Living Maintenance - Book Alert - Frances Kuffel's new book is coming out in January!

http://www.amazon.com/Angry-Fat-Girls-Pounds-Again/dp/0425232182/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_2

I know that a lot of us have read Frances Kuffel's Passing for Thin. She lost weight and then regained it and has apparently lost it again. I have been waiting for her next book and it looks like it will finally be available on Jan 5. She made me insane in her first book with her plan (I thought it was too strict for maintenance) but I sure didn't want her to suffer a re-gain. Should be interesting!

From Amazon:

Like so many women, Frances Kuffel wondered: how could this happen again? She'd transformed her life by losing 188 pounds-but, like the vast majority of dieters, she transformed it again by gaining over half those pounds back. After all the struggle and hard work she somehow lost control, once again forced to carry nearly unbearable physical and psychological weight.

But she also found new friends, in particular, four women in similar situations-and similar bad moods-whom she met online. Frances, Lindsay, Katie, Mimi, and Wendy dubbed themselves the Angry Fat Girlz and shared not just rage but embarrassment and fear, fragile hope, and a mutual obsession with shoes. They asked themselves-and each other-the difficult questions: Who am I inside all this weight? How much am I allowed to enjoy myself, and how much do I have to deny myself? What could I do if I was thin?

In Angry Fat Girls, Frances Kuffel shares their story and struggle to find their best selves along the way.

Ohh, fantastic! I was just wondering this yesterday and forgot to look it up. :D

I check in at her blog occasionally and she writes about her ongoing struggles with food and weight. I think she's only lost about 25 pounds of the weight she regained and is about 225 - 250 ish (kudos to her for not putting it all back on!)

Car On The Hill (http://caronthehill.blogspot.com/)

The interesting thing is, Glory, that she's trying to re-lose the weight with exactly the same restrictive eating plan that she did the first time around. So it may make you insane all over again. :lol:

I'm not particularly interested in reading the book because I find her to be a depressing writer. Her weight loss journeys seem to be all struggle and no joy.

Meg Checked out the blog link you provided. Yeah, she seems really depressed about her life.

Which I totally don't understand because she has Labradors. Those are some of the happiest, most social dogs going. Even if DH and I have been fighting for days or there are other major SNAFU's in my life the sight of the first lab on my walks -Miss Poppy, 12 years old with arthritic knees hobbling down her steps with her tail wagging furiously - fills me with joy.

Maybe Frances (?) isn't taking a look at what's around her?

Dagmar :sklol:

I think I may have read her first book several years ago. Wasn't she going to Overeaters Anonymous or something? I wish I could remember. Either way, I enjoyed the book and look forward to reading her next one. I'll have to check out her blog.

I check in at her blog occasionally and she writes about her ongoing struggles with food and weight. I think she's only lost about 25 pounds of the weight she regained and is about 225 - 250 ish (kudos to her for not putting it all back on!)

Car On The Hill (http://caronthehill.blogspot.com/)

The interesting thing is, Glory, that she's trying to re-lose the weight with exactly the same restrictive eating plan that she did the first time around. So it may make you insane all over again. :lol:

I'm not particularly interested in reading the book because I find her to be a depressing writer. Her weight loss journeys seem to be all struggle and no joy.

I have no doubt she can lose the weight again on her plan. As someone who has dieted many different ways, in some way a very restrictive diet is easiest - there is little thinking, struggle needed.

If I recall, her maintenance plan was exactly the same as her weight loss plan with the addition of a piece of fruit per day. I might be remembering it wrong, but I don't think her plan had any wiggle room for a social life or an occasional treat meal.

So when you go from a super restrictive diet to living the rest of your life with no way to handle temptation...well, I can say I have done this and it was a spectacular failure.

I will definitely check her new book out of the library!

Windchime, yep, she originally lost the weight with OA and that's the plan she's using to lose it again.

Glory, the interesting thing about her maintenance plan was that she never had a maintenance experience. She's written about how she was regaining the weight by the time she went on the book tour for Passing For Thin! I was shocked at that revelation because it means she never -- not even for a year, maybe not even for six months -- was able to keep the weight off. Like a lot of us (me, for years!), she's good at losing weight but not so good at maintaining the loss.

