GM Diet program - Page 3

"elzinator" <elzinator@hotmail.com> wrote
> David Cohen wrote:
>> > Regardless, David, any long-term commitment to a reduction in daily
>> > caloric intake requires a 'lifestyle change'; that person has to
> make
>> > a conscious choice and commitment to that and/or associated
> choices.
>>
>> Dropping 150ish calories from my daily intake and burning 150ish
> extra
>> calories a day does not meet "my" definition of "lifestyle change".
> Your
>> definition may, of course, vary.
>
> Of course, which is why I proposed the challenge of dropping 12.5
> lbs/month and keeping it off. I know you well enough that it might be a
> challenge

Done it before. Probably do it again. Uh...tomorrow. Yeah, tomorrow. No
later than Monday. Probably.

>> > If I told you that you had to drop 50 pounds in 4 months and keep
> it
>> > off or you would die, what alterations in your life would you have
> to
>> > make to reach that goal?
>>
>> Eat less, exercise more.
>>
>> Trick question.
>
> It's all relative.

You've met my sisters?

David

"Charles" <charles@msn.com> wrote in message
news:7vgp011vlo4ml8k8jngmj11ja3ac5ofb9o@4ax.com...
> On 11 Feb 2005 05:53:42 -0800, "elzinator" <elzinator@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Dr_Dickie wrote:
>>
>>> > Regardless, David, any long-term commitment to a reduction in daily
>>> > caloric intake requires a 'lifestyle change'; that person has to
>>make
>>> > a conscious choice and commitment to that and/or associated
>>choices.
>>> >
>>> > If I told you that you had to drop 50 pounds in 4 months and keep
>>it
>>> > off or you would die, what alterations in your life would you have
>>to
>>> > make to reach that goal?
>>>
>>> I actually was in that situation (lost approx 100#). And a lifestyle
>>change
>>> is exactly what I did. That really is a term that someone who has not
>>done
>>> so cannot truly understand. More than just eat less and exercise more
>>> (although that is a big part), you must also educate yourself and eat
>>> better. No 2, 3, 4, or 6 month fix, a change for life (the longer I
>>stay
>>> changed, the longer I live).
>>
>>That is the point I am trying to hammer home. Thanks for providing an
>>example.
>>
>>Many of the folks here don't realize the extent or effort that the
>>general public must alter their daily routine, attitude, knowledge,
>>etc. (activity and behavior) to meet their health goals. They have to
>>change their lifestyle.
>>
>>Working with the general public is very enlightening.
>
> That's all very well, but have you taken into account just how boring
> a maintenance diet is?
>
> If you want to enjoy life, and all the good things it has to offer,
> you have to accept yo-yo dieting as a way of life.

Yes.

I am currently in the yo cycle. I'm gonna' switch to the yo cycle at some
point.

David

In article <NZ3Pd.5859$UX3.4276@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>, "David
Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:

> "Charles" <charles@msn.com> wrote in message
> news:7vgp011vlo4ml8k8jngmj11ja3ac5ofb9o@4ax.com...
> > On 11 Feb 2005 05:53:42 -0800, "elzinator" <elzinator@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>Dr_Dickie wrote:
> >>
> >>> > Regardless, David, any long-term commitment to a reduction in daily
> >>> > caloric intake requires a 'lifestyle change'; that person has to
> >>make
> >>> > a conscious choice and commitment to that and/or associated
> >>choices.
> >>> >
> >>> > If I told you that you had to drop 50 pounds in 4 months and keep
> >>it
> >>> > off or you would die, what alterations in your life would you have
> >>to
> >>> > make to reach that goal?
> >>>
> >>> I actually was in that situation (lost approx 100#). And a lifestyle
> >>change
> >>> is exactly what I did. That really is a term that someone who has not
> >>done
> >>> so cannot truly understand. More than just eat less and exercise more
> >>> (although that is a big part), you must also educate yourself and eat
> >>> better. No 2, 3, 4, or 6 month fix, a change for life (the longer I
> >>stay
> >>> changed, the longer I live).
> >>
> >>That is the point I am trying to hammer home. Thanks for providing an
> >>example.
> >>
> >>Many of the folks here don't realize the extent or effort that the
> >>general public must alter their daily routine, attitude, knowledge,
> >>etc. (activity and behavior) to meet their health goals. They have to
> >>change their lifestyle.
> >>
> >>Working with the general public is very enlightening.
> >
> > That's all very well, but have you taken into account just how boring
> > a maintenance diet is?
> >
> > If you want to enjoy life, and all the good things it has to offer,
> > you have to accept yo-yo dieting as a way of life.
>
> Yes.
>
> I am currently in the yo cycle. I'm gonna' switch to the yo cycle at some
> point.

