Core success?

[Someplace_Else]

Hi all,

I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the core plan
instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even better, those
that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been for you so
far?

Any info is appreciated.

Thanks,

Sofia

[Miss Violette]

it was very unsuccessful for me, but I am glad I tried it and it reconfirmed
the food choices I make, my food issues are in portions rather than in types
of food. I may try it again at some point and many people I know have had
excellent progress with it, Lee
Someplace_Else > wrote in message
...
> Hi all,
>
> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the core
plan
> instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even better,
those
> that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been for you
so
> far?
>
> Any info is appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sofia
>
>

[Miss Violette]

it was very unsuccessful for me, but I am glad I tried it and it reconfirmed
the food choices I make, my food issues are in portions rather than in types
of food. I may try it again at some point and many people I know have had
excellent progress with it, Lee
Someplace_Else > wrote in message
...
> Hi all,
>
> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the core
plan
> instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even better,
those
> that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been for you
so
> far?
>
> Any info is appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sofia
>
>

[Laura]

I have had mixed results with Core. I started losing again after being stuck
on Flex this summer. Now I find myself stuck again. Could just be my body
trying to catch up or I am letting things go these days.

Core is nice that it eliminated all of the junk that had crept into my life.
The hard part is knowing when you are satisfied to stop eating. I try and
count my points too as a way of keeping the portions sizes under control.
This is where I fall down on the job. I need to get back to serious weighing
and measuring. That is the only part of Core that I don't like. I don't mind
journaling either. I think that is the only thing that will keep me on
track. Come monday morning I am back to serious tracking as a way of getting
things under control.

For folks just starting out I would recommend doing Flex first to get the
hang of proper portions. Concentrate on healthy eating and don't fall into
the habit of filling up on empty points just because they are there to be
used up. Eat healthy points. Follow the 8 guidelines and drink your milk,
eat your fruits and veggies plus your 2 healthy oils a day. If you follow
this (which I did not always do) you won't have a ton of points to waste on
junk.

Good luck on whatever plan you decide to try. Just remember that you can't
switch back and forth during the week so plan on sticking with one or the
other for at least a week. Some say it is best to give either plan 2-3 weeks
before knowing if it is something you can follow for a long time.

"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
...
> Hi all,
>
> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the core
plan
> instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even better,
those
> that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been for you
so
> far?
>
> Any info is appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sofia
>
>

[Laura]

I have had mixed results with Core. I started losing again after being stuck
on Flex this summer. Now I find myself stuck again. Could just be my body
trying to catch up or I am letting things go these days.

Core is nice that it eliminated all of the junk that had crept into my life.
The hard part is knowing when you are satisfied to stop eating. I try and
count my points too as a way of keeping the portions sizes under control.
This is where I fall down on the job. I need to get back to serious weighing
and measuring. That is the only part of Core that I don't like. I don't mind
journaling either. I think that is the only thing that will keep me on
track. Come monday morning I am back to serious tracking as a way of getting
things under control.

For folks just starting out I would recommend doing Flex first to get the
hang of proper portions. Concentrate on healthy eating and don't fall into
the habit of filling up on empty points just because they are there to be
used up. Eat healthy points. Follow the 8 guidelines and drink your milk,
eat your fruits and veggies plus your 2 healthy oils a day. If you follow
this (which I did not always do) you won't have a ton of points to waste on
junk.

Good luck on whatever plan you decide to try. Just remember that you can't
switch back and forth during the week so plan on sticking with one or the
other for at least a week. Some say it is best to give either plan 2-3 weeks
before knowing if it is something you can follow for a long time.

"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
...
> Hi all,
>
> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the core
plan
> instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even better,
those
> that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been for you
so
> far?
>
> Any info is appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sofia
>
>

[Brenda southern Lady]

I had Grits with fat free butter spray and two eggs _core
, whole wheat spagetti with squash, zucchini,onions,garlic and green
peas, tomatoes -core........ all core !
4 small sweet pototoes -core with fat free butter spray ,tea water,
and coffee.
i had vanilla low fat yougart which i counted . seems i am doing core
and didn't realize it .
any way i feel good and i am not over eating .
Brenda



In The noise and confusion of your life take time to find Peace in your
soul. Jesus Saves.
Stop Child abuse- words can slam harder then a fist.

[Brenda southern Lady]

P.S. i still write everything down as this helps me a lot !
Brenda

In The noise and confusion of your life take time to find Peace in your
soul. Jesus Saves.
Stop Child abuse- words can slam harder then a fist.

[Laura]

"Brenda southern Lady" > wrote in message
...
> I had Grits with fat free butter spray and two eggs _core
> , whole wheat spagetti with squash, zucchini,onions,garlic and green
> peas, tomatoes -core........ all core !
> 4 small sweet pototoes -core with fat free butter spray ,tea water,
> and coffee.
> i had vanilla low fat yougart which i counted . seems i am doing core
> and didn't realize it .
> any way i feel good and i am not over eating .

Once you know what foods are core it is not hard to follow the plan even on
flex. I have had to adjust to the ff plain yogart and other ff cheeses but I
am getting use to them.

I found a new dessert: take an apple and core and cut into pieces. I don't
even peel it. Put a 1/4 c water in a microwaveable bowl, add the apple
pieces. Mix 1/4c quick oats, some cinnomon and 1 packet splenda and put on
top of apple. Cover with plastic wrap. Nuke for 2 minutes and stir. Nuke
another minute or 2 until apple and oatmeal are cooked. Let cool a few
minutes and enjoy. Once I put a glop of frozen cool whip on top as "ice
cream".

[Byron Oost]

Unless I am mistaken, core only allows for 1 serving of bread or potato a
day. If that is correct then you are not doing core. Perhaps modified core.
I am diabetic (type II) and could not follow core to a T because of that. My
blood sugar was falling so low I was sick nearly everyday. I am allowing 1
bread or potato per meal, and am using pretzels and apples to keep my blood
sugar from plummeting.

ironbyron in Owensboro, KY

"Brenda southern Lady" > wrote in message > I
had Grits with fat free butter spray and two eggs _core
> , whole wheat spagetti with squash, zucchini,onions,garlic and green
> peas, tomatoes -core........ all core !
> 4 small sweet pototoes -core with fat free butter spray ,tea water,
> and coffee.
> i had vanilla low fat yougart which i counted . seems i am doing core
> and didn't realize it .
> any way i feel good and i am not over eating .

[Laura]

That is partially correct. Bread is not allowed on Core. Whole wheat pasta,
potatoes & Rice are restricted to one MEAL (not serving) per day. So Brenda
will need to count the points for either the sweet potatoes or the whole
wheat spagetti if she was doing core. Still considered core without it being
a modified version.

As for your blood sugar levels on core, I know of several people in other
groups that have had great sucess with Core and are diabetic. Many have to
eat more frequently plus increased their fruit to help keep the levels
steady. Some say this is the exact type of food plan that their nutritionist
layed out for them. Maybe it would help to talk to a nutritionist yourself
to see what modifications that you can make without having to have bread or
potatoe at every meal. Plus you just started WW so it will take a few weeks
for your body to adjust to improved, probably a much lower carb than you are
used to.

"Byron Oost" > wrote in message
...
> Unless I am mistaken, core only allows for 1 serving of bread or potato a
> day. If that is correct then you are not doing core. Perhaps modified
core.
> I am diabetic (type II) and could not follow core to a T because of that.
My
> blood sugar was falling so low I was sick nearly everyday. I am allowing 1
> bread or potato per meal, and am using pretzels and apples to keep my
blood
> sugar from plummeting.
>
> ironbyron in Owensboro, KY
>
> "Brenda southern Lady" > wrote in message > I
> had Grits with fat free butter spray and two eggs _core
> > , whole wheat spagetti with squash, zucchini,onions,garlic and green
> > peas, tomatoes -core........ all core !
> > 4 small sweet pototoes -core with fat free butter spray ,tea water,
> > and coffee.
> > i had vanilla low fat yougart which i counted . seems i am doing core
> > and didn't realize it .
> > any way i feel good and i am not over eating .
>
>

[Fred the Second]

Byron, the Core Plan allows potatoes to be eaten as a Core food at only one
meal per day. If you want to eat another meal with potatoes you count the
Points value of the potatoes in the 2nd meal towards your Weekly Points
Allowance.

You can have bread on the Core Plan as well, it just needs to be counted
against your Weekly Points Allowance. Remember, in addition to the core
group of foods you are allowed 35 Points per week. Use them for breads,
beer, candy, brown rice at a second meal, etc.

- Fred #2

"Byron Oost" > wrote in message
...
> Unless I am mistaken, core only allows for 1 serving of bread or potato a
> day. If that is correct then you are not doing core. Perhaps modified
> core.
> I am diabetic (type II) and could not follow core to a T because of that.
> My
> blood sugar was falling so low I was sick nearly everyday. I am allowing 1
> bread or potato per meal, and am using pretzels and apples to keep my
> blood
> sugar from plummeting.
>
> ironbyron in Owensboro, KY
>
> "Brenda southern Lady" > wrote in message > I
> had Grits with fat free butter spray and two eggs _core
>> , whole wheat spagetti with squash, zucchini,onions,garlic and green
>> peas, tomatoes -core........ all core !
>> 4 small sweet pototoes -core with fat free butter spray ,tea water,
>> and coffee.
>> i had vanilla low fat yougart which i counted . seems i am doing core
>> and didn't realize it .
>> any way i feel good and i am not over eating .
>
>

[Fred the Second]

Byron, the Core Plan allows potatoes to be eaten as a Core food at only one
meal per day. If you want to eat another meal with potatoes you count the
Points value of the potatoes in the 2nd meal towards your Weekly Points
Allowance.

You can have bread on the Core Plan as well, it just needs to be counted
against your Weekly Points Allowance. Remember, in addition to the core
group of foods you are allowed 35 Points per week. Use them for breads,
beer, candy, brown rice at a second meal, etc.

- Fred #2

"Byron Oost" > wrote in message
...
> Unless I am mistaken, core only allows for 1 serving of bread or potato a
> day. If that is correct then you are not doing core. Perhaps modified
> core.
> I am diabetic (type II) and could not follow core to a T because of that.
> My
> blood sugar was falling so low I was sick nearly everyday. I am allowing 1
> bread or potato per meal, and am using pretzels and apples to keep my
> blood
> sugar from plummeting.
>
> ironbyron in Owensboro, KY
>
> "Brenda southern Lady" > wrote in message > I
> had Grits with fat free butter spray and two eggs _core
>> , whole wheat spagetti with squash, zucchini,onions,garlic and green
>> peas, tomatoes -core........ all core !
>> 4 small sweet pototoes -core with fat free butter spray ,tea water,
>> and coffee.
>> i had vanilla low fat yougart which i counted . seems i am doing core
>> and didn't realize it .
>> any way i feel good and i am not over eating .
>
>

[Fred the Second]

Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total weight loss
115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't have to
count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am satisfied. In
fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or else I
start dropping below my goal weight!

- Fred #2

"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
...
> Hi all,
>
> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the core
> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even better,
> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been for
> you so far?
>
> Any info is appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sofia
>

[Fred the Second]

Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total weight loss
115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't have to
count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am satisfied. In
fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or else I
start dropping below my goal weight!

- Fred #2

"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
...
> Hi all,
>
> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the core
> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even better,
> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been for
> you so far?
>
> Any info is appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sofia
>

[Samantha Does It Matter]

[Brenda southern Lady]

Re: Core success?

Group: alt.support.diet.weigh****chers Date: Sun, Nov 7, 2004, 6:23am
(EST-1) From: (Byron=A0Oost)
Unless I am mistaken, core only allows for 1 serving of bread or potato
a day. If that is correct then you are not doing core. Perhaps modified
core. I am diabetic (type II) and could not follow core to a T because
of that. My blood sugar was falling so low I was sick nearly everyday. I
am allowing 1 bread or potato per meal, and am using pretzels and apples
to keep my blood sugar from plummeting.
ironbyron in Owensboro, KY

I heard you ! my dietitian put me on 45 to 60 grams of carb three times
a day , now i am enjoying normal blood sugar readings > Brenda

In The noise and confusion of your life take time to find Peace in your
soul. Jesus Saves.
Stop Child abuse- words can slam harder then a fist.

[Brenda southern Lady]

Re: Core success?

Group: alt.support.diet.weigh****chers Date: Sun, Nov 7, 2004, 6:23am
(EST-1) From: (Byron=A0Oost)
Unless I am mistaken, core only allows for 1 serving of bread or potato
a day. If that is correct then you are not doing core. Perhaps modified
core. I am diabetic (type II) and could not follow core to a T because
of that. My blood sugar was falling so low I was sick nearly everyday. I
am allowing 1 bread or potato per meal, and am using pretzels and apples
to keep my blood sugar from plummeting.
ironbyron in Owensboro, KY

I heard you ! my dietitian put me on 45 to 60 grams of carb three times
a day , now i am enjoying normal blood sugar readings > Brenda

In The noise and confusion of your life take time to find Peace in your
soul. Jesus Saves.
Stop Child abuse- words can slam harder then a fist.

[Miss Violette]

potatoes/rice/whole wheat pasta are once a day for choosing one of these,
all bread, white rice and regular pasta are NOT core but you need only count
them to still be doing core, Lee
Byron Oost > wrote in message
...
> Unless I am mistaken, core only allows for 1 serving of bread or potato a
> day. If that is correct then you are not doing core. Perhaps modified
core.
> I am diabetic (type II) and could not follow core to a T because of that.
My
> blood sugar was falling so low I was sick nearly everyday. I am allowing 1
> bread or potato per meal, and am using pretzels and apples to keep my
blood
> sugar from plummeting.
>
> ironbyron in Owensboro, KY
>
> "Brenda southern Lady" > wrote in message > I
> had Grits with fat free butter spray and two eggs _core
> > , whole wheat spagetti with squash, zucchini,onions,garlic and green
> > peas, tomatoes -core........ all core !
> > 4 small sweet pototoes -core with fat free butter spray ,tea water,
> > and coffee.
> > i had vanilla low fat yougart which i counted . seems i am doing core
> > and didn't realize it .
> > any way i feel good and i am not over eating .
>
>

[Byron Oost]

Not without limit. At least not me. Under the core plan you can as much of
"core" foods up to the point of satisfaction, but not to the point of being
stuffed.

ironbyron in Owensboro, KY

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35 point
> allowance in addition.

[Laura]

Technically speaking, yes. You will find, however, because you are eating
high fiber foods without preservatives that your cravings and need for
snacks will be greatly reduced. And of course, snacks now are fruits, FF
yogurt or 94% FF popcorn if you are going to stay within the Core list. Or
you could use your 35 point allowance for the non-core stuff. Many people in
the message boards say the do best when they keep the number of non-core
items to a bare minimum (me too). Also, many non-core items are trigger
foods that will cause your cravings to return so you want to be very careful
as to how you use them. Some people use them for eating out or for real
cheese and other non FF items. Or bread (I only have bread about once a week
these days) but that is a common use for the 35 WPAs.

I still journal, weigh and measure like I did on Flex to keep my portion
size under control. I have not really gotten the "eat until satisfied" part
figured out so I have a normal size portion and leave it at that. If I am
hungry later then I grab something else. The key is to only eat when hungry.
That's hard too when DH and DD are having a bowl of ice cream in front of
me. I am learning to be content with a nuked apple and oatmeal concotion
with a glop of frozen cool whip on top.

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35 point
> allowance in addition.
>
> The other Fred
>
> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
> wrote:
>
> >Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total weight
loss
> >115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't have
to
> >count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am satisfied. In
> >fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or else I
> >start dropping below my goal weight!
> >
> >- Fred #2
> >
> >"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the core
> >> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even
better,
> >> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been
for
> >> you so far?
> >>
> >> Any info is appreciated.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Sofia
> >>
> >
>

[Fred the Second]

In a word, yes.

For breakfast I have oatmeal with a bit of Sugar Twin brown sugar and skim
milk. Lunch is usually a can of kippers packed in water or plain boiled
pinto beans and brown rice and salsa, making a sort of stew. Dinner varies
but is usually roasted chicken without the skin (or some other lean meat),
steamed cauliflower or green beans, salad with some olive oil and balsamic
vinegar.

