This is an excellent read on why people stay thin or maintain their weight loss. I don't have time now but when I get back from work I will further comment on the article.
I find it interesting that they used Anne Fletcher as a resource on how "always thin or post-weight-loss" people eat. She's undeniably a good resource on the "post-weight-loss" part, but I don't think she has any real research experience with the always-slim.
I've said this before, but I REALLY don't think the two groups can be mashed together like that. There are fundamental biological differences between the always-slim and the post-obese. You can hook us up to metabolic testing and you can TELL which of us used to be heavier and which of us are at about the same weight we always have been. There's no evidence that a formerly obese person who loses weight becomes qualitatively the same as a never-obese person. So already the lumping of the two groups together makes me nervous.
I'd say that all of the slides apply to almost all people who've lost weight and kept it off. A lot DON'T apply to people who are naturally slim. I have known naturally slim people who never exercise, who don't get on the scale EVER, and who regularly eat their feelings, whose cupboards are filled with junk. I wouldn't comment on their HEALTH, but they are SLIM. And I can't count the number of tiny girls in my dorm in college who NEVER ate breakfast.
I have NEVER known a maintainer who does those things and is successful...the vast majority of MAINTAINERS do indeed follow most of these if they are successful. This is why I don't like the mixed message of the title of this article at all. "10 secrets of the effortlessly thin". In my opinion, either you're naturally slim, in which case many or all of these "secrets" might not apply to you, or they all do apply but you may or may not consciously consider them, or you're post-obese, in which case NOTHING about weight maintenance can really be called "effortless".
I think that "Post-obese" is sort of a weight class in itself. The rules are somewhat different and what you have to do to retain that status is different than the never-obese.
Last edited by mandalinn82; 10-23-2008 at 12:08 PM.
I also think there is a huge difference between maintainers and 'effortlessly' thin people.
Once you get to goal, it doesn't become effortless at all. Again, 2 different categories of people as Mandalinn stated.
I've always found statement like this interesting:
Quote:
a group of lean subjects sat for two hours a day less than the obese subjects, potentially burning up to 350 additional calories.
Are the obese more sedentary *because* they are obese, and therefore it is much more physically demanding to move around, or did they *become* obese because they didn't move around?
I absolutely agree with mandalinn; there is NOTHING effortless about maintenance and the "naturally" thin and reduced-obese are two very different creatures, both metabolically and usually behaviorally.
Further, there is no such thing as naturally lean and fit. Fitness doesn't just happen and lean is not necessarily fit.
Thinking about it, I honestly can't think of any naturally thin women over the age of 25 who eat whatever they want and don't exercise. I do know a few very unnaturally thin women, but they are headed down a very unhealthy road.
We are different; I think there is a thread titled that floating around somewhere in which Meg posted research on resting and non-resting metabolic rates of reduced-obese compared to never obese people. The results were startling.
It seems to me someone took quotes from Anne Fletcher's book (which I just bought but haven't read yet) and slapped a misleading headline on them. The instructions in the slides require quite a lot of effort (as all of us who are doing just those things know)
Fletcher (from what I've read about her books) actually interviewed and based her books on her interviews with people who were formerly fat and now were long term weight loss maintainers.
I'll have to read the books before commenting further (I'll get back to you sometime next year )
It's funny. Just last week I was speaking to a woman who has "always been thin". We got to talking about weight and how she "always" stays so slim.
Wouldn't you know it - she's on "maintenance", just like us!! She STRUGGLES. She gives herself a 5 lb leeway, just like us. She is constanly up and down between those 5. When she's on the lower end, she'll "allow" herself a treat, otherwise it's resist - resist - resist.
Thing is she's never let it get past those 5 lbs, but nevertheless it IS a constant struggle with her. Having the right foods on hand, resisting temptation that is all around her, the whole kit and caboodle. She told me how HARD it is, cause' she loves food, simply loves it. She eats very healthy - by choice, not "naturally" and exercises at least 5x a week.