Is this the Philly diet?

"Yo, Adrianne!"

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:14:53 GMT, "David Cohen"
<sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>"Charles" <charles@msn.com> wrote in message
>news:7vgp011vlo4ml8k8jngmj11ja3ac5ofb9o@4ax.com...
>> On 11 Feb 2005 05:53:42 -0800, "elzinator" <elzinator@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Dr_Dickie wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Regardless, David, any long-term commitment to a reduction in daily
>>>> > caloric intake requires a 'lifestyle change'; that person has to
>>>make
>>>> > a conscious choice and commitment to that and/or associated
>>>choices.
>>>> >
>>>> > If I told you that you had to drop 50 pounds in 4 months and keep
>>>it
>>>> > off or you would die, what alterations in your life would you have
>>>to
>>>> > make to reach that goal?
>>>>
>>>> I actually was in that situation (lost approx 100#). And a lifestyle
>>>change
>>>> is exactly what I did. That really is a term that someone who has not
>>>done
>>>> so cannot truly understand. More than just eat less and exercise more
>>>> (although that is a big part), you must also educate yourself and eat
>>>> better. No 2, 3, 4, or 6 month fix, a change for life (the longer I
>>>stay
>>>> changed, the longer I live).
>>>
>>>That is the point I am trying to hammer home. Thanks for providing an
>>>example.
>>>
>>>Many of the folks here don't realize the extent or effort that the
>>>general public must alter their daily routine, attitude, knowledge,
>>>etc. (activity and behavior) to meet their health goals. They have to
>>>change their lifestyle.
>>>
>>>Working with the general public is very enlightening.
>>
>> That's all very well, but have you taken into account just how boring
>> a maintenance diet is?
>>
>> If you want to enjoy life, and all the good things it has to offer,
>> you have to accept yo-yo dieting as a way of life.
>
>Yes.
>
>I am currently in the yo cycle. I'm gonna' switch to the yo cycle at some
>point.

As the name implies, you'll know when it's time to revert from one yo
to the other, which normally coincides with that awkward physical fact
of life, when you ultimately (again) can't see your **** when you're
peeing!! ;o)

Have a great weekend David - you know I will!! ;o)

TFIF!!

Dr_Dickie wrote:
> "elzinator" <elzinator@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1108130021.972804.167140@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Dr_Dickie wrote:
> >
> > > > Regardless, David, any long-term commitment to a reduction in
daily
> > > > caloric intake requires a 'lifestyle change'; that person has
to
> > make
> > > > a conscious choice and commitment to that and/or associated
> > choices.
> > > >
> > > > If I told you that you had to drop 50 pounds in 4 months and
keep
> > it
> > > > off or you would die, what alterations in your life would you
have
> > to
> > > > make to reach that goal?
> > >
> > > I actually was in that situation (lost approx 100#). And a
lifestyle
> > change
> > > is exactly what I did. That really is a term that someone who has
not
> > done
> > > so cannot truly understand. More than just eat less and exercise
more
> > > (although that is a big part), you must also educate yourself and
eat
> > > better. No 2, 3, 4, or 6 month fix, a change for life (the longer
I
> > stay
> > > changed, the longer I live).
> >
> > That is the point I am trying to hammer home. Thanks for providing
an
> > example.
> >
> > Many of the folks here don't realize the extent or effort that the
> > general public must alter their daily routine, attitude, knowledge,
> > etc. (activity and behavior) to meet their health goals. They have
to
> > change their lifestyle.
> >
> > Working with the general public is very enlightening.
>
> Also explains why losing weight is so hard for the public, and why
fad diets
> are so popular. Takes a lot of work, and a lifetime of vigilance to
pull it
> off. The general public simply doesn't want to learn and put in the
effort
> (try teaching college students chemistry!).