For snacks I grab a banana, apple, or pear; for desserts I love fat-free
cottage cheese with pineapple chunks (canned, in their own juice). For the
crunchies I have a bag of 94% fat free popcorn.

Another dessert I've made is instant fat-free, sugar-free pudding with
bananas sliced up in it. Wow! Filling, and a nice treat.

If I feel like having a sandwich I'll dip into my Weekly Points Allowance
and have 4 slices of a lite Italian bread (3 Points total) with cold sliced
chicken or lean beef, lettuce, onion, mustard, and maybe a slice of fat-free
cheddar cheese.

Since I'm still losing and want to "bulk up" back to my goal weight I'm
adding non-Core foods gradually to reach an equilibrium. For instance, last
night I had a bit of mayonnaise on my sandwich, something I haven't had in
nearly a year.

- Fred #2

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35 point
> allowance in addition.
>
> The other Fred
>
> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
> wrote:
>
>>Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total weight
>>loss
>>115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't have to
>>count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am satisfied. In
>>fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or else I
>>start dropping below my goal weight!
>>
>>- Fred #2
>>
>>"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
...
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the core
>>> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even
>>> better,
>>> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been
>>> for
>>> you so far?
>>>
>>> Any info is appreciated.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Sofia
>>>
>>
>

[Laura]

This is where things get confusing. The Getting started manual implies that
if you make the item then you only have to count the non core items. A quiz
on the WW site said that if something was made with 2 or more non-core items
then the whole thing was non-core. This correction has NOT been mentioned by
my leader nor has WW issued official corrections to the original materials.
If the non core items are mininal and readily identifiable such as bread or
cheese then I only count those items. I don't count the whole thing as non
core. But if I am out to a restaurant and I have no clue as to what extras
they have added to something then I will count the whole thing as non core
and use my points. Very confusing.

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks for the info.
>
> Not being a CORE person, when you have a sandwich, you have to count
> all of the points, bread, filling (chicken or beef), etc?
>
> Sounds like you have it down pretty well. Maintenance is hard. I
> kept dropping for a while, too. Now bobbling but a bit too up for my
> comfort level at the moment.
>
> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:22:40 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
> wrote:
>
> >In a word, yes.
> >
> >For breakfast I have oatmeal with a bit of Sugar Twin brown sugar and
skim
> >milk. Lunch is usually a can of kippers packed in water or plain boiled
> >pinto beans and brown rice and salsa, making a sort of stew. Dinner
varies
> >but is usually roasted chicken without the skin (or some other lean
meat),
> >steamed cauliflower or green beans, salad with some olive oil and
balsamic
> >vinegar.
> >
> >For snacks I grab a banana, apple, or pear; for desserts I love fat-free
> >cottage cheese with pineapple chunks (canned, in their own juice). For
the
> >crunchies I have a bag of 94% fat free popcorn.
> >
> >Another dessert I've made is instant fat-free, sugar-free pudding with
> >bananas sliced up in it. Wow! Filling, and a nice treat.
> >
> >If I feel like having a sandwich I'll dip into my Weekly Points Allowance
> >and have 4 slices of a lite Italian bread (3 Points total) with cold
sliced
> >chicken or lean beef, lettuce, onion, mustard, and maybe a slice of
fat-free
> >cheddar cheese.
> >
> >Since I'm still losing and want to "bulk up" back to my goal weight I'm
> >adding non-Core foods gradually to reach an equilibrium. For instance,
last
> >night I had a bit of mayonnaise on my sandwich, something I haven't had
in
> >nearly a year.
> >
> >- Fred #2
> >
> >"Fred" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
> >> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35 point
> >> allowance in addition.
> >>
> >> The other Fred
> >>
> >> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total weight
> >>>loss
> >>>115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't have
to
> >>>count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am satisfied.
In
> >>>fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or else
I
> >>>start dropping below my goal weight!
> >>>
> >>>- Fred #2
> >>>
> >>>"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the
core
> >>>> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even
> >>>> better,
> >>>> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it
been
> >>>> for
> >>>> you so far?
> >>>>
> >>>> Any info is appreciated.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> Sofia
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

[Laura]

This is where things get confusing. The Getting started manual implies that
if you make the item then you only have to count the non core items. A quiz
on the WW site said that if something was made with 2 or more non-core items
then the whole thing was non-core. This correction has NOT been mentioned by
my leader nor has WW issued official corrections to the original materials.
If the non core items are mininal and readily identifiable such as bread or
cheese then I only count those items. I don't count the whole thing as non
core. But if I am out to a restaurant and I have no clue as to what extras
they have added to something then I will count the whole thing as non core
and use my points. Very confusing.

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks for the info.
>
> Not being a CORE person, when you have a sandwich, you have to count
> all of the points, bread, filling (chicken or beef), etc?
>
> Sounds like you have it down pretty well. Maintenance is hard. I
> kept dropping for a while, too. Now bobbling but a bit too up for my
> comfort level at the moment.
>
> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:22:40 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
> wrote:
>
> >In a word, yes.
> >
> >For breakfast I have oatmeal with a bit of Sugar Twin brown sugar and
skim
> >milk. Lunch is usually a can of kippers packed in water or plain boiled
> >pinto beans and brown rice and salsa, making a sort of stew. Dinner
varies
> >but is usually roasted chicken without the skin (or some other lean
meat),
> >steamed cauliflower or green beans, salad with some olive oil and
balsamic
> >vinegar.
> >
> >For snacks I grab a banana, apple, or pear; for desserts I love fat-free
> >cottage cheese with pineapple chunks (canned, in their own juice). For
the
> >crunchies I have a bag of 94% fat free popcorn.
> >
> >Another dessert I've made is instant fat-free, sugar-free pudding with
> >bananas sliced up in it. Wow! Filling, and a nice treat.
> >
> >If I feel like having a sandwich I'll dip into my Weekly Points Allowance
> >and have 4 slices of a lite Italian bread (3 Points total) with cold
sliced
> >chicken or lean beef, lettuce, onion, mustard, and maybe a slice of
fat-free
> >cheddar cheese.
> >
> >Since I'm still losing and want to "bulk up" back to my goal weight I'm
> >adding non-Core foods gradually to reach an equilibrium. For instance,
last
> >night I had a bit of mayonnaise on my sandwich, something I haven't had
in
> >nearly a year.
> >
> >- Fred #2
> >
> >"Fred" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
> >> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35 point
> >> allowance in addition.
> >>
> >> The other Fred
> >>
> >> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total weight
> >>>loss
> >>>115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't have
to
> >>>count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am satisfied.
In
> >>>fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or else
I
> >>>start dropping below my goal weight!
> >>>
> >>>- Fred #2
> >>>
> >>>"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the
core
> >>>> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even
> >>>> better,
> >>>> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it
been
> >>>> for
> >>>> you so far?
> >>>>
> >>>> Any info is appreciated.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>>
> >>>> Sofia
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

[Fred the Second]

When I have a sandwich I count only the bread. Its just as if I were having
a plate of sliced cold roast beef with mustard and some lettuce, then added
some bread on the side.

Maintenance is a lifelong journey, it is wise to learn all you can about it!
Best thing is not to let things get out of control, you are doing the right
thing keeping tabs on where you are.

- Fred #2

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks for the info.
>
> Not being a CORE person, when you have a sandwich, you have to count
> all of the points, bread, filling (chicken or beef), etc?
>
> Sounds like you have it down pretty well. Maintenance is hard. I
> kept dropping for a while, too. Now bobbling but a bit too up for my
> comfort level at the moment.
>
> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:22:40 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
> wrote:
>
>>In a word, yes.
>>
>>For breakfast I have oatmeal with a bit of Sugar Twin brown sugar and skim
>>milk. Lunch is usually a can of kippers packed in water or plain boiled
>>pinto beans and brown rice and salsa, making a sort of stew. Dinner
>>varies
>>but is usually roasted chicken without the skin (or some other lean meat),
>>steamed cauliflower or green beans, salad with some olive oil and balsamic
>>vinegar.
>>
>>For snacks I grab a banana, apple, or pear; for desserts I love fat-free
>>cottage cheese with pineapple chunks (canned, in their own juice). For
>>the
>>crunchies I have a bag of 94% fat free popcorn.
>>
>>Another dessert I've made is instant fat-free, sugar-free pudding with
>>bananas sliced up in it. Wow! Filling, and a nice treat.
>>
>>If I feel like having a sandwich I'll dip into my Weekly Points Allowance
>>and have 4 slices of a lite Italian bread (3 Points total) with cold
>>sliced
>>chicken or lean beef, lettuce, onion, mustard, and maybe a slice of
>>fat-free
>>cheddar cheese.
>>
>>Since I'm still losing and want to "bulk up" back to my goal weight I'm
>>adding non-Core foods gradually to reach an equilibrium. For instance,
>>last
>>night I had a bit of mayonnaise on my sandwich, something I haven't had in
>>nearly a year.
>>
>>- Fred #2
>>
>>"Fred" > wrote in message
...
>>> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
>>> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35 point
>>> allowance in addition.
>>>
>>> The other Fred
>>>
>>> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total weight
>>>>loss
>>>>115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't have
>>>>to
>>>>count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am satisfied. In
>>>>fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or else I
>>>>start dropping below my goal weight!
>>>>
>>>>- Fred #2
>>>>
>>>>"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
...
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the
>>>>> core
>>>>> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even
>>>>> better,
>>>>> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it been
>>>>> for
>>>>> you so far?
>>>>>
>>>>> Any info is appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Sofia
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Fred the Second]

If you are overly confused then perhaps the Point Plan is better suited to
your needs.

- Fred #2

"Laura" > wrote in message
...
> This is where things get confusing. The Getting started manual implies
> that
> if you make the item then you only have to count the non core items. A
> quiz
> on the WW site said that if something was made with 2 or more non-core
> items
> then the whole thing was non-core. This correction has NOT been mentioned
> by
> my leader nor has WW issued official corrections to the original
> materials.
> If the non core items are mininal and readily identifiable such as bread
> or
> cheese then I only count those items. I don't count the whole thing as non
> core. But if I am out to a restaurant and I have no clue as to what extras
> they have added to something then I will count the whole thing as non core
> and use my points. Very confusing.
>
> "Fred" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Thanks for the info.
>>
>> Not being a CORE person, when you have a sandwich, you have to count
>> all of the points, bread, filling (chicken or beef), etc?
>>
>> Sounds like you have it down pretty well. Maintenance is hard. I
>> kept dropping for a while, too. Now bobbling but a bit too up for my
>> comfort level at the moment.
>>
>> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:22:40 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In a word, yes.
>> >
>> >For breakfast I have oatmeal with a bit of Sugar Twin brown sugar and
> skim
>> >milk. Lunch is usually a can of kippers packed in water or plain boiled
>> >pinto beans and brown rice and salsa, making a sort of stew. Dinner
> varies
>> >but is usually roasted chicken without the skin (or some other lean
> meat),
>> >steamed cauliflower or green beans, salad with some olive oil and
> balsamic
>> >vinegar.
>> >
>> >For snacks I grab a banana, apple, or pear; for desserts I love fat-free
>> >cottage cheese with pineapple chunks (canned, in their own juice). For
> the
>> >crunchies I have a bag of 94% fat free popcorn.
>> >
>> >Another dessert I've made is instant fat-free, sugar-free pudding with
>> >bananas sliced up in it. Wow! Filling, and a nice treat.
>> >
>> >If I feel like having a sandwich I'll dip into my Weekly Points
>> >Allowance
>> >and have 4 slices of a lite Italian bread (3 Points total) with cold
> sliced
>> >chicken or lean beef, lettuce, onion, mustard, and maybe a slice of
> fat-free
>> >cheddar cheese.
>> >
>> >Since I'm still losing and want to "bulk up" back to my goal weight I'm
>> >adding non-Core foods gradually to reach an equilibrium. For instance,
> last
>> >night I had a bit of mayonnaise on my sandwich, something I haven't had
> in
>> >nearly a year.
>> >
>> >- Fred #2
>> >
>> >"Fred" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
>> >> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35 point
>> >> allowance in addition.
>> >>
>> >> The other Fred
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total
>> >>>weight
>> >>>loss
>> >>>115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't
>> >>>have
> to
>> >>>count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am satisfied.
> In
>> >>>fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or else
> I
>> >>>start dropping below my goal weight!
>> >>>
>> >>>- Fred #2
>> >>>
>> >>>"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >>>> Hi all,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the
> core
>> >>>> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even
>> >>>> better,
>> >>>> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it
> been
>> >>>> for
>> >>>> you so far?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Any info is appreciated.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Sofia
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>

[Laura]

The only confusing part of the Core plan is which set of rules do you
follow? The getting started book or the so-called corrections that nobody
except for the leaders have seen. Mine won't even discuss the corrections
anymore so I am not sure if they are real.

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:aEgkd.79691$R05.65701@attbi_s53...
> If you are overly confused then perhaps the Point Plan is better suited to
> your needs.
>
> - Fred #2
>
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
> > This is where things get confusing. The Getting started manual implies
> > that
> > if you make the item then you only have to count the non core items. A
> > quiz
> > on the WW site said that if something was made with 2 or more non-core
> > items
> > then the whole thing was non-core. This correction has NOT been
mentioned
> > by
> > my leader nor has WW issued official corrections to the original
> > materials.
> > If the non core items are mininal and readily identifiable such as bread
> > or
> > cheese then I only count those items. I don't count the whole thing as
non
> > core. But if I am out to a restaurant and I have no clue as to what
extras
> > they have added to something then I will count the whole thing as non
core
> > and use my points. Very confusing.
> >
> > "Fred" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Thanks for the info.
> >>
> >> Not being a CORE person, when you have a sandwich, you have to count
> >> all of the points, bread, filling (chicken or beef), etc?
> >>
> >> Sounds like you have it down pretty well. Maintenance is hard. I
> >> kept dropping for a while, too. Now bobbling but a bit too up for my
> >> comfort level at the moment.
> >>
> >> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:22:40 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In a word, yes.
> >> >
> >> >For breakfast I have oatmeal with a bit of Sugar Twin brown sugar and
> > skim
> >> >milk. Lunch is usually a can of kippers packed in water or plain
boiled
> >> >pinto beans and brown rice and salsa, making a sort of stew. Dinner
> > varies
> >> >but is usually roasted chicken without the skin (or some other lean
> > meat),
> >> >steamed cauliflower or green beans, salad with some olive oil and
> > balsamic
> >> >vinegar.
> >> >
> >> >For snacks I grab a banana, apple, or pear; for desserts I love
fat-free
> >> >cottage cheese with pineapple chunks (canned, in their own juice).
For
> > the
> >> >crunchies I have a bag of 94% fat free popcorn.
> >> >
> >> >Another dessert I've made is instant fat-free, sugar-free pudding with
> >> >bananas sliced up in it. Wow! Filling, and a nice treat.
> >> >
> >> >If I feel like having a sandwich I'll dip into my Weekly Points
> >> >Allowance
> >> >and have 4 slices of a lite Italian bread (3 Points total) with cold
> > sliced
> >> >chicken or lean beef, lettuce, onion, mustard, and maybe a slice of
> > fat-free
> >> >cheddar cheese.
> >> >
> >> >Since I'm still losing and want to "bulk up" back to my goal weight
I'm
> >> >adding non-Core foods gradually to reach an equilibrium. For
instance,
> > last
> >> >night I had a bit of mayonnaise on my sandwich, something I haven't
had
> > in
> >> >nearly a year.
> >> >
> >> >- Fred #2
> >> >
> >> >"Fred" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
> >> >> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35
point
> >> >> allowance in addition.
> >> >>
> >> >> The other Fred
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second"
>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total
> >> >>>weight
> >> >>>loss
> >> >>>115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't
> >> >>>have
> > to
> >> >>>count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am satisfied.
> > In
> >> >>>fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or
else
> > I
> >> >>>start dropping below my goal weight!
> >> >>>
> >> >>>- Fred #2
> >> >>>
> >> >>>"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >>>> Hi all,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using the
> > core
> >> >>>> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and even
> >> >>>> better,
> >> >>>> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it
> > been
> >> >>>> for
> >> >>>> you so far?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Any info is appreciated.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Sofia
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Fred the Second]

There is only one set of rules - its what's published in the Getting Started
book.

