of the person, not the method,
It’s a difficult task for virtually anyone, Dr. Kerns said: “The amount of time and dedication it takes to manage one’s food intake and prioritize exercise every day can be an untenable burden for many people.” “It’s totally unfair to judge those who can’t do it,” she added.
Doesn't multiple injuries or nervous system exhaustion with fighting off restriction show dedication? How can you get any more dedicated that actually exhausting your body's ability to continue with what you are doing?
Cahill could do it. He wasn't a can't do it! At the very least should be where even the most raving calorie restrictionists draw the line. It should be "Okay, you all have to train like athletes and starve like anorexics, until your body breaks down, then you must stop."
But no, apparently, you still haven't done anything. It is an extreme version of how the ideology in people's minds erases recognise fat people's efforts.
As has been pointed out, these "biggest losers" are the success stories. They are outliers in success. Biggest loser type dieters are like anorexics without the madness, their behaviour, not anorexics, is driven by pure will.
Neither are in control.
Nor is dieting hard its easy, it's the body blocking its action that gives it rigour, but that wasn't in the calculation. Ci/co cannot adjust to this.
What happened to Danny Cahill is what your defences are blocking, potential damage and injury. This erasure of fat people's efforts is a sign of deep neurosis. These people are hallucinating an absence, whilst looking directly at what is present.
I'll re-emphasise, it is normal for most of us to display signs that could be seen as or actually form part of a psychiatric diagnosis. Unless that's so pronounced as to pull other things out of alignment [or the reverse], the overall pattern is what makes up genuine diagnosis.
This should be enough of a warning sign though, even addicts going into rehab and coming out addicts will not be told-you didn't go there. Whether the failure is seen as one of those things or something the person did wrong, their presence is recognised.
Here's is a mindset which perceives doing purely on outcome. Do nothing + the desired outcome = activity, success. Do everything + undesired outcome = inaction, failure.
Calorie restriction has always been unlimited in this way, sure evidence of its inherent quackery. Every function has limits. Only in fiction are there no limits. In reality, not recognising any limits just puts pressure on your mind to erase the limits that will naturally manifest.
Dieting and exercise feel bad not because they are hard-they aren't-it's because they are bad.
All this is also evidence of a profound failure of us fat people. Our refusal to set limits ourselves, on what we should expect to do is perhaps most shocking of all. What exactly is motivating us to allow such liberties to be taken with us? Why do we allow people to impose unending, unendurable labour?
Slim people, fat phobes maybe sinking under the weight [yes] of their own neuroses, but it is we that seem entranced by this. It is we that appear to be willingly sleepwalking to our own destruction.
Cahill could do it. He wasn't a can't do it! At the very least should be where even the most raving calorie restrictionists draw the line. It should be "Okay, you all have to train like athletes and starve like anorexics, until your body breaks down, then you must stop."
But no, apparently, you still haven't done anything. It is an extreme version of how the ideology in people's minds erases recognise fat people's efforts.
As has been pointed out, these "biggest losers" are the success stories. They are outliers in success. Biggest loser type dieters are like anorexics without the madness, their behaviour, not anorexics, is driven by pure will.
Neither are in control.
Nor is dieting hard its easy, it's the body blocking its action that gives it rigour, but that wasn't in the calculation. Ci/co cannot adjust to this.
What happened to Danny Cahill is what your defences are blocking, potential damage and injury. This erasure of fat people's efforts is a sign of deep neurosis. These people are hallucinating an absence, whilst looking directly at what is present.
I'll re-emphasise, it is normal for most of us to display signs that could be seen as or actually form part of a psychiatric diagnosis. Unless that's so pronounced as to pull other things out of alignment [or the reverse], the overall pattern is what makes up genuine diagnosis.
This should be enough of a warning sign though, even addicts going into rehab and coming out addicts will not be told-you didn't go there. Whether the failure is seen as one of those things or something the person did wrong, their presence is recognised.
Here's is a mindset which perceives doing purely on outcome. Do nothing + the desired outcome = activity, success. Do everything + undesired outcome = inaction, failure.
Calorie restriction has always been unlimited in this way, sure evidence of its inherent quackery. Every function has limits. Only in fiction are there no limits. In reality, not recognising any limits just puts pressure on your mind to erase the limits that will naturally manifest.
Dieting and exercise feel bad not because they are hard-they aren't-it's because they are bad.
All this is also evidence of a profound failure of us fat people. Our refusal to set limits ourselves, on what we should expect to do is perhaps most shocking of all. What exactly is motivating us to allow such liberties to be taken with us? Why do we allow people to impose unending, unendurable labour?
Slim people, fat phobes maybe sinking under the weight [yes] of their own neuroses, but it is we that seem entranced by this. It is we that appear to be willingly sleepwalking to our own destruction.
No comments:
Post a Comment