Thoughts that I just have to write to understand

No Snacks, no sweets, no seconds. Except on Days that start with S. Too simple for you? Simple is why it works. Look here for questions, introductions, support, success stories.

Moderators: Soprano, automatedeating

Post Reply
User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Thoughts that I just have to write to understand

Post by Christine » Thu Jun 13, 2013 8:37 pm

Hey y'all, this is just a bunch of rambling stuff that a week of No S has popped into my consciousness. I don't care if you don't read it, I've just gotta understand it by typing it.

I've read several posts here, and one of them mentioned a "Zen" thing about looking at a mountain, then looking at it from all sorts of different ways, then you end up looking at it as simply a mountain again (of course it was put much more eloquently than how I've just said it). This is also how I see eating. Not dieting, eating. I've been through every diet you can think of, and coming to this just makes so much sense that (slap in the forehead) I could have done this long ago and it would have worked! But if I hadn't gone through the Zen "dissecting the mountain" thing, guess it wouldn't have had as much impact as it seems to be doing for me now.

Another thing is the Medifast experience. Anyone here ever do Medifast? Five of their meals, one of protein and veg, every day; roughly 800-900 calories. I lost 65 lbs. with it, but (as I've said elsewhere) even though I swore by it, I was shocked to see, when I recently looked at my order history on their web site, that I'd ordered it many times through the past few years to repeatedly try to keep the weight off. And each time I'd ordered it, I felt more and more averse to having to eat "space food" yet again, because I wasn't controlling my weight very well. What is that all about? That's being successful? I've gotta eat Medifast the rest of my life just to maintain? Um, something is not right, and I finally realized that. Now I have several days' worth of Medifast sitting in the bottom of the pantry, not tempting me AT ALL.

'Nother thing: I've read people here also, that they used to be normal weight when they ate like this when they were young (and nobody ever thought about it!), and it wasn't until they started dieting that they gained weight! That happened to me too. I was 14, wanting to be a model (yeah, stop laughing now), so my parents took me to a modeling agency to find out how to do it. Well, they told us that I couldn't be because my legs were too thick (muscular, NOT fat). That's when my dieting career first began. However, during high school I didn't think about it much, but being an active teenager, I could eat my mom's boring dinners, snack on candy in the evenings unbeknownst to my parents, and not have to worry about my weight.

Even after having my first two children, my weight only ended up being about seven pounds heavier than pre-pregnancy weight. But unfortunately that's when the boredom, depression, etc. set in and that's when the permasnacking and creation of the new food group of desserts began.

Ok, enough of that. I started the endless diet nightmare. I've yo-yo'ed so many times the string has had to be replaced many times over. Then when I found Medifast I thought that was the be-all, end-all of diets: to me it felt like eating their food got me "abstaining" from real food, put me on track again, just as though I was an alcoholic abstaining from alcohol. Yes, it did work. Took a LOT of willpower but I complied pretty well--the first time. And it "sort of" taught me to "really" pig out when I was going to pig out, because I was going to have to go back to "space food" again.

Anyway my daughter had slowly gotten big during the past few years. She joined Precision Nutrition several months ago and looks fantastic now after having lost 25 lbs. Anyone here ever done that one? I was about to join the next class in July, inspired by my daughter, but had to do something in the meantime besides eat more Medifast. That's when I re-read Reinhard's book, and decided once and for all, this has got to be my last best hope; how could anything get more simple and commonsense than this?

I'm hungry a couple of hours after eating my meals, and don't like it. I've complied with this 100% so far, knock on wood. I'll figure things out, but I've got to do No S, it seems like the only way I'll ever get back to eating normally and stop obsessing like I've been doing this whole time.

OK, done with the outpouring, just had to type it out to make sense of stuff. Later--
I'm a Mac

emmay
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:10 am
Location: Australia

Post by emmay » Sat Jun 15, 2013 5:45 am

Hi Christine.
I wish you luck with finding what works for you.
For between meal hunger you could try adjusting your meals to make them more satisfying, e.g. add good fats like avocado, nuts, olive oil. Also, a milky tea or coffee can tide you over for another hour or so.

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:05 am

Are you actually hungry a few hours later or just wanting to eat? I always wanted to binge in the first three hours after a meal. If I made it that long without eating, I found I could wait longer and would then experience real hunger. SO much more satisfying to eat in response to REAL hunger. But if you are really hungry, I agree that you should eat more substantial meal. Or have a cafe au lait or something a couple of hours after your meal. I've done that for the 40 months I've been using No S. It feels very civilized. I stumbled a bit recently over LACK of hunger-- don't ask, too complicated for this post- but I feel I'm back on track.

I admire your willingness to do this, and to recognize the sanity in it. Try not to be too diverted by your daughter. I pray she's one of the exceptions, but you know most people who "go on a diet" are heavier two years later. Never be diverted by short term success. I would never have given Reinhard's system a second look if he hadn't used it for four years before he started this site. I don't consider No S going on a diet. You don't have to go on a diet or swear off chocolate or whatever to learn to eat less by choosing appropriate limits. (IN fact, those notoriously fail over the long run) And that kind of tactic has led to weight loss by many of the most successful losers. Even better, it leads to joyful eating.

I also agree about the Zen analogy. (In my circles, it was "Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood and carry water.") I went to OA nearly 30 years ago when their recommendation was three moderate meals a day and no eating in between. There was no mention, as I hear there is now, about no sugar and flour, etc. But I thought they were crazy, and that sounded hard! It IS hard, to some degree. It just turns out that everything else is harder.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:30 pm

Hi,

Thanks to you both for your words of encouragement, I really appreciate it!

So after 10 days of complying 100%, I weighed in yesterday and found that I actually gained about 1 1/2 lbs. Gosh, I really didn't need to see that. I really have not been loading up my plates, either, like folks say might happen at first.

Yes, I am actually physically hungry in between. So the coffee & milk is probably a safe way to stave it off for a while. But at this point, I don't want to make "allowances" that might turn into no-kiddin' red days. But if I've gained, how can I be so hungry all the time and still gain weight? Was it just because of the S days? Water weight from S day food & drink? I want this to work sooooooo badly. But because I'm the Queen of Freaking Out, I was all ready to try something else after weighing in. But I thought, no, I committed to doing this through the end of the month, so I will.

I'd tempted myself into thinking, also, that I'm "special": I need something more than just this; it's a sluggish thyroid or my metabolism is that of a hibernating bear, or I've dieted myself into barely-existing muscles, etc. etc. etc.

In the case of my daughter, this was her first time having been overweight and then losing it. She was so willowy in high school and afterwards, so in her case she'll probably stay OK. Well, I hope so anyway. She has no children and probably won't, so that factor doesn't apply to her. I'm just so used to glomming on to the latest "new" diet breakthrough and falling for it every single time. The diet plan itself doesn't sound ridiculous, I know it's sound and all, but I'm sorry, I just can't/don't want to/don't have time to force myself to eat vegetables for breakfast (along with protein, which isn't so weird) and I don't want to drink protein smoothies, and I don't want to drink them while I'm at the gym working out (which I just only force myself to do because I'm "supposed to").

I too went to OA years ago, about the same timeframe, and at the time all the ladies there were much bigger than I was. Oh, to be the size I was then when I thought I was overweight! Anyway, that really didn't click with me. I'm not addicted to food! I don't want to do a 12-step program! Blah, blah, blah.

So, just wondering in general. Are there a lot of people who gain weight after first starting this? If there are, do they keep at it anyway and do they eventually lose the weight? Does the hunger really lessen (I had just read this assurance from Reinhard in the book)? Yep, I want joyful eating too. But not the kind that makes me feel like a hippo lazing around in the water.
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:10 pm

I think a lot of people gain initially because they've been restricting previously. As difficult as it is, I think you just have to follow the habits and give it time. Weight loss is typically not quick on No-S. Also, if you've been a chronic dieter it may take time for your body to stop behaving as if you're going to starve it again.

I think the people who do see quick weight loss here are the people who have been grazing constantly or consuming high calorie snacks and their absence makes a significant difference in calorie consumption.

Regarding your hunger: Are you eating "diet" meals? Low calorie, low fat or in any way restricted?
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Mon Jun 17, 2013 5:17 pm

Well -- this time I had not been starving myself within the past several months, and was gaining gradually and found myself 20 lbs. up from the weight I'd maintained for the past few years (in the wrong way, I might add). However, yep, I'm sure my body is well used to thinking I'm starving it. You're right, I want to follow the habits and give it time, just seemed really weird and dismaying that I actually gained instead of lost anything.

