New Blog Updated: Phat Pilates~~How Your Trainer Can Modify for the Big-Bellied so the Fat and Obese and Do Pilates!

Read it here (and see the pics):

Phat Pilates ~How Your Trainer Can Modify For The Big-Bellied so the Fat and Obese CAN do Pilates!

Please update your links/follows to the new blog. THANKS.

Happy Monday!

My pic at Suite 101: "Fat People Can Do Pilates Equipment Workout"

A pic of me from this blog post originally published on  this blog in June showed up in an article over at Suite 101. The article is titled "Fat People Can Do Pilates Equipment Workout."  And yes, I'm proof fat people CAN.


I've published a page with my Pilates workout pictures from both the June OUAD blog posts that featured them over at my new blog in a tab page: Phat Pilates.

If I was a trainer or Pilates stuidio owner, I'd start "Phat Pilates" classes and do an outreach to interest the overweight and obese and morbidly obese. 


~~~~
~~~~

185 --The Magic Number Where I'd Stop Being Obese

I was fiddling with the NIH's BMI Calculator. I know I'd done this before--trying to figure out where I stopped being obese, etc, but I'd forgotten.

So, I did it again.

The WHO's classification for obesity is this:

BMI	Classification
< 18.5	underweight
18.5–24.9	normal weight
25.0–29.9	overweight
30.0–34.9	class I obesity
35.0–39.9	class II obesity
≥ 40.0	class III obesity

Well, at my highest, my BMI--as approximated using the NIH calculator-- was 48.3. That means that at 299, I was in a subset of Class III obesity called super obese.

When I started this blog at 289 lbs in 2007, my BMI was 46.6. Still super obese.  Today, I was a scosh over 263, which has my BMI at 42.4. No longer in the worst category, but still in Class III. This is morbidly obese.

To leave Class III, I'd have to get down to 246, at which weight my BMI would be 39.9 and Class II Obesity, and I'd be considered severely obese.  At 216, I'd have a BMI of 24.9 and be in Class I--plain old obese. No scary modifiers.

But 186 lbs is THE magic number: No longer obese at all. Merely categorized as overweight. BMI of 29.9.

The SUPER MAGIC NUMBER: 154. This was my weight on my wedding day. My weight at my first gynecological exam. My weight when I was 23. It was all UPscale from then...  This was normal weight for my height, right on the border.

Which is funny, cause in the back of my mind, I've always wanted to be that poundage again. Not cause of the weight charts.  Not cause I looked slim. That was the upper end of my doctor's weight chart numbers for me, for my height. I clearly felt a bit chubby. I couldn't shop at "normal" stores, cause they didn't have my size. I still was not slender. I even had hubby take pics of me in a bathing suit and hated the sight of my pudge. (I wish I was that pudgy now, dangit.)  BUT...I was "normal weight."

154. Wedding Day Weight. Normal Weight. Youth weight.

Yeah. It's a very significant number.

I don't expect to get there. I'd love to, but I think the caloric sacrifice would be too much to even KEEP me there, if I got there. Big if. I choose to be realistic these days, and I don't know if I could be happy with that sort of caloric restriction. Shoot, just staying under 2000 is hard.

But 185. I can dream that without an immense twinge of disbelief at impossibilities. I can be "just overweight."

After two decades plus of obesity, merely overweight sounds really, really good. I can aim for that. I can dream of that.

It's not a bad dream.

If you want to fiddle with your numbers, HERE.

School Lunches; Jamie Oliver and Chicken Nuggets; Weight Loss Shows; Shapelovers again, and Strawberries galore; Five Fruit Frenzy at Jamba Juice

Easter Sunday I was over at my big bro's home. He has two grandkids and I got a look at the elementary school lunch menu. It was taped to the fridge and smack in front of my face as I stored the extra chicken satay.

What crap we feed our kids. How come taxpayer dollars go to feed kids fattening, unhealthful crap? Chicken nuggets. Meat pizza (I'm guessing NOT on a whole grain crust or with low-fat cheese). Hot dogs (omigod). Corn Dogs (doubleomigod).

A quick google got this article with this summary of research findings regarding obesity and these crap school lunches:

Research presented this past weekend at a meeting of the Annual College of Cardiology determined that kids who eat lunches served by their schools are almost 60 percent more likely to be overweight or obese when compared to children who bring their lunch from home. The survey of nearly 1,300 Michigan-based sixth graders, taken over three years, also found that school lunch eaters ate more fat-intensive meats and sugar, as well as fewer vegetables than their counterparts—which contributed to them showing elevated levels of bad cholesterol in their bloodstreams.

If I were Empress of the US, school lunches would be the epitome of healthful, balanced eating to give kids a great start and energy to get through their studies. Whole grains. Nothing fried. No caffeine. Nothing with sugar (except for rare treats on a holiday times or other special occasions). No sugar-laden chocolate milk, for sure. No sodas--diet or otherwise. No junk chips (unless baked and low-salt and ideally made from something that has fiber). Fruit cups would have no added sugar. Certainly no hot dogs would be featured. Egads.

I know, they'll say this: kids won't eat healthful stuff.

Guess what? Tough patooties. Give parents before school starts an idea of a menu and what items are included. "If your child has not been trained at home to eat these foods, then please pack as suitable brown bag or bento or boxed lunch for them each day."