Biochemistry maybe, but not general chem. (taught a few labs in
virology; does that count?)
Make it interesting and they will come

Same with diets. They don't have to be boring.

"elzinator" <elzinator@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1108143386.711813.259660@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Dr_Dickie wrote:
> > "elzinator" <elzinator@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1108130021.972804.167140@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > Dr_Dickie wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Regardless, David, any long-term commitment to a reduction in
> daily
> > > > > caloric intake requires a 'lifestyle change'; that person has
> to
> > > make
> > > > > a conscious choice and commitment to that and/or associated
> > > choices.
> > > > >
> > > > > If I told you that you had to drop 50 pounds in 4 months and
> keep
> > > it
> > > > > off or you would die, what alterations in your life would you
> have
> > > to
> > > > > make to reach that goal?
> > > >
> > > > I actually was in that situation (lost approx 100#). And a
> lifestyle
> > > change
> > > > is exactly what I did. That really is a term that someone who has
> not
> > > done
> > > > so cannot truly understand. More than just eat less and exercise
> more
> > > > (although that is a big part), you must also educate yourself and
> eat
> > > > better. No 2, 3, 4, or 6 month fix, a change for life (the longer
> I
> > > stay
> > > > changed, the longer I live).
> > >
> > > That is the point I am trying to hammer home. Thanks for providing
> an
> > > example.
> > >
> > > Many of the folks here don't realize the extent or effort that the
> > > general public must alter their daily routine, attitude, knowledge,
> > > etc. (activity and behavior) to meet their health goals. They have
> to
> > > change their lifestyle.
> > >
> > > Working with the general public is very enlightening.
> >
> > Also explains why losing weight is so hard for the public, and why
> fad diets
> > are so popular. Takes a lot of work, and a lifetime of vigilance to
> pull it
> > off. The general public simply doesn't want to learn and put in the
> effort
> > (try teaching college students chemistry!).
>
> Biochemistry maybe, but not general chem. (taught a few labs in
> virology; does that count?)
> Make it interesting and they will come
>
> Same with diets. They don't have to be boring.

By the time you get them to biochem they are already chem or biology
students (studying what they are interested in)--you got a built in hook.
G-chem they just need for general purposes--much harder group to get
involved. Actually, intro chem (chem for nurses and poets--sorry Cohen
that's what some folks call it) was easier. They were just there for general
purpose but the simplicity of the material made it easier to make fun.
Although that had a lot to do with class size as well. G-chem or into at 250
students is a bear. Intro or quant at 25 or 50 students is easier.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 01:26:18 GMT, "David Cohen"
<sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>"Martin Bakalorz" <mrblendingtree@hotmail.com> wrote
>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>If I am 20 pounds overweight, am stable at that weight, and have 20 pounds
>>>of fat liposuctioned off, and do not change my "lifestyle" in any way, it
>>>won't "work"?
>>>
>>>Anonymous Hotmail posters are always morons.
>>
>> <Nit pick>
>> No it won't work,
>> At first you are at maintenance calories.
>> After the Lipo you have 20 lbs of fat less to support, so maintenance
>> calories are lower.
>> If you don't change your lifestyle in any way you will slowly
>> asymptotically regain to your former weight.
>> </nit pick>
>
>I am the first to appreciate a good nit pick, so, I agree with you.

eh ... I was mainly yanking your chain ...
Howevvvvver ... I think the original hotmailer was closer to right
than the statement below

> However,
>I would not consider a reduction in maintenance calories to reflect the
>lower weight (200-300 calories) to constitute a "lifestyle change".

The 99.99 percent of dieters who regain all the weight they lost
would tend to disagree with you.

I think a longterm 10% change in calories qualifies as a lifestyle
change.

>> Just had to defend hotmail posters.
>
>You are not an "anonymous" Hotmail poster.
>
>In fact, we at the International Zionist Cabal have all your personal
>information. BTW, the check you wrote to BDSMtoys.com is gonna' bounce, so
>you might want to fix that

Ha ... Now I know you're lying; they wont take checks from me or most
other customers, only credit cards.

The only reason they accept checks from you is because you are a
member of their prefered customer club.