As far as what I've been eating, no low cal or low fat stuff; I have made it a point to pretty much eat what I want, with a slight nod to eating healthy vs eating crap. For example today for lunch I just had leftover roast turkey about 4 oz. and, say, a small handful of green beans, with no sauce or anything; a can of V8, and an apple. And I am truly full "enough" right now. Friday I had leftover baked ziti, about a cupful, with some extra sauce, and some strawberries. And I felt satisfied after both lunches. So it just seems like I'd feel really full if I ate more than that at a sitting, which I don't want to happen. But it's like I need to eat too much, so I don't get hungry too soon. I haven't found that equilibrium, but if I'm going to keep gaining weight *and* being really hungry between meals, aagghhhh!!! it'll ruin my high expectations of this! :?

Again, though. I'm in this for the rest of the month, hope I'll see some encouragement...Oh, and I don't mind losing slowly (finally), I just hope that I do lose it!
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:09 pm

I'm going to suggest that you add some fat to your meals. Fat aids substantially in satiety and keeping hunger at bay. Up above emmay suggested avocado, nuts, and olive oil. There's also olives, seeds, and butter. You could also add fat in the form of full fat dairy products.

I would have sauteed the green beans in olive oil or butter. I'm a huge fan of the food of the Mediterranean, especially Italian, and pretty much everything is cooked in or has some olive oil drizzled on top. Maybe some cheese, too. You wouldn't be eating more.

By the way, all of the weight I've lost has been since I started adding more fat to my diet. (I was older and probably less active than you when I started.)
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:58 am

I had been bingeing mercilessly for a few months before I started on No S, (and much of the 38 years before that) but also tended to eat "healthy" meals already. Got in the habit of 40*30*30 years before. I lost right away (in the first month) but stalled and started again for most of the rest of the time. But the TREND has been downward. I think I've gained a bit from last quarterly weigh in, but I had been eating very little for a few months before that as a fluke, so I think it was artificially low.

Anyway, if you had just been overeating slightly for your weight to inch up, it's likely to go the other way the same way.

Though many here don't use a scale at all, I say if you're going to weigh, weigh every day and average the amount once a week. Friday is a good day for that. Try to do it just as a scientist records data. If it drives you crazy, quit. I quit after I got into my normal BMI range and have weighed almost exclusively at the changes of the seasons since then. But I think I could have started that practice earlier with little difference in results. Feeling better by eating moderately and reducing bingeing were my real goals.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:06 pm

emmay wrote:For between meal hunger you could try adjusting your meals to make them more satisfying, e.g. add good fats like avocado, nuts, olive oil. Also, a milky tea or coffee can tide you over for another hour or so.
wosnes wrote:I'm going to suggest that you add some fat to your meals. Fat aids substantially in satiety and keeping hunger at bay. Up above emmay suggested avocado, nuts, and olive oil. There's also olives, seeds, and butter. You could also add fat in the form of full fat dairy products.
...
By the way, all of the weight I've lost has been since I started adding more fat to my diet. (I was older and probably less active than you when I started.)
Hm. I guess my examples weren't very good as far as the fat that I do eat! I'm pretty sure the leftover baked ziti had "lots" of fat, it was left over from our favorite Italian restaurant! :wink: I do saute stuff in olive or peanut oil; didn't happen to do it for the green beans because they were in a steam-ready package and who doesn't love convenience? (now that I think of it, I could have drizzled oil on the beans after they were done!) However -- I will try to do that, adding more "good" fat that is. The only reason I shy away from it at all is simply to avoid the calorie count; trying to get over that mindset! You don't say how old you are but I'm 62 and not very active. I've been walking with my friend occasionally (1-2 times per week) and joined the local gym a couple months ago but have not gone lately (vacation, getting a cold, weird shifts at work). And what's said here about folks eating giant plate fulls of food at first, is apparently what's happening to me but with giant calorie totals per plate, at first. At least at dinner, and enough to make the scale to go the wrong way: here's an example of dinner (last night): two (hot dog-size) kielbasas on buns with a bunch of tater tots! Technically one plate! But I have generally been trying to *not* eat stuff like that during the week. And it's just after breakfast and lunch that I get really hungry too soon. I guess there is more fine-tuning to this diet than what I'd thought/hoped.
oolala53 wrote:I had been bingeing mercilessly for a few months before I started on No S, (and much of the 38 years before that) but also tended to eat "healthy" meals already. Got in the habit of 40*30*30 years before. I lost right away (in the first month) but stalled and started again for most of the rest of the time. But the TREND has been downward.
...
Though many here don't use a scale at all, I say if you're going to weigh, weigh every day and average the amount once a week. Friday is a good day for that. Try to do it just as a scientist records data. If it drives you crazy, quit. I quit after I got into my normal BMI range and have weighed almost exclusively at the changes of the seasons since then. But I think I could have started that practice earlier with little difference in results. Feeling better by eating moderately and reducing bingeing were my real goals.
Since I had been gaining over the past several months, and just sort of gave up, is why I'd thought I'd get better results after starting this. And I really have (mostly) been trying to eat healthy (dinner last night notwithstanding), including healthy fats, peanut or almond butter occasionally, etc. Maybe as Wosnes said, not enough though! Some stuff that I was eating, I really got tired of because I don't like it that much: greek yogurt, lots of salads, dinner of plain meat and plain veg, etc. Naturally! All the stuff that's good for you! Guess that's my take on Reinhard meant when he said something about eating all the awful food they make you eat on regular diets. What's 40*30*30? -- like, protein, carbs, fat percentages? I kind of don't want to weigh myself at all! -- I get obsessive really easily and hate that. But I've kept it to weighing in once a week the whole time after I first lost the weight, going on six years now. And I do record it. I used to do measurements once a month also, but that's fallen by the wayside in the past several months also. I also hate getting depressed. However, I'll try your suggestions. Also, should I avoid having S days for a while?

I am keeping in mind, too, that this does not happen overnight; but having done Medifast with instant results (if you do it strictly) kinda spoiled me in that regard. And I definitely *need* the structure of three meals per day. Guess I just wanna be thin and throw away the scale and not think about any of this at all. Haha, too late for that, huh?
I'm a Mac

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:02 pm

Spoiled, indeed. In more ways than one. I say that with open arms and complete empathy.

You say you'd rather not weigh at all but your whole focus seems to be on weight loss.

Is there any other reason to change your eating besides for weight loss?

But how do you feel about how you eat in general? Do you think you eat too much? Are you content for the most part with your food choices and amounts? Or does the answer to that question always have to involve whether that eating gets you to a certain weight?

Because that is a problem. It is very very difficult to repair disordered eating by manipulating food intake to achieve a certain weight. And counterintuitive though it seems, a thin appearance is a woefully unsuccessful motivation DOWN DEEP for most people. They think that should be enough but face facts! In fact, in over a hundred years of such attempts and the follow up metastudies, it fails 97% of the time.

Let that sink in.

Yes, if you got to the National Weight Loss Registry, you will find people there who have done it. But they represent a very small percentage who attempt it. And many of them live lives circumscribed by the effort. Hey, if it's that important to them, so be it, but don't tell me that's anything to emulate.

Reinhard said he set out to find a simple way to lose weight, but if you really look at how he ended up going about it, what he really did was find a way to repair eating gone cattywompers. It seems he was a motivated by the "shame" of not being satisfied with moderate eating consistently as much as by the idea that it might make him thin. Moderate eating became the Holy Grail, not the scale.


Just out of curiosity, why did you eat two kielbasas and tater tots for dinner? Is that what really appealed? How full were you afterwards?

If you wanted that for dinner, I think you HAVE to let yourself have meals like that, and keep having them until they just don't appeal anymore. (I don't want to jump ahead, but I know I would have felt sick to my stomach after a meal of that much dense food. But I ate many meals like that even after feeling crappy from them for a long time before it became much more natural to eat, say, only one kielbasa and a few tater tots. Not because I wanted to weigh less, but because if I ate more, I didn't feel very peppy, AND I didn't get hungry for another meal in a reasonable amount of time. Eating moderately so that I would get reasonably hungry for about an hour before the next meal became my Holy Grail, but it took a couple of years to get that down, most of the time feeling pretty good. Wild S days practically the whole time, too. Fluctuating weight loss. Down each year. And always the specter of the alternative: prison-like deprivation (in my mind) around food. Je refuse!

Now I'm having to adjust again because my hunger is even smaller than it was, but I still like eating the same amount of food. I think that will change, too.

