Not losing. Please help me.

Nobody can say I'm not trying! Here is what I ate in the last few
days. Am I eating healthy? Not much physical activity, and not much
stool in the last few days either. I'm going for an-hour walk right
now. I need to move it.

DAY 1 (182 pounds)

BREAKFAST

Apples, 2
Psyllium

LUNCH

Sunflower seeds
Coffee

DINNER

Brocoli, carrot, cowliflower
Salmon, 1 can
Brown rice, 1 cup
Sunflower seeds
====================

DAY 2 (182)

Strawberries, 6
Apples, 2

Figues (700 calories)
Walnuts, 1/4 cup
Coffee

Homemade veggie mix (One tomatoe,
red pepper, one carott, romaine lettuce)
Cowliflower
Sweet potatoe
Almonds, 10
Brown rice, 1 cup

==============================

DAY 3 (182)

Pears, 2
Banana
Avocados, 2

Psyllium
Prunes, 15

Salmon, 1 can
Romaine lettuce
Sunflower seeds

===================================

DAY 4 (182)

Strawberries, 5
Figues (800 calories)
Banana, 1
Pear, 1

Avocado, 1
Coffee
Tuna, 1 can
Parboil rice, 1 cup
Sunflower seeds
Peas in can, 1

Mineral water
Tomatoe, 2
Parboil rice, 1 cup
Sweet potato

On Apr 14, 10:09 pm, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
<mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Nobody can say I'm not trying! Here is what I ate in the last few
> days. Am I eating healthy? Not much physical activity, and not much
> stool in the last few days either. I'm going for an-hour walk right
> now. I need to move it.
>
> DAY 1 (182 pounds)
>
> BREAKFAST
>
> Apples, 2
> Psyllium
>
> LUNCH
>
> Sunflower seeds
> Coffee
>
> DINNER
>
> Brocoli, carrot, cowliflower
> Salmon, 1 can
> Brown rice, 1 cup
> Sunflower seeds
> ====================
>
> DAY 2 (182)
>
> Strawberries, 6
> Apples, 2
>
> Figues (700 calories)
> Walnuts, 1/4 cup
> Coffee
>
> Homemade veggie mix (One tomatoe,
> red pepper, one carott, romaine lettuce)
> Cowliflower
> Sweet potatoe
> Almonds, 10
> Brown rice, 1 cup
>
> ==============================
>
> DAY 3 (182)
>
> Pears, 2
> Banana
> Avocados, 2
>
> Psyllium
> Prunes, 15
>
> Salmon, 1 can
> Romaine lettuce
> Sunflower seeds
>
> ===================================
>
> DAY 4 (182)
>
> Strawberries, 5
> Figues (800 calories)
> Banana, 1
> Pear, 1
>
> Avocado, 1
> Coffee
> Tuna, 1 can
> Parboil rice, 1 cup
> Sunflower seeds
> Peas in can, 1
>
> Mineral water
> Tomatoe, 2
> Parboil rice, 1 cup
> Sweet potato

Give it time, and really up the fluid levels. Try to drink at least 2
quarts (liters) of non-caloric fluid every day, especially to help the
system move those nasty unmentionables along the path and out your
body.

Personally, I found my weight didn't start moving much until about 3
days after drastically cutting my calorie intake. After that, it
started falling off.

Are you coming from a trend of weight gain, or stability? If you're
coming from a gain, you might be cutting calories just enough to
balance. Even if you're coming from stability, the calorie deficit
you're at could still be small enough to be unnoticeable on your
particular scale (I notice you gave your weight to the pound).
Remember, the weight in food, water, and air you're moving through
your body every single day is a whole order of magnitude (or two!)
larger than the weight difference each day. This creates a lot of
signal noise.

Rest assured, if you're eating less calories than your body burns, you
WILL lose weight. Just try to stick to your numbers (don't obsess
over calories, but at least pick a number and try to hit it to within
100 calories each day).