I figure it's up to parents to train kids to eat fruits, veggies, whole grains, etc. If they don't, then make lunch. I, as a taxpayer, don't wanna finance the ticking time bomb that is obesity and diabetes. I am a product of this junk food lunch system training kids to want and like more and more crap. (I remember grilled cheese sandwiches DRiPPING with margarine, fatty meat pizzas, oily fried chicken, sloppy joes on white buns, oily fries, huge-sized cookies.) Funny, cause at home we got rice, beans, salad with avocado and olive oil, and things that were far less damaging than what schools gave.

So, today, I caught Jamie Oliver on The Doctors (where I got a look at a liver and a heart that probably look like mine, given I'm obese. Ick.) He was showing kids how gross chicken nuggets can be made. It was vile. But when he fried them up and asked which of the kids would eat them, all of them raised their hands. Even after seeing the globs of fat and goo that went into the nuggets, they'd eat 'em. Hah. Jamie was shocked.

They also showed the crazy amounts of salt and sugar in kid's lunch meals. One could weep.

I really am amazed parents tolerate those menus. Corn dogs. CORN DOGS???

Insane.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I caught a couple episodes of LOST IT! on Discovery Health channel. I wanted to see if the stories could up my mojo factor. It's always nice to see folks get it off and feel happier and healthier. One lady did WW. One did Jenny Craig. One guy did hypnosis tapes, which actually looked maybe interesting.

I'm not feeling all that motivated, but I did feel a tad more hopeful watching. :)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gotta admit that the Shapelover meals this week have been very good. Their food is tastier than when I first tried them more than a year ago (for a brief while). Very tasty. Yesterday, I had the Normandy Beef consomme, and while it wasn't so much consommeish (it had thick veggies in there), it was really delicious and hearty.

Hubby really liked his pork fricasse with carrots that I served him with the mashed new potatoes that came with my blue cheese beef dish. Today, for lunch, I had a pesto beef lasagna for lunch that was excellent, if a tad tad tad salty (prolly the cheese sprinkled on top was to blame for that). It came with a tomato basil onion salad that had a lovely balsamic/basil flavor. The chocolate berry dessert was so good for 70 calories. Mmm.