Sad to say, she doesn't seem to see maintenance as her issue. It's hard to see what would be different for her this time around even if she manages to lose the weight again. All her focus in her blog is on "abstinence", which as you so rightly point out, really isn't going to be an effective strategy for the rest of one's life.

I didn't read her book, but I did see her interviews. I do agree with Glory that it appears that she has no problem losing weight, but struggles with maintaining. I know for me that I never would have been able to lose weight on a super restrictive diet let alone try to maintain it for any length of time. I didn't lose all of this weight so that I couldn't enjoy my life.

Unfortunately, I see lots of friends and family who have lived her journey. I am working really hard to not do the same. This whole weight loss has been much more of a head game than about my food and exercise. I too will get it from the library.

Just went to her blogspot, but I am otherwise unfamiliar with this author. I am curious -- how restrictive was her original weight loss strategy?

Definitely agree that restrictive is, in a way, easiest re: little thinking and struggle.

Just went to her blogspot, but I am otherwise unfamiliar with this author. I am curious -- how restrictive was her original weight loss strategy?

Definitely agree that restrictive is, in a way, easiest re: little thinking and struggle.

She goes to OA, and her food plan was a common one for them: no sugar no flour, and food "turned over" to a sponsor every day (you call your sponsor and tell them what you plan to eat for the day, and then if you have any changes you call and turn those over, too). She follows a specific plan with precise measurements of veggies, carbs, and other foods. The idea behind OA is to remove the problem foods from your diet, and by putting food into a controlled package you have room to then deal with everything else--emotional and spiritual issues that the food has been hiding. For some people it is tremendously restrictive; for some people it works very, very well and they have years of abstinence. There is a lot of recovery in OA. Just because it is restrictive doesn't necessarily mean that it is doomed to failure.

Just wanted to be clear I wasn't knocking OA. I'm not usually negative about plans that are healthy and that people like and that work for them. I am a huge believer there are many paths and many right answers and each person has to look deep inside to find what's ultimately right for them long term.

That being said, this plan is apparently not working for her!

Oh, glory, I for one didn't read you that way! I'm a bit defensive of her because I've spoken with her on the phone about my past struggles (she has a gorgeous, sultry, rich voice) and we have a lot in common. I've also been to OA myself, and it really doesn't deserve the "cultish" reputation it has. OA really does help a lot of people.

Frances has had a lot of personal challenges, and for handling some of them she was ill-equipped. The argument could be made that her food plan was perfect for dealing with her physical issues; her challenges really asked her for new ways to cope, which she did not at the time have. So of course she fell back to the one way she did know and trust. It really invites a discussion of the difference between physically and emotionally appropriate plans, but that's a thought for another thread. For some of us, the food is secondary. :shrug:

Again, I'm sorry if I came off as defensive.

This is a very interesting thread. I found it by accident while googling Frances Kuffel...which led me to this thread on 3 fat chicks...good thing I'm a member; I just logged right in!

I read the book when it came out and had very mixed emotions about it. I never liked the idea of depending on OA sponsors and a rigid diet for your emotional strength and physical well-being. Now, a few years later I wanted to see if she kept the weight off, and of course found out she did not.

I wasn't too surprised she gained the weight back. Her eating plan was super restrictive. I can relate because I've been there and done that. If you choose a plan that is just not liveable, eventually you rebel. This happened to me and I am now unpleasantly FAT.

This time around I'm dusting off a book I bought a few years ago, then put aside for fad, trendy diets. It's called Calorie Queens. The concept is that you reduce calories, but not drastically. You use a formula called Eucalorics. You basically eat your maintenance calories now. If I want to weigh 150 I should be eating 1800 calories. That is what a 150 pound woman should be eating to maintain that weight. The theory is that if I eat my ideal weight calories, I will eventually weigh that much. The mother-daughter team who wrote the book did just that and lost a ton of weight between them.

I don't know if the book really selled well. It wasn't sexy, trendy or have famous authors. It just taught you how to reduce calories in an often humorous way.