Besides which, UPS delivered all my toys yesterday.
I love most of the ones you recomended, although I still don't agree
with your obsession with all the enlargers ...
<shrug> I guess some of us are just more satisfied with what nature
provided than others.

>David

Martin

"Martin Bakalorz" <mrblendingtree@hotmail.com> wrote
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>"Martin Bakalorz" <mrblendingtree@hotmail.com> wrote
>>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>If I am 20 pounds overweight, am stable at that weight, and have 20
>>>>pounds
>>>>of fat liposuctioned off, and do not change my "lifestyle" in any way,
>>>>it
>>>>won't "work"?
>>>>
>>>>Anonymous Hotmail posters are always morons.
>>>
>>> <Nit pick>
>>> No it won't work,
>>> At first you are at maintenance calories.
>>> After the Lipo you have 20 lbs of fat less to support, so maintenance
>>> calories are lower.
>>> If you don't change your lifestyle in any way you will slowly
>>> asymptotically regain to your former weight.
>>> </nit pick>
>>
>>I am the first to appreciate a good nit pick, so, I agree with you.
>
> eh ... I was mainly yanking your chain ...
> Howevvvvver ... I think the original hotmailer was closer to right
> than the statement below

But, that would make you wrong.
>
>> However,
>>I would not consider a reduction in maintenance calories to reflect the
>>lower weight (200-300 calories) to constitute a "lifestyle change".
>
> The 99.99 percent of dieters who regain all the weight they lost
> would tend to disagree with you.
>
> I think a longterm 10% change in calories qualifies as a lifestyle
> change.

But, that isn't the case. First, a 10% reduction in bodyfat as a result of
liposuction would cause less than a 10% reduction in maintenance calories.
From, say, about 3000 calories, to about 2800 calories. Second, no one said
you have to account for this with calorie reduction only. A couple hundred
extra calories burned would do, or 100 less calories and 100 extra calories
burned, or etc etc etc. Any such combination does not fit my definition of
"lifestyle change". Your definition, is, of course, your business.
>
>>> Just had to defend hotmail posters.
>>
>>You are not an "anonymous" Hotmail poster.
>>
>>In fact, we at the International Zionist Cabal have all your personal
>>information. BTW, the check you wrote to BDSMtoys.com is gonna' bounce, so
>>you might want to fix that
>
> Ha ... Now I know you're lying; they wont take checks from me or most
> other customers, only credit cards.
>
> The only reason they accept checks from you is because you are a
> member of their prefered customer club.

Good point.

> Besides which, UPS delivered all my toys yesterday.
> I love most of the ones you recomended, although I still don't agree
> with your obsession with all the enlargers ...

They have many uses. Try to be more imaginative.

> <shrug> I guess some of us are just more satisfied with what nature
> provided than others.

Well, there was that tragic wheat threasher accident

David

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"Martin Bakalorz" <mrblendingtree@hotmail.com> wrote
>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> However,
>>>I would not consider a reduction in maintenance calories to reflect the
>>>lower weight (200-300 calories) to constitute a "lifestyle change".
>>
>> The 99.99 percent of dieters who regain all the weight they lost
>> would tend to disagree with you.
>>
>> I think a longterm 10% change in calories qualifies as a lifestyle
>> change.
>
>But, that isn't the case. First, a 10% reduction in bodyfat as a result of
>liposuction would cause less than a 10% reduction in maintenance calories.
>From, say, about 3000 calories, to about 2800 calories. Second, no one said
>you have to account for this with calorie reduction only. A couple hundred
>extra calories burned would do, or 100 less calories and 100 extra calories
>burned, or etc etc etc. Any such combination does not fit my definition of
>"lifestyle change". Your definition, is, of course, your business.