Been eating a lot of strawberries, too. The harvest right now is huge from Central Florida, so prices are low and berries are sweet. :D  I hope you check for them when you go shopping this week. Good for ya!

~~~~~~~~~~~

Hubby went to get some home repair stuff, and I asked him to pick me up some carrot juice and the new Five Fruit Frenzy smoothie that Jamba Juice has been highlighting as having "five servings of fruit in a 16 oz serving." I asked for the smaller size (in case I'm not wild about it, anyway). It's got strawberries, blueberries, banana, mango, peaches--ye five fruits there--mixed in peach juice, berry juice with ice.  I'm a sucker for mango, so I hope this is numsy.

If ya wanna try it, get a dollar off with a printable coupon until 4/10.

DragonFire Factoid: Oops, We Got Fatter As A Nation...AGAIN!

Two-thirds of Americans are overweight or obese, and there’s no end in sight to this dangerous trend. According to the Centers for Disease Control, in 2007 25.6 percent of Americans were obese. But in 2008, it crept up to 26.1 percent.

There are six states that can dubiously boast the fact that over 30 percent of their citizens are obese: Alabama, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee and West Virginia.

Colorado is the only state in which less than 20 percent of its citizens are not obese.

Another Reason To Get Trim and Fit: Obesity Link To Cancer Stronger

Man, this is scary stuff. If risk of stroke and heart disease and diabetes were all not enough, add the increased risk of cancer to the worries of the obese--like moi.

Yeah, read it and weep:

A new report released yesterday by the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research states that most cancers are preventable.

Poor diet, lack of exercise, obesity and smoking account for the vast majority of cancers; the role of genetic factors is by far overrated.

Indeed, the dramatic impact of obesity on cancer is now increasingly appreciated – one in three cancers may be caused by obesity (or as a result of lifestyle factors that promote obesity). It is therefore perhaps not surprising, that large prospective studies have shown an almost 60% reduction in deaths from cancer with bariatric surgery.

Full post on the study is at Dr. Sharma's blog.

I go in for an endometrial biopsy in three weeks. I think this finding will be weighing on my mind until I get those results.

And for a while after.

It may be what I needed to make a good choice for supper tonight, too.


Have a healthful weekend, folks!

Not Impressed by Five Pound Loss of Recent Diet/Exercise vs Relaxation Study

While I totally believe that stress screws your body and mind up, and destressing and learning to do things that involve quietness and meditation are healthful (they prove so to me), I can't get too excited about that study recently reported all over the diet world online. You may have heard about it, the one that says that destressing with meditation and Yoga and such is better for weight loss than diet and exercise.

The destressors kept off the five pound weight loss for two years, while the nutrition info and the diet/exercise groups didn't lose or keep off.

When you're big like me and five pounds barely registers, this is not big news. If the women in the study had lost and kept off 25+ pounds (just with destressing), I might perk up.

But I've struggled to keep off 25 lbs. I had lost 29, then regained, then lost, then regained a bit, then lost. After my last bout with asthma (3.5 weeks of ickiness), I'm up again. For me, 25 pounds is an ongoing battleground. Makes me nuts. So, excuse me if a five pound loss after two years doesn't make me go yippee for Yoga.

Five pounds. This is gonna solve the obesity epidemic? I think not.

I still think that it's a holistic thing that's gonna get us there--ie, dealing with sedentary habits and moving into movement; dealing with excess calories and outsized portions and learning to eat less; cutting down or out the junk and non-nutritive foods and snacks and focusing on whole and clean foods; working with internal/emotional issues and learning how to tap into the self-control we all have to some extent; tapping into our spiritual power (if we believe in such); creating support systems in and even beyond our family/friendship circles; committing to a lifestyle change that is lifelong; changing the societal landscape so that it is fashioned and structured to support healthful living; encouraging employers to make room for exercise at work and offer healthful snacks instead of junk on the jobsites; incorporating stress management techniques; eliminating all junk from schools; adding penalty taxes to junk foods and using that money to offset health care costs for obesity; tax deductions for gym memberships and buying at-home health gear (bikes, ellipticals, treadmills, etc); making health a top family and personal priority for life.

Destressing, as you see, imo is part of that holistic approach. But without diet and exercise and support, etc, I'm sorry, the very overweight and obese and superobese can't be satisfied with losing five pounds doing yoga. That's not gonna cut it.

So, I'll take the study for what it's worth. Yes, I'll continue to incorporate mind-body/destressing times and activities into my life. But that will not solve my obesity problem--or the nation's. Or the world's. Life is stressful, no matter what we do. Destressing helps, but when you'r mom is dying or your husband leaves you or your kid gets a major illness, or your car is totalled or your country is at war or your house is foreclosed on or someone robs you at gunpoint or a hurricane is coming--stress is hard to eradicate. I think the researchers who de-emphasize or pooh-pooh (or seem to) the role of diet and exercise ain't helping us as much as they might think.

They probably just make us worry about destressing enough. :)

New Bariatric Device Undergoing Human Trial

The following snippet is from "New Bariatric Device Doesn't Require Surgery, Can Be Removed"

Dr. Randal Baker, a local bariatric surgeon, said he and his partners are negotiating with three well-known companies who are bidding to buy the rights to the device he invented, the patented Full Sense Bariatric Device.

The two-section implement, made of silicone and nitinol, sits at the end of the esophagus and just inside the stomach. It is inserted through the mouth by a flexible tube called an endoscope and kept in place by three sutures. Baker said the pressure of the lightweight device is enough to convince the brain that the stomach is full.

The device induced significant weight loss in animal trials in dogs, Baker said. Last month, he and two other doctors inserted the device into three people in Mexico. He said they reported losing 18 percent of excess body weight in less than three weeks, without overwhelming hunger.

