Not sure why weight loss has slowed down to the speed of naught, but I'll keep on keepin' on. Have started exercising during lunchtime since I'm not eating anyway, and that is going marvelously well. Can't believe how great it feels, actually, so I'll stick with it while it works. And hopefully the weight will at least trickle off.
Husband and I went out to dinner last Saturday evening, to my favorite restaurant. I ate exactly what I wanted to, but I was moderate with the portions. Win! We had a long, long, hours long conversation about bodies—about the pressure I feel to have a certain body because that is all that is portrayed in the media. I'd really love to have a tight, flat little tummy. Will that happen, after bearing seven? I just don't foresee it. I could possibly lose that much weight, but at what sacrifice?
And why should I feel like I must? Why do I crave it so badly?
Interestingly, we ended up thinking I needed to go looking at new clothes, some that don't fit me quite so snugly. Some of my shirts, while they look okay when I'm standing, accentuate my rolls on my abdomen most unflatteringly when I sit. What if they were a little looser, and could drape over and camouflage the rolls? We went to Eddie Bauer and tried on a few shirts and pants in a bit larger size and found some things that actually look quite nice.
So I'm feeling, actually, okay[er] about myself. Why do I need to get down to a certain weight to be cute, to dress well, to feel happy about myself?
I'll continue. I'm doing well. But I'm also okay, right now, with me. I'll see where it leads.
For Angela, who recently found my blog: welcome! I'm glad you stumbled on it. I hope to see you around a lot. I wanted to address one thing in particular that you said: "Maybe your body doesn't like you skipping lunch and thinks you are starving it." For what it's worth, I don't believe in starvation mode. (That sounds funny, like it's Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy.) All the latest research I can find indicates to me that starvation mode is a lot harder to enter than we're made to believe, and that if I am, for instance, lifting weights and actively building/maintaining muscle while cutting calories (even below the 1000-calorie level) then my body realizes it isn't starvation, and just behaves as it should: expending more calories than it takes in, and losing weight. I think there is ample research on this, and I'm doing my own personal experiment on it, I suppose you could say. :) In months and months of doing 24-hour fasts, I never touched my metabolism, it continued to function perfectly. We're pretty resilient creatures.
Onward! Now, with clothes that fit better! (That's a new feature, darling.)
----------------
Now playing: Muse - Exogenesis: Symphony Part 1
via FoxyTunes
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thanks for replying to me in your post your thoughts. First could you explain a bit more when you mean you didn't touch your metabolism? As in you never felt a change etc?
ReplyDeleteI also can understand what you are saying about not believing in the whole idea of starvation mode but I can't get behind it 100% as i do agree we are resilient but at the same time we are primal and really not that far removed in the scale of life from our primitive ancestors. But what makes me think you may be right about starvation is I had gastric bypass almost a year and a half ago. I was 366 and am now 190-184 depending on scale, time of week, etc. I went from losing thirty lbs a month, twenty, lbs etc to just 1-3 a month in the last three months. though I have severly fallen off the wagon as far as excercise! I am trying to find my mojo again and really is there mojo? Or just to do it!! Anyway all those times my body was starved and I kept loosing I did have one plateau though and I had to increase my protein so maybe that was due to starvation mode??
Anyway in less then a year I lost 150 lbs (here is a peek at the years progression http://superchick2006.blogspot.com/2009/07/yes-i-am-posting-lot.html) and so maybe you are right. :D sorry to babble but it made me think.