A Weightloss and diet forum. WeightLossBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » WeightLossBanter forum » alt.support.diet newsgroups » Weightwatchers
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

One more question-goal weight



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 17th, 2004, 04:49 AM
skiur
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight

I've got that same part telling me that I'm being ridiculous in even trying
this again. I want that part to shut up. So I'm going to try it one step
at a time. It joined in chorus with the "you're never going to find a
decent job so don't bother trying" gremlin.

Usually when I think I'm being ridiculous, I want to stuff my face with
empty calories. Tonight's response to stuffing my face was to measure out
some chips and salsa and to try that first. That wasn't enough so I grabbed
a pinch of marinated ginger. That wasn't doing much either so I got a a
huge bowl of spring mix, 3oz tomatoes, 1 oz peppers, cukes, and 2 tbsp of
salad dressing.

I'm addressing the "want sweet" desire with some bubble gum. Still better
that what is lurking in the freezer in the dark corners.

I don't have to stop all the bad habits, just tweek 'em enough to keep going
to the next day and not turn them into bad decisions.

Julie

"Prairie Roots" wrote in message
...
When I started, I set my goal weight at 157, not as low as the high
end of WW range, but certainly ambitious for me. As I settled into the
program and realized that thin and healthy is how I want to be and
this way of eating is how I want to live, I lowered my goal weight to
the high end of WW goal. Now that I'm within 15 lbs of reaching it,
I'm beginning to think I can get down to 130. I won't decide until
I've hit my WW goal. It's been since the mid 1970s since I weighed
under 160. I weighed 140 all through high school, 20 lbs overweight
according to my doctor at the time. In other words, I've never weighed
130 as an adult. Some part of thinks it might be possible. Even as
another part of me thinks I'm being ridiculous. Of course, that same
part of me doesn't believe I've come as far as I have.

Prairie Roots
232/158.8/WW goal 145
joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 08:49:32 -0600, "skiur"
wrote:

Hi everyone,

This is a bit of a silly question. When you set your target, do you go

by
your own goal or is the chart weight assigned to you?

I'm not really confident that I can get to the chart assigned weight for

my
height. I've never been that weight. I can't imagine it or picture

myself
that way.

Julie




  #12  
Old February 17th, 2004, 05:57 AM
Connie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight

The ranges can be found at:

http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx

Hope this helps.

Connie

Fred wrote:
Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted
were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches
taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or
misread the chart.

Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a
2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal.

But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote:


Fred wrote in
news

WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45??
or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women.
It is based on height.


My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I
feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no
desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is 177#.






--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5

  #13  
Old February 17th, 2004, 05:59 AM
Connie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight

Sounds like a great response to your gremlins!!

Connie

skiur wrote:
I've got that same part telling me that I'm being ridiculous in even trying
this again. I want that part to shut up. So I'm going to try it one step
at a time. It joined in chorus with the "you're never going to find a
decent job so don't bother trying" gremlin.

Usually when I think I'm being ridiculous, I want to stuff my face with
empty calories. Tonight's response to stuffing my face was to measure out
some chips and salsa and to try that first. That wasn't enough so I grabbed
a pinch of marinated ginger. That wasn't doing much either so I got a a
huge bowl of spring mix, 3oz tomatoes, 1 oz peppers, cukes, and 2 tbsp of
salad dressing.

I'm addressing the "want sweet" desire with some bubble gum. Still better
that what is lurking in the freezer in the dark corners.

I don't have to stop all the bad habits, just tweek 'em enough to keep going
to the next day and not turn them into bad decisions.

Julie

"Prairie Roots" wrote in message
...

When I started, I set my goal weight at 157, not as low as the high
end of WW range, but certainly ambitious for me. As I settled into the
program and realized that thin and healthy is how I want to be and
this way of eating is how I want to live, I lowered my goal weight to
the high end of WW goal. Now that I'm within 15 lbs of reaching it,
I'm beginning to think I can get down to 130. I won't decide until
I've hit my WW goal. It's been since the mid 1970s since I weighed
under 160. I weighed 140 all through high school, 20 lbs overweight
according to my doctor at the time. In other words, I've never weighed
130 as an adult. Some part of thinks it might be possible. Even as
another part of me thinks I'm being ridiculous. Of course, that same
part of me doesn't believe I've come as far as I have.

Prairie Roots
232/158.8/WW goal 145
joined WW Online 22-Feb-2003

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 08:49:32 -0600, "skiur"
wrote:


Hi everyone,

This is a bit of a silly question. When you set your target, do you go


by

your own goal or is the chart weight assigned to you?

I'm not really confident that I can get to the chart assigned weight for


my

height. I've never been that weight. I can't imagine it or picture


myself

that way.

Julie







--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5

  #14  
Old February 17th, 2004, 06:35 AM
buck naked
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight


Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye
caramba

"Connie" wrote in message
...
The ranges can be found at:

http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx

Hope this helps.

Connie

Fred wrote:
Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted
were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches
taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or
misread the chart.

Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a
2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal.

But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote:


Fred wrote in
news

WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45??
or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women.
It is based on height.


My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I
feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no
desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is

177#.





