Showing posts with label weight gain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label weight gain. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
A gal DELIBERATELY gaining "mass" (not weight). How can this be?
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
So, i'm female, like to be lean and ripped AND i'm trying to gain mass - a new way to say "gain weight." What is that about? If awhile ago someone had told me i'd be looking at mass going up rather than down i would have paled, horrified. So what's happened?
Two things:
So, with the release of Pavel's Return of the Kettlebell (start of a review series here)- geared at hypertrophy strength in particular- i thought i'm in a good enough place now to push on this strength side with RTK's double KB work and investigate the mass side promised with it. And i know for my NSCA CSCS text book - and every other sentient knowledgeable person on mass tells me so - this means eating to achieve a caloric surplus not a deficit. I have never eaten for caloric surplus deliberately in my life.
The result so far is a strange thing. Over the past 6-8 weeks i have been watching the scale go up AND i have not freaked out, i have not panicked, i have not broken into a sweat of fear.
Don't Panic
Part of the reason for this lack of panic is perhaps knowledge and control. I know something about what's going on, and i am doing it cautiously and deliberately. Whether it's optimally remains to be seen, but i'm ok with that, too, as the weight going up is not huge leaps and bounds.
Part of the ok'ness is also that in the knowledge side, i know how to evaluate the number on the scale from a few metrics. One of the most powerful ones is girth and the other is skin fold testing.
With Girth i whip out a wonderful gadget called a myotape, and cuff it around my biceps. Not
a ton of change, but it's an honest 1/8th of an inch. And after a workout the measure is considerably greater. But we're talking post rest not post workout measures. the real stuff. I can also keep an eye on more sensitive areas like hips and waist with girth and see if this is beyond my mental tolerances or not. The best check there however is still feeling comfy in my clothes.
With skin fold measures i track what i really want to track here: improvements in lean mass. These are slower to grow than fat to be sure, but seeing weekly progress is a good thing. So far i haven't seen bigger jumps than when i've been trying to lean out and work out at the same time, but it's only been a short trial so far. The main thing is the trends are going in the right direction, and the BF% is still well within tolerable limits.
Why else am i doing this?
I want to see if i can "get arms" (and maybe some other body parts too, but arms has always been the one for me). As far as i know there's no genetic reason why my arms shouldn't respond approriately to appropriate forces for hypertrophic adaptation. However, i also want to walk the walk.
I confer with lots of folks who are more into bodybuilding than strength. The interesting demographic is young lads and post 30's gals - in my experience anyway. So while i'm giving council like "eat more to gain" where have i been on that continuum? Strength and leanness.
So i figure now is the time to fish or cut bait. I'm not going into body building, but i am experimenting with how muscle mass growth can be stimulated, fed, supported, with what one might see as the *minimal* set of moves to achieve that goal, and where RTK right now is my main mission.
For now, part of the experiment is just figuring out how to be cool like a little fonzy with this weight gain thing while the mass gain thing comes along.
The basics: how one reacts to food.
The far more challenging part at least for me and perhaps for other women too who may want more mass (as opposed to weight, dam it. weight bad; mass good - we know what we mean) - is feeling ok about seeing the scale go in the usually dreaded direction.
The take away from this for me so far thinking about it is that it's been my work in nutrition that's let me feel comfortable exploring this uncharted territory in strength and mass (mass. ha! so far i say ha! we'll see. an eighth of an inch for pete's sake! ), not the workouts.
The workouts psychologically seem the eas(ier) part. There are certain principles to which muscle reacts when stimulated appropriately. Check. But the scale? Really, i think if i didn't have those other measures, and a faith that i know how to reduce the weight again, i couldn't do this.
The Way i've Found Thinner Peace.
I'm stealing thinner peace from a fabulous book on how we react to change and how to make habits successful called the Four day Win by Martha Beck (US || UK ) - recommended. If you want to see why, i talk about habits, and the change of pain that is changing one's dietary ways and how to do this with as little brain pain as possible over here. That's potentially a first place: to know how change can work safely. And whence from there?
For me, how i got to a place of really knowing my body in terms of nutrition is with Precision Nutrition that i've reviewed over time, and have been using now, literally for years. The thing i'd like to draw attention to here are three parts of that approach that i think are relevant to this weight going up mental safety zone.
We're complex systems. Why wouldn't it take that kind of time to get to know how these complex mechanisms interact with complex inputs?
So i think it's great that there's a base case from which adjustments can be made. Second, once the base case is established, time to look at parameters for individualizing to get on with one's body comp goals: where start sensibly to work towards losing weight or gaining mass? how tweak either calories or macronutrients? why? how do that again in the spirit of change one thing, maintain the change for two weeks, assess.