Okay, just for perspective, that would be like me losing 22 pounds in 3 weeks, more than a pound a day. Yoiks! (And I calculated that only using my "excess body weight", not my total weight.)

I'm gonna keep an eye on this one. I'm curious to see how the trials end up in terms of results. I think a lot of folks who don't want to be cut into or cut up (intestinally) may see this as a viable alternative, especially if it has far, far fewer complications than bypass or gastric-banding.

~~

Another Rant on Kids and Junk Food... Just for Atara :)

A blogger named Atara--who has a lovely new baby, too, and a blog I've enjoyed perusing this AM--asked the following in a previous post of mine about junk food and kids:

OK, I'm just curious because I have a 3 month old. If I never bring the junk in the house, will he still want it? In other words, do they just get used to eating it? Is that it?

Well, I'm not a mom and never have been. I posted--er, vented may be a better word--because I keep reading about the obesity increase in kids, the increase in diabetes, earlier-in-life atherosclerosis, etc, and I've observed how very many kids are allowed to just snack and feast on all sorts of crap from morning till night--sugary sodas with meals, candy between meals, allowed to skip veggies but have white bread, etc.

Lyn made a great point in the comments section of that post: Kids, when they are older and are mobile and have friends who share, will get junk. Unavoidable. Kids like sweet. Kids like fast food. Humans like salty, sweet, fatty. We just do.

The thing is that just like parents try to instill all sorts of "against natural desires" behaviors in kids (ie, don't just jump in and have sex when you get those first stirrings, don't cheat on a test just cause you can and everyone else does, don't be a bully just cause you're bigger and stronger and faster and power is fun, don't blow off school when you're bored, don't shoplift if you can't afford that pretty necklace cause stealing is wrong, etc), what cuisine/foods/tastes a kid has is partially (if not fundamentally) set in the home. I love bean soup, avocado, olive oil on bread, and fresh fruit cause we ate those a lot (almost daily, except for avocados, those in season) as a kid. We ate beans about every day, and I can still eat beans about every day now, cause my taste buds adapted. But I also had candy and pizza and potato chips and Cheetos a lot, and that was NOT a good thing for my teeth or my weight. Daily crap is not good for anyone.

But especially not kids who are learning how to eat for life. What should be "sparingly" eaten is now routinely eaten. A factotum from Junk Food Wars:

Even though the Food Guide Pyramid suggests eating fats and sweets sparingly, the survey found that children consume more than three servings of these foods daily. Fatty goods such as French fries, desserts, potato chips and soft drinks have become staples rather than occasional treats.

And kids don't have to eat tons to gain weight, says the article. Two hundred extra daily calories than what is needed by a child's bodymeans a half-pound gain a week. 26 a year. That kid can be 100 pounds overweight in 4 years. Scary, huh? And how easy is it to eat 200 calories? A small pack of 4 Oreos will do it. A bag of chips goes over that (unless it's a very small bag). Half a slice extra of a meaty pizza. A candy bar will do that and more. An extra cup of sugary cereal. Eight Hershey's kisses. A 16 ounce glass of Coke (non-diet). Easy peasy to eat 200 calories too many.

I simply think that parents who don't want kids burdened with junk food habits and weight woes need to do what they can at home to develop from the earliest age a taste for fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and other "clean" and nutritious fare and show kids what normal portions are like. Two cups of rice is not a normal portion. A big fat heaping bowl of spaghetti is not a normal portion, and neither is 20 ounces of fruit juice (much less fruit drinks that are full of sugar and very little fruit).

Keeping the junk mostly out of the home and putting the emphasis on treating a sweet tooth with natural sweets created by God in their perfect form--an apple, grapes, an orange, strawberries, pineapple, lychees, plums, peaches, pears, kiwi, blueberries, etc. And to make sure they start eating a wide variety of veggies as soon as possible, so they can develop a taste for produce and not just go yuck at greens (or any other color veggie). It's simply part of teaching good habits, along with brushing and flossing and getting exercise in play (cause video games all afternoon long is hardly healthful, either).

What they do with what they learn at home when they're older and have access to Burger King and the Kwik Mart, what they do as adults out of your home...you cannot control. No parent can. (Though Madonna sure is giving it the best and most obssessive shot she can!)

Parents can control IN the home (except for creative sneaking of candy). What's in the fridge, in the pantry, on the table, and in the lunchbox. That is controllable. Mom or dad buy it and store it and cook it. They can control it.

Our society is too riddled with junk to have utter faith that kids won't sneak it, buy it with an allowance, get it from friends, have it at school. But if the foundation is laid not to indulge in it freely at home and to think of cookies and candies and cakes and sugary drinks as special-occasion treats that are NOT good for us, but that we can use for a limited purpose, that's a step in the right direction. Of course, if a kid develops a taste at home for healthier versions of junk, "redeemed" junk, as it were, cause mom and dad are willing to find alternatives to the high-fat, sugary crap, that's also good. Oatmeal cookies made less sweet and with whole grains, nuts with dark chocolate in modest portions, etc.

I was one of those kids whose eating was not at all monitored,except by the limitation of "this is what's there". Once the platters of food ran out on the table, well, that was the limitation. Or if the box of cookies finished. Or the bag of bread lay empty. But... if I wanted to fill a bowl with five cups of sugar-rich, artificially colored cereal (which I did) and dump in 3 cups of full fat milk (which I did), as a between meal snack, I did. If I wanted to dump 5 tablespoons of sugar in my oatmeal, I could. If I wanted to drink the whole jug of orange juice, I could. And nobody said anything to indicate that I was out of control or doing something that was unhealthful. Not till I got older and did get fat. But it takes all those steps to get there. It's not overnight.

