Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
ALGEBRAGIRL Posts: 1,925
1/4/14 12:01 P

You mention being sedentary. One thing you can do (it's a really small thing) is raise your computer's monitor up to eye level with some books or sturdy boxes. Or just have a high table beneath the monitor. Keep the computer and monitor at a level you where your hands can rest comfortably on the mouse pad. Arrange it so that your only option when you're at the computer is to stand. This is probably not as easily done with a laptop. However, my husband has several monitors attached to his laptop and he watches each for different reasons. So, I know the monitor thing can be done. If you have freecycle in your area, you can probably get a free flat screen monitor or put out a request that you're looking for one. Once set up, you will be standing a lot more. If standing too long fatigues you, pull a chair up and stand on one foot while you have a knee on a pad on the chair. Just try not to sit down at the computer and your activity level will change a bit without your having to actively exercise.

My doctor thinks this is great and a podiatrist told me it's much better for your back to stand at the computer.

For Christmas this year, I got a pad that people use who work in kitchens - for the floor in front of my computer. It's like a springy cushion, kind of like getting a new pair of running shoes!

Edited by: ALGEBRAGIRL at: 1/4/2014 (12:03)
FTSOLK Posts: 1,395
1/3/14 3:25 P

An APPLE wouldn't fit in my fist.

OCEANLOVE77 SparkPoints: (2,761)
Fitness Minutes: (80)
Posts: 39
12/3/13 7:06 P

Honey, you can do it, you are so young, the best of your life is ahead of you!!!
I'm 60 years old, and i'm here trying....
Don't think about numbers too much, think portions, if it does not fit in your hand (in a fist) then it is too much.
So, think fist of meats, fist of veggies, and fist of fruits.... and you need to get out of the house,
because you may eat out of boredom, go walk the mall, library etc. it is not cold there...
Good luck
write to me if you like :)

LEC358 SparkPoints: (11,135)
Fitness Minutes: (6,555)
Posts: 2,744
12/3/13 8:30 A

I second Michelle's suggestion and add that you should work your entire personal network in order to get a job. Ask friends, family, etc to ask their friends if they know of any positions that would fit your skill set. Also, is it worth getting credentialed for one of those child care websites? People are very willing to help those who reach out.

MICHELLEXXXX SparkPoints: (12,229)
Fitness Minutes: (5,920)
Posts: 3,780
12/3/13 5:32 A

Have you talked to the leaders of your Church about your employment situation? I believe they will help steer you towards work.
Also, I encourage you to look into free groups such as TOPS for guidance, support, and accountability. I also love and encourage joining small Church groups.

Edited by: MICHELLEXXXX at: 12/3/2013 (05:42)
RUSSELL_40 Posts: 16,826
12/3/13 3:36 A

Whether you want to lose 1 lb a week, or 2 lbs a week, if you sit on your butt all day, you will do it on either plan, so if the exercise is set, then you are basically trying to lose 1 less lb a week, right? A lb is 3500 calories. Divide that by the days in a week, and you are at 500 calories a day.

So if 1200-1550 helps you lose 2 lbs a week, then to lose 1 lb a week, you should be able to consume 500 extra calories. So the range should move to 1700-2050, unless 3500 calories does not result in a lb gain/loss. That notion has been drummed into us since childbirth it seems, so I understand Honeylissabee's confusion. She is settling for 1/2 the weight loss to up calories, and confused as to why she only get 90 extra calories, which would only be 630 extra calories. In theory, she would need a 7000 calorie deficit to lose 2 lbs a week, so if she only adds back in 630 calories, she is being told, she can cut 7000 calories, and lose 2 lbs, OR cut 6,340 calories and lose 1.

Honeylissabee: I would just try to eat the upper original range (1500 ), and see how it works. If you lose 1.5 lbs, and want to lose a bit slower, so you don't feel like you are starving yourself, then up the calories to 1600, and try that for a few weeks, and see if it slows a bit. Make adjustments as necessary. Just make changes slowly, and average the rate of loss over a couple weeks, so you don't overcompensate. You may find that you can eat 1800 and lose 1 lb a week, and feel full. If that is what it takes to see steady weight loss, without feelings of deprivation, just do what works for you. SP is just giving you guidelines, based on what you input, and sometimes they make errors. If you think it is an error you can ask for someone to look at it, but you can just as easily fix it, by slowly upping calories, until weight loss is at an ideal pace.