What you intimate are another set of rules consist mainly of corrections to
the Complete Food Companion which slipped by the proofreaders. Only a few
corrections need to be made, compared to the 15,000+ items listed in the
guide. No Core rule is being changed - there are not two sets of rules for
Core. For instance, one of the changes is to Kentucky Fried Chicken's
Original Recipe drumstick. The guide says it is Core. The clarification
states it is not. The reason is that as it is listed in the guide it
includes the skin and breading. Skin and breading are not Core - never have
been.

Look up one or two entries above that and you see KFC chicken breast - skin
removed by customer - is Core. As it should be. Fast food fried chicken is
Core - as long as you remove the skin and breading. Nothing is changed,
there are not two sets of rules.

The probable reason for not disseminating the clarifications right now is
that WW wants to get all the clarifications gathered together and then pass
them out, rather than dribbling them out in several stages.

The other subject you bring up is when is a blended food Core? Well, there
may never be a definitive answer that will satisfy everyone. If you start
with extra lean ground beef (Core), and start adding ingredients to it
(mustard, relish, 2% cheese, fat-free mayo, a low-carb bun, a slice of
onion, a fried egg on top), at some point it is no longer Core. My
suggestion is that if there is something presented to you that you have
questions about, and cannot get definitive answers from the preparer, use
your best judgment. If its a sandwich and you can see what the parts
consist of, and it is not a high-abuse-potential food, then count only the
non-Core parts. If you are presented with a chicken breast smothered in
sauce and don't know what the sauce consists of, you can either assume its
fat-based and count the Points or scrape the sauce off and don't worry about
it.

The USPS has a handy template for judging whether an envelope is oversized
or not; there is a slot in the guide and if the letter fits through it is
not too thick. You won't find such a go-no go rule for the Core Plan.

- Fred #2

"Laura" > wrote in message
...
> The only confusing part of the Core plan is which set of rules do you
> follow? The getting started book or the so-called corrections that nobody
> except for the leaders have seen. Mine won't even discuss the corrections
> anymore so I am not sure if they are real.
>
> "Fred the Second" > wrote in message
> news:aEgkd.79691$R05.65701@attbi_s53...
>> If you are overly confused then perhaps the Point Plan is better suited
>> to
>> your needs.
>>
>> - Fred #2
>>
>> "Laura" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > This is where things get confusing. The Getting started manual implies
>> > that
>> > if you make the item then you only have to count the non core items. A
>> > quiz
>> > on the WW site said that if something was made with 2 or more non-core
>> > items
>> > then the whole thing was non-core. This correction has NOT been
> mentioned
>> > by
>> > my leader nor has WW issued official corrections to the original
>> > materials.
>> > If the non core items are mininal and readily identifiable such as
>> > bread
>> > or
>> > cheese then I only count those items. I don't count the whole thing as
> non
>> > core. But if I am out to a restaurant and I have no clue as to what
> extras
>> > they have added to something then I will count the whole thing as non
> core
>> > and use my points. Very confusing.
>> >
>> > "Fred" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >> Thanks for the info.
>> >>
>> >> Not being a CORE person, when you have a sandwich, you have to count
>> >> all of the points, bread, filling (chicken or beef), etc?
>> >>
>> >> Sounds like you have it down pretty well. Maintenance is hard. I
>> >> kept dropping for a while, too. Now bobbling but a bit too up for my
>> >> comfort level at the moment.
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:22:40 GMT, "Fred the Second" >
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In a word, yes.
>> >> >
>> >> >For breakfast I have oatmeal with a bit of Sugar Twin brown sugar and
>> > skim
>> >> >milk. Lunch is usually a can of kippers packed in water or plain
> boiled
>> >> >pinto beans and brown rice and salsa, making a sort of stew. Dinner
>> > varies
>> >> >but is usually roasted chicken without the skin (or some other lean
>> > meat),
>> >> >steamed cauliflower or green beans, salad with some olive oil and
>> > balsamic
>> >> >vinegar.
>> >> >
>> >> >For snacks I grab a banana, apple, or pear; for desserts I love
> fat-free
>> >> >cottage cheese with pineapple chunks (canned, in their own juice).
> For
>> > the
>> >> >crunchies I have a bag of 94% fat free popcorn.
>> >> >
>> >> >Another dessert I've made is instant fat-free, sugar-free pudding
>> >> >with
>> >> >bananas sliced up in it. Wow! Filling, and a nice treat.
>> >> >
>> >> >If I feel like having a sandwich I'll dip into my Weekly Points
>> >> >Allowance
>> >> >and have 4 slices of a lite Italian bread (3 Points total) with cold
>> > sliced
>> >> >chicken or lean beef, lettuce, onion, mustard, and maybe a slice of
>> > fat-free
>> >> >cheddar cheese.
>> >> >
>> >> >Since I'm still losing and want to "bulk up" back to my goal weight
> I'm
>> >> >adding non-Core foods gradually to reach an equilibrium. For
> instance,
>> > last
>> >> >night I had a bit of mayonnaise on my sandwich, something I haven't
> had
>> > in
>> >> >nearly a year.
>> >> >
>> >> >- Fred #2
>> >> >
>> >> >"Fred" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
>> >> >> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35
> point
>> >> >> allowance in addition.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The other Fred
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second"
> >
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total
>> >> >>>weight
>> >> >>>loss
>> >> >>>115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I don't
>> >> >>>have
>> > to
>> >> >>>count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am
>> >> >>>satisfied.
>> > In
>> >> >>>fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or
> else
>> > I
>> >> >>>start dropping below my goal weight!
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>- Fred #2
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >>>> Hi all,
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using
>> >> >>>> the
>> > core
>> >> >>>> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and
>> >> >>>> even
>> >> >>>> better,
>> >> >>>> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has it
>> > been
>> >> >>>> for
>> >> >>>> you so far?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Any info is appreciated.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Thanks,
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Sofia
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

[Laura]

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:Jpzkd.26674$5K2.6841@attbi_s03...
> There is only one set of rules - its what's published in the Getting
Started
> book.
>
> What you intimate are another set of rules consist mainly of corrections
to
> the Complete Food Companion which slipped by the proofreaders. Only a few
> corrections need to be made, compared to the 15,000+ items listed in the
> guide. No Core rule is being changed - there are not two sets of rules
for
> Core. For instance, one of the changes is to Kentucky Fried Chicken's
> Original Recipe drumstick. The guide says it is Core. The clarification
> states it is not. The reason is that as it is listed in the guide it
> includes the skin and breading. Skin and breading are not Core - never
have
> been.
>
> Look up one or two entries above that and you see KFC chicken breast -
skin
> removed by customer - is Core. As it should be. Fast food fried chicken
is
> Core - as long as you remove the skin and breading. Nothing is changed,
> there are not two sets of rules.
>
> The probable reason for not disseminating the clarifications right now is
> that WW wants to get all the clarifications gathered together and then
pass
> them out, rather than dribbling them out in several stages.
>
> The other subject you bring up is when is a blended food Core? Well,
there
> may never be a definitive answer that will satisfy everyone. If you start
> with extra lean ground beef (Core), and start adding ingredients to it
> (mustard, relish, 2% cheese, fat-free mayo, a low-carb bun, a slice of
> onion, a fried egg on top), at some point it is no longer Core. My
> suggestion is that if there is something presented to you that you have
> questions about, and cannot get definitive answers from the preparer, use
> your best judgment. If its a sandwich and you can see what the parts
> consist of, and it is not a high-abuse-potential food, then count only the
> non-Core parts. If you are presented with a chicken breast smothered in
> sauce and don't know what the sauce consists of, you can either assume its
> fat-based and count the Points or scrape the sauce off and don't worry
about
> it.

Yes it was this area that gets confusing. The Getting starting book clearly
says that if you know what is in the dish then you only have to count the
non core items. Yet a quiz on the WW site states that if you use 2 or more
non core items that you MUST count the entire dish as NON CORE.
http://www.weigh****chers.com/util/qzs/questions.aspx?quiz_id=6471 This has
not been mentioned by my leader yet.

The other clarifications and typo corrections make sense. I understand the
rule that you can't make a non core food item out of core ingredients. It is
the newly discovered rule about 2+ non core items makes the whole dish non
core that bothers me. I realise that if the amount of the non core items is
significant then you are probably already counting the majority of those
points. I can't imagine someone purposely making a dish that consists of
significant amounts of non core foods. But if you use a Tablespoon of
reduced fat cheese plus 1 Tablespoon of reduced fat sour cream on your core
chili then you should not have to count the core chili as non core. Yet the
new rule says that you have to despite the fact that the Getting started
book directs you to use your best judgement. So do we use our best judgement
or do we follow this new unwritten rule? Hense the confusion.

> The USPS has a handy template for judging whether an envelope is oversized
> or not; there is a slot in the guide and if the letter fits through it is
> not too thick. You won't find such a go-no go rule for the Core Plan.
>
> - Fred #2
>
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
> > The only confusing part of the Core plan is which set of rules do you
> > follow? The getting started book or the so-called corrections that
nobody
> > except for the leaders have seen. Mine won't even discuss the
corrections
> > anymore so I am not sure if they are real.
> >
> > "Fred the Second" > wrote in message
> > news:aEgkd.79691$R05.65701@attbi_s53...
> >> If you are overly confused then perhaps the Point Plan is better suited
> >> to
> >> your needs.
> >>
> >> - Fred #2
> >>
> >> "Laura" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > This is where things get confusing. The Getting started manual
implies
> >> > that
> >> > if you make the item then you only have to count the non core items.
A
> >> > quiz
> >> > on the WW site said that if something was made with 2 or more
non-core
> >> > items
> >> > then the whole thing was non-core. This correction has NOT been
> > mentioned
> >> > by
> >> > my leader nor has WW issued official corrections to the original
> >> > materials.
> >> > If the non core items are mininal and readily identifiable such as
> >> > bread
> >> > or
> >> > cheese then I only count those items. I don't count the whole thing
as
> > non
> >> > core. But if I am out to a restaurant and I have no clue as to what
> > extras
> >> > they have added to something then I will count the whole thing as non
> > core
> >> > and use my points. Very confusing.
> >> >
> >> > "Fred" > wrote in message
> >> > ...
> >> >> Thanks for the info.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not being a CORE person, when you have a sandwich, you have to count
> >> >> all of the points, bread, filling (chicken or beef), etc?
> >> >>
> >> >> Sounds like you have it down pretty well. Maintenance is hard. I
> >> >> kept dropping for a while, too. Now bobbling but a bit too up for
my
> >> >> comfort level at the moment.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:22:40 GMT, "Fred the Second"
>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >In a word, yes.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >For breakfast I have oatmeal with a bit of Sugar Twin brown sugar
and
> >> > skim
> >> >> >milk. Lunch is usually a can of kippers packed in water or plain
> > boiled
> >> >> >pinto beans and brown rice and salsa, making a sort of stew.
Dinner
> >> > varies
> >> >> >but is usually roasted chicken without the skin (or some other lean
> >> > meat),
> >> >> >steamed cauliflower or green beans, salad with some olive oil and
> >> > balsamic
> >> >> >vinegar.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >For snacks I grab a banana, apple, or pear; for desserts I love
> > fat-free
> >> >> >cottage cheese with pineapple chunks (canned, in their own juice).
> > For
> >> > the
> >> >> >crunchies I have a bag of 94% fat free popcorn.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Another dessert I've made is instant fat-free, sugar-free pudding
> >> >> >with
> >> >> >bananas sliced up in it. Wow! Filling, and a nice treat.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >If I feel like having a sandwich I'll dip into my Weekly Points
> >> >> >Allowance
> >> >> >and have 4 slices of a lite Italian bread (3 Points total) with
cold
> >> > sliced
> >> >> >chicken or lean beef, lettuce, onion, mustard, and maybe a slice of
> >> > fat-free
> >> >> >cheddar cheese.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Since I'm still losing and want to "bulk up" back to my goal weight
> > I'm
> >> >> >adding non-Core foods gradually to reach an equilibrium. For
> > instance,
> >> > last
> >> >> >night I had a bit of mayonnaise on my sandwich, something I haven't
> > had
> >> > in
> >> >> >nearly a year.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >- Fred #2
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"Fred" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
> >> >> >> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35
> > point
> >> >> >> allowance in addition.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The other Fred
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second"
> > >
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total
> >> >> >>>weight
> >> >> >>>loss
> >> >> >>>115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I
don't
> >> >> >>>have
> >> > to
> >> >> >>>count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am
> >> >> >>>satisfied.
> >> > In
> >> >> >>>fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or
> > else
> >> > I
> >> >> >>>start dropping below my goal weight!
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>- Fred #2
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >>>> Hi all,
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using
> >> >> >>>> the
> >> > core
> >> >> >>>> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and
> >> >> >>>> even
> >> >> >>>> better,
> >> >> >>>> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has
it
> >> > been
> >> >> >>>> for
> >> >> >>>> you so far?
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Any info is appreciated.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Thanks,
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Sofia
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Laura]

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:Jpzkd.26674$5K2.6841@attbi_s03...
> There is only one set of rules - its what's published in the Getting
Started
> book.
>
> What you intimate are another set of rules consist mainly of corrections
to
> the Complete Food Companion which slipped by the proofreaders. Only a few
> corrections need to be made, compared to the 15,000+ items listed in the
> guide. No Core rule is being changed - there are not two sets of rules
for
> Core. For instance, one of the changes is to Kentucky Fried Chicken's
> Original Recipe drumstick. The guide says it is Core. The clarification
> states it is not. The reason is that as it is listed in the guide it
> includes the skin and breading. Skin and breading are not Core - never
have
> been.
>
> Look up one or two entries above that and you see KFC chicken breast -
skin
> removed by customer - is Core. As it should be. Fast food fried chicken
is
> Core - as long as you remove the skin and breading. Nothing is changed,
> there are not two sets of rules.
>
> The probable reason for not disseminating the clarifications right now is
> that WW wants to get all the clarifications gathered together and then
pass
> them out, rather than dribbling them out in several stages.
>
> The other subject you bring up is when is a blended food Core? Well,
there
> may never be a definitive answer that will satisfy everyone. If you start
> with extra lean ground beef (Core), and start adding ingredients to it
> (mustard, relish, 2% cheese, fat-free mayo, a low-carb bun, a slice of
> onion, a fried egg on top), at some point it is no longer Core. My
> suggestion is that if there is something presented to you that you have
> questions about, and cannot get definitive answers from the preparer, use
> your best judgment. If its a sandwich and you can see what the parts
> consist of, and it is not a high-abuse-potential food, then count only the
> non-Core parts. If you are presented with a chicken breast smothered in
> sauce and don't know what the sauce consists of, you can either assume its
> fat-based and count the Points or scrape the sauce off and don't worry
about
> it.

Yes it was this area that gets confusing. The Getting starting book clearly
says that if you know what is in the dish then you only have to count the
non core items. Yet a quiz on the WW site states that if you use 2 or more
non core items that you MUST count the entire dish as NON CORE.
http://www.weigh****chers.com/util/qzs/questions.aspx?quiz_id=6471 This has
not been mentioned by my leader yet.

The other clarifications and typo corrections make sense. I understand the
rule that you can't make a non core food item out of core ingredients. It is
the newly discovered rule about 2+ non core items makes the whole dish non
core that bothers me. I realise that if the amount of the non core items is
significant then you are probably already counting the majority of those
points. I can't imagine someone purposely making a dish that consists of
significant amounts of non core foods. But if you use a Tablespoon of
reduced fat cheese plus 1 Tablespoon of reduced fat sour cream on your core
chili then you should not have to count the core chili as non core. Yet the
new rule says that you have to despite the fact that the Getting started
book directs you to use your best judgement. So do we use our best judgement
or do we follow this new unwritten rule? Hense the confusion.

