Diet

[robby denning]

Successful Weight Managers Instinctively do This...

I was going to post on the next step, Stimulis Control, but ran across this blog from one of my favorite dieticians, Dorene Robinson of Beyonddiets.com. This is good stuff and is another sustainable behaviour that works:

"We’ve lost track of a structure around eating that had existed for generations. Your grandparents will confirm that until recently a simple structure to our eating activities was followed—and no one questioned or thought about it much.
We ate breakfast and dinner at home, and a lunch was packed to take to work. Meals were large enough that they provided the calories needed to fuel us until the next meal, without needing a snack. Snacking wasn’t the norm, and the vast majority of body weights were in the healthy range. An overweight child was unusual.
Those days—where there was a cultural norm around when we ate, and how much we ate—are long gone. Instead, it’s routine for people to skip breakfast or lunch, and graze throughout the day. That coupled with a food environment that offers almost anything hunger-driven-cravings bring to mind is a recipe for weight gain.
It’s pretty easy to know if you’re overeating when you eat three usual meals a day (properly sized to keep you going). On the other hand, when you’re skipping meals and grazing through the day it’s hard to know when you’ve surpassed your energy needs. That may be partly because your body signals—regarding hunger and satiety—are clearer when you feed yourself on a regular schedule in regular amounts.
Successful weight managers have instinctively put the basic 3-Meals-A-Day structure back in their lives. They might also have an afternoon snack, or a mid-morning and afternoon snack, but the key is that it’s a regular pattern of eating, and what they eat is planned (including snacks).
Implementing a 3-Meals-A-Day structure (and planned snacks as preferred) into your life will eliminate indiscriminate eating, reduce cravings, improve the quality of your diet, and will help you lose weight without counting a single calorie!
Structure gives you control, and control makes success seem easy.
All the best,
-Dorene"

There you go.

 

[tstowater]

Next, I am waiting.......you have my attention and I am sure others also.

 

[robby denning]

STEP FOUR: Stimulus Control

Been very busy with other Rokslide and business stuff, but I'm back. Thanks for participating everyone.

I've been teaching this stuff about 20 years and this next step has proven the most important for a big majority of clients we've helped AND most importantly, the data keeps confirming that successful weight managers (can't be significantly overweight and be as healthy as normal weight no matter how much you work out) practice this step regularly.

Stimulus Control (SC) is just a fancy phrase for controlling your food environment- keeping it free of "trigger foods".

We all learned about Pavlov's dog in high school. Remember him? Pavlov would feed the dog and turn on a lightbulb at the same time. After many times, this association between the light bulb and the food became a conditioned response. Light bulb would come on, and even with no food present, the dog would begin to exhibit hunger cues like increased saliva, excitement, etc. The light bulb became the cue for the food instead of the food itself.

What in tarnations does this have to do with us?

We operate the same way. We have all kinds of associations in our brains related to eating. If we are raised by a caring mother, who builds structure into our day with regular feeding and healthy food, and teaches us to pay attention to natural God-given hunger cues, these associations are usually pretty healthy. Example, it's noon, I ate a moderate breakfast 5 hours ago, it is time to eat both physiologically (body needs fuel) and emotionally (brain needs the pleasure of eating, the relaxation of sitting down for a meal), etc. I eat a moderate lunch and my body is satisfied for hours to come. Snacking isn't really needed and my ability to resist crappy temptations is strengthened as the body is satisfied.

For thousands of years, this pattern served man well. Obesity and overweight were almost non existent (around 5% of population by some estimates- it's pushing 80% in US now).

Now in modern society (rich by all world standards), we don't have these natural cycles anymore. We're living in a completely different world than virtually any human being has ever lived in: 24/7 food availability, massive amounts of sugar and fat in our processed foods (drives up calories), really no set limit on how much we can eat (virtually no one reading this stopped eating last night because there may not be enough food for tomorrow- a common reality just 75 years ago), and tons of cues (remember the light bulb) to eat all around us: commercials, foody environments that should have nothing to do with food (I'm in a hotel lobby right now and they serve FREE warm cookies and milk-300 calories each and milk 150 calories per serving- every night), out of control portion sizes at restaurants that people think are normal sizes, virtually no convenience foods that are high in nutrition and low in calories...on and on and on. Humans were not designed to live this way and America's (and other developed countries with food to spare) waist line is proving it everyday. This is our culture now and is why in my writings you hear me refer to successful weight managers as being anti-culture. They have to be. Our culture is simply a recipe for weight gain.