So anyway, sorry I digressed, but this is what I'm doing now. I was a little sorry to hear Frances is back to an eating style that didn't work for her in the long run.

I agree with the poster who said the book was kind of depressing. I'm a firm believer that weight loss doesn't have to be morbid, depressing or over-analyzed.

This time around I have a positive attitude and am making a game out of lowering my calories. It's actually fun and not work because there is minimal deprivation involved.

I like these maintenance threads because I can learn so much from those who are successful....found you guys by accident, but I hope to hang around even though I'm far from maintenance.

:wave: Hi Tea! We'd love to have you hang around!

I read the book when it came out and had very mixed emotions about it. I never liked the idea of depending on OA sponsors and a rigid diet for your emotional strength and physical well-being. Now, a few years later I wanted to see if she kept the weight off, and of course found out she did not.

I wasn't too surprised she gained the weight back. Her eating plan was super restrictive. I can relate because I've been there and done that. If you choose a plan that is just not liveable, eventually you rebel. This happened to me and I am now unpleasantly FAT.
.

I'm not terribly familiar with OA, but I had heard, not sure if it's true that one of their main "beliefs" is that you have no control over your compulsive eating. So for me, right there, that just wouldn't work. I believe completely the opposite. By saying that we don't have control, you give away your power, IMO.

Yes, you need to choose a plan that is livable (I'm not saying that that IS OA, it certainly wouldn't be for me), but whatever that plan is, I believe you have to be WILLING TO MAKE IT LIVABLE. You have to find some plan, or make your own, always tweaking if need be, that you are indeed WILLING to live with. WILLING to MAKE work.

There is a restrictive component to losing and maintaining weight. There just has to be. If there wasn't, if it was a free for all, with no restriction, no boundaries, no rules, well that's what I did for 20 plus years and that's what led be to be super morbidly obese.

Hi Meg, thank you for the welcome!

Meg and Robin, OMG I'm just noticing your stats and you have both lost very well over 100 pounds! That is so awesome! I raise my big mug of morning tea and give a big shout-out of congratulations to you both!

I will definitely stay on the maintenance forum. I want to learn from those who have been there, done that, and still have the weight loss to confirm success.

This is a great forum.

rockinrobin, if you're reading this, I just want to thank you. Since I read your post (above) this morning, I keep thinking of something you said in one small sentence. You said there has to be a restrictive component to weight loss. I thought of this in relation to my goal weight which I posted as 150. But that is actually 10 pounds over a healthy BMI for me, which is 140 lbs.

I chose 150 because I am 56, tired of the restrictive diets I've been on all my life which only made me fatter, and was thinking at least I'd be annoyingly overweight at 150 instead of obese, which I am now.

But I want to be healthy, and at a BMI of 24 (140 lbs), I will be at lowest risk for disease. And now I'm thinking "restriction" is not such a bad thing. At 150 I can maintain at 1800 calories. At 140 I need to restrict myself to 1680 calories. Big deal. That's still not the starvation diets I've lived on.

So your one simple sentence made me realize restriction (if not too severe) is not so bad.

Why not be the best I can be?

So thanks for putting that little bug in my head.

Thanks Sidhe and other posters; I actually didn't know there was such a specific OA plan, very interesting.

I feel I have been particularly restrictive/hardcore in weight loss, so that's partly why I asked -- soaking up everyone's maintenance successes and failures -- but then again, I don't have any off-limit foods and have surprised myself with moderation. So I guess it's all how you look at it.

Robin, the 'that's how I got/stayed fat' is exactly what popped in my head one moment last week when my mother was lecturing me about not denying myself ... She and I popped into a restaurant/bar downtown while waiting on my husband to join us at another place. The plan was to go to an acclaimed restaurant where my mother (famously dieting) and I planned to split a somewhat decadent dinner.

My half of the calorific dinner was allotted in my day's plan and fit into my calories for the day. But it was cold waiting on my husband to meet us post-shopping, and she suggested we duck into a bar for a drink. Okay. Sat down and she ordered us each a glass of merlot for our wait. Well, I didn't have room for a glass of wine that day and so of course demurred.