Has she always been thin? - YES. Is it "natural"? - I think NOT.
Is there really such a thing as a "naturally slim" person?? Because the few people I once thought were naturally slim (one example is my bf) are not immune to weight gain by overeating.
Robin, DH's grandmother is like that. A year or so ago she said, "Well, I'm old now, so I can finally eat until I'm full. My whole life I've been just a little bit hungry to maintain my figure." Of course, after she started eating whatever she wanted she gained some weight, and then made an effort to lose it again and is now back to the same size she's always been. I thought it was kind of sad to think that she'd never eaten as much as she wanted. OTOH she had a very traditional US diet -- bacon and eggs for breakfast, lots of meat and potatoes, and she made two pies a month for her and her husband her whole life.
Jelly, I have one friend who is "naturally slim" who has been trying to GAIN weight her entire life. She's always been underweight. She recently got pregnant and is struggling with trying to gain enough weight for the baby to be healthy -- she actually *lost* weight when she got pregnant.
But I don't think she ever overeats. She just has a very small appetite in general, and with the nausea she had her first trimester it was difficult for her to even force down a couple bites a day of solid food.
The media always seems to be trying to present a "simple solution" or condense weight loss "secrets" into a one-size-fits-all approach, and ultimately it comes down to marketability. Such crap sells, because a large number of people want to hear it.
Obesity is a complicated issue, with influences in the environment and in hereditary (some of the genes have even been identified). It isn't a blank slate, and it's not a level playing field. Our genetic and experiential heritage are often very different. Any one-size-fits all approach is either going to be hooey or so vague (like a horoscope) that it is virtually meaningless. I think the article had elements of both.
Define "healthy foods." In part, the definition, depends upon your weight and how you see that weight (as ideal, or too high, or too low for that matter).
Define "emotional eating."
How often is occasionally, anyway?
I agree that the article describes (except for defining any of it as "effortless") not just a path to healthy maintenance, but healthy weight loss as well (though in a vague, horoscopy way). However, it oversimplifies until the information is virtually meaningless, sadly just like most popular magazine pieces.
I think one of the reasons weight loss "science" is so far behind most others is that it lumps all overweight individuals in the same group, assuming the same "treatments" will be equally effective for someone who gained weight after menopause, and someone who has been morbidly obese since childhood. If our weight gain patterns are different, possibly our weight loss and maintenance patterns may need to be different also. It's like assuming all headaches would respond equally well to the same treatment whether they be caused by tension, sinus infection, migraines, or brain tumors.
Sadly, anyone who has been overweight for more than a couple years, often knows more about weight loss than even their doctor (not to mention fluff magazine writers).
My mom is a true, naturally thin person. At the age of 60, she gained a tiny bit of weight in her belly for the first time in her life but until then she was a tiny 110 pound woman, her entire life.
She didn't eat breakfast daily, just had a pot of coffee in the morning. She did pack a lunch everyday for work. We rarely went out to dinner when I was younger, she made dinner every night (meat, starch, veggie every night - now that I'm a working adult I really respect she put a dinner on the table every night). We rarely had treats in the house (cake, cookies, etc). She does stuff like "forget to eat" if she's not hungry. She can eat one graham cracker and stop.
I always thought I was built like my dad, but when I lost weight, I realized I was built like my slim mom, it was pretty eye-opening:
Glory - I found the exact same thing when I lost the extra weight I've been carrying around... I always thought I was built like my dad, and his side of the family. He, my grandmother and my aunts are all pear shaped, as I have been the last several years. As I've lost the weight I've realized my frame is more like my mom's. She is 'naturally thin' as well, she weighs 85 now at 56 years old, but her ideal weight, or at least when she looked healthy, is more like 105ish (5'2"). Even being that small she thought she was fat, and has had some issues related to that her whole life. I never saw her overweight, though - she doesn't eat breakfast either, we also didn't go out much, she skips meals if not hungry or too busy.