> The USPS has a handy template for judging whether an envelope is oversized
> or not; there is a slot in the guide and if the letter fits through it is
> not too thick. You won't find such a go-no go rule for the Core Plan.
>
> - Fred #2
>
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
> > The only confusing part of the Core plan is which set of rules do you
> > follow? The getting started book or the so-called corrections that
nobody
> > except for the leaders have seen. Mine won't even discuss the
corrections
> > anymore so I am not sure if they are real.
> >
> > "Fred the Second" > wrote in message
> > news:aEgkd.79691$R05.65701@attbi_s53...
> >> If you are overly confused then perhaps the Point Plan is better suited
> >> to
> >> your needs.
> >>
> >> - Fred #2
> >>
> >> "Laura" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > This is where things get confusing. The Getting started manual
implies
> >> > that
> >> > if you make the item then you only have to count the non core items.
A
> >> > quiz
> >> > on the WW site said that if something was made with 2 or more
non-core
> >> > items
> >> > then the whole thing was non-core. This correction has NOT been
> > mentioned
> >> > by
> >> > my leader nor has WW issued official corrections to the original
> >> > materials.
> >> > If the non core items are mininal and readily identifiable such as
> >> > bread
> >> > or
> >> > cheese then I only count those items. I don't count the whole thing
as
> > non
> >> > core. But if I am out to a restaurant and I have no clue as to what
> > extras
> >> > they have added to something then I will count the whole thing as non
> > core
> >> > and use my points. Very confusing.
> >> >
> >> > "Fred" > wrote in message
> >> > ...
> >> >> Thanks for the info.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not being a CORE person, when you have a sandwich, you have to count
> >> >> all of the points, bread, filling (chicken or beef), etc?
> >> >>
> >> >> Sounds like you have it down pretty well. Maintenance is hard. I
> >> >> kept dropping for a while, too. Now bobbling but a bit too up for
my
> >> >> comfort level at the moment.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:22:40 GMT, "Fred the Second"
>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >In a word, yes.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >For breakfast I have oatmeal with a bit of Sugar Twin brown sugar
and
> >> > skim
> >> >> >milk. Lunch is usually a can of kippers packed in water or plain
> > boiled
> >> >> >pinto beans and brown rice and salsa, making a sort of stew.
Dinner
> >> > varies
> >> >> >but is usually roasted chicken without the skin (or some other lean
> >> > meat),
> >> >> >steamed cauliflower or green beans, salad with some olive oil and
> >> > balsamic
> >> >> >vinegar.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >For snacks I grab a banana, apple, or pear; for desserts I love
> > fat-free
> >> >> >cottage cheese with pineapple chunks (canned, in their own juice).
> > For
> >> > the
> >> >> >crunchies I have a bag of 94% fat free popcorn.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Another dessert I've made is instant fat-free, sugar-free pudding
> >> >> >with
> >> >> >bananas sliced up in it. Wow! Filling, and a nice treat.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >If I feel like having a sandwich I'll dip into my Weekly Points
> >> >> >Allowance
> >> >> >and have 4 slices of a lite Italian bread (3 Points total) with
cold
> >> > sliced
> >> >> >chicken or lean beef, lettuce, onion, mustard, and maybe a slice of
> >> > fat-free
> >> >> >cheddar cheese.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Since I'm still losing and want to "bulk up" back to my goal weight
> > I'm
> >> >> >adding non-Core foods gradually to reach an equilibrium. For
> > instance,
> >> > last
> >> >> >night I had a bit of mayonnaise on my sandwich, something I haven't
> > had
> >> > in
> >> >> >nearly a year.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >- Fred #2
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"Fred" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> So you eat all you want until satisfied of all core foods without
> >> >> >> "limit?" Snacks, too, core? Are you eating non-core in that 35
> > point
> >> >> >> allowance in addition.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The other Fred
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:49:27 GMT, "Fred the Second"
> > >
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>Sofia, I am a Lifetime WW member who reached goal in 1994, total
> >> >> >>>weight
> >> >> >>>loss
> >> >> >>>115 lbs. I am following the Core Plan and am very happy. I
don't
> >> >> >>>have
> >> > to
> >> >> >>>count or record, I have snacks as often as I want, and am
> >> >> >>>satisfied.
> >> > In
> >> >> >>>fact, I have to be diligent to add non-Core foods to my eating or
> > else
> >> > I
> >> >> >>>start dropping below my goal weight!
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>- Fred #2
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>"Someplace_Else" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >>>> Hi all,
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> I recently re-joined Weight Watchers and was considering using
> >> >> >>>> the
> >> > core
> >> >> >>>> plan instead of the flex. For those that are doing Core, and
> >> >> >>>> even
> >> >> >>>> better,
> >> >> >>>> those that have switched to core from flex, how successful has
it
> >> > been
> >> >> >>>> for
> >> >> >>>> you so far?
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Any info is appreciated.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Thanks,
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Sofia
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Fred the Second]

"Laura" > wrote in message
...

<snip>

> The Getting starting book clearly
> says that if you know what is in the dish then you only have to count the
> non core items. Yet a quiz on the WW site states that if you use 2 or more
> non core items that you MUST count the entire dish as NON CORE.
> http://www.weigh****chers.com/util/qzs/questions.aspx?quiz_id=6471 This
> has
> not been mentioned by my leader yet.

No, it says you SHOULD: "But two or more ingredients puts it over the top,
and you should count the POINTS value for the entire recipe."

There are lots of things we should be doing, but you cannot look at this
with so much legalism. We SHOULD all take a daily multivitamin on the Core
Plan. For medical reasons I do not. We SHOULD increase our activity level.
Because I am lazy I have not.

If you are a Traditional WW member (go to a weekly class) your Leader is
your guide. Discuss it with him/her. The materials handed out in the
meeting room and the material presented in the meeting discussions are what
you should be following. And just because something is put in print
somewhere by Weight Watchers does not mean it is without errors. The
current issue of WW Magazine has a "Quickbites" recipe for a Core muffin.
There is no such thing. A correction will be included in the next issue.

> But if you use a Tablespoon of
> reduced fat cheese plus 1 Tablespoon of reduced fat sour cream on your
> core
> chili then you should not have to count the core chili as non core.

Then don't! I wouldn't. I use my best judgement. Last night I had a
tostada made of chicken simmered in taco seasonings, fat-free refried beans,
lettuce, pico de gallo, shredded FF cheddar, guacamole, FF sour cream, all
on a couple of corn tortillas which I warmed by heating in a skillet with a
little oil. I counted the oil as less than a quarter point, the tortillas
as 4 points, and the guacamole (which is technically non-Core) I counted as
Core because It contained only Core ingredients and is not a trigger food
for me. Maybe I should have counted the entire meal as non-Core because of
the ingredients, but I didn't. I used my best judgement. I had one
serving, recognized I was satisfied, counted my Points, and slept like a
baby without worrying about it.

> Yet the new rule says that you have to despite the fact that the Getting
> started
> book directs you to use your best judgement. So do we use our best
> judgement
> or do we follow this new unwritten rule? Hense the confusion.

An unwritten rule is no rule at all. Follow the Getting Started book. The
whole point of the Core Plan is not having to track or count. I figure if
my own best judgement is causing me to be successful then I am making the
right choices. Use your own best judgement, Laura, and see how you do. If
you make wise decisions I know you will do just fine.

- Fred #2

[Laura]

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:6j%kd.602689$8_6.464080@attbi_s04...
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> <snip>
>
> > The Getting starting book clearly
> > says that if you know what is in the dish then you only have to count
the
> > non core items. Yet a quiz on the WW site states that if you use 2 or
more
> > non core items that you MUST count the entire dish as NON CORE.
> > http://www.weigh****chers.com/util/qzs/questions.aspx?quiz_id=6471 This
> > has
> > not been mentioned by my leader yet.
>
> No, it says you SHOULD: "But two or more ingredients puts it over the top,
> and you should count the POINTS value for the entire recipe."
>
> There are lots of things we should be doing, but you cannot look at this
> with so much legalism. We SHOULD all take a daily multivitamin on the
Core
> Plan. For medical reasons I do not. We SHOULD increase our activity
level.
> Because I am lazy I have not.
>
> If you are a Traditional WW member (go to a weekly class) your Leader is
> your guide. Discuss it with him/her. The materials handed out in the
> meeting room and the material presented in the meeting discussions are
what
> you should be following. And just because something is put in print
> somewhere by Weight Watchers does not mean it is without errors. The
> current issue of WW Magazine has a "Quickbites" recipe for a Core muffin.
> There is no such thing. A correction will be included in the next issue.
>
> > But if you use a Tablespoon of
> > reduced fat cheese plus 1 Tablespoon of reduced fat sour cream on your
> > core
> > chili then you should not have to count the core chili as non core.
>
> Then don't! I wouldn't. I use my best judgement. Last night I had a
> tostada made of chicken simmered in taco seasonings, fat-free refried
beans,
> lettuce, pico de gallo, shredded FF cheddar, guacamole, FF sour cream, all
> on a couple of corn tortillas which I warmed by heating in a skillet with
a
> little oil. I counted the oil as less than a quarter point, the tortillas
> as 4 points, and the guacamole (which is technically non-Core) I counted
as
> Core because It contained only Core ingredients and is not a trigger food
> for me. Maybe I should have counted the entire meal as non-Core because
of
> the ingredients, but I didn't. I used my best judgement. I had one
> serving, recognized I was satisfied, counted my Points, and slept like a
> baby without worrying about it.
>
> > Yet the new rule says that you have to despite the fact that the Getting
> > started
> > book directs you to use your best judgement. So do we use our best
> > judgement
> > or do we follow this new unwritten rule? Hense the confusion.
>
> An unwritten rule is no rule at all. Follow the Getting Started book.
The
> whole point of the Core Plan is not having to track or count. I figure if
> my own best judgement is causing me to be successful then I am making the
> right choices. Use your own best judgement, Laura, and see how you do.
If
> you make wise decisions I know you will do just fine.

Well said and thanks for your support. You confirmed my own personal
feelings. I will continue to use my best judgement in this journey. Now to
figure out how to reduce portion sizes again. I think they have gotten out
of hand lately which is causing me to not lose.

[Fred the Second]

"Laura" > wrote in message
...

> Well said and thanks for your support. You confirmed my own personal
> feelings. I will continue to use my best judgement in this journey. Now to
> figure out how to reduce portion sizes again. I think they have gotten out
> of hand lately which is causing me to not lose.

You are quite welcome. I am so glad I could help!

If I could give you a tip about portion control: Put out your servings as
if you were filling a child's plate. Eat slowly, savoring each bite. When
finished check in with your feelings. Are you satisfied? If not, you can
always go back for seconds but it is extremely hard, psychologically, to put
back food you have already put on your plate!

- Fred #2

[prairieroots]

I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime later
as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion (food)
for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
--
Linda P

[Fred the Second]

"Laura" > wrote in message
...

> "Fred the Second" > wrote:

>> If I could give you a tip about portion control: Put out your servings
>> as
>> if you were filling a child's plate. Eat slowly, savoring each bite.
> When
>> finished check in with your feelings. Are you satisfied? If not, you
>> can
>> always go back for seconds but it is extremely hard, psychologically, to
> put
>> back food you have already put on your plate!
>
> I am trying that this week. It has been hard but I am making a concerted
> effort to cut back on the food. I am cutting back in little ways-puffed
> wheat cereal and smoothies instead of shredded wheat or oatmeal. At lunch
> I'm having 1/2c yogart instead of my normal 1 cup serving. I am finding
> that
> I need less food than I thought I did. We went out to dinner last night. I
> had a bowl of french onion soup (only ate half of the cheese), a small
> cesaer salad with 1teaspoon of dressing, part of a chicken tender (~2 oz)
> plus a couple of bites of my daughters dessert. I was happy with just that
> amount of food. That is a lot less food than I normally eat when I eat
> out.
> Even tonight when we had chinese take out. I opted for a egg roll, some
> egg
> drop soup and 2 beef on a stick. For dessert an hour later I had some
> melon.
> Again not a lot of food but I was satified with it.

Good for you!

> I am to figure out if this "being satisfied" is a brain thing or a tummy
> thing. Any thoughts?

Good question. Though the GSS doesn't delve too deeply into the Comfort
Zone or the overall idea of satisfaction there is a lot of substance there.
If I may use myself as an example, the reason I became so overweight was
because I had disassociated eating with my physical needs.

In 1993 I was the primary caregiver for my elderly parents who subsequently
passed away at the end of that year, and I was also struggling with the
growing pains of a rebellious teenage daughter. I took to food for comfort
and would stuff myself with whatever I thought would give me pleasure.

I suspect the majority of WW members became overweight by not eating for
nourishment but for eating for something else. Among the list are eating
out of boredom; eating by association (a movie demands cola and popcorn);
eating for comfort; eating to not be wasteful (you put out too much food but
consider it wasteful to throw any away); eating because of social pressure;
eating for self-destruction; and on and on.

In the many years I have been associated with WW I believe the single most
important thing they have done is make members aware of their comfort zone.
Doesn't matter if you are following the Flex Plan or Core Plan there is a
psychology of eating which needs to be addressed. If we knew to eat healthy
foods and to eat when we begin to feel hunger and to stop eating before we
are overfull then we probably wouldn't have to be WW members!

The comfort zone is a physical sensation and it is the physical sensation we
have disassociated from our eating. The more we learn about physical
satiety the better able we will be to lose weight and keep it off.

To directly answer your question, satisfaction is a brain thing. I have
been unsatisfied and wanting more food even though I was on the floor in
pain from eating too much. What we have to do is train our brain
(intellect) to check in with our tummy (physical sensations) before eating,
rather than checking in with our emotions or environment. Perhaps the most
difficult part is to really recognize what hunger and fullness feel like.

Hope this helps!

- Fred #2

[Fred the Second]

"Fred" > wrote in message
...

> I know that people also emphasize too much the exact point values,
> too. If the program were absolutely scientific or legal, the
> granularity would not be two points at 25 pound ranges.

<snip>

> I remember at one of our meetings this person went on and on about
> eating only a portion of an apple and was stuck on how many points to
> give this partial apple. We must have spent 10 minutes trying to help
> the person sort it out in some way that provided comfort but it was
> impossible. Half a point, one point, no points - it did not matter in
> the scheme of things but nothing soothed the stress.

There is the Blue Suit Rule: If you need a blue suit for a special
occasion, don't sweat about the exact shade of blue or subtle patterns or if
it is a two or three button suit. If you just buy any blue suit which fits
reasonably well you have fulfilled what you were striving for.

<snip>

> Hmmm, are "Fred's" too laid back? (G)

I believe we are! My father, Fred, was laid-back. His father, also Fred,
was as well!

- Fred #2
(or should that be Fred #4?)

[Laura]

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:9Vrld.333903$wV.302845@attbi_s54...
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > "Fred the Second" > wrote:
>
> >> If I could give you a tip about portion control: Put out your servings
> >> as
> >> if you were filling a child's plate. Eat slowly, savoring each bite.
> > When
> >> finished check in with your feelings. Are you satisfied? If not, you
> >> can
> >> always go back for seconds but it is extremely hard, psychologically,
to
> > put
> >> back food you have already put on your plate!
> >
> > I am trying that this week. It has been hard but I am making a concerted
> > effort to cut back on the food. I am cutting back in little ways-puffed
> > wheat cereal and smoothies instead of shredded wheat or oatmeal. At
lunch
> > I'm having 1/2c yogart instead of my normal 1 cup serving. I am finding
> > that
> > I need less food than I thought I did. We went out to dinner last night.
I
> > had a bowl of french onion soup (only ate half of the cheese), a small
> > cesaer salad with 1teaspoon of dressing, part of a chicken tender (~2
oz)
> > plus a couple of bites of my daughters dessert. I was happy with just
that
> > amount of food. That is a lot less food than I normally eat when I eat
> > out.
> > Even tonight when we had chinese take out. I opted for a egg roll, some
> > egg
> > drop soup and 2 beef on a stick. For dessert an hour later I had some
> > melon.
> > Again not a lot of food but I was satified with it.
>
> Good for you!
>
> > I am to figure out if this "being satisfied" is a brain thing or a tummy
> > thing. Any thoughts?
>
> Good question. Though the GSS doesn't delve too deeply into the Comfort
> Zone or the overall idea of satisfaction there is a lot of substance
there.
> If I may use myself as an example, the reason I became so overweight was
> because I had disassociated eating with my physical needs.
>
> In 1993 I was the primary caregiver for my elderly parents who
subsequently
> passed away at the end of that year, and I was also struggling with the
> growing pains of a rebellious teenage daughter. I took to food for
comfort
> and would stuff myself with whatever I thought would give me pleasure.
>
> I suspect the majority of WW members became overweight by not eating for
> nourishment but for eating for something else. Among the list are eating
> out of boredom; eating by association (a movie demands cola and popcorn);
> eating for comfort; eating to not be wasteful (you put out too much food
but
> consider it wasteful to throw any away); eating because of social
pressure;
> eating for self-destruction; and on and on.
>
> In the many years I have been associated with WW I believe the single most
> important thing they have done is make members aware of their comfort
zone.
> Doesn't matter if you are following the Flex Plan or Core Plan there is a
> psychology of eating which needs to be addressed. If we knew to eat
healthy
> foods and to eat when we begin to feel hunger and to stop eating before we
> are overfull then we probably wouldn't have to be WW members!
>
> The comfort zone is a physical sensation and it is the physical sensation
we
> have disassociated from our eating. The more we learn about physical
> satiety the better able we will be to lose weight and keep it off.
>
> To directly answer your question, satisfaction is a brain thing. I have
> been unsatisfied and wanting more food even though I was on the floor in
> pain from eating too much. What we have to do is train our brain
> (intellect) to check in with our tummy (physical sensations) before
eating,
> rather than checking in with our emotions or environment. Perhaps the
most
> difficult part is to really recognize what hunger and fullness feel like.
>
> Hope this helps!