What does and does not constitute a "lifestyle change"? And how long
must it last to constitute that? How much difference is there,
really, between someone who changes things for a month, gets results,
and gradually gravitates back to the way things were, and someone who
does it for two years before regressing?
--

JMW
http://www.rustyiron.net

"JMW" <jmw@event.horizon> wrote
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>"Martin Bakalorz" <mrblendingtree@hotmail.com> wrote
>>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> However,
>>>>I would not consider a reduction in maintenance calories to reflect the
>>>>lower weight (200-300 calories) to constitute a "lifestyle change".
>>>
>>> The 99.99 percent of dieters who regain all the weight they lost
>>> would tend to disagree with you.
>>>
>>> I think a longterm 10% change in calories qualifies as a lifestyle
>>> change.
>>
>>But, that isn't the case. First, a 10% reduction in bodyfat as a result of
>>liposuction would cause less than a 10% reduction in maintenance calories.
>>From, say, about 3000 calories, to about 2800 calories. Second, no one
>>said
>>you have to account for this with calorie reduction only. A couple hundred
>>extra calories burned would do, or 100 less calories and 100 extra
>>calories
>>burned, or etc etc etc. Any such combination does not fit my definition of
>>"lifestyle change". Your definition, is, of course, your business.
>
> What does and does not constitute a "lifestyle change"? And how long
> must it last to constitute that? How much difference is there,
> really, between someone who changes things for a month, gets results,
> and gradually gravitates back to the way things were, and someone who
> does it for two years before regressing?

Exactly. As I've been pointing out, the definition of "lifestyle change" is
extremely individual. There is no one answer.

David

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"JMW" <jmw@event.horizon> wrote
>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>"Martin Bakalorz" <mrblendingtree@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> However,
>>>>>I would not consider a reduction in maintenance calories to reflect the
>>>>>lower weight (200-300 calories) to constitute a "lifestyle change".
>>>>
>>>> The 99.99 percent of dieters who regain all the weight they lost
>>>> would tend to disagree with you.
>>>>
>>>> I think a longterm 10% change in calories qualifies as a lifestyle
>>>> change.
>>>
>>>But, that isn't the case. First, a 10% reduction in bodyfat as a result of
>>>liposuction would cause less than a 10% reduction in maintenance calories.
>>>From, say, about 3000 calories, to about 2800 calories. Second, no one
>>>said
>>>you have to account for this with calorie reduction only. A couple hundred
>>>extra calories burned would do, or 100 less calories and 100 extra
>>>calories
>>>burned, or etc etc etc. Any such combination does not fit my definition of
>>>"lifestyle change". Your definition, is, of course, your business.
>>
>> What does and does not constitute a "lifestyle change"? And how long
>> must it last to constitute that? How much difference is there,
>> really, between someone who changes things for a month, gets results,
>> and gradually gravitates back to the way things were, and someone who
>> does it for two years before regressing?
>
>Exactly. As I've been pointing out, the definition of "lifestyle change" is
>extremely individual. There is no one answer.

Yes. Some answers are better than others, but even then, it's all a
matter of context.
--

JMW
http://www.rustyiron.net

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 15:12:55 GMT, David Cohen wrote:
>
>"elzinator" <elzinator@hotmail.com> wrote
>> David Cohen wrote:
>>> > Regardless, David, any long-term commitment to a reduction in daily
>>> > caloric intake requires a 'lifestyle change'; that person has to
>> make
>>> > a conscious choice and commitment to that and/or associated
>> choices.
>>>
>>> Dropping 150ish calories from my daily intake and burning 150ish
>> extra
>>> calories a day does not meet "my" definition of "lifestyle change".
>> Your
>>> definition may, of course, vary.
>>
>> Of course, which is why I proposed the challenge of dropping 12.5
>> lbs/month and keeping it off. I know you well enough that it might be a
>> challenge
>
>Done it before. Probably do it again. Uh...tomorrow. Yeah, tomorrow. No
>later than Monday. Probably.

Point driven home.

------------------------------
Reality is an illusion created by an intelligence deficiency.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 12:52:04 -0500, Dr_Dickie wrote:
>
>
>"elzinator" <elzinator@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1108143386.711813.259660@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Dr_Dickie wrote:

>> > (try teaching college students chemistry!).
>>
>> Biochemistry maybe, but not general chem. (taught a few labs in
>> virology; does that count?)
>> Make it interesting and they will come
>>
>> Same with diets. They don't have to be boring.
>
>By the time you get them to biochem they are already chem or biology
>students (studying what they are interested in)--you got a built in hook.
>G-chem they just need for general purposes--much harder group to get
>involved. Actually, intro chem (chem for nurses and poets--sorry Cohen
>that's what some folks call it) was easier. They were just there for general
>purpose but the simplicity of the material made it easier to make fun.
>Although that had a lot to do with class size as well. G-chem or into at 250
>students is a bear. Intro or quant at 25 or 50 students is easier.