Oh, and if you're having a little problem on the toilet, you might
consider adding a fiber supplement. A diet can be a particularly
stressful event for your GI tract, and a little extra fiber can't hurt
you. It's not a big pain to add a little to a glass of water in the
morning and pound it down. Trust me, the prospects of developing
diverticulitis and having to deal with it (personally, my brother is
actually afflicted by this, and blames Atkin's. Not sure if that's an
accurate cause, but it IS disconcerting) is NOT worth the convenience
of avoiding a little task in the morning.


STICK IN THERE!

Oh, and you might want to crunch the numbers on all the fruit you're
eating. Fruit, despite being considered quite healthy (and quite
tasty!) packs a good number of calories, because it's sugary.

<mikesmith9999@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a0b5f5c2-1516-46db-8b94-91501f7c10d9@1g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Nobody can say I'm not trying! Here is what I ate in the last few
> days. Am I eating healthy? Not much physical activity, and not much
> stool in the last few days either. I'm going for an-hour walk right
> now. I need to move it.
>
> DAY 1 (182 pounds)
>
(snip)

If you aren't doing much physical, then you probably only burn like 2000
calories more or less. So it is hard to have enough deficit to cause
rapid loss. Have you been losing up until now? Or are you just starting
out. If you have been losing for awhile, staying at the same weight for
several days or even longer is not uncommon.

del

Thanks for everyone's help. REALLY appreciated. The weight has been
fluctuating between 180 and 184 in the last 11 days.

I started keeping tracker of my weight and all the food I eat since
September 28, 2007. I started at a time when I was eating a lot of
bread, pizza, cookies, sandwiches and the like. I started at 191
pounds and quickly reached 182 pounds. I lost 9 pounds in 12 days. It
has been a roller coaster since then. The weight has been fluctuating
from 174 to 185. At one point I went from 182 to 174 pounds (8 pounds)
in 9 days. I'll post a link to the chart tomorrow to give you a better
idea of the fluctuation.

Now I'm looking at the chart I made two or three years ago. Boy, I
reached 168 and kept the weight between 170 and 173 for several weeks.
I thought I had made it, but I lost my way ever after that. I'm
realizing now that I was eating really differently back then. I was
starting my day with 500 ml of prune juice and had walnuts, brown
rice, vitamine C as supplement, and whole almonds. I may have to come
back to that.

On Apr 14, 7:09*pm, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
<mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Nobody can say I'm not trying! Here is what I ate in the last few
> days. Am I eating healthy? Not much physical activity, and not much
> stool in the last few days either. I'm going for an-hour walk right
> now. I need to move it.
>
> DAY 1 (182 pounds)
>
> BREAKFAST
>
> Apples, 2
> Psyllium
>
> LUNCH
>
> Sunflower seeds
> Coffee
>
> DINNER
>
> Brocoli, carrot, cowliflower
> Salmon, 1 can
> Brown rice, 1 cup
> Sunflower seeds
> ====================
>
> DAY 2 (182)
>
> Strawberries, 6
> Apples, 2
>
> Figues (700 calories)
> Walnuts, 1/4 cup
> Coffee
>
> Homemade veggie mix (One tomatoe,
> red pepper, one carott, romaine lettuce)
> Cowliflower
> Sweet potatoe
> Almonds, 10
> Brown rice, 1 cup
>
> ==============================
>
> DAY 3 (182)
>
> Pears, 2
> Banana
> Avocados, 2
>
> Psyllium
> Prunes, 15
>
> Salmon, 1 can
> Romaine lettuce
> Sunflower seeds
>
> ===================================
>
> DAY 4 (182)
>
> Strawberries, 5
> Figues (800 calories)
> Banana, 1
> Pear, 1
>
> Avocado, 1
> Coffee
> Tuna, 1 can
> Parboil rice, 1 cup
> Sunflower seeds
> Peas in can, 1
>
> Mineral water
> Tomatoe, 2
> Parboil rice, 1 cup
> Sweet potato