The data says that people who choose to control their food environments- the environments they spend the most time in like home, work, and eating establishments- do the best at losing fat and keeping fat off.

There are two types of Stimulus Control (SC): Negative and Positive.

Negative SC is what most people think of: removing junky, high calorie food choices from our immediate environments and is where is all starts for most of us.

Positive SC is less obvious, but just as important: surrounding ourselves with healthy food choices.

This is not rocket science people and is why I find it so humorous when the diet gurus sell millions of books on food magic and the sort. We just eat too much because there is too much crap available. Pretty simple.

Many of the posters on this thread stated, without even my asking, that cleaning out the crap from around them got them on the right track to health. No wonder every time a researcher studies successful weight managers they find that they practice SC- it works!

The real power in SC lies in understanding what it is not: willpower.

Willpower is the natural human response to a foody environment "I want to get healthy, lose fat, so I'm not going to eat that cookie, or drink that pop, or go back for second helpings... whatever". The problem with that approach is that if people are overweight, they have "habits" of eating/living a certain way that got them overweight. They are so accustomed to eating the way that got them overweight that they don't even have to think about it- they naturally fall back to that habit because willpower is not strong enough (for most of us mere mortals) to kick the habit.

I'll give you a crude example. Looking out the window of the lobby, I see an overweight maintainence guy working on an air conditioning unit. Next to his cordless drill stands at least a 44 ounce Mountain Dew.

50 years ago, most workers in the job would be of normal weight, but now this guy is packing an extra 30 pounds around, yet he has an active job. Why? Well, I don't know him, but it's 10:30 am. I assume that for his morning break, his environment is fueling his habit to just grab a pick-me-up. He probably got it at the gas station on the corner where 25 years ago, the fountain pops used to be served by the attendant and maxed out at 16 ounces but now are self serve and go to half-gallon size. His habit is to just grab a pop, which just happens to be 600 calories and won't provide one drop of nutrition that would reset his hunger cues (lunch is in 1.5 hours and he'll be hungry as pop, junk food doesn't fill us up) and that habit is, in part, driving his weight gain.

Years ago, that morning break would have been coffee or tea(5 calories before additives) as drinking pop in the AM was a cultural taboo, or milk (150 calories) and maybe even a donut (back then would have been about 150 calories- now they are 300 plus). Easy to see that "habit" of his is netting him at least 300 more calories at one snack than a generation ago. Times that by a year and I'm surprised he's not more overweight than he is- but that will probably come in time unless he changes that habit by changing his environment.

Almost guarantee if he and I struck up a conversation and it turned toward what I do for a living, he'd offer up 15 myths that are causing his weight gain (myths the diet gurus are promoting every day) with no comprehension that how much his little habit is costing him. Not knocking the poor guy, he's just a product of his environment.

If he is concerned about his weight (might not even care- many don't), but can't stop drinking pop, the first thing I'd do is point out that he is relying on willpower not to get a pop every morning. Almost surely it will be an unawareness of how much his environment is affecting him. He doesn't even want to to drink the pop, but can't resist the urge when he walks into that same gas station he has for years and that big fountain calls out to him. I'd start by suggesting he stay out of that gas station (negative SC) unless he's fully satisfied. The only way he could do that is by practicing positive SC- like packing his own lunch/snacks with healthy foods like maybe nuts and a whole fruit, or whole grain bagel, or a lower fat protein like venison, and milk or coffee or some lower calorie drink. Then when break time comes, he can satisfy the body and walking in that gas station without filling up on a 44 ouncer doesn't have much to do with will power.

When a person practices SC, they live in a clean food environment most of the time and his stimulus to eat is low and his weight follows. When a person lives in a foody environmnet with all kinds of cues to eat, it will be constant struggle: "do I eat it or do it not, do I eat it or do I not" is the conversation in his head. Most often the conflict is resolved by "eating it" and the bad cycle continues.

I'm very passionate about this STEP as it is the one that made the biggest difference for me from weighing 200# in my 20's (I'm less than 5 foot 9) to the 180 or so I maintain year round now. I changed my food environment and my weight followed. This doesn't mean I don't get to live (took family to the Macaroni Grill last night) but that I don't live in a constant struggle to resist tempting food.

For this to work, you have to solicit support from those around you. If other people are surrounding you with crappy choices, you will only have willpower to rely on and it will fail you almost surely. SC will not fail you near as often. This will lead us to our final step (as soon as time allows), SUPPORT.