OCEANLOVE77 SparkPoints: (2,761)
Fitness Minutes: (80)
Posts: 39
12/2/13 10:54 P

Hi, wow how did u do it :) good for you!!!
I'm having trouble getting my numbers, too little calories, too little protein etc. and exercise, i can't seem to get motivated to start and when i try, i don't like it, i do love dancing but never dance, where? when?
I've notice you dance, I'm latina and love all the music that you mentioned, do you dance with videos or take classes?? i would love to start dancing again ( need to lose 50 lbs.)

AZULVIOLETA6 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (74,443)
Posts: 3,293
12/2/13 9:45 P

The point is not to track it absolutely accurately down to the n-th degree--the point is to do more so that you see more success. What would be wrong with underestimating your activity level and actually doing slightly more? As long as you underestimate your activity and your calories, you will be fine.

You need to stop worrying so much about the formulas and your approach and just DO MORE. Every 3-4 weeks, step something up a notch--add more exercise, make your diet slightly stricter, etc.

FTSOLK Posts: 1,395
12/2/13 4:36 P

Nirerin- Eating 90% real food is my top priority. I can't eat artificial sweeteners without getting a horrible stomachache, and I don't think I should be picking hydrogenated oils over real cream.

I know from EXPERIENCE that I can't maintain a 1,200-1,300 calorie diet ESPECIALLY with exercise. That's why I decided to set a goal to lose a pound a week instead. I figured that would be a reasonable goal that should allow me to eat more.

I am starting a workout routine. I only did 30 minutes of cardio today (306 calories burned according to my HRM), but it was something. I simply don't have a very active lifestyle. I don't work a job where I'm on my feet all day. I have a sedentary LIFESTYLE, but I'm trying to make more effort to move more. When I go shopping, I spend hours at the store walking around. I'm starting to work out intentionally 30 minutes a day 6 days per week.

And Azul, there's nothing wrong with intentional exercise. When did I say there was? My problem is that sometimes the line between intentional exercise (exercise I enter into the activity tracker) and lifestyle activity (whether I say I'm sedentary or lightly active) can get blurred at times. I honestly feel the best thing would be to have a mixture of both intentional exercise and lifestyle activity. Maybe one day in the near future, I'll have a full-time job at a daycare, and I can claim to be more active.

EELPIE Posts: 2,700
12/2/13 3:36 P

Oh I'm sorry, I must have read the original posting wrong!!

AZULVIOLETA6 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (74,443)
Posts: 3,293
12/2/13 3:30 P

Eelpie, Lissa has been dieting for many, many months. She is not just starting out.

Edited by: AZULVIOLETA6 at: 12/2/2013 (21:34)
EELPIE Posts: 2,700
12/2/13 2:50 P

Try making small changes at first. I couldn't drink 8 glasses of water a day right from the get-go, it took about 5 days to get up to that. Think of the same with calories, decrease a little each day to get to your target calorie range.

The range of 1500 calories a day should ensure a loss of about a pound a week - and that's not really too bad. I aim for that because for me and my lifestyle that is a very realistic goal. Don't ever make your goals too hard to attain, as that is a certain recipe for failure.

In order to stay within your daily calorie range, start adding foods that don't add a lot of calories, yet are more filling (think fiber!!). Apples, beans, etc.

NIRERIN Posts: 14,275
12/2/13 2:36 P

the point of eating food is to get fuel so that your body can go. so it does make sense that whole food has calories and enough of them fuel your body.

the only punishment i see is you being hard on yourself because you have decided that you must meet these six rules, where those six rules happen to be things that are diametrically opposed. it reminds me of a sign in a little to go restaurant. it looked something like this
good, cheap or quick. you can pick any two.
if you pick good and cheap it will not be quick.
if you pick good and quick it will not be cheap.
if you pick cheap and quick it will not be good.