It does look like this should allow you to lose wt. Nuts are very high
fat and calories though. A cup of walnuts is about 800 calories, 700
of which is fat. Sunflower seeds are also very high fat. I personally
never eat nuts and Dr. Ornish in his low-fat diet does not recommend
them either. Avocados are also high fat, and you could pick a
different fruit. I always look for the fat if someone isn't losing wt,
cause that's where the concentrated calories are. You got plenty of
protein and fat without them with the salmon, tuna, brown rice, etc.
If you were to substitute a high fiber, low-cal food like green
beans, you could eat a lot more by weight. A quarter cup of walnuts is
equivalent in calories to about 3 cans of green beans. You wouldn't
need to take the fiber either. Still, your diet looks reasonable to me
and I can't understand why you wouldn't be losing wt. with this. I eat
much more in terms of weight of food and calories, but not fat of
course and I weigh 138. Maybe it will just take more time. dkw

I'll keep the "fat factor" in mind. I did buy fresh green beans
yesterday. I will steam them this morning. This morning I weight
181. Hopefully it's the begining...

"mikesmith9...@hotmail.com" <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for everyone's help. REALLY appreciated. The weight has been
> fluctuating between 180 and 184 in the last 11 days.

A bit of advice from Dr Atkins that really applies to all dieters -

A stall is 4+ weeks without a new low, without a lost inch,
without a cheat.

It says that size matters and that's easy to miss when staring
at the scale reading. But water, fat and crap all respond to
gravity. Water and crap once lost can no longer get lower but
they can get higher again. That makes the scale reading noisey.

The time scale is not arbitrary. Like it or not, because of factors
like the scale bounce you have been seeing the time scale for
fat loss is month to month not day to day or week to week.
There has probably not been a single dieter in history happy
with this fact, but disliking a fact does not magically convert it
to fiction.

Eleven days is TOO SHORT a time to conclude that anything is
wrong with your loss rate, though it is plenty long to not have
bowel move. But you mentioned "not much stool" and there is
nothing wrong with being empty as long as you aren't plugged.

> I started at 191
> pounds and quickly reached 182 pounds. I lost 9 pounds in 12 days.

Initial water loss. Not to be confused with fat loss.

> It has been a roller coaster since then.

In other words you don't understand the concept of signal
noise in an instrument reading. Check. There are articles
about "Why the Scale Lies" that you should read. If you
weigh daily it is extremely important you average over at
least a week to have any sort of number with meaning.

> The weight has been fluctuating
> from 174 to 185. At one point I went from 182 to 174 pounds (8 pounds)
> in 9 days. I'll post a link to the chart tomorrow to give you a better
> idea of the fluctuation.

BTDTgtTS. My water retention bounce is also 6+ pounds.
If my readings are within 6 pounds of each other, that means
I have neither gained nor lost fat or lean. And I'm not here to
lose water.

> Now I'm looking at the chart I made two or three years ago. Boy, I
> reached 168 and kept the weight between 170 and 173 for several weeks.
> I thought I had made it, but I lost my way ever after that. I'm
> realizing now that I was eating really differently back then. I was
> starting my day with 500 ml of prune juice and had walnuts, brown
> rice, vitamine C as supplement, and whole almonds. I may have to come
> back to that.

If that worked without hunger then you should do that.

"But you mentioned "not much stool" and there is
nothing wrong with being empty as long as you aren't plugged. "

How can I know which one I am?

<mikesmith9999@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3b02c72a-a122-4406-8b1e-6f684011f166@1g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> I'll keep the "fat factor" in mind. I did buy fresh green beans
> yesterday. I will steam them this morning. This morning I weight
> 181. Hopefully it's the begining...

read up on the "hacker's diet". It has a lot of good information.

On Apr 15, 7:50 pm, "Del Cecchi" <delcecchioftheno...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:3b02c72a-a122-4406-8b1e-6f684011f166@1g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > I'll keep the "fat factor" in mind. I did buy freshgreenbeans
> > yesterday. I will steam them this morning. This morning I weight
> > 181. Hopefully it's the begining...
>
> read up on the "hacker's diet". It has a lot of good information.

In fact, here's the direct link. It explains the problem with signal
noise very well, and even has a lot of utilities online to assist your
dieting. I personally use and love it.

http://www.fourmilab.ch/hackdiet/

"mikesmith9...@hotmail.com" <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
> > But you mentioned "not much stool" and there is
> > nothing wrong with being empty as long as you aren't plugged.
>
> How can I know which one I am?