Because I read about diets a lot (could hardly ever stay on one), and did a solid stint in WW, I knew roughly the calorie count of my meals and even occasionally record them with a calculator on No S. I won't say the amounts but I can tell you I've gone through some periods of eating as little as one would on a traditional diet and even now I know I average less than a woman my height would if she had never been overweight. But the gem is that at these amounts, I don't feel I'm on a diet. I'm not struggling to limit myself to these amounts. (My problem now is that they fill me up too much, but I don't want to eat less- yet. I predict I'm going to get tired of feeling out of whack with my hunger and it will get easier again.)


No S cannot trick your body into being able to take in more calories than it needs and still lose weight. It's a way to work with your body to get into sync with its needs, and changing needs. For some, it happens unconsciously; others have to be a little more mindful. But for me it sure is a lot more fun mindful than the alternatives.

Do you think you've ever eaten that way? Could you give yourself a year to learn it? Because you cannot tell AT ALL whether it is working in a few weeks. Adjusting to less food just doesn't work that way!

I have complete faith in you.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:04 pm

I'm going to make a radical suggestion: just follow No-S and don't worry about what you eat. Don't weigh, either, if you don't want to weigh. You may have to make some adjustments to your meals so you're not getting hungry soon after meals, but other than that: No snacks, no sweets, no seconds, except on S days. And don't give up the S days. They're important so that you can stick to the rules on the No-S days.

Follow the rules for 6 months to a year and see what happens.

Don't worry about the calories in fat. I don't mean to overdo fat, but we need the fat for many reasons.

By the way, I'm 64 and my exercise consists of walking the dog 2-3 times daily and other activities of daily living. The doggy walks are long, but slow. She likes to poke around and I let her.

The sausage meal? Yea, I do that on occasion. Except I have homemade potato salad instead of tater tots.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:29 pm

Yes, both of you have brought up some really valid points. I stand chastised ... :oops: But --you give me some good stuff to think about. Yep, I do have lots of issues that seem to manifest themselves in the weight. Not going to go into it here -- but nevertheless I thank you for looking at this more sanely than I do!

BTW I am a member of the National Weight Loss Registry; I report to them every year via a questionnaire that members fill out and return to them. Guess that's part of the problem; pride. I will do my absolute best to stick with this and see what happens. I know that this is really too soon to do serious tweaking. I absolutely do need the control. I feel that having control over my food intake is the basis for getting myself righted in all different areas; just one part of my fragmented, freak-out personality.

Thanks, really; I hope to update with some positive results after a while.
I'm a Mac

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:01 pm

Sorry if you felt chastised. You're much too nice for that!

I have a couple of areas in my life that I have similar challenges in, especially with paper clutter. (Analogous to overabundance of food available.) I'm trying to learn to apply some of the lessons learned here to them. Equally uneven progress! But where else to go?
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:25 am

Haha, that's OK. Pride's one of the "deadlies" which I have an abundance of! This whole way of thinking is really simple, but not easy. Common sense is like that! However, one of the reasons I really have to think about weight loss (besides just being vain) is -- I'm a breast cancer survivor, coming up on nine years. Since they've found out that it's linked to obesity, it's a reeeeeally strong motivator to stay slim. 'Cause I *definitely* want to do the most I can do to keep it from returning!

Ha, that's right. Where else to go, indeed? :wink:
I'm a Mac

Nicest of the Damned
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:26 pm

Post by Nicest of the Damned » Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:06 am

Christine wrote:Yes, I am actually physically hungry in between. So the coffee & milk is probably a safe way to stave it off for a while. But at this point, I don't want to make "allowances" that might turn into no-kiddin' red days.
Being "actually physically hungry" is not a problem or some kind of abnormal state (unless you have a metabolic problem of some sort, in that case ask an actual doctor). It's not something you must get rid of RIGHT NOW. It's certainly not an emergency. It's what happens between meals if you don't eat. It isn't going to hurt you to be hungry for a couple of hours. It's almost certainly not the worst discomfort you have ever felt in your life.

You will get used to not eating between meals, and then you will feel less hungry. It's kind of like moving from one time zone to another. At first, you feel hungry at meal times in your old time zone. But, eventually, you adjust and eat your meals at normal times in your new time zone. People who move from the East Coast to California don't always keep eating their meals three hours earlier than native West Coast people. They adjust to the different eating schedule. It takes a while, but they do.

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Wed Jun 19, 2013 2:12 pm

Nicest, thanks for the reassurance! I just have been hungry so much during the past six years trying to maintain the weight loss, I'm just tired of it. I knew I read somewhere either here or in the book that at first you would be more hungry and then it would lessen after a while. Thanks for the reminder! Impatience is another one of my vices! Still haven't "technically" had a red day though. So I guess I could be doing worse. As long as I have this mentality that I can game the system, I'll probably grumble. Which I definitely have to get over, sooner the better.
I'm a Mac

Nicest of the Damned
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:26 pm

Post by Nicest of the Damned » Wed Jun 19, 2013 2:34 pm

Incidentally, a lot of the people who try to tell you that being hungry is a bad thing and something that Must Be Dealt With Right Now sell snack foods for a living (or have a business relationship with someone who does). I wonder why someone who makes money when you buy snack foods might want you to think that you need to eat right now if you feel even slightly hungry, hmmm?

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:01 pm

Ha, yes, exactly! I've been paying attention to snack commercials lately, and the recurring theme is, you gotta have this RIGHT NOW! Sadly I haven't even realized this before.
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:01 pm

Nicest of the Damned wrote:Incidentally, a lot of the people who try to tell you that being hungry is a bad thing and something that Must Be Dealt With Right Now sell snack foods for a living (or have a business relationship with someone who does). I wonder why someone who makes money when you buy snack foods might want you to think that you need to eat right now if you feel even slightly hungry, hmmm?
I think the same is true for breakfast foods. I'm not at all sure it's the most important meal of the day. It's the least important meal in many countries around the world. But if every health professional tells you it is, then you might eat breakfast and fill the coffers of some food manufacturer.

“The real reason for health claims is well established: health claims sell food products. Marion Nestle

Unfortunately, it doesn't include only "healthy" food products, but "healthy" advice (eat frequently). And all those groups (American Dietetic Association, American Heart Association and so on) who advise you to eat more often have usually been paid by a manufacturer to spread that advice.

All the food products that have a "heart-healthy" seal of approval from the AHA have paid the AHA to say their products are heart healthy.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

Nicest of the Damned
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:26 pm

Post by Nicest of the Damned » Thu Jun 20, 2013 1:13 am

wosnes wrote:
Nicest of the Damned wrote:Incidentally, a lot of the people who try to tell you that being hungry is a bad thing and something that Must Be Dealt With Right Now sell snack foods for a living (or have a business relationship with someone who does). I wonder why someone who makes money when you buy snack foods might want you to think that you need to eat right now if you feel even slightly hungry, hmmm?
I think the same is true for breakfast foods. I'm not at all sure it's the most important meal of the day. It's the least important meal in many countries around the world. But if every health professional tells you it is, then you might eat breakfast and fill the coffers of some food manufacturer.
There are a lot of processed foods that people eat at snacks and generally not at other times. If you advertise for a snack food company (the mere existence of the phrase "snack food" in English shows that there are foods people eat mostly as snacks) and you want your sales to grow, you could try to take market share away from your competitors, or you could try to convince more people to snack, or you could try to convince those who do snack to do more of it.

Similarly, there are a lot of processed foods that people eat at breakfast and generally not at other times. It probably wouldn't sound strange to you if I said "breakfast foods", not the way it might if I said "lunch foods" or "dinner foods". Hmmmm... it's at least suspicious to my cynical mind.

This doesn't mean breakfast is evil or that you shouldn't eat breakfast while doing No S. It's just something I found interesting.

Of course, sellers of food that people eat at mealtimes don't always avoid this type of tactics, either. Remember when Taco Bell was trying to urge people to eat a fourth meal? Same kind of thing.

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Thu Jun 20, 2013 11:20 am

Yes, I agree; like the phrase "breakfast food" exists because lots of folks don't eat or don't want to eat breakfast. So the companies can use this to sell less-than-healthy foods so people are lured into eating them when they're marketed as "breakfast food". As in, You'll want to eat breakfast if you eat THIS! We used to have snack drawers at work, and I can't tell you how often I'd hit the pop tarts because "well, it's still breakfast time, isn't it?"
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Thu Jun 20, 2013 3:51 pm

Let me clarify: I'm not necessarily speaking about breakfast foods being promoted, but the meal as the most important meal of the day. If the meal is being promoted, then it follows that the foods people would eat at that meal would be promoted.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

Nicest of the Damned
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:26 pm

Post by Nicest of the Damned » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:23 pm

wosnes wrote:Let me clarify: I'm not necessarily speaking about breakfast foods being promoted, but the meal as the most important meal of the day. If the meal is being promoted, then it follows that the foods people would eat at that meal would be promoted.
I suspect that the people who make the processed breakfast foods may be behind promoting the meal. It would make a lot of business sense for them to do so.