I could eat whatever, whenever. And this is not a good system. For anyone at any time. I learned that I could eat until stuffed and I could eat sugar at will. How nuts is that? And especially not kids in the formative and "training" stages of life--from pureed foods to table manners training to first grade. And no kid should have total access to a pantry or fridge full of crap. How is that good nutritional sense?

To quote Obama's former pastor: The chickens have come home to roost...and they are breaded, fried, salted like the Dead Sea, and (until recently) utterly riddled with trans fats and come with an fatty, white-flour, salty biscuit on the side.

Fast food, easy "convenience foods", processed foods, junk foods, oversized portions, sugary supersized drinks, big candy bars....they have resulted in many kids considering the fattiest items at McDonalds and KFC and Pizza Hut what lunch and dinner are supposed to be. That a 32 ounce soda is a serving. That a giant muffin or humongo cookie is for one person at one sitting. That Doritos is a normal after school snack. Something's wrong with that.

I mean, come on--watermelon, fresh and chilled, really is so much better than cupcakes as a treat. Just not cheaper or easier to have on hand. A ripe mango has it all over artificially flavored jelly beans, even mango-flavored ones. The thing is that real food will cost more than processed crap, oftentimes. And fruit goes bad quickly, while convenience foods are...convenient, with long shelf lives. It's easy to eat bad. It takes a bit more effort--and maybe cash--to eat cleanly.

So, that rant--and this one--is out of my fear of the next generation being even fatter and and more riddled with diabetes and cursed with shorter life expectancies than today's because WE ALLOW and WE OFFER them junk instead of real, honest, fresh, wholesome food that they can develop a taste for. And they CAN develop a taste for all sorts. Just look at kids in cultures without fast food or candy shops. They eat what the parents eat--be it nuts, seeds, fruits, veggies, meats, etc.

Oh, and this study goes counter to idea that kids hate fruits and veggies. That article says this, emphasis mine:

Fewer than half of California’s children ages 2 to 11 eat the recommended amount of fruit and vegetable servings daily (5 or more servings), according to the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research. Further, almost 25 percent of them eat two or more servings of cookies, candy, donuts or popsicles every day.

Lack of proper nutrition contributes to certain health problems, such as the rising trend in childhood obesity. In California, one in three children is overweight or at risk of becoming overweight – far worse than the national average.

“While there has been a lot of research on barriers to childhood nutrition, this study dispels the myth that kids are predisposed to dislike healthy foods,” Perry said. “Now our challenge is to help parents find simple, affordable ways to prepare nutritious meals and snacks for their kids.”

Will they want junk anyway? Probably. But they can be trained to love good, healthful food, too, and that means they will crave that as well.

Sorry. It's a sore subject, I guess.

Y'all should just go look at Atara's cute baby, now. :)

~

Why Do We Give Kids Foods We Know Are Bad for Our Own Struggling Selves?

With the holiday season in full swing, I've been a bit concerned about how entrenched unhealthful foods are part of the gift-giving tradition. Fatty cakes. Butter-laden cookies. Sugary treats in huge portions in pretty cans and jars and boxes.

As people fighting the fight against fat, we know that cookies, candies, and cakes are things that ought to be RARE treats (or, in the cases of those with bad triggers, banned altogether or modified significantly into less-dangerous versions).

But what do I see, including from women and men as big as I am (or bigger)? People with kids...

They stuff them with candy, cookies and cakes. Not just once week or once a month, but regularly. And moreso in this holiday time.

With childhood obesity a major health concern (some call it an epidemic) in the US (and other nations), we really need to take a look at this. A good hard no-excuses sort of look.

Imagine if we had grown up with our parents more disciplined about what cereal we ate in the morning (no KABOOM or Cap'n Crunch, but whole grain and no sugar--fruit instead?). Imagine if a candy bar or pack of animal crackers was a special weekend treat, and not a regular afterschool yumsy, if the daily treat was apples and oranges and carrots with hummus or celery with Laughing Cow light or a whole grain role with peanut butter. Imagine if our parents stocked the pantry with stuff that was clean, nutritious, no to low-sugar, high fiber, and fresh.

Would we be where we are?

Maybe. :)

But I think we train kids to like what they like. I love fruit because my parents loved fruit and had plenty of it around and made smoothies before smoothies were a commonly enjoyed commodity around town. They used olive oil and vinegar, not bottled dressings. They offered us beans almost daily, so we were all bathroom regular.

But I was the one who grew up from age 2 in this country, so I got the junk cereals that were mostly sugar and refined grains. I got candy bars after school. Sno-cones daily in summer. Pocket money for potato chips and other crap.

Of all my siblings, I am the ONLY one who got superobese (or even obese, for that matter). My brothers and sisters, who grew up in another country, much more physically active and eating more natural foods and much less junk--they didn't develop the crazy food relationship I did. They didn't grow up with junk food commercials on television sending them off into cravings for Milky Ways and pizza and burgers and fries and Starburst and cupcakes and whatnot.

So, when I see someone, especially a parent with weight issues, struggling, on diets, struggling to lose, that same parent buy candy and cupcakes and sugary cereals for their kids, I wonder about the dissonance. Why give them the taste habits and food issues we have? Why not hand them pears and grape tomatoes and mango slices and low-fat string cheese and almonds and raspberries? Why not end the crazy food cycle NOW?

I've begged a particular family member not to inflict our curse on her own kids. She and I are both obese. She has two kids who are currently normal weight. When I see the kids fed crap, it hurts. When I see kids catered to (ie, they don't want to eat the wholesome fair, and just pick at, say, white bread and then rush to eat a handful of candy), I want to cry.

In 20 or 30 years, they'll be where we are. Oversized and health-impaired.

It frightens me, and I don't even have kids.