the parameters that you have set for yourself right now [whole foods, 1600-1700 cals, little to no exercise, 2lb per week in losses] aren't compatible. you need to put them in order of what you want the most and you really need to focus on the top one and do that right now. you might be able to work in #2 on your list as well. but if your goals/parameters stay anywhere near what i summed up numbers three and four have to change. the tradeoff to whole foods, eating more calories and not exercising is a slower loss. so if you want to lose as much as possible as quickly you need to do the opposite of at least two of those things. if you want to eat whole foods, fine. but you'll need to suffer through being hungry for a bit if you want a faster loss. and if you want to stay at a higher range you'll have a slower loss. unless you want to exercise.
so list out all your goals/needs/parameters. put them in order of what you want the absolute most right now. and put all of your energy into achieving that goal. you'll likely have to alter everything beyond three in order to make one and maybe two happen. but you won't be pulling yourself between opposite goals. because what you're upset with yourself for not being able to work out is the equivalent of waking up when you're 40 and being mad that you aren't a gymnast, concert pianist, nfl linebacker and aren't a judge when you have never taken a tumbling class, had a piano lesson, played a game of touch football or went to law school. to achieve some things you really have to streamline. otherwise you just sort of flounder in the middle never really reaching anything and always mad at yourself. so pick what you want the most. if you truly believe that what you put into your body is the most important thing in the world, great. read up on proper fueling and nutrition and accept that you're not going to lose very quickly, but your body is going to be in the best shape and the best health possible while you get there and you don't really have to exercise. or if you want to lose a little quicker, rotate in some of the of 1200-1300 days. mainly stick to your higher ranges, but switch it up a little lower still with whole foods. or even add that distant second focus to exercise. if you want to lose weight in the quickest manner possible, accept that you might need to have cool whip instead of cream most of the time, that egg beaters or egg whites instead of whole eggs have fewer calories and that you can cut 100 cals out of a muffin if you use splenda instead of honey. alternately you could eat fewer whole food calories and get there. or again, bump up the exercise. but pick your focus. and once you have done that, evaluate all the secondary things to make sure that they are helping you reach your primary goal.

AZULVIOLETA6 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (74,443)
Posts: 3,293
12/2/13 2:29 P

I don't understand why there is something wrong with intentional exercise--you NEED to be exercising every day just for good cardiovascular health, much less for weight loss. Unemployment is no excuse--the last time I was unemployed I used the extra time to train for a marathon--all you need is a pair of shoes and the will to do it.

That was a HUGE breakfast and quite high in carbs. Eating real food is a great first step and I know that it is a huge change for you. Once that becomes a habit you can work on eating less of that real food and moving more as well.

RENATARUNS SparkPoints: (4,367)
Fitness Minutes: (2,155)
Posts: 1,379
12/2/13 2:27 P

You get a third of what they get, but it's going to taste SO much better, and you'll probably feel better after eating it too with a better balance of real food than is in the diet stuff. It's all in how you look at it.

Remember that as someone who is losing weight (and to a lesser extent even once you reach maintenance) you must limit some foods to being eaten much more rarely or in much smaller amounts than previously. There's no way around that. The key is to find a way of looking at it mentally that avoids resentment, which can be so poisonous to staying consistent over the long term. Maybe tell yourself that instead of a constant stream of high volume and low quality sweets you are instead going to trade that for a weekly (or however often works for you) treat of the highest quality, yummiest, tastiest thing you can make (though purchasing might be better temptation wise if you can possibly find anything of the right portion size. Going upscale on the bakery choice would likely help in that regard), and you're going to savor every single bite. That way you focus on the quality over the missing quantity.

You are very likely to find over time that you simply lose your appetite for cruddy mass-produced sweets. I can barely even stomach generic birthday cake anymore. I'm a big believer in taking a small amount of problematic foods at social events for social reasons and even so -- it usually winds up in the trash after the first bite. The resentment problem you're having now may very well not stick with you forever. You just need to find a way to deal with it for now.

BUNNYKICKS Posts: 2,433
12/2/13 1:28 P

So make it with "real whole food" and reduce portion size accordingly.

That's what I do. I never feel "punished" and i never eat "diet food" - i don't use splenda, or fat free "cheese", or applesauce-instead-of-oil.... but I *do* eat vastly reduced portions when I choose to eat calorie-dense foods. That said... i wouldn't typically choose a muffin - because they just *are not that good* and certainly not very filling for the calories they pack.

There's no "punishment" involved. It's all a matter of personal choice and personal accountability for the consequence of their choice(s).

Edited by: BUNNYKICKS at: 12/2/2013 (13:30)
FTSOLK Posts: 1,395
12/2/13 1:09 P

It feels like I'm being punished for making food with real, whole ingredients. If I use Splenda instead of honey, that's a savings of 35 calories per muffin. If I leave out the yolks, I'm sure I'll save some more calories there too. And another 40-80 calories if I find an artificial alternative for some or all of the oil.

I could have a Betty Crocker muffin for nearly half the calories, yet my version had all good, clean ingredients. It doesn't make sense. I want to eat more real, unprocessed ingredients, but they seem to come at a caloric bang. Homemade whipped cream is probably triple the calories of the sugar-free cool-whip some dieters recommend, which means I get a third of what they get for the same calories.

At least tomorrow is a low-carb day. Some berries in the morning, and no starchy carbs for the rest of the day.I'm giving carb cycling a try.