Point is, when you see diet advice, you have to ask yourself, is there some reason other than health that someone might have for suggesting this? Does someone have a financial interest in promoting this? If the answer is yes, then you might want to look at that advice a little more skeptically.

leafy_greens
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 8:18 pm

Post by leafy_greens » Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:50 pm

oolala53 wrote:Are you actually hungry a few hours later or just wanting to eat? I always wanted to binge in the first three hours after a meal.
Me too! :oops: I'm not alone... I find it so hard to STOP eating after a meal.

I went to OA nearly 30 years ago when their recommendation was three moderate meals a day and no eating in between. There was no mention, as I hear there is now, about no sugar and flour, etc.
Sounds like OA went from sensible to diety? Like our entire culture over the past few decades.
It IS hard, to some degree. It just turns out that everything else is harder.


Great quote!
Nicest of the Damned wrote:Incidentally, a lot of the people who try to tell you that being hungry is a bad thing and something that Must Be Dealt With Right Now sell snack foods for a living (or have a business relationship with someone who does).


:D Isn't this the truth. I am so sick of hearing about having to stoke the metabolism by snacking every 3 hours.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:08 pm

leafy_greens wrote: Sounds like OA went from sensible to diety? Like our entire culture over the past few decades.
That is so true! We overreact to everything it seems.
I am so sick of hearing about having to stoke the metabolism by snacking every 3 hours.
The other day I thought that if you're snacking and "stoking the fire" you're still probably consuming calories you don't need.

I've posted this several times, but it's always worth a repeat:
Mark Bittman wrote:There's a basic truth here: there are stages of hunger, and we -- Americans -- have become accustomed to feeding ourselves at the first sign. This is the equivalent of taking a nap every time you get tired, which hardly anyone does.

There are levels of hunger, and there is a very real difference between hunger and starvation. Starvation is a physical state; your body is deprived of essential nutrients or calories for a long period of time. Probably no one reading this book has ever been truly starving -- though we all think we know what starving feels like.

Hunger is a hardwired early-warning system. At first, your brain says, "Think about eating something soon." In the later stages it says, "Eat as soon as you can; make eating a priority." At no point does your brain say, "Eat now or you will do permanent damage," though at times it may feel as if that is true. But "Eat when hungry" has become a habit. We get hungry. We eat. We get hungry again. We eat again. And so on.

I'm not saying, "Don't eat when you're hungry." I'm saying that if losing or maintaining weight is important to you, think twice before you eat from simple hunger, or from other reasons, like emotion. And when you do eat, choose a piece of fruit; a carrot; a handful of nuts. If you're still hungry, have more. And more. Eat a pint of blueberries, or cherry tomatoes; have a mango, a banana, and an apple. Have a lightly dressed salad. You would be hard-pressed to gain weight eating this way.

You can also embrace hunger, strange as that may sound, just as you might embrace the delicious anticipation of a nap, or sexual craving. Your hunger will, after all, be satisfied; why not wait an hour? (You're not dying, after all!) You might also stop eating before you're full (three-quarters full is probably about right). And if you eat slowly, taking your time, you'll give the food time to reach your stomach and give you a sense of satisfaction before you have seconds or thirds.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:22 pm

wosnes wrote:Let me clarify: I'm not necessarily speaking about breakfast foods being promoted, but the meal as the most important meal of the day. If the meal is being promoted, then it follows that the foods people would eat at that meal would be promoted.
Nicest of the Damned wrote:Point is, when you see diet advice, you have to ask yourself, is there some reason other than health that someone might have for suggesting this? Does someone have a financial interest in promoting this? If the answer is yes, then you might want to look at that advice a little more skeptically.
Yes, that's what I'm trying to look at little harder at. Snacks as such might be a little harder to market than crappy foods for a meal that is touted as the most important meal of the day. All in all -- if we stick to real, un-derivative food, we'll be doing OK. What do they say, less than five ingredients on the label, something like that? It's hard for any company to sell processed food when the buyer is aware of what's happening and just sticks to the basics.
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:07 pm

Christine wrote:
wosnes wrote:Let me clarify: I'm not necessarily speaking about breakfast foods being promoted, but the meal as the most important meal of the day. If the meal is being promoted, then it follows that the foods people would eat at that meal would be promoted.
Nicest of the Damned wrote:Point is, when you see diet advice, you have to ask yourself, is there some reason other than health that someone might have for suggesting this? Does someone have a financial interest in promoting this? If the answer is yes, then you might want to look at that advice a little more skeptically.
Yes, that's what I'm trying to look at little harder at. Snacks as such might be a little harder to market than crappy foods for a meal that is touted as the most important meal of the day. All in all -- if we stick to real, un-derivative food, we'll be doing OK. What do they say, less than five ingredients on the label, something like that? It's hard for any company to sell processed food when the buyer is aware of what's happening and just sticks to the basics.
Yea, they say less than five ingredients. I really don't care how many ingredients are on a label as long as they're things I'd have in my pantry (or fridge/freezer).

I got a kick out of Hagen Dazs "Take Five" ice cream when it was available. Five ingredients in every flavor. The same flavors in their "regular" ice cream? The same five ingredients in the same order. I think the biggest difference between the two ice creams was the packaging. As I recall not even the price was different.

You might be interested in reading Michael Pollan's In Defense of Food and Food Rules.
Mark Bittman wrote:The seven most famous words in the movement for good food are: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.†They were written, of course, by Michael Pollan, in “In Defense of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto,†the follow-up to “The Omnivore’s Dilemma.â€

Now Pollan might add three more words to the slogan: “And cook them.†Because the man who so cogently analyzed production and nutrition in his best-known books has tackled what he calls “the middle link in the food chain: cooking.â€
From Pollan Cooks!
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Thu Jun 20, 2013 9:40 pm

wosnes wrote:I got a kick out of Hagen Dazs "Take Five" ice cream when it was available. Five ingredients in every flavor. The same flavors in their "regular" ice cream? The same five ingredients in the same order. I think the biggest difference between the two ice creams was the packaging. As I recall not even the price was different.
Haha, that's funny! Reminds me of Excedrin for Migraines. Exact same ingredients as regular Excedrin.

I've heard that slogan, "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants"; unfortunately the "not too much" part has eluded me most of the time! And, I used to be a vegetarian. I'm here to tell you that you can get fat without eating a single shred of meat. In fact, I was at my highest weight while still being a vegetarian. I was working in North Carolina on assignment once, and the group decided to have a cookout toward the end of the assignment. The barbecued burgers were just too good to resist, even after years of vegetarianism. That had to have been the most wonderful burger I ever ate. Thus ended my vegetarianism. However, still at the same weight for a couple more years, is when I got diagnosed with breast cancer. And stayed that same weight for about three years afterward, when I decided to try Medifast. Yes, I lost the weight. And have kept it off, but like I said, very wrongly by eating Medifast a LOT on and off since then. That's why I'm here now, and that's why I'm looking like an idiot writing conflicting sentiments and trying to figure this all out. So, right now I'm really hungry! having lunched on veg chili, oyster crackers, topped with shredded cheese, and some cherries, about five hours ago. Yep, y'all will say, yeah, so? So now I'm off to *not* cook dinner, guess I'll go to the deli and find something halfway acceptable! :wink:
I'm a Mac

Nicest of the Damned
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:26 pm

Post by Nicest of the Damned » Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:31 am

Christine wrote:I've heard that slogan, "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants"; unfortunately the "not too much" part has eluded me most of the time!
No S is here to help you with that. Its specialty is tackling issues of eating too much food.
And, I used to be a vegetarian. I'm here to tell you that you can get fat without eating a single shred of meat. In fact, I was at my highest weight while still being a vegetarian.
Yup. You can eat mostly healthy food and be fat, if you eat too much of it. I did. A lot of the makers of other diets would like to pretend that this isn't true (possibly because, if you limit how much you eat, you are probably also limiting the amount of food you buy, and therefore how much money they or their business associates can make selling food). Unless you're really limiting what you eat, you can't eat as much as you want and lose weight. And if you are really limiting what you eat, you're going to have trouble sticking to that for long.

Incidentally, you can eat a diet of junk food and lose weight, if you limit your portions enough:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/tw ... index.html

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:41 am

Christine wrote: Haha, that's funny! Reminds me of Excedrin for Migraines. Exact same ingredients as regular Excedrin.
This is off topic, but some years ago I was having trouble with TMJ. I found the best meds for it were one regular aspirin, one regular acetaminophen, one regular ibuprofen and a cup of coffee. Worked every time.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am

@wosnes: What's that old song, "one bourbon, one whiskey, one beer" -- haha! Interesting and good that it worked for you.