Until next time,

 

[tstowater]

Thanks, Robby. New York strips for dinner tonight. Pretzels are my enemy. I would still eat a whole bag under the right conditions. Best to keep them out of the house or only in small quantities.

 

[robby denning]

Love New Yorks, and less fat than my favorite cut: ribeye.

sounds like you know the pretzels are a "trigger" food.

 

[ScottR_EHJ]

I have a sweet tooth. Dont buy candy ot sweets and I dont have an issue.

 

[Reflex]

Robby, I am newer to the forum and wasn’t able to follow along with this thread as it was being written. I have gone back through and read all of the posts and I want to say thank you for spending so much time going into thorough detail with your recommendations backed behind solid scientific research. I have started using myfitnesspal to track my calories and it has really helped me out in managing how much food I eat throughout the day. The approach that you have explained seems like it will be much more sustainable as opposed to many of the other “diets” that are available. Especially since my wife isn’t all that interested in drastically changing her eating habits (i.e., paleo diet, etc.). She likes pasta and breads, so switching to whole grain products is much easier to swallow than completely cutting them out of our diet.
I do have a few questions for you that I believe have not been covered. As for red meat, my wife and I only eat wild game. You have indicated that you can eat more wild meat that the recommended amounts of farm-raised animals, but how much more is acceptable? Also, I have been under the impression that if you are lifting weights, you cannot have too much protein. What are your thoughts on the amount of protein to have for someone who incorporates weight lifting 2-3 times a week into their exercise routine?
What are your thoughts on artificial sweeteners? They are zero or low in calories, so are they o.k.? I usually eat low-fat yogurt that has aspartame instead of sugar and occasionally have diet pop. I’m guessing that they are probably o.k. for the calorie budget, but maybe not all that good for overall health? I also enjoy putting flavor packets into my water. I tend to drink a lot more if it is not so “boring”.
Thanks again for all of your help with this thread. I have truly enjoyed reading it.

 

[robby denning]

Hi Reflex,
welcome to Rokslide and thanks for the comments. You make my point in that if someone likes whole grains, and we have proof they are healthy (much more proof than the contrary), it is much more enjoyable and sustainable to eat them than not. You just have to be careful as the calories do add up pretty fast eating whole grains. There is no argument here that eating refined grains and lots of sugars is a bad thing!

Your questions:
How much wild game? The recommendations I've posted are for red meat, which for 98% of Americans is either high fat (regular burger, fatty cuts) or processed (bacon, ham, sausage, lunch meats, etc.). Most of the research says too much of these meats are bad for Americans because they are high in saturated fat. That is where the 20 ounce limit per week comes in.

However, once you switch to wild game, the saturated fat content drops drastically, so you can take in more. How much? No one knows at this point and we may not know as so few Americans consume wild game, there isn't much demand for research on the subject. Something else to consider is the The American Institute for Cancer Research (a large American cancer research organization associated with the World Cancer Research) says more than about 3-6 ounces per day of any meat is associated with higher cancer risks.

So, what to do? I look at it this way, we don't seem to be designed to eat lots of meat every day, so moderation is a good bet. I seem to AVERAGE about 8 ounces per day (might eat 16 one day and none the next.) I try to get the majority from lean sources, but don't freak out if I consume alot of satruated fat once in a while. For me, this is moderation, might be different for someone else, but when someone tries to tell me it's OK to eat sausage for breakfast, lunch meat for lunch, then steak for dinner, I know they are not being moderate. Most cultures can't even afford to eat that much meat, but American's can and we seem to be the ones leading the world in cancers and heart disease.

Don't get too hung up on the details. That is why the "diets" are so frustrating, as they tend to swing completely one direction or the other. Somewhere in the middle usually lies the truth.

You asked "Also, I have been under the impression that if you are lifting weights, you cannot have too much protein."

BS! The current guidelines indicate taking in more than 35% of total calories in protein (2000 cal diet = 700 cals/4 cal/gram =175 grams) isn't necessary- body can't assimilate that much- leads to too much meat consumption, and if you aren't actually tracking your percentages, just end up eating too many calories. I work with pro level body builders and they lift more than you and me and two other guys put together, and they aren't eating more than about that 35% as an average (sometimes they go higher in a cut-phase).

Artificial sweetners. Not a lot of data against them BUT that doesn't mean they are safe. We're taking complex chemicals we don't know much about and ingesting them. HMMMMMM? Again, moderation a good bet. I have no data to back this,but if you are drinking/eating artificial sweetner every day, that doesn't sound moderate to me. I personally drink about 2 a week. I'm not afraid of a little sugar, so once a week or less, I order a regular pop (AGGGGHHH, I can hear the anti-sugar people groaning now.) Again moderation. I meet fat people all the time who are drinking 60 ounces or more of sugar pop A DAY.