BUNNYKICKS Posts: 2,433
12/2/13 12:44 P

two teaspoons of oil is 80 calories!! that's a lot of fat in one tiny muffin! plus whatever fat is in the egg yolk. plus, white or whole-wheat, *flour has calories* - and more than it looks like it should. Whereas in a loaf of bread, the flour is rather fluffed up, in a muffin, it's packed more densely. So yes, you are getting a lot of calories in a small "healthy looking" package. Muffins are misleading. They are not "part of a healthy breakfast" - they are more or less cake masquerading as a sensible choice.

FTSOLK Posts: 1,395
12/2/13 12:40 P

Refined flour? Fat? These muffins have 100% whole wheat flour and 2 teaspoons of olive oil per muffin (along with the two teaspoons of honey). Then, of course, there's eggs, pumpkin, and seasonings. They're actually pretty "clean." That's what really gets me. I get 800 calories in a Costco muffin. I can understand 300 calories in a processed, from a box muffin. But it still seems crazy that I make a muffin that's 100% whole wheat, free of chemicals and preservatives, and is STILL 200 calories.

I have gone to places to apply for jobs. I typically am told they aren't hiring, or I need to fill out the application online. I have never even been called back for an interview or anything actually going to places, and it seems like a waste of gas to drive around to apply. I DO go to stores and pick up applications if I'm out, though. I just have found slightly more success searching the web for job postings.

And my dad says I need to make looking for a job a full-time job. 2 hours a day isn't enough. In fact, since I'm still unemployed, 12 hours a day isn't enough either. I probably should increase to 90-100 hours per week devoted to looking for a job. I basically have two resumes: a generic retail job resume and one that's more catered to childcare jobs.

SIMPLELIFE2 Posts: 707
12/2/13 12:19 P

"there are plenty of days where I hardy get out of bed."

"I spend 8-12 hours a day (sometimes more) 5-7 days per week sitting on my butt sending out resumes and filling out online job applications"


BUNNYKICKS Posts: 2,433
12/2/13 12:09 P

While I understand that looking for work is of extreme importance, there's really no need for sitting in front of a computer for 12 hours a day "sending out online applications." Honestly, I find it hard to imagine how this could take more than an hour or two a day, including checking the online help-wanted sites for new listings. If it's taking more than that, then you need to find ways of streamlining the process - make a few variations of your basic resume, write a few sample cover letters.... then for each ad you answer, spend 5 minutes "customizing to the job listing" and click upload and send.

Why not try the old-school method of knocking on a few doors? That actually still works in this day and age, just as well (and in many cases, works more effectively) than the hi-tech method of online-screening. Even if the company insists on an online-application, having met the manager face-to-face adds greatly to the chance that your online application is paid some attention.

As for food, yes, the calories add up fast. Muffins are one of the most evil foods in the universe, in my opinion at least. They have the sound and appearance of "healthy" and "light" and yet they are total calorie bombs. The sugar in the muffin is not the problem - it's the fat and refined flour. Baked goods are calorie-dense for the satisfaction they provide, and muffins even more so due to all the butter-or-oil used to make them "tender." For the calories involved in your morning muffin, you could have had two extra eggs and another cup of fruit.

FTSOLK Posts: 1,395
12/2/13 11:27 A

I spend 8-12 hours a day (sometimes more) 5-7 days per week sitting on my butt sending out resumes and filling out online job applications. I do have some Leslie Sansone videos (I plan on doing a workout after I digest my breakfast).

My breakfast today was two eggs, a cup of frozen mango (we're a little low on fruit), a teaspoon of coconut oil, and a homemade whole wheat pumpkin muffin. It wasn't a very big breakfast, but it was a little under 500 calories. It was that muffin that really threw me over. One muffin has just 2 teaspoons of honey to sweeten it, but it's still nearly 200 calories. I wanted to get 2 dozen muffins out of the batch so they'd be 100 calories each, but that obviously didn't happen.

The calories add up so quickly! I am so used to these 200-300 calorie meal suggestions that I feel like I'm eating too much if I have 400-500 calories for breakfast. I mean, even after tracking breakfast and lunch (I need to weigh my sweet potato so those numbers may change slightly) I still have 500-800 calories for dinner and snack(s). That should be plenty- especially if I exercise today, but it still feels like I'm doing something wrong.

I did just sign up for a gym membership, but the gym hasn't opened yet, so I'm not sure when I'll be able to start going. For now, I have Leslie Sansone and Jillian Michaels.