@Nicest: Interesting article! But they don't have Twinkies anymore so I can't go on that diet!!! :lol:

Last evening I went up to the grocery store and got stuff from the deli for dinner. I looked at the pre-packaged dinners from the deli, checked out the calorie content of them all, and kept thinking that I shouldn't be doing that. But it's just so ingrained in my brain! So I got stuff from the salad bar; a portion of faux crab and about 1/2 - 3/4 c. of corn/black bean salsa-y stuff. Then when I got home I chopped up some romaine and tomatoes and put the faux crab on it, and my salad dressing was some chipotle salsa. And had the corn & black bean stuff on the side. I think I could have done a lot worse! (well, I did actually... 3 1/2 glasses of wine) Come to think of it, I'm guessing that if I cut out the wine on N days I'll be doing a lot better.
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Fri Jun 21, 2013 12:26 pm

Christine wrote:.
@Nicest: Interesting article! But they don't have Twinkies anymore so I can't go on that diet!!! :lol:
They should be coming back! I know the bakery here is reopening soon and will be making most of the standard products.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

Nicest of the Damned
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:26 pm

Post by Nicest of the Damned » Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:26 pm

Christine wrote:(well, I did actually... 3 1/2 glasses of wine) Come to think of it, I'm guessing that if I cut out the wine on N days I'll be doing a lot better.
Careful. There's a temptation to try to fix everything you don't like about your eating habits at once. Don't do that. You'll spread your willpower too thin, and end up trying a lot but accomplishing nothing. You've only got so much willpower. It will increase over time, but think of it like a muscle. If you were lifting weights, you wouldn't start with a 500 pound weight. You'd start smaller and work your way up.

That said, 3.5 glasses is a lot of wine, more than you should be having. You might want to try glass ceiling, where you limit yourself to 2 drinks a day.

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Fri Jun 21, 2013 1:47 pm

Nicest of the Damned wrote:That said, 3.5 glasses is a lot of wine, more than you should be having. You might want to try glass ceiling, where you limit yourself to 2 drinks a day.
Yes, it is more than I should have, so Glass Ceiling is what I was thinking. I showed my husband the web page about Glass Ceiling, who's an avowed beer drinker. He's been getting worse in that regard... but thinks that Glass Ceiling makes a lot of sense. Since then, he's been getting a bottle of wine and we share it. But he mentioned yesterday about getting the smaller containers, so he can have two glasses and I can have one. I hope he'll stick with that because it's kind of been the case lately that his bad habit is becoming mine.

But you're right, and I do have the tendency to fix everything all at once and I'm hardly ever successful (who is?)
I'm a Mac

Nicest of the Damned
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 4:26 pm

Post by Nicest of the Damned » Fri Jun 21, 2013 2:05 pm

Christine wrote:But you're right, and I do have the tendency to fix everything all at once and I'm hardly ever successful (who is?)
Lots of people tend to do that. That's why New Year's resolutions exist, and why almost nobody is still keeping theirs in March.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:23 pm

Christine wrote:
Nicest of the Damned wrote:That said, 3.5 glasses is a lot of wine, more than you should be having. You might want to try glass ceiling, where you limit yourself to 2 drinks a day.
Yes, it is more than I should have, so Glass Ceiling is what I was thinking. I showed my husband the web page about Glass Ceiling, who's an avowed beer drinker. He's been getting worse in that regard... but thinks that Glass Ceiling makes a lot of sense. Since then, he's been getting a bottle of wine and we share it. But he mentioned yesterday about getting the smaller containers, so he can have two glasses and I can have one. I hope he'll stick with that because it's kind of been the case lately that his bad habit is becoming mine.

But you're right, and I do have the tendency to fix everything all at once and I'm hardly ever successful (who is?)
I've never been much of a drinker but I used to be able to have two glasses of wine with a meal and be okay. Lately, however, one makes me feel bad. Not drunk, just bad. I can't figure out why this is happening because absolutely nothing has changed. At least I can still cook with it!
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:49 pm

Christine, there is not one thing you've said that sounds idiotic to me. It seems that in all your years of attempting to regulate your food, you just never stumbled on information alternate to the mainstream diet message. Plenty of people don't, and to many of them that do, these ideas seem idiotic!
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:45 pm

wosnes, a similar thing has been happening to me with food. I'm not peaceful with it yet. I'm eating pretty much the same as I have been on No S, but I don't feel as good later, especially when I wake up. I'll often feel as if I've just binged an hour ago, yet I haven't even had sugar, nor an immoderate meal by any means. It's not heartburn. More like mild but persistent nausea. It has rattled me, but I'm surfing this wave to. It's preferable to life before No S.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

finallyfull
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:10 pm

Post by finallyfull » Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:49 pm

Christine: reading what you ate for meals makes me hungry. Also, (as my name suggests) I started out making sure my meals were very good, and when I found myself "hungry" three hours later (still do sometimes, but how can it be hunger when I'm again "full" another hour later?) I just mentally picture what I ate for the last meal, remind myself that the content of that plate is undeniably, scientifically, certainly enough to get me through five or six hours, and maybe have a big glass of water. As Nicest said, with her excellent "time zone" analogy, you get accustomed to it.

I read recently that both being very attuned and present for your meals and also recalling what you ate later caused test subjects to eat less at the next meal. When hungry, I try to use that tidbit. It works. Also, when I start to feel really hungry an hour or so before a meal, six months in, I honestly welcome it as a sign that I will enjoy my meal much much more. I no longer enjoy eating between meals because it spoils my appetite. For real. But it took awhile, and I am still sometimes tempted, but I quickly decide it's not worth it (usually).

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Mon Jun 24, 2013 4:46 pm

Good Monday to y'all, hope everyone had a good weekend. You know, what keeps me on track more than everything else is -- how unbelievably commonsense this No S thing is, and I'm slowly realizing the unbelievability (?) of how people have forgotten this.

@wosnes & @oolala53, I hope you ladies will feel better soon; I don't know if this is similar to what you're feeling, but, about a year ago, a few times, I would get sick the day after I'd had (usually) a tall beer. Then I was OK. That to me was strange because I'd only had one, but during a checkup I told the doc about it, but she didn't appear to be concerned at all, I guess when she heard my answer "the next day" rather than just after drinking it. This only happened 3-4 times and has not happened since. Also, I feel slightly nauseated during certain periods of the day, but I attribute it to probably low blood sugar, being hungry, etc. However I hope that if you don't get better, please see the doc. Just to ease your minds.
finallyfull wrote:I just mentally picture what I ate for the last meal, remind myself that the content of that plate is undeniably, scientifically, certainly enough to get me through five or six hours, and maybe have a big glass of water. As Nicest said, with her excellent "time zone" analogy, you get accustomed to it.
That's a good idea. I keep thinking, what the heck DO I have to eat, to not make me hungry until my next meal? And I realize the answer: some giant breakfast that I shouldn't be eating in the first place. I did it Saturday morning (and boy was it good!) but Sunday morning I was very pleasantly surprised to find out that I'd lost just over 3 lbs. this past week! This has given me the impetus to keep this up with a more hopeful frame of mind, and just a few minutes ago I read about LA_Loser's mod of recording her S days with green even though she could have an S day. I don't really want to add an extra piece of bookkeeping, I am actually "kind of" finding that I could be doing that, because some S days I don't eat breakfast at all, but when I do eat, it is following N day principles. And I am finding that even if I do have an S day that actually could be an N day, I consider having a dessert but don't care if I do or not! So I don't!!! Wow!!! What a wonderful feeling that is!!! I think it is mainly the fact that I don't feel like I've GOT to have a dessert because I don't know when I could "cheat" again. All of this makes me more willing to go through some hungry periods of time, and getting it into my mind that I'm starting to look forward to making "real" recipes again. Gosh I can't tell you how sick I was of plain meat & veg for dinner, and not having enough gumption to figure out something that would fit into Medifast's "lean & green" guidelines that wasn't just plain meat & veg. Again. Not that I'm knocking Medifast; I was very successful in getting the weight off initially. I just wasn't smart at keeping it off the way they wanted you to. Oh well! 'Nuff rambling. Tonight it's beef stroganoff! :)
I'm a Mac

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Mon Jun 24, 2013 4:52 pm

finallyfull wrote:I read recently that both being very attuned and present for your meals and also recalling what you ate later caused test subjects to eat less at the next meal. When hungry, I try to use that tidbit. It works. Also, when I start to feel really hungry an hour or so before a meal, six months in, I honestly welcome it as a sign that I will enjoy my meal much much more. I no longer enjoy eating between meals because it spoils my appetite. For real. But it took awhile, and I am still sometimes tempted, but I quickly decide it's not worth it (usually).
And this is good too! I will try to do these suggestions too, thanks!
I'm a Mac

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Mon Jun 24, 2013 5:14 pm

Congrats on the weight loss, but even more on the renewed enthusiasm from insight into the value of the process.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

finallyfull
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:10 pm

Post by finallyfull » Mon Jun 24, 2013 7:02 pm

I should mention that I DID start out by having very large breakfasts, for a number of reasons. I heard it helps curb later appetite, it started me out with the comfort of knowing I was well fed indeed, and set a good tone for the day. It helped me get through the first few months, and actually I've slowwwwwwly started to reduce it a bit to get me hungry for lunch. My loss is snail-slow, but I don't have much to lose, yet it's trending downward at it's snail pace.