Thanks once again. This is what I am trying to work on these days. I am
guilty of finishing my plate so that I don't waste food. I am trying to
learn to put less on my plate to start with. When DH serves dinner I am
checking the amount he gives me first. Many times I will cut the portion in
half before I take it to the dining room. Things like rice he has been very
good about only giving me 1/2 cup. Maybe it is time to cut that down to 1/4
or 1/3 cup instead. As for meats I think he feels that 5 or 6 oz is the
right size while I think 3 or 4 might be enough. It all depends on the rest
of the plate or how I am feeling at the time. Unfortunately if I take the
plate to the dining room I am likely to finish it all up so I am better off
screening my plate while it is still in the kitchen. Such a mind thing. I'm
sure it has something to do with how I was brought up and I am having a
difficult time breaking it. My folks are elderly. Dad is gone now but would
be 90+ if he were alive and mom is 86 so I suspect it stems from their
experiences during the depression days. I also have been known to eat for
comfort although I seem to have that under control these days. Now, boredom
eating is another story especially in the evenings while watching TV. I can
be happy with some fruit or popcorn although I am trying to not give in to
those feelings lately. I am not hungry so I should not be eating or so they
say. <g>. Work in progress.

[Laura]

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:9Vrld.333903$wV.302845@attbi_s54...
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > "Fred the Second" > wrote:
>
> >> If I could give you a tip about portion control: Put out your servings
> >> as
> >> if you were filling a child's plate. Eat slowly, savoring each bite.
> > When
> >> finished check in with your feelings. Are you satisfied? If not, you
> >> can
> >> always go back for seconds but it is extremely hard, psychologically,
to
> > put
> >> back food you have already put on your plate!
> >
> > I am trying that this week. It has been hard but I am making a concerted
> > effort to cut back on the food. I am cutting back in little ways-puffed
> > wheat cereal and smoothies instead of shredded wheat or oatmeal. At
lunch
> > I'm having 1/2c yogart instead of my normal 1 cup serving. I am finding
> > that
> > I need less food than I thought I did. We went out to dinner last night.
I
> > had a bowl of french onion soup (only ate half of the cheese), a small
> > cesaer salad with 1teaspoon of dressing, part of a chicken tender (~2
oz)
> > plus a couple of bites of my daughters dessert. I was happy with just
that
> > amount of food. That is a lot less food than I normally eat when I eat
> > out.
> > Even tonight when we had chinese take out. I opted for a egg roll, some
> > egg
> > drop soup and 2 beef on a stick. For dessert an hour later I had some
> > melon.
> > Again not a lot of food but I was satified with it.
>
> Good for you!
>
> > I am to figure out if this "being satisfied" is a brain thing or a tummy
> > thing. Any thoughts?
>
> Good question. Though the GSS doesn't delve too deeply into the Comfort
> Zone or the overall idea of satisfaction there is a lot of substance
there.
> If I may use myself as an example, the reason I became so overweight was
> because I had disassociated eating with my physical needs.
>
> In 1993 I was the primary caregiver for my elderly parents who
subsequently
> passed away at the end of that year, and I was also struggling with the
> growing pains of a rebellious teenage daughter. I took to food for
comfort
> and would stuff myself with whatever I thought would give me pleasure.
>
> I suspect the majority of WW members became overweight by not eating for
> nourishment but for eating for something else. Among the list are eating
> out of boredom; eating by association (a movie demands cola and popcorn);
> eating for comfort; eating to not be wasteful (you put out too much food
but
> consider it wasteful to throw any away); eating because of social
pressure;
> eating for self-destruction; and on and on.
>
> In the many years I have been associated with WW I believe the single most
> important thing they have done is make members aware of their comfort
zone.
> Doesn't matter if you are following the Flex Plan or Core Plan there is a
> psychology of eating which needs to be addressed. If we knew to eat
healthy
> foods and to eat when we begin to feel hunger and to stop eating before we
> are overfull then we probably wouldn't have to be WW members!
>
> The comfort zone is a physical sensation and it is the physical sensation
we
> have disassociated from our eating. The more we learn about physical
> satiety the better able we will be to lose weight and keep it off.
>
> To directly answer your question, satisfaction is a brain thing. I have
> been unsatisfied and wanting more food even though I was on the floor in
> pain from eating too much. What we have to do is train our brain
> (intellect) to check in with our tummy (physical sensations) before
eating,
> rather than checking in with our emotions or environment. Perhaps the
most
> difficult part is to really recognize what hunger and fullness feel like.
>
> Hope this helps!

Thanks once again. This is what I am trying to work on these days. I am
guilty of finishing my plate so that I don't waste food. I am trying to
learn to put less on my plate to start with. When DH serves dinner I am
checking the amount he gives me first. Many times I will cut the portion in
half before I take it to the dining room. Things like rice he has been very
good about only giving me 1/2 cup. Maybe it is time to cut that down to 1/4
or 1/3 cup instead. As for meats I think he feels that 5 or 6 oz is the
right size while I think 3 or 4 might be enough. It all depends on the rest
of the plate or how I am feeling at the time. Unfortunately if I take the
plate to the dining room I am likely to finish it all up so I am better off
screening my plate while it is still in the kitchen. Such a mind thing. I'm
sure it has something to do with how I was brought up and I am having a
difficult time breaking it. My folks are elderly. Dad is gone now but would
be 90+ if he were alive and mom is 86 so I suspect it stems from their
experiences during the depression days. I also have been known to eat for
comfort although I seem to have that under control these days. Now, boredom
eating is another story especially in the evenings while watching TV. I can
be happy with some fruit or popcorn although I am trying to not give in to
those feelings lately. I am not hungry so I should not be eating or so they
say. <g>. Work in progress.

[Laura]

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:H2sld.93315$R05.19426@attbi_s53...
> "Fred" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > I know that people also emphasize too much the exact point values,
> > too. If the program were absolutely scientific or legal, the
> > granularity would not be two points at 25 pound ranges.
>
> <snip>
>
> > I remember at one of our meetings this person went on and on about
> > eating only a portion of an apple and was stuck on how many points to
> > give this partial apple. We must have spent 10 minutes trying to help
> > the person sort it out in some way that provided comfort but it was
> > impossible. Half a point, one point, no points - it did not matter in
> > the scheme of things but nothing soothed the stress.
>
> There is the Blue Suit Rule: If you need a blue suit for a special
> occasion, don't sweat about the exact shade of blue or subtle patterns or
if
> it is a two or three button suit. If you just buy any blue suit which
fits
> reasonably well you have fulfilled what you were striving for.
>
> <snip>
>
> > Hmmm, are "Fred's" too laid back? (G)
>
> I believe we are! My father, Fred, was laid-back. His father, also Fred,
> was as well!
>
> - Fred #2
> (or should that be Fred #4?)

My last boss in the corporate world was Fred. Boy, was he ever laid back.

[Laura]

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:H2sld.93315$R05.19426@attbi_s53...
> "Fred" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > I know that people also emphasize too much the exact point values,
> > too. If the program were absolutely scientific or legal, the
> > granularity would not be two points at 25 pound ranges.
>
> <snip>
>
> > I remember at one of our meetings this person went on and on about
> > eating only a portion of an apple and was stuck on how many points to
> > give this partial apple. We must have spent 10 minutes trying to help
> > the person sort it out in some way that provided comfort but it was
> > impossible. Half a point, one point, no points - it did not matter in
> > the scheme of things but nothing soothed the stress.
>
> There is the Blue Suit Rule: If you need a blue suit for a special
> occasion, don't sweat about the exact shade of blue or subtle patterns or
if
> it is a two or three button suit. If you just buy any blue suit which
fits
> reasonably well you have fulfilled what you were striving for.
>
> <snip>
>
> > Hmmm, are "Fred's" too laid back? (G)
>
> I believe we are! My father, Fred, was laid-back. His father, also Fred,
> was as well!
>
> - Fred #2
> (or should that be Fred #4?)

My last boss in the corporate world was Fred. Boy, was he ever laid back.

[Miss Violette]

very good post. Convinces me even more that I will always have to journal
and keep track, Lee
Fred the Second > wrote in message
news:9Vrld.333903$wV.302845@attbi_s54...
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > "Fred the Second" > wrote:
>
> >> If I could give you a tip about portion control: Put out your servings
> >> as
> >> if you were filling a child's plate. Eat slowly, savoring each bite.
> > When
> >> finished check in with your feelings. Are you satisfied? If not, you
> >> can
> >> always go back for seconds but it is extremely hard, psychologically,
to
> > put
> >> back food you have already put on your plate!
> >
> > I am trying that this week. It has been hard but I am making a concerted
> > effort to cut back on the food. I am cutting back in little ways-puffed
> > wheat cereal and smoothies instead of shredded wheat or oatmeal. At
lunch
> > I'm having 1/2c yogart instead of my normal 1 cup serving. I am finding
> > that
> > I need less food than I thought I did. We went out to dinner last night.
I
> > had a bowl of french onion soup (only ate half of the cheese), a small
> > cesaer salad with 1teaspoon of dressing, part of a chicken tender (~2
oz)
> > plus a couple of bites of my daughters dessert. I was happy with just
that
> > amount of food. That is a lot less food than I normally eat when I eat
> > out.
> > Even tonight when we had chinese take out. I opted for a egg roll, some
> > egg
> > drop soup and 2 beef on a stick. For dessert an hour later I had some
> > melon.
> > Again not a lot of food but I was satified with it.
>
> Good for you!
>
> > I am to figure out if this "being satisfied" is a brain thing or a tummy
> > thing. Any thoughts?
>
> Good question. Though the GSS doesn't delve too deeply into the Comfort
> Zone or the overall idea of satisfaction there is a lot of substance
there.
> If I may use myself as an example, the reason I became so overweight was
> because I had disassociated eating with my physical needs.
>
> In 1993 I was the primary caregiver for my elderly parents who
subsequently
> passed away at the end of that year, and I was also struggling with the
> growing pains of a rebellious teenage daughter. I took to food for
comfort
> and would stuff myself with whatever I thought would give me pleasure.
>
> I suspect the majority of WW members became overweight by not eating for
> nourishment but for eating for something else. Among the list are eating
> out of boredom; eating by association (a movie demands cola and popcorn);
> eating for comfort; eating to not be wasteful (you put out too much food
but
> consider it wasteful to throw any away); eating because of social
pressure;
> eating for self-destruction; and on and on.
>
> In the many years I have been associated with WW I believe the single most
> important thing they have done is make members aware of their comfort
zone.
> Doesn't matter if you are following the Flex Plan or Core Plan there is a
> psychology of eating which needs to be addressed. If we knew to eat
healthy
> foods and to eat when we begin to feel hunger and to stop eating before we
> are overfull then we probably wouldn't have to be WW members!
>
> The comfort zone is a physical sensation and it is the physical sensation
we
> have disassociated from our eating. The more we learn about physical
> satiety the better able we will be to lose weight and keep it off.
>
> To directly answer your question, satisfaction is a brain thing. I have
> been unsatisfied and wanting more food even though I was on the floor in
> pain from eating too much. What we have to do is train our brain
> (intellect) to check in with our tummy (physical sensations) before
eating,
> rather than checking in with our emotions or environment. Perhaps the
most
> difficult part is to really recognize what hunger and fullness feel like.
>
> Hope this helps!
>
> - Fred #2
>
>

[Miss Violette]

very good post. Convinces me even more that I will always have to journal
and keep track, Lee
Fred the Second > wrote in message
news:9Vrld.333903$wV.302845@attbi_s54...
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > "Fred the Second" > wrote:
>
> >> If I could give you a tip about portion control: Put out your servings
> >> as
> >> if you were filling a child's plate. Eat slowly, savoring each bite.
> > When
> >> finished check in with your feelings. Are you satisfied? If not, you
> >> can
> >> always go back for seconds but it is extremely hard, psychologically,
to
> > put
> >> back food you have already put on your plate!
> >
> > I am trying that this week. It has been hard but I am making a concerted
> > effort to cut back on the food. I am cutting back in little ways-puffed
> > wheat cereal and smoothies instead of shredded wheat or oatmeal. At
lunch
> > I'm having 1/2c yogart instead of my normal 1 cup serving. I am finding
> > that
> > I need less food than I thought I did. We went out to dinner last night.
I
> > had a bowl of french onion soup (only ate half of the cheese), a small
> > cesaer salad with 1teaspoon of dressing, part of a chicken tender (~2
oz)
> > plus a couple of bites of my daughters dessert. I was happy with just
that
> > amount of food. That is a lot less food than I normally eat when I eat
> > out.
> > Even tonight when we had chinese take out. I opted for a egg roll, some
> > egg
> > drop soup and 2 beef on a stick. For dessert an hour later I had some
> > melon.
> > Again not a lot of food but I was satified with it.
>
> Good for you!
>
> > I am to figure out if this "being satisfied" is a brain thing or a tummy
> > thing. Any thoughts?
>
> Good question. Though the GSS doesn't delve too deeply into the Comfort
> Zone or the overall idea of satisfaction there is a lot of substance
there.
> If I may use myself as an example, the reason I became so overweight was
> because I had disassociated eating with my physical needs.
>
> In 1993 I was the primary caregiver for my elderly parents who
subsequently
> passed away at the end of that year, and I was also struggling with the
> growing pains of a rebellious teenage daughter. I took to food for
comfort
> and would stuff myself with whatever I thought would give me pleasure.
>
> I suspect the majority of WW members became overweight by not eating for
> nourishment but for eating for something else. Among the list are eating
> out of boredom; eating by association (a movie demands cola and popcorn);
> eating for comfort; eating to not be wasteful (you put out too much food
but
> consider it wasteful to throw any away); eating because of social
pressure;
> eating for self-destruction; and on and on.
>
> In the many years I have been associated with WW I believe the single most
> important thing they have done is make members aware of their comfort
zone.
> Doesn't matter if you are following the Flex Plan or Core Plan there is a
> psychology of eating which needs to be addressed. If we knew to eat
healthy
> foods and to eat when we begin to feel hunger and to stop eating before we
> are overfull then we probably wouldn't have to be WW members!
>
> The comfort zone is a physical sensation and it is the physical sensation
we
> have disassociated from our eating. The more we learn about physical
> satiety the better able we will be to lose weight and keep it off.
>
> To directly answer your question, satisfaction is a brain thing. I have
> been unsatisfied and wanting more food even though I was on the floor in
> pain from eating too much. What we have to do is train our brain
> (intellect) to check in with our tummy (physical sensations) before
eating,
> rather than checking in with our emotions or environment. Perhaps the
most
> difficult part is to really recognize what hunger and fullness feel like.
>
> Hope this helps!
>
> - Fred #2
>
>

[Miss Violette]

or journals, I got a two/four on that one, kept journal to occupy my head,
and fed perfectionist tendencies to the journal so I can be "perfect" and
learn when I do something not the way I wanted to and can go ahead and not
berate myself, hey maybe that's more than two, Lee
prairieroots > wrote in message
lkaboutsupport.com...
> I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
> have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
> this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime later
> as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion (food)
> for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
> --
> Linda P
>

[Miss Violette]

or journals, I got a two/four on that one, kept journal to occupy my head,
and fed perfectionist tendencies to the journal so I can be "perfect" and
learn when I do something not the way I wanted to and can go ahead and not
berate myself, hey maybe that's more than two, Lee
prairieroots > wrote in message
lkaboutsupport.com...
> I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
> have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
> this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime later
> as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion (food)
> for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
> --
> Linda P
>

[Laura]

Same here. Even on Core I am still journalling my food. Helps keep me
focused and honest about what I have eaten. Plus I have a severe case of CRS
and will forget what I have eaten by the next day if I don't write it down.