I just reach for the water as often as possible.

If you're bored with water, you probably just haven't really made a habit of it.

As I write this, there are (4) 20 ounce bottles next to the computer (room temp.) Out of habit, I drink them gone almost every day. Boring? probably, but it's a habit I formed over 25 years ago and it seems to have stuck.

Best of luck, Keep us posted on your progress, and enjoy life a little- old people tell me it goes by really fast.

 

[ChadH]

Robby,
I really want to thank you for all the work you've put in to this information. I get the impression it is helping a whole lot of us, myself included. After starting off April 15th at 225 pounds and really out of shape, I've been putting a bunch of time into working out at the gym and eating right by following your suggestions here. It is working and I currently am weighing in at 193, a whole lot stronger and my cardio is doing much better. I've targeted losing about 2 pounds a week, and wanted to get down below 190 before switching to a few more calories daily and working on muscle mass. The whole experience has been freeing and very rewarding and I thank you for helping me and others along.

One question, I read a lot about "plateau" in weight lose and the fact that after a while it gets harder and harder to loose weight. So how does that jive with the "calorie is king" plan??? If it is true that if you only put "X" calories in per day, and you need "y" calories to be at your needed caloric intact according to your BMR, then shouldn't you loose weight at the same rate as long as you stay below your needed calories according to your BMR? I ask because the last 5 pounds have been way harder to loose than the first 25 or so. I assume it is because I am in much better shape and the BMR changes over time... but perhaps I am wrong.

Again, thanks for all your great info.

Chad

 

[robby denning]

Thanks for the update Chad. Great job! Serious progress there.

Weight loss slows because you don't weigh as much relative to what you are used to eating for years and years.

Example:
240 pound guy requires about 12 cal/pound/day so 2880. He loses 40 pounds, which is 40 x 12 = 480 calories less per day required for life to maintain new weight, i.e. his new lifestyle has to net him 480 less calories per day every day to keep that weight off, whereas before, that 480 calorie deficit was producing weight loss, now it's just weight maintenence. This doesn't mean his metabolism slowed down, it means he's a smaller person and now requires less food to maintain that new person, but inside that person is still a 240 pound guy used to eating whatever, however, whenever he wants.

Well, suffice to say that 240 pound guy picked up a few eating habits along the way that allowed him to get to 240- had to or he couldn't weigh 240! He may be able to change the habits enough to drop the 40 pounds, but to get the next 20 pounds (12 x 20 = 240), he has to change habits even more. The next 20 are going to be harder as he's already changed many of the habits and there isn't a lot more room to lose. Calories are still king, you are just getting closer to a healthy weight and it will get harder.

This is one reason we coach weight loss over many months, even years. It takes as much effort to maintain weight loss as it took to lose the weight for many people and as weight loss naturally slows, we have to work harder.

Make sense?

 

[Brandon Pattison]

I have been doing the myfitnesspal.com and it is saying that I need to hit the 1600 calorie mark to loose 15 pounds by the end of August. What? 1600 calories? Maybe my exercising doesn't show up like it should in the app as I burn almost that much some days. I lost the first 15 pounds easily by just eating fruit and veggies until dinner. I am hovering now at around 190 and would like to be at 175. This winter I was at 205. I feel a bit bloated in the gut but look good otherwise and have great endurance. I am 38 years old and 5'10". What have you got?

 

[robby denning]

I don't use the online apps- just good ol' pen and paper, but do recommend the app mentioned as many of our clients like it. However, sometimes people are confused on what it's telling them. In a nutshell, this is what the math says:

198 x 12 = 2376/day to maintain, eat 1600 would be 776 deficit, times that by July 23 thru August 30th (39 days) = 30,264 deficit (not including exercise) or 8.6 pounds fat loss. That means you'd have to burn about 6.3 pounds by exercise which is 570 per day for everyone of those 39 days. Doable, but might not be likely.

I recommend not getting too fixated on "175" but continue with the sustainable behaviors you've picked up along the way. For most people, eating only F&V till dinner might not be sustainable and then they gain weight back as soon as they stop doing it. Don't want to discourage you- you're kicking tail!- but if you've followed this thread much, I always go for the slow sustainable approach as that is (usually) what allows people to keep it off. Make a decision and go for it!
Keep us posted.