For some of us, a great breakfast is a great idea, at least at first. I may change that later as I adjust naturally.

I should also mention I gained a few pounds at first, but lost them again as I kept to the process. I consider that gain VERY important, because the first couple of months I truly felt I needed to reassure my body and my mind that nobody was going to try to starve it! My inner beast gets easily riled.

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Mon Jun 24, 2013 8:24 pm

@oolala53: thank you! Yes, I want to get to that point where lots of folks are here: getting my eating behavior in order and have the bonus of weight loss--even though I don't always sound like that's what I want.

@finallyfull: Thanks for your comments! I have a "very" short time to scarf down breakfast in the morning; I might want to come up with a way to eat more, and more of a healthy breakfast than what I had Saturday morning. I'm glad to hear that other folks have gained at first, also. That encourages me, since my inner beast is about as big as King Kong.

I just bought a couple of bags of chopped nuts at the store yesterday; almonds and walnuts. I'm gonna add them to my Grape Nuts in the morning, and possibly to other dishes where they wouldn't be completely icky.

Also speculated today that I may be so hungry between meals because they are spaced out pretty far. Breakfast before 6:30, lunch as close to 12 as I can get, and dinner at about 6 (sometimes later). Or is that normal but I just don't know it yet? :?
I'm a Mac

User avatar
DaveMc
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:28 pm

Post by DaveMc » Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:06 pm

oolala: "cattywompers"! I love it. Is that a common term where you live, or is that your own invention? Either way, I'm stealing it. :)

Healthiermum
Posts: 68
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 9:58 pm

Post by Healthiermum » Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:08 pm

My meals are pretty much at the same times except we have dinner at around 5:30

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:54 pm

Christine wrote: Also speculated today that I may be so hungry between meals because they are spaced out pretty far. Breakfast before 6:30, lunch as close to 12 as I can get, and dinner at about 6 (sometimes later). Or is that normal but I just don't know it yet? :?
If I eat breakfast it's around 7:00 and it's not a substantial meal. Lunch is usually around 12:30. Dinner isn't until at least 7 and frequently 8. I don't think 6-ish hours between meals is an excessively long time.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

finallyfull
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:10 pm

Post by finallyfull » Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:46 pm

I also space them out about 6 hours, unless I just can't because of work. I now don't get really hungry until 5 or so hours after a meal. (I get "cravings" and sometimes a feeling close to hunger that passes, but they are more and more rare. I now recognize them as "wanting food" rather than needing food. I pretty much always want food, at some level. But with No S, I no longer fret about whether or not I "should" have it, so I think about it far less, thus, I want it far less.

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:46 pm

Your spacing sounds relatively reasonable, but it's your appetite.

More than 6 hours is starting to push it for me, unless I'm involved in something really compelling. Five hour-gaps are more common. Honestly, even after 41 months, I am not willing to feel legitimate hunger for more than two hours at a time. If I get legitimately hungry with more than three hours to go for a meal, I have a mocha, a substantial one. Thankfully, this rarely happens anymore, but it did a lot in the beginning.

Fake hunger is more common in the few hours AFTER a meal for me. I always ignore it.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

finallyfull
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:10 pm

Post by finallyfull » Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:54 pm

I think it's a really important concept -- real versus fake hunger. I think sometimes people feel insulted by the thought, and I wish there were a way to talk about it without that. I have what I consider "fake" hunger when I want food but I know I had a good solid meal less than five hours ago. I know this for several reasons. Because it goes away and I get full again (huh?). Because I can then refrain from eating for several more hours. Because it's rarely or never a desire for raw veggies (always a good test for me). And because I'm remarkably unfazed by any fake hunger when I'm doing something fun or very interesting. REAL hunger interrupts whatever I'm doing, even if I'm having a fantastic time, it keeps tapping me on the shoulder and saying "hey, stop playing tennis, you are hungry and I wont' leave you alone!" But fake hunger somehow miraculously comes around when I'm bored or sedentary. I always look suspiciously at "hunger" that comes hand in hand with boredom or monotony (3:00 work slump anyone?). I think there is a very very strong impulse to eat and a strong desire for food, that we call hunger, that just is not the same thing as the body biologically needing more fuel. Maybe it needs a less insulting name?

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Jun 25, 2013 12:20 am

Dunno what that name would be, but it would be helpful to have one. The British have the term "peckish" that I wish we could use for it. But in Britain peckish is supposed to mean actually hungry, though not ravenous, so we would be changing the meaning. Not like that hasn't happened!

I thought at one time of trying to spread the word funger, but it turns out it has a pornographic meaning, at least according to one online urban dictionary. What a waste.

I have found that even real hunger CAN go away when I'm absorbed in an activity, but it's less likely to, and I think ex-bingers run the risk of the pendulum swinging when they push the envelope, so I don't.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

Bssh
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 5:46 pm
Location: London

Post by Bssh » Tue Jun 25, 2013 8:36 am

My meal spacing is:
Breakfast (if I eat it) - 9.30am (I work from home)
Lunch - 2pm
Dinner - 8.30/9pm (as that's when my husband returns home and I like to eat with him).

I really don't have a problem with hunger anymore. I'm able to ignore it now (I think it's the months of intermittent fasting I've done).

Christine I'm really enjoying your thread. You come across as a very thoughtful, reflective and self-aware person.
Start BMI 36, current BMI 19, goal BMI 19.
Losing by combining intermittent fasting with NoS.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Tue Jun 25, 2013 9:46 am

I've found that thinking about food makes me want food, but it's not hunger. Like oolala, I've also found that real hunger will go away.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:07 pm

finallyfull wrote:Because it's rarely or never a desire for raw veggies...
I don't think I've ever been hungry enough to want raw veggies.
oolala53 wrote:I thought at one time of trying to spread the word funger, but it turns out it has a pornographic meaning, at least according to one online urban dictionary. What a waste.
:lol: :lol: :lol: I don't want to know what that is! I usually just say peckish, but in the sense that I'm beginning to get hungry. Being an IT person myself, I just differentiate the two by saying physical or virtual hunger. Physical, meaning the obvious, and virtual, meaning "brain" hunger resulting from different stimuli: thinking about food, seeing food, boredom, etc.

@Bssh, thank you for the kind words! I'm having a great time reading everyone's insights; lots for me to think about and learn from. :D Your threads about intermittent fasting were interesting, because on weekends I tend to do that without thinking. My husband usually eats just one meal a day, and sometimes on the weekends I sort of follow his lead unless I'm really ravenous. So I'd guess that's a sort of intermittent fasting? And if that is a good practice, maybe I don't want to try to stop it. Not sure yet, I am still on my 21-day habit-building phase so maybe I don't want to go off on a mod tangent just yet.
wosnes wrote:I've found that thinking about food makes me want food, but it's not hunger. Like oolala, I've also found that real hunger will go away.
Yep, I'm finding that out too (one of my causes for "virtual" hunger). Right now, for example, it's not quite 11:00 am, but I'd say that I'm feeling "peckish". Pretty empty, but not yet physically hungry--but I'm getting there! Something I thought of this morning: I've been chewing sugarless gum to tide me over, but I'm thinking now that it's not such a great idea. I think it gets my stomach excited, thinking that I'm gonna put something in it. In fact, I think I'll have a coffee with some (ugh) fake cream & sugar. Just enough to calm it down some.

Oh, and what do y'all think about all the food shows? My husband and I had (past tense!) been watching Man vs Food and I call it Food Porn, how disgusting is that!? :shock:
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Tue Jun 25, 2013 3:28 pm

I was feeling a little under the weather yesterday and my main source of nourishment was ginger ale and soda crackers. I'm feeling better this morning and was actually hungry for breakfast. I had some berries and yogurt cream (mixture of yogurt and heavy cream with some sweetener of choice -- honey, maple syrup, brown sugar, whatever).

