I've never had to deal with the vanishing TOM's - except
when pregnant. <G> Sounds like it is something you are
pretty familiar with, so probably nothing to overly worry
about. When you started ww and they disappeared, were you
also exercising very heavily? I do wonder if this has
anything to do with it at all (not that it matters, just
curiousity on my part).
I do agree, it is a huge juggling act. Rules don't seem to
fit everyone, we all work differently. If my memory is
correct though, I recall your weight being up about 6 pounds
or so when you first ventured back here requesting
information as to why you were no longer losing. The bright
side is ... you are lower than that now! <G> I'm still going
with the *either lower your exercise or increase your food*
tactic. It seemed to work for you the first time around. And
if your exercise level has increased even more ... well ...
you know. By any chance have you eliminated too much fat in
your diet? I have a tendency to do this and weightloss
ceases to exist. When I add some good fats back into the
mix, it picks back up again. Just a thought (I'm always
thinking - maybe not logically, but always thinking). <G>
And another scenario which I'm not sure has even been
brought up ... with all the exercise you have been involved
in, I am sure that you must have built some muscle. That
could very well account for you feeling thinner, clothing
being looser, yet the scale not budging. It's only a number,
doesn't tell the entire story. It's my understanding that
many extremely fit people actually carry higher weights, due
to the muscle involved.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you, hoping you get the
results you are wishing for. Please do keep us posted.
Joyce
On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 15:50:20 -0000, "krys"
<
[email protected]> wrote:
>Well, it's half way to next WI now, and I've changed
>nothing, so I guess we'll see what happens this week. I
>earnt so many points, I've just not been able to use them
>all, but I don't know if that will make any difference.
>
>My TOM is a couple of weeks late. They're susceptible to
>vanishing - I started WW, 1 month in they vanished, and
>didn't reappear until 2 years later - which is only 6
>months ago. I'll leave that one in the lap of the
>gods......my body is pretty good at sorting itself out in
>the long run.
>
>126 pts is strict UK 18 points per day. But there's all my
>APs too. Argh - it's all such a juggling act! *grin*
>
>let's see what the scales bring this week.........
>
>--
>krys
>
>UK 157/129.6/126 Started March 1st 2001 GOAL August 16th
>2001 ...a little stuck at present...
>
>"Joyce" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
>
news:[email protected]...
>> Soooo, you're not exactly into a plateau, technically ...
>> but also aren't consistently losing like you'd wish -
>> right? A few things concern me a
>bit.
>> First ... 126 points works out to 18 per day. That is the
>> bare bones
>minimum, or
>> is the UK program a strict 18 points for your weight? It
>> just seems so
>little to
>> me, roughly 1000 calories, if even that (if my
>> calculations are close to
>correct).
>> And how late is TOM, a few days, a few weeks? I'm going
>> on things I have
>read
>> long ago, related to anorexia and other weightloss issues
>> with teen girls
>... over
>> exercising, not eating enough, can effect the female
>> cycle. So am
>wondering if
>> that could be right where you are. If you feel that you
>> need to work out
>that
>> intensively, maybe you need to try and eat more again?
>> Lets figure those
>18 daily
>> points, plus 7 activity points per day ... that's still
>> only 25 points per
>day -
>> not quite a lot in any book and might not be enough for
>> you. I really do
>hate
>> pushing you into eating more though, have the same fears
>> in my stupid head
>as you
>> do ... if I eat more I will put weight on. Yet logically
>> we also know
>that isn't
>> always the case. Are you training for a marathon? <g> I
>> just read in the exercise manual that came with hubs bike
>> that the fitness gurus or
>association or
>> whatever recommends a workout that expends 300-500
>> calories ... lower end
>for
>> those who are trying to maintain fitness levels, higher
>> end for those
>training for
>> more intensive things. Don't have a clue how true those
>> figures are, or
>if they
>> are just something that someone has come up with off the
>> top of their
>head.
>>
>> I'm not sure it would really matter where you add those
>> points to, food
>points or
>> activity points - end result would be the same anyway ...
>> a few extra
>points are a
>> few extra points regardless as to where they are.
>>
>> Another thing to consider, even if we don't really want
>> to <grin> ...
>could it be
>> possible that your body is perfectly happy where it is,
>> and maybe this new
>weight
>> is where you should be? I have no idea how tall you are,
>> how old, body
>frame
>> size, etc. But your system may very well be trying to
>> tell you something
>(heaven
>> only knows what).
>>
>> Joyce <being her usual wishy-washy self>
>>
>> On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 16:32:54 -0000, "krys"
>> <
[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >hi folks,
>> >
>> >Well, I've not posted my WI in here for a few weeks -
>> >nowt much to shout about I suppose. I went down 0.6, up
>> >0.6, and back down 0.6 today -
>which
>> >is a good thing.
>> >
>> >I have been wondering though...... My weight loss
>> >appears to have slowed down. Was that the week of
>> >antibiotics? Inaccurate guestimations?
>> >
>> >Or is it my excercise regime? Am I doing too much? My
>> >TOM is late -
>have I
>> >scared them off again? - which could be a sign I'm doing
>> >more than my
>body
>> >is equipped for. My swimming has crept up from 60 25m
>> >lengths in 45 mins
>to
>> >70 lengths in a little under that. My gym session has
>> >gone from just
>over
>> >an hour and c 400cals + weights, to a good 1 1/4 hours
>> >and c: 530 cals + weights each time. I'm also walking
>> >even more - got the spring time fidgets. Basically, I
>> >think it may be time to up the points a bit. I
>used
>> >to call both things 6 points each....
>> >
>> >My question really is - should I add extra? I work on a
>> >baseline 126
>points
>> >a week, earn about 40/50 APs a week of which I use all
>> >but about 13 or so....... If so - do I add to my
>> >activity points - and call each session more points, or
>> >do I just up my weekly ration of points to take into
>account
>> >my more active (and presumably better metabolically)
>> >life style?
>> >
>> >Or do I leave well alone and wait and see what happens
>> >next WI?
>> >
>> >Boy - is this ever tricky.........*grin*......I want a
>> >handbook!
)