"Miss Violette" > wrote in message
...
> very good post. Convinces me even more that I will always have to journal
> and keep track, Lee
> Fred the Second > wrote in message
> news:9Vrld.333903$wV.302845@attbi_s54...
> > "Laura" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > > "Fred the Second" > wrote:
> >
> > >> If I could give you a tip about portion control: Put out your
servings
> > >> as
> > >> if you were filling a child's plate. Eat slowly, savoring each bite.
> > > When
> > >> finished check in with your feelings. Are you satisfied? If not,
you
> > >> can
> > >> always go back for seconds but it is extremely hard, psychologically,
> to
> > > put
> > >> back food you have already put on your plate!
> > >
> > > I am trying that this week. It has been hard but I am making a
concerted
> > > effort to cut back on the food. I am cutting back in little
ways-puffed
> > > wheat cereal and smoothies instead of shredded wheat or oatmeal. At
> lunch
> > > I'm having 1/2c yogart instead of my normal 1 cup serving. I am
finding
> > > that
> > > I need less food than I thought I did. We went out to dinner last
night.
> I
> > > had a bowl of french onion soup (only ate half of the cheese), a small
> > > cesaer salad with 1teaspoon of dressing, part of a chicken tender (~2
> oz)
> > > plus a couple of bites of my daughters dessert. I was happy with just
> that
> > > amount of food. That is a lot less food than I normally eat when I eat
> > > out.
> > > Even tonight when we had chinese take out. I opted for a egg roll,
some
> > > egg
> > > drop soup and 2 beef on a stick. For dessert an hour later I had some
> > > melon.
> > > Again not a lot of food but I was satified with it.
> >
> > Good for you!
> >
> > > I am to figure out if this "being satisfied" is a brain thing or a
tummy
> > > thing. Any thoughts?
> >
> > Good question. Though the GSS doesn't delve too deeply into the Comfort
> > Zone or the overall idea of satisfaction there is a lot of substance
> there.
> > If I may use myself as an example, the reason I became so overweight was
> > because I had disassociated eating with my physical needs.
> >
> > In 1993 I was the primary caregiver for my elderly parents who
> subsequently
> > passed away at the end of that year, and I was also struggling with the
> > growing pains of a rebellious teenage daughter. I took to food for
> comfort
> > and would stuff myself with whatever I thought would give me pleasure.
> >
> > I suspect the majority of WW members became overweight by not eating for
> > nourishment but for eating for something else. Among the list are
eating
> > out of boredom; eating by association (a movie demands cola and
popcorn);
> > eating for comfort; eating to not be wasteful (you put out too much food
> but
> > consider it wasteful to throw any away); eating because of social
> pressure;
> > eating for self-destruction; and on and on.
> >
> > In the many years I have been associated with WW I believe the single
most
> > important thing they have done is make members aware of their comfort
> zone.
> > Doesn't matter if you are following the Flex Plan or Core Plan there is
a
> > psychology of eating which needs to be addressed. If we knew to eat
> healthy
> > foods and to eat when we begin to feel hunger and to stop eating before
we
> > are overfull then we probably wouldn't have to be WW members!
> >
> > The comfort zone is a physical sensation and it is the physical
sensation
> we
> > have disassociated from our eating. The more we learn about physical
> > satiety the better able we will be to lose weight and keep it off.
> >
> > To directly answer your question, satisfaction is a brain thing. I have
> > been unsatisfied and wanting more food even though I was on the floor in
> > pain from eating too much. What we have to do is train our brain
> > (intellect) to check in with our tummy (physical sensations) before
> eating,
> > rather than checking in with our emotions or environment. Perhaps the
> most
> > difficult part is to really recognize what hunger and fullness feel
like.
> >
> > Hope this helps!
> >
> > - Fred #2
> >
> >
>
>

[Prairie Roots]

Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.

No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
BMI.

Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.

It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.

(Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)

I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
--
Linda P

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
wrote:

>I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
>waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
>
>On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> wrote:
>
>>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
>>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
>>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime later
>>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion (food)
>>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!

[Prairie Roots]

Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.

No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
BMI.

Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.

It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.

(Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)

I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
--
Linda P

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
wrote:

>I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
>waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
>
>On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> wrote:
>
>>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
>>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
>>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime later
>>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion (food)
>>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!

[Laura]

Very well said. I think one of the reasons that I like Core so much is that
my fretting over points has greatly diminished. As long as I am picking core
(or almost-core) foods and watching my portions I can live with myself. I
still journal the food and the corresponding points but I don't get obsessed
with making sure that I eat my target number of points like I did on flex. I
would be good all day on flex and have 5+ points left over after dinner.
Knowing that I HAD to eat them drove me nuts. Many nights I over compensated
and consumed too many points after dinner. That part has been eliminated for
me with core and I like that. At the end of the day I have eaten my food and
move on to the next day. I don't worry if I have eaten enough points. I eat
until I am satisfied (or at least not hungry) and am done. I wish they had
taught this concept with Flex a year and a half ago.


"Prairie Roots" > wrote in message
...
> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
>
> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
> BMI.
>
> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
>
> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
>
> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
>
> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
> --
> Linda P
>
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
> wrote:
>
> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
> >
> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> > wrote:
> >
> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
later
> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion (food)
> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
>

[Laura]

Very well said. I think one of the reasons that I like Core so much is that
my fretting over points has greatly diminished. As long as I am picking core
(or almost-core) foods and watching my portions I can live with myself. I
still journal the food and the corresponding points but I don't get obsessed
with making sure that I eat my target number of points like I did on flex. I
would be good all day on flex and have 5+ points left over after dinner.
Knowing that I HAD to eat them drove me nuts. Many nights I over compensated
and consumed too many points after dinner. That part has been eliminated for
me with core and I like that. At the end of the day I have eaten my food and
move on to the next day. I don't worry if I have eaten enough points. I eat
until I am satisfied (or at least not hungry) and am done. I wish they had
taught this concept with Flex a year and a half ago.


"Prairie Roots" > wrote in message
...
> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
>
> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
> BMI.
>
> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
>
> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
>
> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
>
> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
> --
> Linda P
>
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
> wrote:
>
> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
> >
> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> > wrote:
> >
> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
later
> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion (food)
> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
>

[Miss Violette]

I divide into obsessive is ok compulsive isn't,just a matter of degree
really, one of the first thing you learn as a psychology student is that all
psychosis/neurosis start as personality traits. I guess Its fine I don't
know the meaning of house cleaning, I wouldn't want to develop another bad
habit, Lee
Prairie Roots > wrote in message
...
> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
>
> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
> BMI.
>
> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
>
> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
>
> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
>
> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
> --
> Linda P
>
> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
> wrote:
>
> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
> >
> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> > wrote:
> >
> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
later
> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion (food)
> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
>

[Fred the Second]

As you get comfortable with your decisions and the signals your body is
sending you there may come a time when you will allow yourself to stop
tracking and journaling. I made that leap myself just four weeks ago; prior
to that I had recorded everything. It was scary at first but now I enjoy
the freedom to just grab an apple or some popcorn if I feel I need to snack.

I won't presume say you (or anyone else) needs to let go of counting and
tracking but the Core Plan was designed to give freedom from that. It is so
much now like what "normal, skinny people" do that I feel I've finally made
the change. I do keep a mental note of how I'm doing with fruit and
vegetables, healthy oils, dairy, and protein but am not obsessive about it.
Its a lifestyle I can live with and can "blend in" with normal folks.

- Fred #2

"Laura" > wrote in message
...
> Very well said. I think one of the reasons that I like Core so much is
> that
> my fretting over points has greatly diminished. As long as I am picking
> core
> (or almost-core) foods and watching my portions I can live with myself. I
> still journal the food and the corresponding points but I don't get
> obsessed
> with making sure that I eat my target number of points like I did on flex.
> I
> would be good all day on flex and have 5+ points left over after dinner.
> Knowing that I HAD to eat them drove me nuts. Many nights I over
> compensated
> and consumed too many points after dinner. That part has been eliminated
> for
> me with core and I like that. At the end of the day I have eaten my food
> and
> move on to the next day. I don't worry if I have eaten enough points. I
> eat
> until I am satisfied (or at least not hungry) and am done. I wish they had
> taught this concept with Flex a year and a half ago.
>
>
> "Prairie Roots" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
>> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
>> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
>> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
>>
>> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
>> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
>> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
>> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
>> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
>> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
>> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
>> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
>> BMI.
>>
>> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
>> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
>> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
>> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
>> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
>> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
>> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
>> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
>> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
>>
>> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
>> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
>> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
>> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
>> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
>> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
>> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
>> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
>> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
>> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
>>
>> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
>>
>> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
>> --
>> Linda P
>>
>> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
>> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
>> >
>> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
>> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
>> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
> later
>> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion
>> >>(food)
>> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
>>
>
>

[Fred the Second]

As you get comfortable with your decisions and the signals your body is
sending you there may come a time when you will allow yourself to stop
tracking and journaling. I made that leap myself just four weeks ago; prior
to that I had recorded everything. It was scary at first but now I enjoy
the freedom to just grab an apple or some popcorn if I feel I need to snack.

I won't presume say you (or anyone else) needs to let go of counting and
tracking but the Core Plan was designed to give freedom from that. It is so
much now like what "normal, skinny people" do that I feel I've finally made
the change. I do keep a mental note of how I'm doing with fruit and
vegetables, healthy oils, dairy, and protein but am not obsessive about it.
Its a lifestyle I can live with and can "blend in" with normal folks.

- Fred #2

"Laura" > wrote in message
...
> Very well said. I think one of the reasons that I like Core so much is
> that
> my fretting over points has greatly diminished. As long as I am picking
> core
> (or almost-core) foods and watching my portions I can live with myself. I
> still journal the food and the corresponding points but I don't get
> obsessed
> with making sure that I eat my target number of points like I did on flex.
> I
> would be good all day on flex and have 5+ points left over after dinner.
> Knowing that I HAD to eat them drove me nuts. Many nights I over
> compensated
> and consumed too many points after dinner. That part has been eliminated
> for
> me with core and I like that. At the end of the day I have eaten my food
> and
> move on to the next day. I don't worry if I have eaten enough points. I
> eat
> until I am satisfied (or at least not hungry) and am done. I wish they had
> taught this concept with Flex a year and a half ago.
>
>
> "Prairie Roots" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
>> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
>> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
>> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
>>
>> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
>> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
>> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
>> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
>> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
>> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
>> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
>> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
>> BMI.
>>
>> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
>> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
>> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
>> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
>> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
>> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
>> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
>> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
>> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
>>
>> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
>> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
>> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
>> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
>> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
>> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
>> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
>> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
>> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
>> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
>>
>> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
>>
>> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
>> --
>> Linda P
>>
>> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
>> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
>> >
>> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far, I
>> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right at
>> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
> later
>> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion
>> >>(food)
>> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
>>
>
>

[Laura]

I am hoping that some day I will be able to stop journalling. My memory is
so poor some days that it helps me keep track of my
fruits/veggies/dairy/oil. If I don't write it down that day I won't remember
the next day. CRS s*cks. <g>

How do you handle snacking urges? Frequently in the evening I have the urge
for a snack. I am not necessarily hungry but something keeps nagging me to
have a snack. I'll have fruit, yogart or popcorn but since I am not really
hungry doesn't this go against the Core guidelines?

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:hVPld.337790$wV.72959@attbi_s54...
> As you get comfortable with your decisions and the signals your body is
> sending you there may come a time when you will allow yourself to stop
> tracking and journaling. I made that leap myself just four weeks ago;
prior
> to that I had recorded everything. It was scary at first but now I enjoy
> the freedom to just grab an apple or some popcorn if I feel I need to
snack.
>
> I won't presume say you (or anyone else) needs to let go of counting and
> tracking but the Core Plan was designed to give freedom from that. It is
so
> much now like what "normal, skinny people" do that I feel I've finally
made
> the change. I do keep a mental note of how I'm doing with fruit and
> vegetables, healthy oils, dairy, and protein but am not obsessive about
it.
> Its a lifestyle I can live with and can "blend in" with normal folks.
>
> - Fred #2
>
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Very well said. I think one of the reasons that I like Core so much is
> > that
> > my fretting over points has greatly diminished. As long as I am picking
> > core
> > (or almost-core) foods and watching my portions I can live with myself.
I
> > still journal the food and the corresponding points but I don't get
> > obsessed
> > with making sure that I eat my target number of points like I did on
flex.
> > I
> > would be good all day on flex and have 5+ points left over after dinner.
> > Knowing that I HAD to eat them drove me nuts. Many nights I over
> > compensated
> > and consumed too many points after dinner. That part has been eliminated
> > for
> > me with core and I like that. At the end of the day I have eaten my food
> > and
> > move on to the next day. I don't worry if I have eaten enough points. I
> > eat
> > until I am satisfied (or at least not hungry) and am done. I wish they
had
> > taught this concept with Flex a year and a half ago.
> >
> >
> > "Prairie Roots" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
> >> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
> >> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
> >> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
> >>
> >> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
> >> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
> >> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
> >> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
> >> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
> >> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
> >> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
> >> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
> >> BMI.
> >>
> >> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
> >> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
> >> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
> >> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
> >> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
> >> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
> >> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
> >> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
> >> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
> >>
> >> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
> >> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
> >> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
> >> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
> >> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
> >> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
> >> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
> >> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
> >> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
> >> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
> >>
> >> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
> >>
> >> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
> >> --
> >> Linda P
> >>
> >> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
> >> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
> >> >
> >> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far,
I
> >> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right
at
> >> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
> > later
> >> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion
> >> >>(food)
> >> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Laura]

I am hoping that some day I will be able to stop journalling. My memory is
so poor some days that it helps me keep track of my
fruits/veggies/dairy/oil. If I don't write it down that day I won't remember
the next day. CRS s*cks. <g>

How do you handle snacking urges? Frequently in the evening I have the urge
for a snack. I am not necessarily hungry but something keeps nagging me to
have a snack. I'll have fruit, yogart or popcorn but since I am not really
hungry doesn't this go against the Core guidelines?

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:hVPld.337790$wV.72959@attbi_s54...
> As you get comfortable with your decisions and the signals your body is
> sending you there may come a time when you will allow yourself to stop
> tracking and journaling. I made that leap myself just four weeks ago;
prior
> to that I had recorded everything. It was scary at first but now I enjoy
> the freedom to just grab an apple or some popcorn if I feel I need to
snack.
>
> I won't presume say you (or anyone else) needs to let go of counting and
> tracking but the Core Plan was designed to give freedom from that. It is
so
> much now like what "normal, skinny people" do that I feel I've finally
made
> the change. I do keep a mental note of how I'm doing with fruit and
> vegetables, healthy oils, dairy, and protein but am not obsessive about
it.
> Its a lifestyle I can live with and can "blend in" with normal folks.
>
> - Fred #2
>
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Very well said. I think one of the reasons that I like Core so much is
> > that
> > my fretting over points has greatly diminished. As long as I am picking
> > core
> > (or almost-core) foods and watching my portions I can live with myself.
I
> > still journal the food and the corresponding points but I don't get
> > obsessed
> > with making sure that I eat my target number of points like I did on
flex.
> > I
> > would be good all day on flex and have 5+ points left over after dinner.
> > Knowing that I HAD to eat them drove me nuts. Many nights I over
> > compensated
> > and consumed too many points after dinner. That part has been eliminated
> > for
> > me with core and I like that. At the end of the day I have eaten my food
> > and
> > move on to the next day. I don't worry if I have eaten enough points. I
> > eat
> > until I am satisfied (or at least not hungry) and am done. I wish they
had
> > taught this concept with Flex a year and a half ago.
> >
> >
> > "Prairie Roots" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
> >> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
> >> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
> >> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
> >>
> >> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
> >> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
> >> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
> >> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
> >> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
> >> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
> >> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
> >> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
> >> BMI.
> >>
> >> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
> >> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
> >> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
> >> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
> >> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
> >> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
> >> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
> >> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
> >> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
> >>
> >> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
> >> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
> >> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
> >> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
> >> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
> >> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
> >> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
> >> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
> >> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
> >> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
> >>
> >> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
> >>
> >> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
> >> --
> >> Linda P
> >>
> >> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
> >> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
> >> >
> >> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far,
I
> >> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right
at
> >> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
> > later
> >> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion
> >> >>(food)
> >> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Laura]

I am hoping that some day I will be able to stop journalling. My memory is
so poor some days that it helps me keep track of my
fruits/veggies/dairy/oil. If I don't write it down that day I won't remember
the next day. CRS s*cks. <g>

How do you handle snacking urges? Frequently in the evening I have the urge
for a snack. I am not necessarily hungry but something keeps nagging me to
have a snack. I'll have fruit, yogart or popcorn but since I am not really
hungry doesn't this go against the Core guidelines?