It really slapped me in the face when I started seeing her bone structure in me instead of my dad and the other women in my family.
My mom is a true, naturally thin person. At the age of 60, she gained a tiny bit of weight in her belly for the first time in her life but until then she was a tiny 110 pound woman, her entire life.
She didn't eat breakfast daily, just had a pot of coffee in the morning. She did pack a lunch everyday for work. We rarely went out to dinner when I was younger, she made dinner every night (meat, starch, veggie every night - now that I'm a working adult I really respect she put a dinner on the table every night). We rarely had treats in the house (cake, cookies, etc). She does stuff like "forget to eat" if she's not hungry. She can eat one graham cracker and stop.
Ah, you see, I was speaking to another person last week who is similar to your Mom. She was quite thin and says she's always been that way. Weight has never been an issue for her. She said she eats whatever she wants, so I said, "it's just got to be that you just don't want all that much", and she agreed. That's exactly it. She's just not that interested in food. Doesn't have a large appetite. Doesn't get "excited" over food. Lucky gal!
About finding out what true body type you are after weight loss - oh yeah. Quite an eye-opener. I always thought I had a full face - a big behind - large breasts - wide hips. Turns out - I don't.
Ha, well, my mom loooves food. She will make happy mmm mmm mmm noises when she eats (I mean, not the WHOLE time, but the first few bites). She always seemed to have a decent sized appetite to me - when she sat down to eat, she would be a member of the clean plate club. I have seen her put away big plates of fajitas or chocolately desserts or Christmas dinner.
She never served herself big portions though. One of the things I definitely remember about my mom was her packing her lunch with a sandwich, cut up apple and a LEETLE baggy of Frito's. I always thought "who would want to eat that tiny amount of Frito's??" She always has a huge Costco container of mixed nuts on the counter and she will eat like 1-2 and then stop. Once I eat a handful of nuts, it is really hard for me to stop.
She loves desserts, steak, chocolate, wine - she is just reasonable with most things, most times. And I do think she has a good metabolism, she's never worked out in her life and has beautiful muscle tone in her arms and legs (still at age 60+).
It is interesting, I do think she's one of the lucky ones - really, genetically lucky. She has been slim and lovely all her life. She eats what she wants. She doesn't work out (she does do a lot of yardwork). Her first diet in her whole life was after age 60 (to lose the tiny bit of weight she put on around her middle) and she quickly lost that weight and is back down to 120 lbs at 5'4".
So back to the article. How does my true, slender mom stack up to the slideshow?
1. Keeps track of weight - okay, I'm not sure. There was always a scale in my parents bedroom growing up, so I guess she did use it. I'll ask her!
2. Work out regularly - that would be a no
3. Don't solve problems with food - actually, mom is is the opposite. Can't eat if she's worried or depressed.
4. Stop eating when they're full - I would say normally this is true, but she pushes it on food she really likes (dessert, fajitas, bbq, etc)
5. They don't surround themselves with tempation - once again, a no. She has all kinds of stuff in the house all the time - several kinds of ice cream, cheese, nuts, cookies, graham crackers, those boxed baked goods from the grocery store, it's torture when *I* visit
6. Allow treats - definitely
7. Eat breakfast - Mom rarely ate breakfast when I was growing up, maybe pancakes on the weekend if dad made them, I think she's eating oatmeal these days, but it's a recent change
8. Fidget - she's a fidgety person, talks with her hands, jiggles her leg when she sits
9. They don't skip meals - she "forgets" to eat and skips meals
10. They don't diet - I would say this is true for her life because there was no need. She ate what she wanted and stayed around 110.
I would agree with the assessment above - that is a very misleading slide show. The habits are MY habits as a formerly obese, not necessarily the habits of an "always thin" person.
Excellent Read
Effortlessly thin?
) 