NIRERIN Posts: 14,275
12/2/13 8:39 A

if your 1lb loss per week is only 90 cals above 1200-1550, that means that when you're sedentary you simply don't burn enough calories to lose 2lbs per week and get the basic nutrients your body needs.

half a pound of loss per week is a 250 cal a day deficit. 3/4 lb per week is 375 per day and a pound a week is 500 cals a day. if you're worried about half not being enough and you're worried about a full pound being to few calories for you to get by on, split the difference. aim for 3/4 lb per week. it will be low enough to get you out of that maintenance variance but it will still be higher than those lows you can't be satisfied on.

and are there any exercise dvds you might want to do this winter? there are walking, dancing, aerobics and tons of other options. are there any wii fit games you like to play? ddr? kinex? could you do jumping jacks or jump rope? yoga? intense housecleaning? the more you can get moving the better you will feel all around.

KMHILLI Posts: 165
12/2/13 6:14 A

Jenni is on to something here...

Let's face it...there aren't a heck of a lot of upsides to unemployment. In fact, there is only one: time. Use it! Get those steps in. It'll help you physically...and mentally too.

JENNILACEY SparkPoints: (81,972)
Fitness Minutes: (86,286)
Posts: 2,489
12/2/13 5:21 A

I'm just estimating here... but if you could burn an extra 300 cals a day through exercise, you should be able to eat between 1300-1700 cals and lose 1-2 lbs per week. You could do some workouts at home when you're not at the gym. I was a stay at home mom up until recently and lost 1-2 lbs/week just working out at home while pretty much house bound, eating around 1400 cals. You could also try calorie cycling. I know how daunting only eating 1200-1300 cals would be. Ugh, bird food. I like to be able to eat! But I could always handle a few low calorie days (where I'd eat super clean, low cal bulky/filling foods, cut out the "extras") when I knew I had a few higher calorie days to look forward to. I'd eat 1200 cals some days and up to 1700-1800 cals on other days, some days in between at 1300-1500 cals to get a weekly average of 1400-1500 cals.

Edited by: JENNILACEY at: 12/2/2013 (05:26)
FTSOLK Posts: 1,395
12/2/13 12:16 A

Not really. I go to a church youth group on the occasional Wednesday night, but there are plenty of days where I hardy get out of bed. I just don't see the point in going out alone- especially when it's cold. I usually just find myself at the grocery store buying food I shouldn't buy.

MICHELLEXXXX SparkPoints: (12,229)
Fitness Minutes: (5,920)
Posts: 3,780
12/1/13 11:44 P

I noticed you mentioned being unemployed at the moment. Are you involved in any clubs, organizations, or causes outside your home?

FTSOLK Posts: 1,395
12/1/13 9:37 P

I've been looking at options for calorie counting. Based on my weight (50 to 70 pounds overweight, though I may even be able to drop 80 pounds from my top weight) and activity level (sedentary due to unemployment), if I want to lose 2 pounds per week, I get the bare minimum of 1,200-1,550 calories per day.

That's not doable for me long-term without it stressing me out immensely, so I figured I'd deal with a pound a week.

My goal if I want to lose 1 pound a week is 90 calories more than what I get if I want to lose 2 pounds a week.

NINETY! Not the 400-500 I was expecting.

I'm obese. I have a fair amount of weight to lose, but to think that I am already at a point where I am near my minimum for my range with losing a pound a week is a little crazy.

I know that my TDEE (calories I burn through normal activities) was about 2,400-2,600 calories when I was taking 11,000 steps per day minimum. Unfortunately, that's a little difficult to keep up with when winter approaches (I hate walking inside my house, and walking outdoors is a pain- though I was considering a gym membership- but then its hard to determine where the line between normal activity and fitness ends if I'm on a treadmill trying to get my steps in).

If I'm at the gym, I'll wear a heart rate monitor and my fitbit. If I'm at the mall walking, I'm JUST going to use my Fitbit.

And the suggestion to use the Fitbit adjustment isn't going to work since Sparkpeople's way of doing the adjustment here is terribly flawed.

I have considered setting my goal to lose half a pound per week and make up the rest with exercise which would be less stressful, except for 2 things:

1. I'm nowhere near my goal weight

2. I get nervous about such a small deficit with the laws that allow calorie variance. In response, I feel more likely to weigh and measure everything extremely accurately because any slight estimation is a huge deal. At that point, I might as well just set a goal to maintain my weight and try to burn 500 calories a day in exercise.

Page: 1 of (1)  

Other Diet and Nutrition Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
Stress and Diet 11/6/2016 2:24:04 PM
Starting FMD next Monday 11/7/2016 11:53:50 PM
had to cut-back 3/4/2017 6:48:55 AM
fast food/take out not so bad treat? 8/17/2016 12:27:55 AM
higher calories needed to lose weight -normal? 8/16/2016 3:30:11 PM