M
Miss Violette
Guest
I would rather eat a can of spinach or grapefruit than a piece of meat. I
love pasta but get too hungry too quick so I avoid it, potatoes are my
friend and lower fat cheese does it OK for me, the truth is that now that I
eat counting points it is even harder to eat enough. I really struggled
when the points were higher. I am hoping that when maintenance comes I will
be able to add back more nuts and that should take care of it, I am also
thinking juice would be nice and so would raisins more regularly. I am sure
I will make it work it is just kinda intimidating to me to think that adding
points is necessary as I have worked at cutting back all this time. Lee
Joyce <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You won't lose more than 2 points then no matter where you set your goal
... 20
> points is as low as you go for losing. Adding the points at first was
difficult,
> it's become much easier now though. Funny how you get used to things so
quickly.
> There are days though, when I fill up on too much fruit and veggies -
making it
> very tough to eat all my points. Not often, but it does happen.
>
> Joyce
>
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:22:42 -0600, "Miss Violette"
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >just 22 points a day, and it is usually OK if I work at it, Lee Joyce <[email protected]> wrote in
> >message news:[email protected]...
> >> How many points are you currently eating though? You have to remember
> >that when
> >> you get to your goal, you probably will have less points to work with
than
> >you
> >> currently do. Trust me, it isn't hard getting them all in ... is much
> >harder to
> >> not go over. <G>
> >>
> >> Joyce
> >>
> >> On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:12:20 -0600, "Miss Violette"
> ><[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I have trouble eating all my points now don't know what will happen
when
> >I
> >> >have to start adding back, Lee Lesanne <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[email protected]...
> >> >> oh, and another thing. You still eat reasonably. From actual
hunger,
> >> >> rather than recreationally? Most the time. And if you lose more,
then
> >> >you
> >> >> know you are not there
"Miss Violette" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> >> >> berlin.de...
> >> >> > I don't really care but when I talk to my sister all of her parts
> >match
> >> >> and
> >> >> > so do my mom's I think I am mismatched and what that really means
is
> >> >that
> >> >> it
> >> >> > will be harder to determine my final weight. I think DH has the
> >right
> >> >> idea,
> >> >> > I lose until I feel right to me or to skinny to him whichever
comes
> >> >first,
> >> >> > Lee Joyce <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:[email protected]...
> >> >> > > Unfortunately for you Lee, I have seen no other way to determine
> >frame
> >> >> > size other
> >> >> > > than using wrist measurements or elbow breadth measurements ...
> >here's
> >> >a
> >> >> > website
> >> >> > > that explains both:
http://www.am-i-fat.com/body_frame_size.html
> >> >> Going
> >> >> > only on
> >> >> > > what you say about your body build, it sounds like you are going
to
> >> >come
> >> >> > into the
> >> >> > > smaller frame size. Personally, I don't think the wrist
> >measurements
> >> >> are
> >> >> > > accurate, at least not when being taken when we are overweight.
> >> >Nothing
> >> >> > else is
> >> >> > > taken into account, and those measurements are obviously going
to
> >be
> >> >> > larger due to
> >> >> > > fat that is stored. And obviously, not every overweight person
in
> >the
> >> >> > world is
> >> >> > > large framed. <G>
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Joyce
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 21:13:13 -0600, "Miss Violette"
> >> >> > <[email protected]>
> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > >The reason I asked is because my bones, like everything else
about
> >me
> >> >> do
> >> >> > not
> >> >> > > >seem to match, chipmunk arms, no shoulders, large ribcage with
err
> >> >> large
> >> >> > > >attachments, long bones from hip to knees and smaller from knee
to
> >> >> ankle,
> >> >> > > >tiny feet, Lee, confused as usual Lesanne <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> > > >news:[email protected]...
> >> >> > > >> 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" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> >> >> > > >> berlin.de...
> >> >> > > >> > 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 <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> >> > > >> > message news:[email protected]...
> >> >> > > >> > > 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+.
have
> >> >said
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > > >it
> >> >> > > >> > doesn't
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"
> >> >> <[email protected]>
> >> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> >> > > >> > >
> >> >> > > >> > > >Just remember that the chart does not take into
> >consideration
> >> >> age
> >> >> > or
> >> >> > > >> > > >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" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> >> >> > > >> > > >kc.rr.com...
> >> >> > > >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >> Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight
is
> >> >> > > >> > 116-140....aye
> >> >> > > >> > > >> caramba
> >> >> > > >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >> "Connie" <walshclan@nospam_primus.ca> wrote in message
> >> >> > > >> > > >> news:40319F1C.5030103@nospam_primus.ca...