 

[Brandon Pattison]

I misinterpreted the app to a point as well, that 1600 number is as if I didn't exercise at all and this number will gain a net amount based on calories burned that day. I really like the app but wish more of the exercises I do were in there as they are crossfit-type. I guess after I educate myself on calories I will get an idea on how to figure out how many there are in home-cooked meals. It took me a while but I did read this whole thread. I was a bit relieved regarding your stance on whole grains but I also have the same distrust for the FDA as another stated and also am on the fence regarding grain consumption at all. There are side-benefits to both arguments in the form of better diet regardless if you completely stop using them or just only consume whole varieties since your overall diet is usually for the better.

I don't want to neccessarily get to 175 if it means I will not have any to lose while on my trip as most of us lose while in steep and deep. Now a lifestyle is what I want, not a fad or diet. I have voiced concerns on other threads but my biggest problem is appetite. The frige door at home was ripped off of its hinges when I got home from school every day. I was always hungry after lunch at school. Today I was hungry an hour after lunch (I have eaten 1105 calories today since I got up at 530am est). It is now 3pm and I am weak feeling from hunger. Chances are I will eat more than the remaining 475 calories as to not be a lion to my family. I was planning on recovering from yesterday's PT and not doing any PT tonight. Maybe I will do something so that I can eat a bit more for dinner so that I can feel full. Any suggestions?

 

[robby denning]

If you're that hungry...

always eat breakfast early,
Try to eat about 35% of total calories from protein
Get at least 38 grams fiber per day (good luck if you don't eat whole grains on getting that much).
If you're eating frequent small meals, go to a traditional 3 meals per day with more cals per meal.
Quit creating such a big deficit every day- of course you'd be hungry!

my two cents

 

[Brandon Pattison]

Deficit?

 

[robby denning]

Deficit = calories below what you require to maintain weight.

You are in a big deficit and that messes with the mind over time.

Basically, short of landing a million dollar contract to lose weight (models, athletes) most people can't sustain more than 250 calorie deficit per day. Hence all my advice on losing weight slowly (and not letting oneself gain it in the first place.)

People buck me on this because they think "If I just set my mind to it, I can do anything!" Not what I've observed for the masses in many years of coaching this stuff on a professional level.

The turtle wins the race...

 

[Brandon Pattison]

Robby,

I don't doubt that but if I am not losing weight then I am probably not in a deficit.

I ate breakfast within minutes of waking up and I usually don't eat until an hour or two later. I am worried that I will be starving 'earlier' than normal. Time will tell.

On another note, do you think that I have a cortisol or adrenal fatigue issue? I only drink 1 cup of coffee per day in the morning. Waking up is a chore. I don't have a problem falling asleep but sometime after a hard run my legs ache pretty badly. I don't feel 'great' after a workout. I usually have a pace and effort that is miserable. I have a fair amount of stress both at work and home. I have stress from a few people I work with, a 7 month old baby girl and fighting a custody battle for my 9 year old son. I take cal-mag citrate. I chew terbacky too.

 

[robby denning]

Then I got confused, as I thought you'd dropped from 205 to 190 and were eating 1600 cal per day (which would make anyone hungry).

I don't know much about the cortisol issue, but do know the data says people who are either all stressed out, or don't manage their stress, struggle to lose weight, but in our profession, we see that those people don't eat well either. It all ties together is the best I can answer.

Just take it slow and be patient. The behaviors will add up over time and the scale will show it.

Also, when is the last time you weighed 175 AND maintained it for at least 1 year?

 

[Brandon Pattison]

I graduated high school at 160 and 3 months later I landed my butt in boot camp, which was in 1992. I started at 160 and got out of boot camp at 185. I have been at 185-190 since then for the most part. The best shape of my life I weighed 185-190 and I had very low body fat. So, to answer your question. I have only weighed that much (175) for a matter of weeks.

On a side note. I am surprised that not one person has mentioned psyllium husks in this thread, especially the anti-grainers. I take it for a few weeks at a time and find its results are wonderful (unless you are stuck on an elevator or in traffic).

 

[robby denning]

Funny about the psyllium husks and elevators!

They are good source of fiber, however, we usually just coach people to get their fiber from whole sources, but the husk can be an ok substitute.

When one of our clients sets a goal weight at something they've never maintained for at least a year as an adult (so like 20 years and up, some still growing less than that), then we usually can predict they are never going to be able to maintain it, and we're usually right. However, we aim for it, just try to cushion their landing and point out that maintaining something lower than where they are at is success! We then build on that success for next goal. Hope that helps. You go for whatever you think you can do!