"Fred the Second" > wrote in message
news:hVPld.337790$wV.72959@attbi_s54...
> As you get comfortable with your decisions and the signals your body is
> sending you there may come a time when you will allow yourself to stop
> tracking and journaling. I made that leap myself just four weeks ago;
prior
> to that I had recorded everything. It was scary at first but now I enjoy
> the freedom to just grab an apple or some popcorn if I feel I need to
snack.
>
> I won't presume say you (or anyone else) needs to let go of counting and
> tracking but the Core Plan was designed to give freedom from that. It is
so
> much now like what "normal, skinny people" do that I feel I've finally
made
> the change. I do keep a mental note of how I'm doing with fruit and
> vegetables, healthy oils, dairy, and protein but am not obsessive about
it.
> Its a lifestyle I can live with and can "blend in" with normal folks.
>
> - Fred #2
>
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Very well said. I think one of the reasons that I like Core so much is
> > that
> > my fretting over points has greatly diminished. As long as I am picking
> > core
> > (or almost-core) foods and watching my portions I can live with myself.
I
> > still journal the food and the corresponding points but I don't get
> > obsessed
> > with making sure that I eat my target number of points like I did on
flex.
> > I
> > would be good all day on flex and have 5+ points left over after dinner.
> > Knowing that I HAD to eat them drove me nuts. Many nights I over
> > compensated
> > and consumed too many points after dinner. That part has been eliminated
> > for
> > me with core and I like that. At the end of the day I have eaten my food
> > and
> > move on to the next day. I don't worry if I have eaten enough points. I
> > eat
> > until I am satisfied (or at least not hungry) and am done. I wish they
had
> > taught this concept with Flex a year and a half ago.
> >
> >
> > "Prairie Roots" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
> >> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
> >> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
> >> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
> >>
> >> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
> >> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
> >> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
> >> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
> >> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
> >> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
> >> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
> >> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
> >> BMI.
> >>
> >> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
> >> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
> >> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
> >> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
> >> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
> >> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
> >> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
> >> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
> >> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
> >>
> >> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
> >> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
> >> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
> >> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
> >> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
> >> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
> >> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
> >> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
> >> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
> >> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
> >>
> >> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
> >>
> >> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
> >> --
> >> Linda P
> >>
> >> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
> >> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
> >> >
> >> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far,
I
> >> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right
at
> >> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
> > later
> >> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion
> >> >>(food)
> >> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Miss Violette]

It is nice to see some people can do it, Lee
Fred the Second > wrote in message
news:hVPld.337790$wV.72959@attbi_s54...
> As you get comfortable with your decisions and the signals your body is
> sending you there may come a time when you will allow yourself to stop
> tracking and journaling. I made that leap myself just four weeks ago;
prior
> to that I had recorded everything. It was scary at first but now I enjoy
> the freedom to just grab an apple or some popcorn if I feel I need to
snack.
>
> I won't presume say you (or anyone else) needs to let go of counting and
> tracking but the Core Plan was designed to give freedom from that. It is
so
> much now like what "normal, skinny people" do that I feel I've finally
made
> the change. I do keep a mental note of how I'm doing with fruit and
> vegetables, healthy oils, dairy, and protein but am not obsessive about
it.
> Its a lifestyle I can live with and can "blend in" with normal folks.
>
> - Fred #2
>
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Very well said. I think one of the reasons that I like Core so much is
> > that
> > my fretting over points has greatly diminished. As long as I am picking
> > core
> > (or almost-core) foods and watching my portions I can live with myself.
I
> > still journal the food and the corresponding points but I don't get
> > obsessed
> > with making sure that I eat my target number of points like I did on
flex.
> > I
> > would be good all day on flex and have 5+ points left over after dinner.
> > Knowing that I HAD to eat them drove me nuts. Many nights I over
> > compensated
> > and consumed too many points after dinner. That part has been eliminated
> > for
> > me with core and I like that. At the end of the day I have eaten my food
> > and
> > move on to the next day. I don't worry if I have eaten enough points. I
> > eat
> > until I am satisfied (or at least not hungry) and am done. I wish they
had
> > taught this concept with Flex a year and a half ago.
> >
> >
> > "Prairie Roots" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
> >> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
> >> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
> >> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
> >>
> >> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
> >> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
> >> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
> >> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
> >> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
> >> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
> >> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
> >> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
> >> BMI.
> >>
> >> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
> >> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
> >> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
> >> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
> >> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
> >> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
> >> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
> >> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
> >> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
> >>
> >> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
> >> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
> >> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
> >> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
> >> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
> >> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
> >> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
> >> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
> >> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
> >> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
> >>
> >> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
> >>
> >> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
> >> --
> >> Linda P
> >>
> >> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
> >> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
> >> >
> >> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far,
I
> >> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right
at
> >> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
> > later
> >> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion
> >> >>(food)
> >> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Miss Violette]

It is nice to see some people can do it, Lee
Fred the Second > wrote in message
news:hVPld.337790$wV.72959@attbi_s54...
> As you get comfortable with your decisions and the signals your body is
> sending you there may come a time when you will allow yourself to stop
> tracking and journaling. I made that leap myself just four weeks ago;
prior
> to that I had recorded everything. It was scary at first but now I enjoy
> the freedom to just grab an apple or some popcorn if I feel I need to
snack.
>
> I won't presume say you (or anyone else) needs to let go of counting and
> tracking but the Core Plan was designed to give freedom from that. It is
so
> much now like what "normal, skinny people" do that I feel I've finally
made
> the change. I do keep a mental note of how I'm doing with fruit and
> vegetables, healthy oils, dairy, and protein but am not obsessive about
it.
> Its a lifestyle I can live with and can "blend in" with normal folks.
>
> - Fred #2
>
> "Laura" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Very well said. I think one of the reasons that I like Core so much is
> > that
> > my fretting over points has greatly diminished. As long as I am picking
> > core
> > (or almost-core) foods and watching my portions I can live with myself.
I
> > still journal the food and the corresponding points but I don't get
> > obsessed
> > with making sure that I eat my target number of points like I did on
flex.
> > I
> > would be good all day on flex and have 5+ points left over after dinner.
> > Knowing that I HAD to eat them drove me nuts. Many nights I over
> > compensated
> > and consumed too many points after dinner. That part has been eliminated
> > for
> > me with core and I like that. At the end of the day I have eaten my food
> > and
> > move on to the next day. I don't worry if I have eaten enough points. I
> > eat
> > until I am satisfied (or at least not hungry) and am done. I wish they
had
> > taught this concept with Flex a year and a half ago.
> >
> >
> > "Prairie Roots" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Of course it's true: Not all compulsions are equal in kind or
> >> severity. Some compulsions are harmful, some are merely annoying, and
> >> some are actually healthy or helpful. I should be so lucky as to have
> >> at least a slight case of compulsivity for housecleaning.
> >>
> >> No, I think was getting at the insanity that often accompanies extreme
> >> compulsive behavior. (I'm not sure which of those is the chicken and
> >> which is the egg!) Whether your compulsion has you opening and eating
> >> an entire bag of chips and/or an entire half-gallon of ice cream or
> >> has you lying awake all night fretting about the number of points in
> >> an apple, in my mind those are equally insane. And while the
> >> apple-fretting might not show up as fat, I would argue that, in its
> >> own, it is destructive and has health-consequences in other areas than
> >> BMI.
> >>
> >> Not always knowing the difference between a "healthy" level of
> >> compulsivity and insanity is one of my challenges. I need to be
> >> compulsive enough about weight loss and maintenance that I follow the
> >> program to the best of my ability but not so compulsive that I can't
> >> enjoy food or don't allow myself to participate in special occasions.
> >> Because whenever I'm too rigid about following the food rules, I
> >> always have an opposite and equal reaction (like that law of
> >> thermodynamics or something: for every action there's an opposite and
> >> equal reaction): I go on a feeding frenzy.
> >>
> >> It's some of that insanity that I see on the WW boards, especially in
> >> the arguments about Core and WW's handling of it. People are
> >> compulsive about wanting to know the rules, can't let "Use your common
> >> sense" be their guide, get angry and irate, get the rest of the group
> >> wound up, and the next thing you know, there's a hostile group of
> >> vigilantes storming the jail, taking the law into their own hands and
> >> hanging the miserable SOB themselves instead of waiting for the
> >> institutes of justice to do their job. The insanity of compulsivity is
> >> when all that drama goes on inside your head, whether you're desperate
> >> to find food or desperate to know the points in an apply.
> >>
> >> (Did I just plagiarize every Western movie I've ever seen?)
> >>
> >> I think I feel an urge to go clean my back porch.
> >> --
> >> Linda P
> >>
> >> On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0800, Fred >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I would guess that 'compulsions' are not all equal. Food goes to the
> >> >waistline. Points, well, mental issues abound! (G)
> >> >
> >> >On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:18:29 -0500, "prairieroots"
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>I've been following this thread with great interest, although so far,
I
> >> >>have been content to lurk. Unfortunately I can't take the time right
at
> >> >>this moment to respond, but I will try to get back to this sometime
> > later
> >> >>as I would like to add some thoughts about trading one compulsion
> >> >>(food)
> >> >>for another (points). Or maybe that's all I need to say!
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Prairie Roots]

This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
more either.

Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
that I'm below 150.

Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?

I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
perfection.
--
Linda P


On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:52:33 -0800, Fred >
wrote:

>I have been there, too. Doing (what I will call) TOO WELL resisting
>only to really cave in rather and having a modest amount when the
>urges first happened. After my first Thanksgiving I realized that
>trying to be perfectly on program had made me crazy and reconciled to
>doing a good job but that Thanksgiving is food and friends and not
>being so stressed.

[Prairie Roots]

This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
more either.

Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
that I'm below 150.

Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?

I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
perfection.
--
Linda P


On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:52:33 -0800, Fred >
wrote:

>I have been there, too. Doing (what I will call) TOO WELL resisting
>only to really cave in rather and having a modest amount when the
>urges first happened. After my first Thanksgiving I realized that
>trying to be perfectly on program had made me crazy and reconciled to
>doing a good job but that Thanksgiving is food and friends and not
>being so stressed.

[Prairie Roots]

This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
more either.

Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
that I'm below 150.

Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?

I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
perfection.
--
Linda P


On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:52:33 -0800, Fred >
wrote:

>I have been there, too. Doing (what I will call) TOO WELL resisting
>only to really cave in rather and having a modest amount when the
>urges first happened. After my first Thanksgiving I realized that
>trying to be perfectly on program had made me crazy and reconciled to
>doing a good job but that Thanksgiving is food and friends and not
>being so stressed.

[Miss Violette]

I figure if I get in shape and follow my plan for goal, the getting in shape
will help me look better/smaller and if I am actually in better shape then I
will be naturally burning more calories so losing another bit won't be that
hard. I REFUSE to be hungry and I REFUSE to be miserable, there are enough
other things to miserable about than stressing over one pound either way, I
think your goal of upping your biking skills is very realistic, Lee
Prairie Roots > wrote in message
...
> This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
> all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
> to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
> for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
> more either.
>
> Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
> facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
> 145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
> It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
> at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
> caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
> that I'm below 150.
>
> Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
> seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
> I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
> I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
> I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?
>
> I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
> that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
> attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
> and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
> the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
> perfection.
> --
> Linda P
>
>
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:52:33 -0800, Fred >
> wrote:
>
> >I have been there, too. Doing (what I will call) TOO WELL resisting
> >only to really cave in rather and having a modest amount when the
> >urges first happened. After my first Thanksgiving I realized that
> >trying to be perfectly on program had made me crazy and reconciled to
> >doing a good job but that Thanksgiving is food and friends and not
> >being so stressed.
>

[Miss Violette]

I figure if I get in shape and follow my plan for goal, the getting in shape
will help me look better/smaller and if I am actually in better shape then I
will be naturally burning more calories so losing another bit won't be that
hard. I REFUSE to be hungry and I REFUSE to be miserable, there are enough
other things to miserable about than stressing over one pound either way, I
think your goal of upping your biking skills is very realistic, Lee
Prairie Roots > wrote in message
...
> This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
> all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
> to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
> for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
> more either.
>
> Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
> facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
> 145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
> It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
> at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
> caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
> that I'm below 150.
>
> Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
> seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
> I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
> I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
> I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?
>
> I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
> that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
> attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
> and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
> the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
> perfection.
> --
> Linda P
>
>
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:52:33 -0800, Fred >
> wrote:
>
> >I have been there, too. Doing (what I will call) TOO WELL resisting
> >only to really cave in rather and having a modest amount when the
> >urges first happened. After my first Thanksgiving I realized that
> >trying to be perfectly on program had made me crazy and reconciled to
> >doing a good job but that Thanksgiving is food and friends and not
> >being so stressed.
>

[Brenda Hammond]

I think the three of you, Lesanne and Joyce have done a wonderful job during
your weight loss journey. You have accomplished something that few
are able to do, so be proud! I hope that I can follow in your steps and
do the same for myself. Stick around, the rest of us have alot to learn
from you.

--
Brenda
209/195/150

"Miss Violette" > wrote in message
...
>I figure if I get in shape and follow my plan for goal, the getting in
>shape
> will help me look better/smaller and if I am actually in better shape then
> I
> will be naturally burning more calories so losing another bit won't be
> that
> hard. I REFUSE to be hungry and I REFUSE to be miserable, there are
> enough
> other things to miserable about than stressing over one pound either way,
> I
> think your goal of upping your biking skills is very realistic, Lee
> Prairie Roots > wrote in message
> ...
>> This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
>> all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
>> to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
>> for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
>> more either.
>>
>> Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
>> facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
>> 145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
>> It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
>> at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
>> caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
>> that I'm below 150.
>>
>> Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
>> seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
>> I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
>> I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
>> I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?
>>
>> I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
>> that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
>> attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
>> and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
>> the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
>> perfection.
>> --
>> Linda P
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:52:33 -0800, Fred >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I have been there, too. Doing (what I will call) TOO WELL resisting
>> >only to really cave in rather and having a modest amount when the
>> >urges first happened. After my first Thanksgiving I realized that
>> >trying to be perfectly on program had made me crazy and reconciled to
>> >doing a good job but that Thanksgiving is food and friends and not
>> >being so stressed.
>>
>
>

[prairieroots]

I don't think stressing over one pound either way will be my problem.
Rather I think I'm more prone to judging myself a failure if I don't keep
going to something below 140.

I know I keep going in circles about this and repeating myself in posts.
That's my way of getting it out of my head where it just makes me crazy.
Putting it "out there," so to speak, and getting feedback helps me get and
stay grounded in reality. On the one hand, I look at a jacket in my closet
and believe it to be so little that I can't possibly wear it. (I'm wearing
that jacket right now but I worried all night whether it would fit this
morning.) That's the part of me that keeps thinking I should push for 138
or 126. On the other hand, I'm amazed that I weigh less than 150. That's
the part of me that says this is good enough, because it's better than I
dreamed possible, and now it's time to focus on other goals.