About an hour later I felt extremely hungry. I ignored it and it went away. Now it's getting close to lunch time and I'm just starting to feel hungry again. I'm at the "I could eat if food were in front of me" stage. It isn't and I will have to do something about that.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Jun 25, 2013 7:30 pm

I want to clarify that I actually find that physical hunger is much LESS likely to go away than virtual hunger. Or should I say I can divert myself more easily from virtual. But I don't push the envelope on physical hunger. I like getting hungry for the upcoming meal, but I don't advocate being hungry a lot. I rarely go for more than an hour feeling hungry before it's actually meal time. I've even eaten dinner early for virtual hunger, but not sooner than four hours after the previous meal. I'm not trying to be a hunger heroine!

Maybe I'm a lightweight, but 41 months in and down 19% of my weight, I'll take it. Thankfully, all my variations are encompassed in No S.

I don't want to scare you but I actually sometimes exactly WANT a raw carrot or piece of jicama. But I don't think it's necessary to having the program "work."
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:39 pm

@wosnes, hope you're feeling better today! Say, how did you come up with yogurt and heavy cream? Sounds delicious! Do you just mix it half and half?

@oolala53, Yes, I agree, I can divert myself away from virtual hunger if I really keep paying attention. Physical hunger, well, I have a little harder time with that. Just finished my lunch of a can of soup and an apple, because I was pretty hungry, although I wanted to wait until 12:00 at least. When I can't scare up anything to keep me busy at work, is when I'm in trouble! As far as raw veggies, well, yeah, I eat them; they're just not high up on my list of, Oh, I'm hungry! I want to munch on celery! or whatever. Not to say that I don't like them at all. I do love plain veggies sauteed in olive oil though, yummy! Also -- roasted vegetables are great too; wish I had a grill to grill them, that would be even better.

I'm very tired of eating "what I'm supposed to eat" just because some diet recommends it. So No S is a great relief in two ways: eating 3 squares in the age-old tradition, plus, eating what the heck I want when I do eat! The trick is, though, to want the healthier stuff in the first place. But, that'll come. I sorely need to learn patience and trust the system.
DaveMc wrote:oolala: "cattywompers"! I love it. Is that a common term where you live, or is that your own invention? Either way, I'm stealing it.
LOL! I've heard that, but from a former co-worker from Maryland. Are you originally from Maryland, oolala?

Anyway. What I'm reading here is that my meal spacing isn't that unusual. Good to know; ya gotta wonder what my head (diethead that is!!!) has been taught when I can't even be "instinctive" about normal mealtimes. Phew.
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:15 pm

Christine wrote:@wosnes, hope you're feeling better today! Say, how did you come up with yogurt and heavy cream? Sounds delicious! Do you just mix it half and half?

@oolala53, Yes, I agree, I can divert myself away from virtual hunger if I really keep paying attention. Physical hunger, well, I have a little harder time with that. Just finished my lunch of a can of soup and an apple, because I was pretty hungry, although I wanted to wait until 12:00 at least. When I can't scare up anything to keep me busy at work, is when I'm in trouble! As far as raw veggies, well, yeah, I eat them; they're just not high up on my list of, Oh, I'm hungry! I want to munch on celery! or whatever. Not to say that I don't like them at all. I do love plain veggies sauteed in olive oil though, yummy! Also -- roasted vegetables are great too; wish I had a grill to grill them, that would be even better.

I'm very tired of eating "what I'm supposed to eat" just because some diet recommends it. So No S is a great relief in two ways: eating 3 squares in the age-old tradition, plus, eating what the heck I want when I do eat! The trick is, though, to want the healthier stuff in the first place. But, that'll come. I sorely need to learn patience and trust the system.
DaveMc wrote:oolala: "cattywompers"! I love it. Is that a common term where you live, or is that your own invention? Either way, I'm stealing it.
LOL! I've heard that, but from a former co-worker from Maryland. Are you originally from Maryland, oolala?

Anyway. What I'm reading here is that my meal spacing isn't that unusual. Good to know; ya gotta wonder what my head (diethead that is!!!) has been taught when I can't even be "instinctive" about normal mealtimes. Phew.
I'm feeling much better, thank you!

I found the yogurt cream on a blog. It's about 3/4 cup yogurt and 1/2 cup heavy cream (Watch out, it can splash and make quite a mess when you're mixing it. Or, at least it can for me!) with sweetener to taste. I've used brown sugar, honey or maple syrup. Let it set for at least 30 minutes before serving. It will keep a few days in the fridge.

Re: "cattywompers" I've not heard exactly that one, but "cattywompass" was common where I grew up (northern Indiana).

I think I ate lunch yesterday at about 12:30. Dinner was at 9:00. I was getting pretty hungry, but it wasn't unmanageable.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Wed Jun 26, 2013 7:45 pm

I think cattywompass is what it's supposed to be. I think I was assuming people using it were from back east and didn't say their r's at the end of words. I haven't used it a lot myself, but it sure fits at times.

Christine I gotta say a can of soup and an apple would not be enough for me for lunch, unless that soup had some BIG chunks of food I could chew in it. I tend to have a source of protein at lunch and dinner that is equivalent in volume to the palm of my hand. And I'd have some nut butter with that apple. But I'm not a little wispy thing.

In fact, it's time for lunch and I"m going to make some now!
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:19 pm

oolala53 wrote:.
Christine I gotta say a can of soup and an apple would not be enough for me for lunch, unless that soup had some BIG chunks of food I could chew in it. I tend to have a source of protein at lunch and dinner that is equivalent in volume to the palm of my hand. And I'd have some nut butter with that apple. But I'm not a little wispy thing.
For the last ten years or so my usual lunch has been soup, bread with butter and fruit. Occasionally I have a meat-based soup, or a completely vegetable soup or a cream-based soup, but usually it's some variaton of lentil or cannellini bean and vegetables.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:44 pm

Well, the soup I had was Progressive Chicken Pot Pie style soup. It was pretty substantial. I'm finding that I need enough protein (oolala, I think the "palm of my hand analogy" is good, I try to use it myself) otherwise I'll be ready to eat my shoes by the time dinnertime rolls around. Also that eating a salad with even that amount of protein does not do it for me; especially if that protein is beans. I think soup with beans or lentils works better. The soup I had today probably didn't have that much protein, but it was pretty thick and starchy as they used to say. I do have to work on the healthy fat part. The grape nuts I eat in the morning with chopped walnuts or almonds that I have had so far this week, is pretty good with some berries on top.
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:56 pm

Christine wrote:Well, the soup I had was Progressive Chicken Pot Pie style soup. It was pretty substantial. I'm finding that I need enough protein (oolala, I think the "palm of my hand analogy" is good, I try to use it myself) otherwise I'll be ready to eat my shoes by the time dinnertime rolls around. Also that eating a salad with even that amount of protein does not do it for me; especially if that protein is beans. I think soup with beans or lentils works better. The soup I had today probably didn't have that much protein, but it was pretty thick and starchy as they used to say. I do have to work on the healthy fat part. The grape nuts I eat in the morning with chopped walnuts or almonds that I have had so far this week, is pretty good with some berries on top.
I find that fat in some form (nuts, avocados, olive oil, butter and dairy products) has a lot to do with me being able to go for six hours between meals. I usually only have animal protein once a day, in the evening. Sometimes I don't have it then.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

noni
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:01 pm

Post by noni » Thu Jun 27, 2013 12:00 pm

Christine said:
"Oh, and what do y'all think about all the food shows? My husband and I had (past tense!) been watching Man vs Food and I call it Food Porn, how disgusting is that!?"

LOL...I saw a few episodes of that. People will violate themselves for money and fame.

finallyfull
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:10 pm

Post by finallyfull » Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:20 pm

A can of substantial soup and an apple would leave me hungry too. Or maybe just feeling punished. For my lunch I would definitely have had a hunk o'bread with butter or a chunk of good cheese, or a banana with that. But as I've said before, my inner beast is sensitive, so I have to go very slow and reassure her three times a day that I'm not out to starve her.

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:41 pm

The reason I said something about the soup not being enough for me was that I think the original poster had said something previously about feeling very hungry pretty quickly after meals during the day. I wanted that person to know that to start at least, it's okay to eat enough to avoid that. Getting the habit is sometimes hard enough without throwing in battling real hunger for hours. Especially for someone who has had plenty of experience eating little, as I think that poster did. I believe in weaning one thing at a time!