Folks with a prior history of being plugged tend to know
based on that experience. You can feel it building up
but it won't come out. And when it does it's like passing
a brick. Folks with no prior experience of being plugged
tend to think that constipation is not going in longer than
you're used to.

Dieting can easily lead to having less roughage and so
less volume. Being empty isn't a problem; it's just
different from what you're used to.

Going but having a lot less volume than usual means
you aren't plugged. How's it getting out if it isn't plugged?
This seems a weak argument but it's enough to convince
me. I'm sure someone will have experienced being
partially plugged so it builds up faster than it's coming
out but it just doesn't seem likely to me. Going but less
volume to me says not plugged.

If you want to know for certain you could conduct an
experiment, but I don't think there's any need at this
point. As long as you haven't taken any harsh medical
laxative recently (a month or two) go for dosing yourself
with ExLax and see how much comes out. If very little
does then you were empty and there was no issue. If a
lot comes out then you were plugged and there's no
longer an issue. Not a great experiment to conduct more
often than annually as I don't think it's a good idea to
take a laxative unless you think you're plugged.

On 16 avr, 11:49, Doug Freyburger <dfrey...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com" <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
> > > But you mentioned "not much stool" and there is
> > > nothing wrong with being empty as long as you aren't plugged.
>
> > How can I know which one I am?
>
> Folks with a prior history of being plugged tend to know
> based on that experience. *You can feel it building up
> but it won't come out. *And when it does it's like passing
> a brick. *Folks with no prior experience of being plugged
> tend to think that constipation is not going in longer than
> you're used to.
>
> Dieting can easily lead to having less roughage and so
> less volume. *Being empty isn't a problem; it's just
> different from what you're used to.
>
> Going but having a lot less volume than usual means
> you aren't plugged. *How's it getting out if it isn't plugged?
> This seems a weak argument but it's enough to convince
> me. *I'm sure someone will have experienced being
> partially plugged so it builds up faster than it's coming
> out but it just doesn't seem likely to me. *Going but less
> volume to me says not plugged.
>
> If you want to know for certain you could conduct an
> experiment, but I don't think there's any need at this
> point. *As long as you haven't taken any harsh medical
> laxative recently (a month or two) go for dosing yourself
> with ExLax and see how much comes out. *If very little
> does then you were empty and there was no issue. *If a
> lot comes out then you were plugged and there's no
> longer an issue. *Not a great experiment to conduct more
> often than annually as I don't think it's a good idea to
> take a laxative unless you think you're plugged.

According to what you're saying, I'm not plugged. I'm still going,
usually once a day, and the stool is not hard. I might try the Exlax
test. I'll tell you what "came out" of it.

On Apr 16, 11:09 am, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
<mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 16 avr, 11:49, Doug Freyburger <dfrey...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com" <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
> > > > But you mentioned "not much stool" and there is
> > > > nothing wrong with being empty as long as you aren't plugged.
>
> > > How can I know which one I am?
>
> > Folks with a prior history of being plugged tend to know
> > based on that experience. You can feel it building up
> > but it won't come out. And when it does it's like passing
> > a brick. Folks with no prior experience of being plugged
> > tend to think that constipation is not going in longer than
> > you're used to.
>
> > Dieting can easily lead to having less roughage and so
> > less volume. Being empty isn't a problem; it's just
> > different from what you're used to.
>
> > Going but having a lot less volume than usual means
> > you aren't plugged. How's it getting out if it isn't plugged?
> > This seems a weak argument but it's enough to convince
> > me. I'm sure someone will have experienced being
> > partially plugged so it builds up faster than it's coming
> > out but it just doesn't seem likely to me. Going but less
> > volume to me says not plugged.
>
> > If you want to know for certain you could conduct an
> > experiment, but I don't think there's any need at this
> > point. As long as you haven't taken any harsh medical
> > laxative recently (a month or two) go for dosing yourself
> > with ExLax and see how much comes out. If very little
> > does then you were empty and there was no issue. If a
> > lot comes out then you were plugged and there's no
> > longer an issue. Not a great experiment to conduct more
> > often than annually as I don't think it's a good idea to
> > take a laxative unless you think you're plugged.
>
> According to what you're saying, I'm not plugged. I'm still going,
> usually once a day, and the stool is not hard. I might try the Exlax
> test. I'll tell you what "came out" of it.

