The FastDay Forum

Did you all pass physics and chem? My Physics teacher disagreed with me on the topic of Time, and then again, about Electricity.

He said on my exam paper "Now that there's electricity pouring out of power points across the world what do you think you would do with it?" Hmmm.
It may be that my understanding of the laws of physics was so deep that I over-invented the wheel but I doubt it.

Which landed me in the world of sociology and my true passion, psychology.
I collect psychology abstracts the way other people collect recipes.

So, call me Professor Sandcastle if you wouldn't mind. I hereby accept the chair. So much psych research to digest, so much socio-physiology to review.
Let's do it! Let's foster the chair of Psycho-sensibilty. Let's summarise the science of human appetite and the history of diet. Let's invent a precis of the news on what we need to know. Let's do it!

Did you all pass physics and chem? My Physics teacher disagreed with me on the topic of Time, and then again, about Electricity.

He said on my exam paper "Now that there's electricity pouring out of power points across the world what do you think you would do with it?" Hmmm.
It may be that my understanding of the laws of physics was so deep that I over-invented the wheel but I doubt it.

Which landed me in the world of sociology and my true passion, psychology.
I collect psychology abstracts the way other people collect recipes.

So, call me Professor Sandcastle if you wouldn't mind. I hereby accept the chair. So much psych research to digest, so much socio-physiology to review.
Let's do it! Let's foster the chair of Psycho-sensibilty. Let's summarise the science of human appetite and the history of diet. Let's invent a precis of the news on what we need to know. Let's do it!

Yes I did and my Physics is pretty strong. I'll be interested in what you suggest. I'm sceptical about statements unless there's reasonable evidence. I know I'm taking a risk with 5:2, but I reckon it's a reasonable one. The NHS is sceptical about it, like I should be really, but it was easy to experiment on myself and discover none of the negatives the NHS warn about, while attaining an even better BMI than I've had for the last 20 years.

Like my OH and my dad, triff! I love a bit of scepticism too.
New Scientist (where I first read about 5:2) has a recent article re research on evolution and genetics of food preferences. The article is titled A Matter of Taste. OH is reading it now, so I await the pleasure.

My biochem sis in law is way sceptical of the intestinal bacteria set of findings: the astronaut poo transplant theory of gut flora transplants. But I still reckon there will be developments in that area. And I feel that the combo of research on bacteria, reactivity in the gut and serotonin research will shed light on weight management in humans.
Thus I take probiotics, eat yoghurt and use a relaxation CD as often as possible. What do you think?

I used to be doubtful re probiotics but too many NS articles to dismiss it. However I wonder how many live microbes get through the stomach from yoghurt, if there's even many in it to start with. So I'm now interested in prebiotics. I read about them online through a link here somewhere I think. I probably need to relax more and don't have a CD but I find the post exercise state rather pleasant and it seems like relaxation. I've not got to the NS article you mention. Something is puzzling me re 5:2. My weight is now constant as I want it to be but I feel I am taking in fewer calories than I did before I started. I only lost 8 lbs so my TDE should be almost same as before. I doubt I'm eating the extra 700 cals/day on feat days to make up. I don't subscribe to the idea that your body goes into starvation mode and makes better use of what you eat. I'm just as active and do all the same exercising I used to.

Some good person flagged these, frankly shocking, articles up elsewhere on the forum: methinks they should be compulsory reading for anyone trying to manage their weight!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/magaz ... d=all&_r=0
http://ajpregu.physiology.org/content/301/3/R581.long

Essentially, if you lose more than 10% of your body weight all sorts of biological messengers and switches get shifted so that, for example, you only use 130cals to do something that a body double (who has never lost weight) would use 200cals for. That's a heck of a difference and, in the extreme, implies to me that one's TDEE could now be set to 1300cals when one calculated it to be 2000cals!

I realise that this doesn't directly reflect your situation but it could be that you're dealing with yet another of those 'unknown unknowns', and the only way to work out your new TDEE is empirically!

All the best.

[Betsysgr8]

It seems to me that most of the studies done to measure body response to weight loss is done by having the participants consume a carb/low-fat diet. My question is: does the body respond differently when consuming low-carb/high-fat? or a more balanced carb/protein/fat diet?

I am consuming generally lower carb/protein/fat diet now and don't have the cravings that I've previously experienced when 'cutting' back. I too had fallen into the "carbs - good, fat - bad trap" and lost nothing, it was only when I ate when I was hungry and only half a portion (saved the other half for later if I was hungry or had at next meal) and moved a bit more (NEAT) that I lost 85 lbs. Changes in my personal life and 45 lbs has crept back over 7 years. This WoE and this forum has reminded me of what I was doing before that worked and was sustainable.

I am fond of my nascent world of psychobabble: eg, The Pigeon Dance as OH and I have nicknamed it.

Quite some years ago I remember a rather glum experiment being shown on Teev, of the diverse ways pigeons would bob, nod, hop and twist around in the belief that this would bring more seed into their food dishes. The sad thing was the food was programmed to be deposited in a random way.

So, I do acknowledge that many of my own hypotheses about weight gain and loss are a bit based on random self experimentation. I have always lost weight slowly, and I suppose gained it slowly too. I suspect my wine allowance decreases my weight loss these days...and I do love being out with my chorister friends and eating apace with the skinny ones...
Meanwhile I do draw huge inspiration from the mathematical logic of fasting. Less food, less often. I reckon that this must work over time. Even if my food intake has to be titrated/lessened and my quality of food increased. I'm enjoying my day off food fixes today.

Thanks Fatdog for the very helpful links. The NYT article is really interesting. Yesterday, a GP was on German TV who actually told the same. You can loose weight, but all the scientific stuides show it is nearly impossible to keep it off. He even argued that he does not recommend dieting at all anymore as the majority of patients end up with a higher weight in the long run.

Maybe for the German speakers of interest:
http://www1.wdr.de/mediathek/video/send ... rl101.html

Essentially, if you lose more than 10% of your body weight all sorts of biological messengers and switches get shifted so that, for example, you only use 130cals to do something that a body double (who has never lost weight) would use 200cals for.

This is very depressing. Plus, if heredity has anything to do with it my ancestors have all lived through hard times and obviously survived to breed. In my family we joke that come the famine we will survive while all the skinny people die.

Well sometimes our ideas of what to do are a bit out of whack.

Maybe depressing, but maybe more: sensible. I did a lot of Weight Watchers: years.
I even trained to become a leader, and they always said

no starving

But I did get hungry and in a way the fasting acknowledges the need to be a bit empty and just let it be. My social life is so enjoyable that I prefer not to worry all the time about points or cals/kgs.