And that means my eating may evolve to the soup and apple lunch volume consistently. There is definitely a trend to be satisfied with eating less in my life; it's just taking years. I've had nothing but trouble trying to speed up the process. But if people are there, mazel tov!
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Thu Jun 27, 2013 5:15 pm

oolala53 wrote:The reason I said something about the soup not being enough for me was that I think the original poster had said something previously about feeling very hungry pretty quickly after meals during the day. I wanted that person to know that to start at least, it's okay to eat enough to avoid that. Getting the habit is sometimes hard enough without throwing in battling real hunger for hours. Especially for someone who has had plenty of experience eating little, as I think that poster did.
Yep, that was me. I think part of the problem is poor planning on my part; grabbing whatever is fast to throw in my lunch bag before I head out to work. Same goes with breakfast. Eat it -fast- and get going. Today I had Progresso "Italian Wedding Soup" and some cherries. I thought about getting some peanuts out of the vending machine. That would qualify as a healthful thing to eat I'd guess. But I've still got 90% of my brain running in "diethead" mode so...I didn't. However, last night my husband was at a meeting, so I grabbed a panini from the deli, with a small bag of chips and some coleslaw. Technically one plate, one layer of food, but a big plate nonetheless. I suppose my eating a big dinner makes up for having sparse breakfasts and lunches, but as everyone says, this does take time to tweak and I'm just starting my fourth week. Not trying to make excuses, guess I'm still in self-observation mode.
I'm a Mac

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Thu Jun 27, 2013 5:34 pm

In my mind, at 4 weeks in, it doesn't matter if the peanuts were healthful or not. It matters whether they would have contributed to pleasure, satiety, and a later feeling of vitality. And keep the plan seeming fair and reasonable. As time goes on, better quality food becomes even more delightful, in my experience.

Reinhard used to and maybe still does eat optimized oatmeal made with hot tap water at work for lunch a lot. Maybe that would appeal to me in year four, but it still sounds like a very unsatisfying lunch to me. But convenience ranks higher to him than it does to me, at least for now.

You will find the balance between ease of meal "planning" and what will truly please you in the long run. Maybe food is less important to you than you thought since it seems you want to be able to grab things to eat. And that is perfectly workable in No S.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Thu Jun 27, 2013 5:45 pm

Have you looked at the Intelligent Dietary Defaults thread? Lots of ideas there for meals people have found easy to make routine.
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:36 pm

oolala53 wrote:It matters whether they would have contributed to pleasure, satiety, and a later feeling of vitality. And keep the plan seeming fair and reasonable.
...
You will find the balance between ease of meal "planning" and what will truly please you in the long run. Maybe food is less important to you than you thought since it seems you want to be able to grab things to eat. And that is perfectly workable in No S.
Well, that's what I was kind of thinking about the peanuts: pleasure, satiety, vitality... but like I said, the "diethead" is still going strong! As far as meal planning goes, I -think- the more I have to plan what I'm going to eat, the more I might feel that I'm on a REAL DIET. I don't want to feel like, Oh, I've got to follow all these diet rules but I don't want to, so I'm gonna cheat. But I've gotta admit, although I like soup, it's not quite doing it for me, and if I'd plan properly, I'd pick something more satisfying and better quality (I'd hope). Gosh this is the most thinking I've done about food habits; guess that means the mechanism of No S frees up my mind to actually determine what works for me. I guess that's a good thing! OK, Intelligent Dietary Defaults, huh? I'm gonna spend a lot of time on that one, that might help me on the way to better instameals.
I'm a Mac

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:59 pm

Take all the time you need. I'm sure there is a fair amount of "recovery" to be done from having relied on Medifast, though I thought they also had classes on how to eat when off the plan? Too diety, I imagine. You're finding YOUR middle road. It's a beautiful thing.

You'll also find the balance between planning to have wonderful food available for meals because, let's face it, you know you're going to want to eat, and feeling that means you're on a diet. I mean, you don't run out and buy napkins just before a meal, right? Having good food available means you can pull the meals together when it suits. Good golly, I know there are thin Italians who think about food a lot of their day! They love food, they plan for their next meal and look forward to it, and they remember it fondly. That is another extreme, not necessarily an ideal! You'll be somewhere in the middle.

I don't know what I'm going to have for dinner tonight. I do know I've got the groceries for several different satisfying meals. And I can say yes to last-minute invitations to eat out, if that comes up. Or go a few blocks and get fast food, if I don't want to fuss. (But I'd be likely to bring that back, split the meal in half and supplement with my own veggies. I likes my veggies! But I've gone without.)

And don't forget life in between. Which I have been ignoring this whole morning!
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Thu Jun 27, 2013 11:23 pm

Yes, Medifast has a transition plan, having you slowly wean yourself off of their meals, and its length depends upon how much weight you have lost. But somehow I could never do that; at the point I'd felt like I was done, I.Was.Done. However, I did my own transition to real food, just not a lot of it; tried to stick to 1100 "base" calories, and if I had a snack or whatever, I still wouldn't be over the limit to maintain my weight. I could have done worse,but the weight maintenance occasionally went off track; I'd had enough cheat days that I'd end up 5-10 lbs. up again, and this past year was 20 lbs., being a particularly stressful year. Through it all I "maintained" going back on Medifast again, way, way too often. So yeah, my middle road is slowly forming ("middle way" of sorts, in Buddhist parlance). Hope you've found something wonderful for dinner!

Life in between; well, that is/has been a major impetus for my eating problems to begin with.
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Thu Jul 04, 2013 3:54 pm

Back to the wine (or beer). Earlier this week Elise at Simply Recipes posted a recipe for Panaché (aka Shandy).

A couple of people wrote in the comments that mixing 7-Up or Sprite with wine was popular where they live. No 7-Up or Sprite in the house, but I still had ginger ale. So I tried it -- half wine, half ginger ale. Not only was it very refreshing and not too sweet, it didn't bother me.

Pretty soon I'll probably be drinking Shirley Temples! :lol:
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

oolala53
Posts: 10059
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Thu Jul 04, 2013 4:24 pm

OMgosh, I had a French Swiss boyfriend who introduced me to Panache! I don't like most alcohol. too bitter for me. Panache was a nice compromise. I've since decided that I'd rather chew than drink, so I limit even sweet booze. But on a hot day, once in a while...
Count plates, not calories. 11 years "during"
Age 69
BMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8 3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (flux) 3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux 6/20 22
1/21-23

There is no S better than Vanilla No S (mods now as a senior citizen)

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Fri Jul 05, 2013 1:53 pm

wosnes wrote:So I tried it -- half wine, half ginger ale. Not only was it very refreshing and not too sweet, it didn't bother me.
Oh wow, that sounds good!

...and Yes!!! A Shandy was great when I was with my Brit friends in Belgium!!!
I'm a Mac

SuperMysteryCat
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:43 am

Post by SuperMysteryCat » Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:12 pm

Hi. I'm new to the forums, but thought I could add a couple of maybe helpful things here...

You say you hate going to the gym (me too!), but walking is easy and pleasurable and canonical No S. Consider becoming an Urban Ranger and forget being a gym rat. There are fancy scientific reasons why long walks are excellent for weight loss and aerobics classes aren't (something to do with fasting blood sugar levels), but - bottom line - they work. Since I started taking long, easy walks whilst listening to audio books or podcasts, my appetite is diminished. Hard gym workouts not only suck, but make me hungry as a horse. A long walk with an iPod, friend or lover after dinner now feels like both a necessity and a luxury to me. I have friends who swear by pedometers and take great pleasure in getting their 10,000 steps a day, but I don't like keeping track.

And just my humble opinion, but I think you should toss your scale in the garbage. It's too blunt a measurement and it's really bad for those of us who have a tendency to obsess.

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Tue Jul 09, 2013 9:54 pm

LOL, you're right about the scale obsession! I do walk with my friend, but unfortunately it's only a couple times a week (work schedules being what they are). I'm afraid that I can't do much more than that (yet!).
I'm a Mac

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:31 am

Christine wrote:LOL, you're right about the scale obsession! I do walk with my friend, but unfortunately it's only a couple times a week (work schedules being what they are). I'm afraid that I can't do much more than that (yet!).
Can you walk by yourself? I find that's a great time for creative thinking and problem solving.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

User avatar
Christine
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm
Location: Williamsburg VA

Post by Christine » Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:59 am

Yes, I do like walking by myself, actually. I like to sprint on and off during the walk; it's exhilarating! Also I do belong to a gym, which I was going to practically every day in April and May. However that's when I went on "vacation", and never got back to it yet. Now that I have just started a new job, I have to see what my hours are going to shake out to be, and start everything again. I don't like being sedentary. Unfortunately I've got other stuff going on too that is making me slightly hesitant, though: not trying to make excuses, but it's there, nonetheless.
I'm a Mac

Post Reply