I, both my nieces and both my nephews are overweight to obese. (Three of us obese, one overweight.) Five out of five of us born in the sixties and seventies in the immediate family--all too big. I don't want the next generation to have this curse. I want them to radiate good health and love good, clean food and be active and be happy and live vibrantly.

If it's not good for us to eat, big as we are, then it's not good for kids to eat, especially in their formative years, when they need the BEST nutrition to build bones and spare teeth from decay and develop the strongest neuromuscular system.

Junk ain't for us. But junk ain't for kids, either.

Why do we not see that?

Maybe it's long past time to tax the hell out of junk foods and treats. How many cupcakes will a kid buy if they're 5 bucks each? How many candy bars if one uses up their whole allowance? I'd rather tax crap that does nothing for one's wellbeing and use that money to subsidize fruit and veggies, so they're more affordable for a family's budget.

I am vowing not to buy junk for the kids in my family anymore. (This will be sooo hard. Habits die hard.) And I'm gonna work hard to break the holiday junk-food giving tradition. I'll find alternatives--sugarless, low-fat, or just plain better treats--like dark chocolate (I've tasted excellent sugar-free varieties) or dried fruit or nuts.

I want the people I love to be healthy and live a long, long time. And I want to be healthy and live longer, too, so I can enjoy their company for years and years.


~

Dragonfire Factoid: Fat? Your Heart Will Attack Earlier and Your Pancreas Give Out Sooner!

A study of more than 111,000 people has shown that overweight people have heart attacks on average 12 years earlier than "normal weight" individuals. This makes obesity worse for the heart than smoking, according to this study...

Dr. Peter McCullough, lead author of the study published in The Journal of the American College of Cardiology, analyzed data from a nationwide U.S. registry of people hospitalized for heart attack and unstable angina, or chest pain, from 2001 to 2007. They were grouped according to their BMI (Body Mass Index). Here's how the numbers break down:

* The heaviest people were an average of 59 years old when they had their heart attacks (average weight 280 pounds).
* That compares to an average age of 75 for the lightest group (average weight 103 pounds). Those in the "normal weight" category averaged 71 years (average weight 142 pounds)
* The rate of diabetes was 17 per cent in the leanest group, and 49 per cent in the most obese.

--from Diet Blog's "Obese Have Heart Attacks 12 Years Earlier?"

Royal Fatfighting Tournament Tools: #4 The Pause that Empowers

After several good eating days, I had a setback at dinner Monday. I ate decently at breakfast. I ate well at lunch. I went to town at dinner. It was a slowly progressive binge.

So, I started reading A Cyberguide To Stop Overeating and Recover from Eating Disorders by Joanna Poppink, M.F.C.C.

As we all know by now, the only way to successfully lose weight and maintain the loss is to implement strategies from the start that bring new protections and better habits into our lives. Learning these strategies is easy for some, harder for others, but we all have to learn to eat differently and how to behave when we are tempted to return to old habits of overeating or bad eating.

In my case, even though I know I should at minimum STOP and CONSIDER what I am doing or am about to do, I didn't.

And I should have gotten the warning alarm the moment I woke up:

I slept badly. I felt tired from the moment I got up. So tired, so heavy in my bones, that I almost cancelled my Pilates session. I drooped. I ate and felt no pick-me-up from the coffee. I did breathing exercises. I talked positively to myself in the shower about having energy, being energetic, being UP.

It took all my strength to get through the Pilates session, and I couldn't do one of the exercises I had done in previous sessions (the side bend on the barrel). The oomph was gone by the time we got to it. I felt like crying. I was THIS near tears, because I felt like such a failure.

So...

1. I woke up tired from a bad night's sleep.
2. I felt massively disappointed by my exercise performance (despite my trainer's great reassurances that I did great and worked hard.)
3. I came home feeling even more drained.
4. Because I was tired, I burned hubby's dinner, which I let unduly upset me, and then I had to quickly think of an alternative.

I should have said, "Princess, you are having a bad day. What do you do when you have bad, tired, draining days. You eat. And then you eat some more. Time for a strategy, like a big bowl of a lite soup and extra water. Like a fiber drink to make your tummy feel expanded. Like a nap. Ask hubby for a massage. Something..."

I didn't stop and assess my feelings about my day. I just went with every impulse except one initial thought--I shot down the persistent urge to order a pizza. But after that, I went with the impulses, which were to lay on the couch between trips to the kitchen, where I had 2 huge bowls of arugula with tomato and Annie's Goddess dressing, a cup and a half of split pea soup, three ounces of asian pork tenderloin with a cup of fruity rice, a half cup of granola with non-fat milk, a single-serve organic cherry turnover-pie with coffee, and just barely manage to fight off a baked potato chips craving. That was the second time I fought off any eating cue.

Now, a year ago plus, I would have ordered that large pizza and garlic rolls and a Caesar salad, maybe some wings or fried zucchini. The very fact that I mostly had healthful stuff on hand is a testament to better food shopping choices. (That cherry pie, organic and single-serve--was in the freezer since February! I went and dug way in the back to find it.)

But it was still bad day, a setback, because I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW that I need to use the strategies, use the tools, and it starts with: SELAH. Pause and consider. Be aware. Self-examine. So I can choose better.

Had I taken 10 to 15 minutes to think and self-talk, I could have stopped after the first bowl of salad, the small piece of roasted pork tenderloin, and the fruited rice, and had a good night. It was the chain reaction, the thoughtless one that got me.

Hence, the tool of the pause for awareness. The tool of the awareness for a better selection of course(s) of action.

The Cyberguide I linked to above has exercises for overeaters (look at the links on that page and scroll to "Exercises to Avoid Overeating" in 10 parts).

I may have to create a chart for my fridge door. I had intended to print out a STOP AND THINK poster for it, and this is something for me to do TOMORROW!

I'm gonna have bad days--little sleep, low energy, depressive episodes. I need to get the tools ingrained to handle them.