I was fortunate to have several very entertaining chem professors
during my three and 1/2 stinking years of chemistry. One was a Brit
who was truly a mad scientist (blew **** up in lectures with the
disclaimer " Don't try this at home or in your dorm room"). The prof
who taught my graduate O-chem was fantastic and didn't ***** (too
much) when I interrupted her with questions (I was always relating it
to biochem). She was adept at relating O-chem to everyday life
(including LSD and marijuana).

All my chem classes had 100+ students minimum, except for one semester
of O-chem (undergrad) where the prof was so damned boring, a month
into the semester, only 25 people showed up for his class.


------------------------------
Reality is an illusion created by an intelligence deficiency.

On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 19:41:57 -0500, JMW <jmw@event.horizon> wrote:

>"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>"Martin Bakalorz" <mrblendingtree@hotmail.com> wrote
>>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> However,
>>>>I would not consider a reduction in maintenance calories to reflect the
>>>>lower weight (200-300 calories) to constitute a "lifestyle change".
>>>
>>> The 99.99 percent of dieters who regain all the weight they lost
>>> would tend to disagree with you.
>>>
>>> I think a longterm 10% change in calories qualifies as a lifestyle
>>> change.
>>
>>But, that isn't the case. First, a 10% reduction in bodyfat as a result of
>>liposuction would cause less than a 10% reduction in maintenance calories.
>>From, say, about 3000 calories, to about 2800 calories. Second, no one said
>>you have to account for this with calorie reduction only. A couple hundred
>>extra calories burned would do, or 100 less calories and 100 extra calories
>>burned, or etc etc etc. Any such combination does not fit my definition of
>>"lifestyle change". Your definition, is, of course, your business.
>
>What does and does not constitute a "lifestyle change"? And how long
>must it last to constitute that? How much difference is there,
>really, between someone who changes things for a month, gets results,
>and gradually gravitates back to the way things were, and someone who
>does it for two years before regressing?

The difference appears, in the scenario you present John, the length
of time between the two respective "regressions"!!

Or is that somewhat too simplistic?

Have a great weekend - you know I will!!

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 01:23:48 GMT, "David Cohen"
<sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
>"JMW" <jmw@event.horizon> wrote
>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>"Martin Bakalorz" <mrblendingtree@hotmail.com> wrote
>>>> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> However,
>>>>>I would not consider a reduction in maintenance calories to reflect the
>>>>>lower weight (200-300 calories) to constitute a "lifestyle change".
>>>>
>>>> The 99.99 percent of dieters who regain all the weight they lost
>>>> would tend to disagree with you.
>>>>
>>>> I think a longterm 10% change in calories qualifies as a lifestyle
>>>> change.
>>>
>>>But, that isn't the case. First, a 10% reduction in bodyfat as a result of
>>>liposuction would cause less than a 10% reduction in maintenance calories.
>>>From, say, about 3000 calories, to about 2800 calories. Second, no one
>>>said
>>>you have to account for this with calorie reduction only. A couple hundred
>>>extra calories burned would do, or 100 less calories and 100 extra
>>>calories
>>>burned, or etc etc etc. Any such combination does not fit my definition of
>>>"lifestyle change". Your definition, is, of course, your business.
>>
>> What does and does not constitute a "lifestyle change"? And how long
>> must it last to constitute that? How much difference is there,
>> really, between someone who changes things for a month, gets results,
>> and gradually gravitates back to the way things were, and someone who
>> does it for two years before regressing?
>
>Exactly. As I've been pointing out, the definition of "lifestyle change" is
>extremely individual. There is no one answer.

It occurs to me that a lifestyle change is just that. The term does
not infer any degree of limits of time, and certainly not a lifetime
change.

Surely most people are adapting their lifestyles, to some degree,
almost throughout the entirety of their three score and ten. Those
unfortunates with un-co-operative metabolisms, are doomed to obesity
or a lifetime of yo-yo dieting!!

Have a great weekend - you know I will!! ;o)