Well, I said all along that my break-through realization was that I could
be thin AND crazy. Hel-lo! You all just go on and talk among yourselves.
I'll stay here and keep babbling to myself.
--
Linda P

[Miss Violette]

I am in no way in the class of les or Joyce, I am proud of my taking off
weight. I never thought I could get as far as I am. I attribute much of my
success to the support I receive. Here, DH, my family, and meetings are all
very important to the continue of the journey, Lee, humbled to be mentioned
with Joyce and Les
Brenda Hammond > wrote in message
...
> I think the three of you, Lesanne and Joyce have done a wonderful job
during
> your weight loss journey. You have accomplished something that few
> are able to do, so be proud! I hope that I can follow in your steps and
> do the same for myself. Stick around, the rest of us have alot to learn
> from you.
>
> --
> Brenda
> 209/195/150
>
> "Miss Violette" > wrote in message
> ...
> >I figure if I get in shape and follow my plan for goal, the getting in
> >shape
> > will help me look better/smaller and if I am actually in better shape
then
> > I
> > will be naturally burning more calories so losing another bit won't be
> > that
> > hard. I REFUSE to be hungry and I REFUSE to be miserable, there are
> > enough
> > other things to miserable about than stressing over one pound either
way,
> > I
> > think your goal of upping your biking skills is very realistic, Lee
> > Prairie Roots > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
> >> all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
> >> to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
> >> for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
> >> more either.
> >>
> >> Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
> >> facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
> >> 145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
> >> It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
> >> at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
> >> caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
> >> that I'm below 150.
> >>
> >> Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
> >> seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
> >> I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
> >> I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
> >> I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?
> >>
> >> I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
> >> that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
> >> attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
> >> and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
> >> the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
> >> perfection.
> >> --
> >> Linda P
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:52:33 -0800, Fred >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I have been there, too. Doing (what I will call) TOO WELL resisting
> >> >only to really cave in rather and having a modest amount when the
> >> >urges first happened. After my first Thanksgiving I realized that
> >> >trying to be perfectly on program had made me crazy and reconciled to
> >> >doing a good job but that Thanksgiving is food and friends and not
> >> >being so stressed.
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Miss Violette]

I am in no way in the class of les or Joyce, I am proud of my taking off
weight. I never thought I could get as far as I am. I attribute much of my
success to the support I receive. Here, DH, my family, and meetings are all
very important to the continue of the journey, Lee, humbled to be mentioned
with Joyce and Les
Brenda Hammond > wrote in message
...
> I think the three of you, Lesanne and Joyce have done a wonderful job
during
> your weight loss journey. You have accomplished something that few
> are able to do, so be proud! I hope that I can follow in your steps and
> do the same for myself. Stick around, the rest of us have alot to learn
> from you.
>
> --
> Brenda
> 209/195/150
>
> "Miss Violette" > wrote in message
> ...
> >I figure if I get in shape and follow my plan for goal, the getting in
> >shape
> > will help me look better/smaller and if I am actually in better shape
then
> > I
> > will be naturally burning more calories so losing another bit won't be
> > that
> > hard. I REFUSE to be hungry and I REFUSE to be miserable, there are
> > enough
> > other things to miserable about than stressing over one pound either
way,
> > I
> > think your goal of upping your biking skills is very realistic, Lee
> > Prairie Roots > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
> >> all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
> >> to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
> >> for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
> >> more either.
> >>
> >> Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
> >> facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
> >> 145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
> >> It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
> >> at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
> >> caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
> >> that I'm below 150.
> >>
> >> Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
> >> seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
> >> I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
> >> I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
> >> I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?
> >>
> >> I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
> >> that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
> >> attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
> >> and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
> >> the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
> >> perfection.
> >> --
> >> Linda P
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:52:33 -0800, Fred >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I have been there, too. Doing (what I will call) TOO WELL resisting
> >> >only to really cave in rather and having a modest amount when the
> >> >urges first happened. After my first Thanksgiving I realized that
> >> >trying to be perfectly on program had made me crazy and reconciled to
> >> >doing a good job but that Thanksgiving is food and friends and not
> >> >being so stressed.
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

[Laura]

I agree with Fred that is a practical outlook and plan. There's a woman in
my group that had reached her goal. This goal was lower than the recommended
WW goal. She got to it by busting her a** off but she did make it. She
stayed there for a few months but was struggling to keep it under goal.
Needless to say she started finding that she could not maintain that low
weight and started gaining. In frustration she talked to our leader one day
about why she could not stick with her goal. The leader explained that
because she had set her goal too low in the first place it was unreasonable
to expect her to keep that weight forever. In the end the leader raised the
goal to something that was maintainable. In the long run the ultimate thing
to do is to pick a weight that you are not only comfortable with, one that
makes you at a healthy BMI but one that you can maintain without a major
struggle for the rest of your life.

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> A really good and practical outlook. Struggling to get to a lower
> weight and possibly struggling to stay there could be a negative
> trigger. I think over the last year and a half that I've learned that
> I may like about 157-8 but it seems hard or maybe even impossible to
> maintain. I don't know if that is a setpoint problem or a struggle
> problem - giving up too much for a few more pounds. I seem to be more
> stable at about 160+. I could attempt to figure out if 164 became an
> obstacle because I set it up as that when it was GOAL. But I don't
> know if that is possible.
>
> And concentrating on getting in shape or better shape and "perfecting"
> what is working now and not perfecting PERFECTION sounds like the
> current ticket.
>
> I, too, joined WW only wanting to lose weight. I recall looking at
> that chart the first time and kind of snuffling - "yeah, right!" But
> I also did not give much thought to it, still accepting that I did
> need to lose weight and how much was not an issue at that time.
> Months before I even got a doctor's note for 170 thinking that would
> be enough if I even got there. For me getting HERE has made a world
> of difference in the things I was already doing but struggling with
> more than years past. Perfect - no. But I have fun skiing and it is
> far from perfect.
>
> I think you have done a great job with weight and apparently managing
> the other occasional stresses that have been thrown at you recently.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:17:12 -0600, Prairie Roots >
> wrote:
>
> >This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
> >all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
> >to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
> >for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
> >more either.
> >
> >Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
> >facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
> >145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
> >It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
> >at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
> >caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
> >that I'm below 150.
> >
> >Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
> >seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
> >I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
> >I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
> >I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?
> >
> >I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
> >that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
> >attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
> >and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
> >the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
> >perfection.
>

[Laura]

I agree with Fred that is a practical outlook and plan. There's a woman in
my group that had reached her goal. This goal was lower than the recommended
WW goal. She got to it by busting her a** off but she did make it. She
stayed there for a few months but was struggling to keep it under goal.
Needless to say she started finding that she could not maintain that low
weight and started gaining. In frustration she talked to our leader one day
about why she could not stick with her goal. The leader explained that
because she had set her goal too low in the first place it was unreasonable
to expect her to keep that weight forever. In the end the leader raised the
goal to something that was maintainable. In the long run the ultimate thing
to do is to pick a weight that you are not only comfortable with, one that
makes you at a healthy BMI but one that you can maintain without a major
struggle for the rest of your life.

"Fred" > wrote in message
...
> A really good and practical outlook. Struggling to get to a lower
> weight and possibly struggling to stay there could be a negative
> trigger. I think over the last year and a half that I've learned that
> I may like about 157-8 but it seems hard or maybe even impossible to
> maintain. I don't know if that is a setpoint problem or a struggle
> problem - giving up too much for a few more pounds. I seem to be more
> stable at about 160+. I could attempt to figure out if 164 became an
> obstacle because I set it up as that when it was GOAL. But I don't
> know if that is possible.
>
> And concentrating on getting in shape or better shape and "perfecting"
> what is working now and not perfecting PERFECTION sounds like the
> current ticket.
>
> I, too, joined WW only wanting to lose weight. I recall looking at
> that chart the first time and kind of snuffling - "yeah, right!" But
> I also did not give much thought to it, still accepting that I did
> need to lose weight and how much was not an issue at that time.
> Months before I even got a doctor's note for 170 thinking that would
> be enough if I even got there. For me getting HERE has made a world
> of difference in the things I was already doing but struggling with
> more than years past. Perfect - no. But I have fun skiing and it is
> far from perfect.
>
> I think you have done a great job with weight and apparently managing
> the other occasional stresses that have been thrown at you recently.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:17:12 -0600, Prairie Roots >
> wrote:
>
> >This is the primary difference in my weight loss effort this time over
> >all the other times. I've allowed myself to live my real life and not
> >to impose such strict, impossible rules that end up being a set up
> >for failure. Food is no longer my enemy. It's not my best friend any
> >more either.
> >
> >Along these same lines, I think this is part of the challenge I'm
> >facing with settling on a goal weight. Where I am right now, between
> >145 and 150, feels like a weight I can maintain without much effort.
> >It's also 10-12 lbs lower than I dreamed possible when I started. Back
> >at 232, I figured I'd be grateful just to get into the 160s. Throwing
> >caution to the wind, I initially set my goal at 157. I'm still shocked
> >that I'm below 150.
> >
> >Should I weigh less than 145? According to most of the literature I've
> >seen, yes. I should probably weigh around 130-135. But I can tell that
> >I'd have to work very hard to get there. What I don't know is how hard
> >I'd have to work at staying there. And what happens if I can't? Would
> >I throw it all away in a fit of perfectionism?
> >
> >I'm beginning to think like Lee. I'll get to 145, work to maintain
> >that, and then focus on getting into shape. I'd rather divert my
> >attention to conditioning and training to become a B level bike rider
> >and riding a century next summer than obsessing about whether I'm at
> >the precisely correct weight. I'm old enough that good enough *is*
> >perfection.
>

[Laura]

It sounds like you need time to get used to the smaller you and until you
are comfortable with your new size it will be a constant battle as to what
the right weight should be. Give it time. You'll get there.

"prairieroots" > wrote in message
lkaboutsupport.com...
> I don't think stressing over one pound either way will be my problem.
> Rather I think I'm more prone to judging myself a failure if I don't keep
> going to something below 140.
>
> I know I keep going in circles about this and repeating myself in posts.
> That's my way of getting it out of my head where it just makes me crazy.
> Putting it "out there," so to speak, and getting feedback helps me get and
> stay grounded in reality. On the one hand, I look at a jacket in my closet
> and believe it to be so little that I can't possibly wear it. (I'm wearing
> that jacket right now but I worried all night whether it would fit this
> morning.) That's the part of me that keeps thinking I should push for 138
> or 126. On the other hand, I'm amazed that I weigh less than 150. That's
> the part of me that says this is good enough, because it's better than I
> dreamed possible, and now it's time to focus on other goals.
>
> Well, I said all along that my break-through realization was that I could
> be thin AND crazy. Hel-lo! You all just go on and talk among yourselves.
> I'll stay here and keep babbling to myself.
> --
> Linda P
>

[Laura]

It sounds like you need time to get used to the smaller you and until you
are comfortable with your new size it will be a constant battle as to what
the right weight should be. Give it time. You'll get there.

"prairieroots" > wrote in message
lkaboutsupport.com...
> I don't think stressing over one pound either way will be my problem.
> Rather I think I'm more prone to judging myself a failure if I don't keep
> going to something below 140.
>
> I know I keep going in circles about this and repeating myself in posts.
> That's my way of getting it out of my head where it just makes me crazy.
> Putting it "out there," so to speak, and getting feedback helps me get and
> stay grounded in reality. On the one hand, I look at a jacket in my closet
> and believe it to be so little that I can't possibly wear it. (I'm wearing
> that jacket right now but I worried all night whether it would fit this
> morning.) That's the part of me that keeps thinking I should push for 138
> or 126. On the other hand, I'm amazed that I weigh less than 150. That's
> the part of me that says this is good enough, because it's better than I
> dreamed possible, and now it's time to focus on other goals.
>
> Well, I said all along that my break-through realization was that I could
> be thin AND crazy. Hel-lo! You all just go on and talk among yourselves.
> I'll stay here and keep babbling to myself.
> --
> Linda P
>

[Miss Violette]

You have no idea how I sooo relate to this, try this on:


OH my in a bit more lost I will have to give up 2 more points... """BIG
STRESS...worryworryworry"

Meanwhile, on the way there, say another 4 or 5 pounds, I eat, get a few aps
and fall asleep,
I wake up and guess what, not counting the AP I am still 8/12 points short
of my target

eat that then wait four hours and start cycle over again... same discussion
different subject, Lee
prairieroots > wrote in message
lkaboutsupport.com...
> I don't think stressing over one pound either way will be my problem.
> Rather I think I'm more prone to judging myself a failure if I don't keep
> going to something below 140.
>
> I know I keep going in circles about this and repeating myself in posts.
> That's my way of getting it out of my head where it just makes me crazy.
> Putting it "out there," so to speak, and getting feedback helps me get and
> stay grounded in reality. On the one hand, I look at a jacket in my closet
> and believe it to be so little that I can't possibly wear it. (I'm wearing
> that jacket right now but I worried all night whether it would fit this
> morning.) That's the part of me that keeps thinking I should push for 138
> or 126. On the other hand, I'm amazed that I weigh less than 150. That's
> the part of me that says this is good enough, because it's better than I
> dreamed possible, and now it's time to focus on other goals.
>
> Well, I said all along that my break-through realization was that I could
> be thin AND crazy. Hel-lo! You all just go on and talk among yourselves.
> I'll stay here and keep babbling to myself.
> --
> Linda P
>

[Prairie Roots]

Weight loss and maintenance involves our appetites for so much more
than food and requires more from our heads and hearts than our bodies.

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 17:17:44 -0600, "Miss Violette"
> wrote:

>You have no idea how I sooo relate to this, try this on:
>
>
>OH my in a bit more lost I will have to give up 2 more points... """BIG
>STRESS...worryworryworry"
>
>Meanwhile, on the way there, say another 4 or 5 pounds, I eat, get a few aps
>and fall asleep,
>I wake up and guess what, not counting the AP I am still 8/12 points short
>of my target
>
>eat that then wait four hours and start cycle over again... same discussion
>different subject, Lee
>prairieroots > wrote in message
lkaboutsupport.com...
>> I don't think stressing over one pound either way will be my problem.
>> Rather I think I'm more prone to judging myself a failure if I don't keep
>> going to something below 140.
>>
>> I know I keep going in circles about this and repeating myself in posts.
>> That's my way of getting it out of my head where it just makes me crazy.
>> Putting it "out there," so to speak, and getting feedback helps me get and
>> stay grounded in reality. On the one hand, I look at a jacket in my closet
>> and believe it to be so little that I can't possibly wear it. (I'm wearing
>> that jacket right now but I worried all night whether it would fit this
>> morning.) That's the part of me that keeps thinking I should push for 138
>> or 126. On the other hand, I'm amazed that I weigh less than 150. That's
>> the part of me that says this is good enough, because it's better than I
>> dreamed possible, and now it's time to focus on other goals.
>>
>> Well, I said all along that my break-through realization was that I could
>> be thin AND crazy. Hel-lo! You all just go on and talk among yourselves.
>> I'll stay here and keep babbling to myself.
>> --
>> Linda P
>>
>

[Prairie Roots]

Weight loss and maintenance involves our appetites for so much more
than food and requires more from our heads and hearts than our bodies.

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 17:17:44 -0600, "Miss Violette"
> wrote:

>You have no idea how I sooo relate to this, try this on:
>
>
>OH my in a bit more lost I will have to give up 2 more points... """BIG
>STRESS...worryworryworry"
>
>Meanwhile, on the way there, say another 4 or 5 pounds, I eat, get a few aps
>and fall asleep,
>I wake up and guess what, not counting the AP I am still 8/12 points short
>of my target
>
>eat that then wait four hours and start cycle over again... same discussion
>different subject, Lee
>prairieroots > wrote in message
lkaboutsupport.com...
>> I don't think stressing over one pound either way will be my problem.
>> Rather I think I'm more prone to judging myself a failure if I don't keep
>> going to something below 140.
>>
>> I know I keep going in circles about this and repeating myself in posts.
>> That's my way of getting it out of my head where it just makes me crazy.
>> Putting it "out there," so to speak, and getting feedback helps me get and
>> stay grounded in reality. On the one hand, I look at a jacket in my closet
>> and believe it to be so little that I can't possibly wear it. (I'm wearing
>> that jacket right now but I worried all night whether it would fit this
>> morning.) That's the part of me that keeps thinking I should push for 138
>> or 126. On the other hand, I'm amazed that I weigh less than 150. That's
>> the part of me that says this is good enough, because it's better than I
>> dreamed possible, and now it's time to focus on other goals.
>>
>> Well, I said all along that my break-through realization was that I could
>> be thin AND crazy. Hel-lo! You all just go on and talk among yourselves.
>> I'll stay here and keep babbling to myself.
>> --
>> Linda P
>>
>