Have you used the pause/self-examination to stop binges? Are they habits yet?

I'm working on it.

~~

Wanna Volunteer for a "Virtual" Obesity Study?

The Texas Obesity Research center at the University of Houston is launching an international effort to find 500 participants for a study promoting healthy dietary habits and physical activity that will be conducted entirely in the virtual world of Second Life. For more information, participants can instant message Sirina Felisimo or Samu Sirnah in Second Life or call the center at (713) 743-9310.

--from
"Fat people get online chance to lose weight"

Dragonfire Factoid: Being Fat = Dying Younger

Look around you at the bodies of the extremely old - when was the last time you recall seeing an obese centenarian? Excess fat held over the years is a killer, and the oldest people are very rarely overweight.

--from The Methuselah Foundation's "There Are Old People and Fat People, But Few Old Fat People"

~~

So Sad, So True

This hasn't been just my experience, but that of most of the folks I know who have weight issues:



Then the "after-after" turns into the "before" and the "after" is less slim than the original after, rinse, repeat.

Which is why I'm not even thinking of fast loss. I keep telling myself--even if it's 1/4th of a pound a week, fine. Just eat smarter and move more, and start building good habits, bit by bit.

Lose fast, regain fast, has been my story. I want a different story.

hat tip to Diet Blog for the drawing.

Tyranny of Skinny Ideal

I had a really "feel good" day yesterday, despite only sleeping 5 hours. (I only got five last night, too, cause I was up till 4 am doing some work.) I had energy like I hadn't had in a long while, and I felt...vivid! I decided my mood needed something vibrant, so I washed and straightened my hair into a glossy waterfall, painted my toenails an orange-red, and put on my summeriest lipstick--Manhunt, which looks orangey-red on me, though I already got my man--with some Lychee Luxe lipglass on top for extra shine. I felt glowy.

My Pilates teacher said she noticed I was walking differently, looked brighter, and seemed slimmer.

Heh.

So, on with the tortuous, but satisfying workout. During a point where my trainer was adjusting some springs on the Reformer, I looked over to the corner with the ladder barrel, where an impossibly slender and tall creature of blessed looks (must be another model, I swear) was leaning on the barrel, pushing disgustingly at the non-existent fat on her thighs. I kid you not. This gal only had the amount of fat humans need to live and no more. But her face in that mirror was disapproving.

What was she disgusted with?

You know how when you sit there is that downward pressure that makes your body spread a bit. It's normal. Has to happen. Gravity, weight, pressure--it's impossible not to have SOME thigh spread when you lean your weight back on your lower body, pressing against leather. Flesh gives.

Well, she judged herself so harshly for being human.

Mind you, she was a very pretty, very very thin, very tall human with legs a couple miles long. Most women would give a few toes and fingers and maybe an ear to have her figure.

She judged herself nonetheless.

How crazy is that?

I look in the mirror at the gym and feel horror, but I'm misshapen from an assortment of ills and bad habits. That gal was not. She should have been reveling in her near-perfection.

I think one day she'll be 68 and look at a photo of herself at this age (20's) and think, "Geesh. I was a hottie. I was SKINNY. Why the hell did I think something was wrong with me?"

I know I look at pics of myself in high school, when I felt so very ugly and chubby, and I think, "Um, not THAT bad. I wish I was that weight now."

I was 135 at my lowest, mostly around 139. Magazines told me I should be 120, 123 tops. I remember that number: 123. It was the Holy Grail back then for me in th 70's. I did yoga. I biked. I never got below 135. I hated, loathed, hated my body for it.

Unless I get some wasting disease or an eating disorder, I'll never be under 135. And now, I'll be happy to be under 200, and delirious to be under 175.

Perspective. Changes everything.

I'm trying to enjoy what I can do now, even if the mirror sometimes scares me. I woke up today and didn't toss on some baggy cotton tee. I treated myself with care. I put on a sexy black plunging v-neck tank top and decided to start being kinder to the me in the mirror, while I work harder at becoming healthier.

Cause, you know, I ain't getting yesterday back, or this last minute I spent typing here. Or my high school weight (realistically.)

And sometimes, when I was in the moment, I had such a warped attitude and judged myself harshly because some stupid ass magazines and charts said the right number was 123 or less. I berated myself. I was cruel to ME.

Internally, in my mind, in my spirit, I became my own enemy.

That fresh, slim, flexible, fit young woman at the studio was, for that moment, in that mirror, her enemy.

And it made me sad.

She's missing this moment, this moment when God blessed her with beauty and health and a body that fits the social ideal so perfectly. She is at a peak--and she's letting it get away in those moments of self-disgust and self-judging.

I'm too old (maybe a bit mature) to have felt spasms of envy (as I might have 10 years ago). A sense of regret at never having known what it felt like to be like THAT, yes, but nothing dark.

I felt mad, too, that we impose such harsh expectations on women. Damn.

So, I should treat this me that I am now with some mercy, cause when I'm 68, I might look back in a pic and think, "I wasn't as horrible as I thought," and I might wish to be this age again.

The Biggest Loser: New Season Nears

We're officially in September!

That means that soon we'll be treated to the next bout of fat folks like us competing to lose weight and win a quarter of a million bucks. The premiere of THE BIGGEST LOSER, season four, is on September 11th at 8 pm. That's a Tuesday, and it's on NBC.

But, what comes before interests me even more. On September 4th, NBC will air a "Where Are They Now?" special that visits with some past THE BIGGEST LOSER contestants. I can't wait for that one. I know that ever since I saw season one, I've wondered, "Hey, did they keep it off?"

I'm obviously not alone in wondering about the progress of contestants and winners...

TIME magazine had interest. They ran an update a couple months ago--I posted about it here on this blog--on the winner of the first season, Ryan Benson. Sadly, he had regained most of the weight. Bummer. Such hard work...poof! Gone. I wish him well in his continuing struggle with weight. Maybe by now he's lost some. TIME let us know that Kelly Minner continued to do well, staying slim. Go, Kelly!