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > The ranges can be found at:
> >> >> > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> > http://www.weightwatchers.com/health/asm/calc_healthyweight.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
> >> >> <[email protected]>
> >> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>Fred <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>news[email protected]:
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>>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
> >> >> > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> > > >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> > >
> >> >> > > >> >
> >> >> > > >> >
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
love pasta but get too hungry too quick so I avoid it, potatoes are my
friend and lower fat cheese does it OK for me, the truth is that now that I
eat counting points it is even harder to eat enough. I really struggled
when the points were higher. I am hoping that when maintenance comes I will
be able to add back more nuts and that should take care of it, I am also
thinking juice would be nice and so would raisins more regularly. I am sure
I will make it work it is just kinda intimidating to me to think that adding
points is necessary as I have worked at cutting back all this time. Lee
Joyce <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You won't lose more than 2 points then no matter where you set your goal
... 20
> points is as low as you go for losing. Adding the points at first was
difficult,
> it's become much easier now though. Funny how you get used to things so
quickly.
> There are days though, when I fill up on too much fruit and veggies -
making it
> very tough to eat all my points. Not often, but it does happen.
>
> Joyce
>
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:22:42 -0600, "Miss Violette"
<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >just 22 points a day, and it is usually OK if I work at it, Lee Joyce <[email protected]> wrote in
> >message news:[email protected]...
> >> How many points are you currently eating though? You have to remember
> >that when
> >> you get to your goal, you probably will have less points to work with
than
> >you
> >> currently do. Trust me, it isn't hard getting them all in ... is much
> >harder to
> >> not go over. <G>
> >>
> >> Joyce
> >>
> >> On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 10:12:20 -0600, "Miss Violette"
> ><[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I have trouble eating all my points now don't know what will happen
when
> >I
> >> >have to start adding back, Lee Lesanne <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[email protected]...
> >> >> oh, and another thing. You still eat reasonably. From actual
hunger,
> >> >> rather than recreationally? Most the time. And if you lose more,
then
> >> >you
> >> >> know you are not there
"Miss Violette" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]> >> >> berlin.de...
> >> >> > I don't really care but when I talk to my sister all of her parts
> >match
> >> >> and
> >> >> > so do my mom's I think I am mismatched and what that really means
is
> >> >that
> >> >> it
> >> >> > will be harder to determine my final weight. I think DH has the
> >right
> >> >> idea,
> >> >> > I lose until I feel right to me or to skinny to him whichever
comes
> >> >first,
> >> >> > Lee Joyce <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:[email protected]...
> >> >> > > Unfortunately for you Lee, I have seen no other way to determine
> >frame
> >> >> > size other
> >> >> > > than using wrist measurements or elbow breadth measurements ...
> >here's
> >> >a
> >> >> > website
> >> >> > > that explains both:
http://www.am-i-fat.com/body_frame_size.html
> >> >> Going
> >> >> > only on
> >> >> > > what you say about your body build, it sounds like you are going
to
> >> >come
> >> >> > into the
> >> >> > > smaller frame size. Personally, I don't think the wrist
> >measurements
> >> >> are
> >> >> > > accurate, at least not when being taken when we are overweight.
> >> >Nothing
> >> >> > else is
> >> >> > > taken into account, and those measurements are obviously going
to
> >be
> >> >> > larger due to
> >> >> > > fat that is stored. And obviously, not every overweight person
in
> >the
> >> >> > world is
> >> >> > > large framed. <G>
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Joyce
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 21:13:13 -0600, "Miss Violette"
> >> >> > <[email protected]>
> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > >The reason I asked is because my bones, like everything else
about
> >me
> >> >> do
> >> >> > not
> >> >> > > >seem to match, chipmunk arms, no shoulders, large ribcage with
err
> >> >> large
> >> >> > > >attachments, long bones from hip to knees and smaller from knee
to
> >> >> ankle,
> >> >> > > >tiny feet, Lee, confused as usual Lesanne <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >> > > >news:[email protected]...
> >> >> > > >> 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" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> >> >> > > >> berlin.de...
> >> >> > > >> > 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 <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> >> > > >> > message news:[email protected]...
> >> >> > > >> > > 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+.
have
> >> >said
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > > >it
> >> >> > > >> > doesn't
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"
> >> >> <[email protected]>
> >> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> >> > > >> > >
> >> >> > > >> > > >Just remember that the chart does not take into
> >consideration
> >> >> age
> >> >> > or
> >> >> > > >> > > >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" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> >> >> > > >> > > >kc.rr.com...
> >> >> > > >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >> Hope it helps??? I'm depressed now....my target weight
is
> >> >> > > >> > 116-140....aye
> >> >> > > >> > > >> caramba
> >> >> > > >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >> "Connie" <walshclan@nospam_primus.ca> wrote in message
> >> >> > > >> > > >> news:40319F1C.5030103@nospam_primus.ca...
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > The ranges can be found at:
> >> >> > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> > http://www.weightwatchers.com/health/asm/calc_healthyweight.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
> >> >> <[email protected]>
> >> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>Fred <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>news
[email protected]:> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >> > >>>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
> >> >> > > >> > > >> >
> >> >> > > >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >> > >
> >> >> > > >> >
> >> >> > > >> >
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >>
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>