I'd suggest trying more fluids and more fiber before turning to a
laxative. A lot of the time it's just a problem of balance, rather
than something that need be solved with "help."

But either way, happy stooling!

On 15 avr, 11:36, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
<mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'll keep the "fat factor" in mind. I did buy fresh green beans
> yesterday. I will steam them this morning. This morning I weight
> 181. Hopefully it's the begining...

181 was two days ago. Yesterday I weight 180, and today I weight
178... I increased the water intake.

"mikesmith9...@hotmail.com" <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm still going, usually once a day, and the stool is not hard.

Therefore build up of crap is not your issue with loss.
Move on to the next issue.

> I might try the Exlax
> test. I'll tell you what "came out" of it.

Waste of time and effort at this point.

On Apr 17, 7:26*am, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
<mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 15 avr, 11:36, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
>
> <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I'll keep the "fat factor" in mind. I did buy fresh green beans
> > yesterday. I will steam them this morning. This morning I weight
> > 181. Hopefully it's the begining...
>
> 181 was two days ago. Yesterday I weight 180, and today I weight
> 178... I increased the water intake.

You seem to be eating a lot of stuff out of cans. Canned goods are
usually high in salt and that will keep you retaining water, and thus
weight. Try to eat the real thing instead of canned and see if that
helps. Fresh salmon and tuna taste much better than canned anyway!

Susan B.

On 17 avr, 20:33, sueb <siouxbe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 17, 7:26*am, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
>
> <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On 15 avr, 11:36, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
>
> > <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > I'll keep the "fat factor" in mind. I did buy fresh green beans
> > > yesterday. I will steam them this morning. This morning I weight
> > > 181. Hopefully it's the begining...
>
> > 181 was two days ago. Yesterday I weight 180, and today I weight
> > 178... I increased the water intake.
>
> You seem to be eating a lot of stuff out of cans. *Canned goods are
> usually high in salt and that will keep you retaining water, and thus
> weight. *Try to eat the real thing instead of canned and see if that
> helps. *Fresh salmon and tuna taste much better than canned anyway!
>
> Susan B.

Yeah, I guess it's a good idea. I used to buy frozen salmon, cut it in
five pieces, and cook one. It was really delicious. Thanks for
reminding me!

On Apr 17, 10:05 pm, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
<mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 17 avr, 20:33, sueb <siouxbe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 17, 7:26 am, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
>
> > <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 15 avr, 11:36, "mikesmith9...@hotmail.com"
>
> > > <mikesmith9...@hotmail.com> wrote:> > > I'll keep the "fat factor" in mind. I did buy freshgreenbeans
> > > > yesterday. I will steam them this morning. This morning I weight
> > > > 181. Hopefully it's the begining...
>
> > > 181 was two days ago. Yesterday I weight 180, and today I weight
> > > 178... I increased the water intake.
>
> > You seem to be eating a lot of stuff out of cans. Canned goods are
> > usually high in salt and that will keep you retaining water, and thus
> > weight. Try to eat the real thing instead of canned and see if that
> > helps. Fresh salmon and tuna taste much better than canned anyway!
>
> > Susan B.
>
> Yeah, I guess it's a good idea. I used to buy frozen salmon, cut it in
> five pieces, and cook one. It was really delicious. Thanks for
> reminding me!

Chicken is a really easy meal on the go, too. Just buy several
breasts at the store, cook them all (I like to use a little lemon
juice and paprika. chili powder is probably good too), and
refrigerate them. Then, it's a cinch to just pull a breast out, nuke
it, and chow down.


Nothing beats a good fillet of salmon, though. Especially when cooked
in tin foil with the skin. Mmmm, yummy! =)