PEOPLE magazine had interest, too. They featured a couple who met on the program: Matt and Suzy. They later wed and had a baby--YAY!--and they're still struggling with those pounds. They regained some, clearly, but not most. So, they're still ahead and I know they'll keep at it. I'm happy for them. They make a darling couple. I had been rooting for Suzy to win that second season. She married the winner. That's not bad, huh?

Celebrity Diet Doctor is interested. That site reported on Matt and Suzy (above) and on the delightful Dr. Jeff (one of my very fave contestants ever on the show). Dr. Jeff has done OUTSTANDINGLY and he looks hot! I'm so happy, cause he's a terrific person. Don't you just love to see a guy madly in love with his own wife? He would weep about his wife and kids. Nice fella. And now, great example. That site also reports on Andrea Baptiste, who looks terrific! She kept it off.

The pathetic stats on keeping weight off make the "Where Are They Now?" show one that many of the "Big" viewers will want to see. I suspect there will be more "kept it off" stories than "gained it back" stories. I hope they give stats on how everyone has done, ie. percentage who kept it off or lost more and percentage who regained most or all. That's a reality check we need. The successes cheer us on and encourage us. If they can do it...WE CAN! The ones who didn't keep it up remind us how very, very, very hard it is to lose and keep it gone. They're the cautionary note that must keep sounding in our ears, not to drown out the success and positive outlooks, but to give us a healthy dose of fear. To keep us on guard. Aware.

If they can regain it, even with all those weeks of nutritional monitoring and counseling and challenges...well...

I want to be one of the winners. I know you do, too.

One more thing: I'm happy to report, Jillian will be back for this season. While I liked Bob best in the first season. (What can I say? I prefer the gentle approach.) Jillian certainly GETS RESULTS. :)

I'll be watching. Will you?

Note: If you'd like to try out to be one of their future contestants, they've got a casting call out.

Dragonfire Factoid: Fat Friendships

Much like a virus, obesity can spread from person to person, according to a new study published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine. When one person gained weight, their close friends tended to gain weight also. Having a friend who was obese would increase your likelihood of becoming obese by 57 %. Having a neighbor who gained weight had no effect and having a family member who gained weight had less of an effect than a friend who gained weight.

--from Study: Obese Friends Could Make You Fat

DragonFire Factoid: US #1 Fattest Nation

America is the fattest nation in the world — the numbers are shocking. According to 2005 government statistics, 66 percent of Americans are overweight, 31 percent are obese, and 5 percent are super-obese. And growing — the number of obese adults has doubled in the last 20 years.

--Holly G. Atkinson, M.D. in "Eating a Healthful Diet"

When Princesses Are Morbidly Obese... And Princes, too!

I, Princess Dieter, am morbidly obese. That means that I have a lot, lot, lot, LOT of weight to lose. The official definition for morbid obesity is as follows:

a BMI of 35 kg/m2 or greater with severe obesity-related co-morbidity or BMI of 40 kg/m2 or greater without co-morbidity [1]. Superobesity is defined as a body weight exceeding IBW by 225% or more, or a BMI of 50 kg/m2 or greater.

If that's gobbledygook to you, allow me to wave this magic wand I borrowed from the Slenderize Me Fairy--thinnityskinnityshoo!--and translate: If you're more than 100 pounds over your ideal weight or your body mass index is more than 40, you're morbidly obese. If your BMI is 50 or more, you're morbidly superobese. That's depression.

Princess Dieter has a BMI of 47. Morbidly obese. (I do not like the sound of that. Do you?)

Calculate your BMI by going HERE.

If you're curious about that Ideal Body Weight (IBW) thing, try THIS SITE. According to them, I am large-frame (ie, my fingers don't meet around the smallest part of my wrist, with a gap of about an inch). But I clicked both large and medium frame to see what values came up.

If Princess Dieter were medium frame (ie, my fingers barely meet around my wrist) : Ideal weight range is 142 - 156.2 lbs. (64.5 - 71 kg.).You are overweight by 132.8 lbs. (60 kg.).

If I am large frame (which is likely, I've never been remotely considered petite in structure--being wide-hipped and broad-shouldered and not-tiny in the feet, either, even when I was normal weight) : Ideal weight range is 152 - 167.2 lbs. (69.1 - 76 kg.).You are overweight by 121.8 lbs. (55 kg.).

Notice something about those numbers?

They're SANE!

They're not crazy, Hollywood, catwalk anorexic size 2 figures. The complete range (ie, taking the medium frame low and the large frame high) would be 142 to 167 pounds. That's not skinny by a long shot. And yet, 145 was a comfortable weight for me when I was in my late teens and early twenties. That is to say, I was active, flexible, and looked normal, though not slim. I was a size 12/13 back then, and while I wished I was one of the thin gals, that actually was a pretty good size for me in terms of activity and health.

Taking into account the large frame range, I'm aiming for 160. The upper end, sure, but still, that's a number I haven't seen on my scale since the mid-80's. It would be like turning the clock back about 20 years.

I can live with that? :)

So, my current weight? 289. A simple bit of arithmetic gives me the amount of weight I aim to lose: 289 - 160 = 129.

Ouch! I feel the pain. But then, so do my feet and knees and back and general self-esteem.

Did you figure out your ideal body weight? Did you calculate your BMI? Wanna share it here and put down your number, the amount you wish to lose?

The story begins...at 289 pounds and a 47 BMI on Tuesday, May 8, 2007.

When does your story begin and how long is that road in terms of pounds?

Come on. Give yourself a fairy tale name if you prefer anonymity, and join me. How about one of these:

Duchess Dieter
Marquesa Makeover
Contessa Calorie Counter
Lady Living Healthy
Dame Dieting
Princess Willpower
Countess Cooking Light
Princess Portion Control
Queen Low-Cal

If you're a gentleman, you can join in, too. Pick a name:

Prince Power Smoothie
Duke Dieter
Count Calorie Slasher
Marquess of Leansberry
Earl of Exercise
Sir Fresh Produce
King Calorie Killer


Make up your own monikers. Have fun. Start the journey off with a tiara or a crown or a satin sash--and a smile!

:::waving borrowed wand for a happy beginning to everyone:::