--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5



  #15  
Old February 17th, 2004, 06:45 AM
Connie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight

So sorry!! Pretend you didn't see it??

Connie

buck naked wrote:
Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye
caramba

"Connie" wrote in message
...

The ranges can be found at:

http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx

Hope this helps.

Connie

Fred wrote:

Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted
were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches
taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or
misread the chart.

Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a
2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal.

But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote:



Fred wrote in
news


WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45??
or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women.
It is based on height.


My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I
feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no
desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is

177#.




--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5







--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5

  #16  
Old February 17th, 2004, 07:27 AM
Fred
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight

I remember when I first looked at the chart. I kind of shrugged my
shoulders and figured if I lost about 20 pounds I would be very happy.
I concentrated most thought on the 10% goal. I never expected to
reach the WW goal to be honest. But it happened over the weeks and
months.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 23:35:33 -0600, "buck naked"
wrote:


Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye
caramba

"Connie" wrote in message
...
The ranges can be found at:

http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx

Hope this helps.

Connie

Fred wrote:
Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted
were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches
taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or
misread the chart.

Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a
2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal.

But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote:


Fred wrote in
news

WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45??
or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women.
It is based on height.


My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#. I
feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no
desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is

177#.





--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5



  #17  
Old February 17th, 2004, 02:15 PM
Laura
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight

Just remember that the chart does not take into consideration age or sex.
Your doctor may recommend a different weight for you that is higher than the
WW one. At this point I would just aim for around 140-150 as your
preliminary goal. Something your head can deal with so that the journey is
not overwhelming. My current "goal" is 150 when I know that it should be
around 135. I'd be happy at 150 at this point after being almost 250 last
year. Once you get closer to that preliminary goal reevaluate it with your
doctor to see just how far you can go. Take one step at a time. One goal at
a time.

"buck naked" wrote in message
...

Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye
caramba

"Connie" wrote in message
...
The ranges can be found at:

http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx

Hope this helps.

Connie

Fred wrote:
Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted
were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches
taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or
misread the chart.

Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a
2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal.

But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote:


Fred wrote in
news

WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45??
or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women.
It is based on height.


My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#.

I
feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no
desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is

177#.





--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5




  #18  
Old February 17th, 2004, 04:32 PM
Joyce
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight

The chart does take age into acount. I believe it is set up into 4 different
columns, one for all adults, next for ages up to 25, next for 25-45, next for 45+.
Sex is not taken into account as I believe new studies have said that it doesn't
matter what sex you are, weight is an age and height related issue. Not sure I
believe that, but it seems to be what is being sold to us now. G What isn't
taken into account is body build ... such as those wide shoulders, bigger boned
frames, etc, which I think is very important. I would think that someone my
height who is petite (such as my daughter) will look and feel much worse carrying
the same amount of weight around that I do.

But yes, definitely check in with the physician. You are setting your goal
exactly as I did. I don't think I set my ww goal until well into the game. When
I reached it I did talk to my physician and was told an absolute minimum he would
like to see me at. I think he was so thrilled to see me where I was that he just
threw a number out of the top of his head ... but at least it was a number and I
knew by that point that it was doable. It will be interesting to see what he has
to say when I have my checkup this week. G

Joyce

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:15:05 GMT, "Laura" wrote:

Just remember that the chart does not take into consideration age or sex.
Your doctor may recommend a different weight for you that is higher than the
WW one. At this point I would just aim for around 140-150 as your
preliminary goal. Something your head can deal with so that the journey is
not overwhelming. My current "goal" is 150 when I know that it should be
around 135. I'd be happy at 150 at this point after being almost 250 last
year. Once you get closer to that preliminary goal reevaluate it with your
doctor to see just how far you can go. Take one step at a time. One goal at
a time.

"buck naked" wrote in message
...

Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is 116-140....aye
caramba

"Connie" wrote in message
...
The ranges can be found at:

http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx

Hope this helps.

Connie

Fred wrote:
Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you posted
were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches
taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or
misread the chart.

Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a
2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal.

But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote:


Fred wrote in
news

WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over 45??
or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or women.
It is based on height.


My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is 161#.

I
feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have no
desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal is

177#.





--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5




  #19  
Old February 17th, 2004, 05:52 PM
Miss Violette
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight

were you confronted with a difference in your body build after you had lost
some weight. I have always considered myself med./heavier boned now that I
have lost some weight I see I might not be Lee
Joyce wrote in message
...
The chart does take age into acount. I believe it is set up into 4

different
columns, one for all adults, next for ages up to 25, next for 25-45, next

for 45+.
Sex is not taken into account as I believe new studies have said that it

doesn't
matter what sex you are, weight is an age and height related issue. Not

sure I
believe that, but it seems to be what is being sold to us now. G What

isn't
taken into account is body build ... such as those wide shoulders, bigger

boned
frames, etc, which I think is very important. I would think that someone

my
height who is petite (such as my daughter) will look and feel much worse

carrying
the same amount of weight around that I do.

