Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Crap, crap, crap

Well, numbers don't lie. I thought I'd been doing really, really well this week, but my activity level was much lower than I thought. I only burned 367 calories per day, and ate an average of 1234 [how cool is that? 1-2-3-4] calories per day. That combo resulted in yet another one-pound gain. I'm still nine pounds heavier than the lowest weight I was able to achieve last year. Bummer!

I've been following the half-marathon training program perfectly, but only added two short weight-training workouts and only 40 minutes of additional intentional exercise all week. I guess my body is getting used to running on the treadmill for extended periods of time at 4.3 mph. I wish my head would get used to it. Mind. Over. Matter.

I'll be so glad when I can get back outside again. We could use some Global Warming here in the Middle of Nowhere! [Now don't go getting all huffy and righteous on me. I watched An Inconvenient Truth. I read the papers and watch the news. I know there's a real problem. I'm trying to be funny!] The dogs don't even stay out longer than necessary.

I wimped out last night and cancelled the drawing class at the prison. We can extend the session a week so they don't miss any of the work, but I felt a little guilty staying home just because it was cold. But it was cold! The high temperature hit 21, and it's only 2 – or should I say TWO – right now. It should be warmer – hah! – today, and I've been invited to attend a Creative Community Task Force meeting tonight. I won't be wimping out on that. Unless it snows. The prediction is for two to five inches. How's that for precise?

Like Rosanna Rosannadanna said: "It's always something."

I bet you're tired of reading blogger weather reports, aren't you?

Last week when I reported a one-pound gain, Dee suggested eating 1500 calories per day. Then the eDiets nutritional support team asked me how much cardiovascular activity I was doing. For the month of January I averaged five hours per week. They suggested my calories should be in the range of 1600 to 1700 per day.

I know all about starvation mode and how your body supposedly won't release weight because it's afraid you're not going to feed it. But I just canNOT wrap my head around these theories. Logically and realistically it all has to come down to creating a calorie deficit. What these theories don't account for is the individual's age – I'm 55. Metabolism slows and slows and s-l-o-w-s the older you get. Most people eat less as they age to maintain a healthy weight.

But I sent a note to the nutritional support team yesterday, surrendering. They're going to revamp my menu plan and I'll try it for a month. I've a feeling I'm going to get fatter rather than thinner, though. But I'm not going to quit running, so as long as I don't break an ankle I'll at least be fit and fat.

Oh, and did I mention, "Crap, crap, crap?"

Eighty-one days until race day.

6 comments:

Jack Sprat said...

Debbi:

No doubt about it, it sucks to gain weight. Especially when you've been working so hard lately!

I don't know what to make of the "starvation mode" theory because your supposition would seem to be right ... a calorie deficit is a calorie deficit. I wonder if there's any sound science on the subject??

At any rate, hang in there!!!

-J

barbra said...

I agree with Jack!!!

Vickie said...

http://www.stormpc.com/ww/wendie_plan.htm

you've probably read this already - as it is very old - but just in case - here is the link.

Vickie said...

http://www.skinnydailypost.com/archives/2003_05_03_skinnydaily_archive.html#000196

you might like this one too (if you haven't seen it already).

Vickie said...

The other person that went through this and then went on to loose is Hilly (snackiepoo at gmail dot com).

I think that she was "stuck" for a couple years - WW - and then switched plans totally (like maybe Jenny C) and then started loosing again.

Didn't know if you ever read her. so, I thought I would mention it - NOT suggesting that you switch food plans - just thought you might be interested in the info . . .

http://www.snackiepoo.com/

Farah said...

Hey there...I've never commented before but I've been reading Shrinking Knitter for a few months now. I hear what you're saying about metabolism slowing with age and creating a deficit to account for that, but with a training program like yours, it seems like 1234 (that IS cool) wouldn't be enough calories to cause weight loss. If eating more every day makes you nervous or hasn't worked in the past, have you thought about a sort of cycling? For example, you could eat 1700-1800 or higher one day and then back down to 1200-1300 the next day and then back up? It wouldn't be higher calorie every day, but perhaps it would kick-start your metabolism enough to start the weight loss? I've read a lot about this in the past, but I'm by no means an expert.

It just doesn't seem fair that you aren't losing with all the work you're doing. But I know going down the 'fair' road isn't very productive. I'm trying to lose weight right now, and I'm married to a man that is 6'2" and weighs 167....couldn't gain if he tried. So I try to stay off the 'it's not fair road'. But still, I feel for you!!

Farah in CO.