My mom was clearly annoyed and lectured me somewhat on moderation, blah blah blah. Well, yeah. We had red wine the night before, as I do several times a week, and it was nice, but I pair wine with low-cal meals like a 4 oz piece of fish and a vegetable. Not the higher-calorie meal we were getting later; there was no room that day. I didn't bother to get into it, as my husband is the only person outside 3fc with whom I discuss such things.

Still, it just struck me as one of the million little banal things that come up and require discipline. I don't get to see my mother much, as we live in far-flung states and it was a rare, fun-making time out together. But no matter the occasion, this is just the way my life is now. I have anything on plan, but there's almost nothing I have on the spur of the moment.

And later, when we finally went to dinner, we got our own dishes after all, instead of splitting -- and she kept talking about feeling bad about how much she ate ... it was obvious that she resented me for only eating half my dish. And then she insisted on the waiter boxing it up, when I had already told him no thanks, and on bringing it home for me to have as lunch the next day even though I told her I had no need for such a rich lunch and even though I tried to 'forget' it on the table, too. No, I didn't eat the leftovers, and no, actually, my mother is not usually like this.

(I do wish I didn't have this effect on other would-be or want-to-be dieters, and that trying to get me to eat more was not the key to other people feeling better about "breaking" their every-other-week on/off "diets" or whatever. But that's another topic entirely!)

Whitepicket, what a great post.

The most I ever kept my weight off was for 1.5 years, I believe. That was on my last "least restrictive" eating plan, the one that is closest to what I am doing now.

"I have anything on plan, but there's almost nothing I have on the spur of the moment."

That is what I did back then, and keeping my weight off was almost effortless...UNTIL I started giving in, wanting to fit in and be "liked" and "accepted", by eating what others were eating. Of course there were other issues as well, but when I stopped planning and being focused, I ran into trouble with my weight that's lasted for years.

Thanks for the reminder that it's good to be selfish about our food needs, even if it makes others uncomfortable.

Thanks tealover; your past experience is a powerful reminder to me, too. This is the first time I have ever lost more than 25 lbs at once, and I am just determined to do whatever it takes to keep it off ... I am really into reading about others' experiences with maintenance.

Whitepicket, I too loved your post. I've been in similar circumstances. Those comments - "can't you eat it just this one time?" Well actually I eat it plenty of times, when I've planned it and DECIDE to - not when I've no interest in it, thank you very much. Or. "Sheesh, you just gotta live sometimes". Well yes I do and that's EXACTLY what I'm hoping for. A happy, active, productive, interesting, fun, joyous and LONG life, thank you very much!

It's all perspective. And frankly, I find very few people (except for here at 3FC) have my perspective. It's quite sad actually.

tealover, you're very welcome! I've had many people ask me why I had to get *this* thin (as if it's there business). I'm like what??? I should have settled for a lower quality of life, not giving myself the best chance at optimal health just because I started out so heavy? Am I not entitled to the same health benefits of everyone else? The truth is it would STILL be restrictive to maintain a higher weight. So why not tighten it up and strive for the VERY BEST? I no longer settle for just "good enough", not when better is available.

Yes, it is restrictive. Somewhat. I actually enjoy having for the first time n my life guidelines and boundaries to adhere to. When I didn't I was MISERABLE. Now I am thrilled with myself and life in general. Thrilled. I don't find this lifestyle to be a burden or a hardship. I find it to be freeing, comforting and joyful.

It is only restrictive in the context of previously eating anything you want, whenever you want it. As time goes on, what seemed restrictive at one time will seem normal--which it actually is!

Jay

I personally don't believe in restriction at all. But, having said that, I certainly do work on my emotions and behaviors to naturally make the best choices for myself. At the end of the day its just semantics I guess.

Exactly! I think that what we consider making good choices others would call restriction. I don't rule any foods (except those I don't like :) ) out of my diet, but I do choose to limit the amount/frequency that I eat some of them. Other people would call that restricting. It's like when others call us obsessed with exercise, while we say we're dedicated, or committed. It's all in how you percieve things.