But yes, definitely check in with the physician. You are setting your

goal
exactly as I did. I don't think I set my ww goal until well into the

game. When
I reached it I did talk to my physician and was told an absolute minimum

he would
like to see me at. I think he was so thrilled to see me where I was that

he just
threw a number out of the top of his head ... but at least it was a number

and I
knew by that point that it was doable. It will be interesting to see what

he has
to say when I have my checkup this week. G

Joyce

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:15:05 GMT, "Laura" wrote:

Just remember that the chart does not take into consideration age or sex.
Your doctor may recommend a different weight for you that is higher than

the
WW one. At this point I would just aim for around 140-150 as your
preliminary goal. Something your head can deal with so that the journey

is
not overwhelming. My current "goal" is 150 when I know that it should be
around 135. I'd be happy at 150 at this point after being almost 250 last
year. Once you get closer to that preliminary goal reevaluate it with

your
doctor to see just how far you can go. Take one step at a time. One goal

at
a time.

"buck naked" wrote in message
...

Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is

116-140....aye
caramba

"Connie" wrote in message
...
The ranges can be found at:

http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx

Hope this helps.

Connie

Fred wrote:
Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you

posted
were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches
taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or
misread the chart.

Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at a
2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal.

But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard wrote:


Fred wrote in
news

WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over

45??
or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or

women.
It is based on height.


My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is

161#.
I
feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I have

no
desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal

is
177#.





--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5






  #20  
Old February 18th, 2004, 12:38 AM
Lesanne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default One more question-goal weight

Ha, this was one for me too. My wrist watch kept having to be made smaller?
I recalled that wrist measurement was supposed to indicate frame size?
Well. Mine indicates Small. On the other hand I have very Long bones, I
think all that average stuff, applies to average people, not Us.

"Miss Violette" wrote in message
...
were you confronted with a difference in your body build after you had

lost
some weight. I have always considered myself med./heavier boned now that

I
have lost some weight I see I might not be Lee
Joyce wrote in message
...
The chart does take age into acount. I believe it is set up into 4

different
columns, one for all adults, next for ages up to 25, next for 25-45,

next
for 45+.
Sex is not taken into account as I believe new studies have said that it

doesn't
matter what sex you are, weight is an age and height related issue. Not

sure I
believe that, but it seems to be what is being sold to us now. G What

isn't
taken into account is body build ... such as those wide shoulders,

bigger
boned
frames, etc, which I think is very important. I would think that

someone
my
height who is petite (such as my daughter) will look and feel much worse

carrying
the same amount of weight around that I do.

But yes, definitely check in with the physician. You are setting your

goal
exactly as I did. I don't think I set my ww goal until well into the

game. When
I reached it I did talk to my physician and was told an absolute minimum

he would
like to see me at. I think he was so thrilled to see me where I was

that
he just
threw a number out of the top of his head ... but at least it was a

number
and I
knew by that point that it was doable. It will be interesting to see

what
he has
to say when I have my checkup this week. G

Joyce

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 13:15:05 GMT, "Laura"

wrote:

Just remember that the chart does not take into consideration age or

sex.
Your doctor may recommend a different weight for you that is higher

than
the
WW one. At this point I would just aim for around 140-150 as your
preliminary goal. Something your head can deal with so that the journey

is
not overwhelming. My current "goal" is 150 when I know that it should

be
around 135. I'd be happy at 150 at this point after being almost 250

last
year. Once you get closer to that preliminary goal reevaluate it with

your
doctor to see just how far you can go. Take one step at a time. One

goal
at
a time.

"buck naked" wrote in message
...

Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight is

116-140....aye
caramba

"Connie" wrote in message
...
The ranges can be found at:

http://www.weigh****chers.com/health...thyweight.aspx

Hope this helps.

Connie

Fred wrote:
Joyce probably found the correct values. I knew the ones you

posted
were wrong since I'm 5'8" and my top of range is 164, so 2 inches
taller would be higher. Someone at WW may have made a mistake or
misread the chart.

Yes, WW first assigns a 10% loss. And I set my secondary goal at

a
2nd ten percent. Then I set the WW goal.

But in any event, get below 200 will be a great step.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 09:38:22 -0600, Richard

wrote:


Fred wrote in
news

WW has charts. The only break is that older folks (was it over

45??
or 50??) get to be slightly higher. No difference for men or

women.
It is based on height.


My first assigned goal is 225#. The assigned ultimate goal is

161#.
I
feel this is unrealistic for a man 5' 10" and 65 years old. I

have
no
desire to weigh that little. I'd be all bones. My personal goal

is
177#.





--

Cheers,

Connie Walsh

241.5/204/155
RAFL 210.5/204/198.5








 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ok, fine, whatever, I give up Luna Low Carbohydrate Diets 101 November 1st, 2005 05:33 AM
We may be screwed That T Woman General Discussion 2 December 7th, 2004 11:03 AM
Study credits Weight Watchers with helping many to keep weight off Neutron Low Carbohydrate Diets 0 May 29th, 2004 06:07 PM
Glycogen weight question and a status update JJ Low Carbohydrate Diets 27 April 19th, 2004 10:51 PM
goal weight Sam Hain Low Carbohydrate Diets 5 January 10th, 2004 06:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 WeightLossBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.