The third part is actually having guidance on how to do girth and skinfold measures and make sense of those measures. A lot of that material is in the PN guides that come with the huge amount of material available in the program. Much more comes from the feedback of folks on the PN forum. The experts there from a diversity of backgrounds are awesome. A breakthrough for me, for instance, happened when i'd seemingly hit a plateua doing everything i thought right, and a power lifter trainer from London, Alex Gold, said, that happened to me: i hate calorie counting, but why not check in with fitday for a couple weeks to get a reality check and see what happens?
Wow. super. Did it for a month, actually, and, combined with what i knew at that point, and advice on tuning my workouts (also from PN) i had it nailed - the light turned on and i got what it took to tune my intake for that particular goal. Now i might not always choose to do that of course, but i know what it is - at least in that direction. I am so grateful for that collision of practice, reading, and the space in which to consult with knowledgeable and simply more experienced people. The photo on the left is from a time just after this tuning process.
Whither Voyager?
My modus operandi now seems to be figuring out how to use that knowledge from leaning up to muscling up (and then leaning again, leaving the mass in tact, more or less ).
What some folks may notice is that the above getting to know my physiology for food was a month here, two week tests at a time there - easily adding up to more than a 12 week body transformation. You bet. But, the point is, do it once, do it right, and the knowledge is there for well, so far, my life since then.
Diets suck. they're about temporary deprivation for the most part. They're not about skills or about self-knowledge to have confidence to take knowledge gained to new places.
With ETK (review) and the RKC cert (review), i learned a lot about single kettlebell work. Not everything, but a great foundation with solid moves that will also last a life time. Likewise i'm using that to transfer to the different beast (but related cousin) of double kettlebell work. I'm looking forward to the RKC II in feb 2010 to develop the vocabulary a bit further.
I guess the big thing here is foundations establishing a base of trust, and that trust comes from self-knowledge, and that the way to get that self-knowledge could be to hack around on one's own and hope to fall into it. Or it could be to get some good guidance, do some research, and find a space to ask questions to improve that practice.
With kettlebells it's been ETK and the RKC. With nutrition, it's been Precision Nutrition. In each case, i've gotten to a point where i'm gaining the confidence to fool around within the parameters of the space - play with a pump post the double pressing in RTK and explore IF that wiser people than I keep saying is cool.
The results of the good foundation and trust it perhaps this boldly going to a territory - weight gain - that previously would have devestated me and is now a new and if not undiscovered then potentially dangerous but with now acceptable levels of risk attached. That's likely a long winded way of saying it feels safe enough to have fun.
Does this process make sense to anyone else? hope if so, it helps :)
best
mc
Related Posts
So, i'm female, like to be lean and ripped AND i'm trying to gain mass - a new way to say "gain weight." What is that about? If awhile ago someone had told me i'd be looking at mass going up rather than down i would have paled, horrified. So what's happened?Two things:
- i've for a long time wanted defined strong and strong looking arms.
- But perhaps more importantly, over the past few years, i've learned how to do lean for me: i know what it takes to get lean dialed in, and have done it a couple of times - getting to the ideal weight, letting that slide a few pounds, going back. For me this has meant my weight has been consistently between 57 point something and 60k. Happy days.
So, with the release of Pavel's Return of the Kettlebell (start of a review series here)- geared at hypertrophy strength in particular- i thought i'm in a good enough place now to push on this strength side with RTK's double KB work and investigate the mass side promised with it. And i know for my NSCA CSCS text book - and every other sentient knowledgeable person on mass tells me so - this means eating to achieve a caloric surplus not a deficit. I have never eaten for caloric surplus deliberately in my life.
The result so far is a strange thing. Over the past 6-8 weeks i have been watching the scale go up AND i have not freaked out, i have not panicked, i have not broken into a sweat of fear.
Don't Panic
Part of the reason for this lack of panic is perhaps knowledge and control. I know something about what's going on, and i am doing it cautiously and deliberately. Whether it's optimally remains to be seen, but i'm ok with that, too, as the weight going up is not huge leaps and bounds.
Part of the ok'ness is also that in the knowledge side, i know how to evaluate the number on the scale from a few metrics. One of the most powerful ones is girth and the other is skin fold testing.
With Girth i whip out a wonderful gadget called a myotape, and cuff it around my biceps. Not
a ton of change, but it's an honest 1/8th of an inch. And after a workout the measure is considerably greater. But we're talking post rest not post workout measures. the real stuff. I can also keep an eye on more sensitive areas like hips and waist with girth and see if this is beyond my mental tolerances or not. The best check there however is still feeling comfy in my clothes.With skin fold measures i track what i really want to track here: improvements in lean mass. These are slower to grow than fat to be sure, but seeing weekly progress is a good thing. So far i haven't seen bigger jumps than when i've been trying to lean out and work out at the same time, but it's only been a short trial so far. The main thing is the trends are going in the right direction, and the BF% is still well within tolerable limits.
Why else am i doing this?
I want to see if i can "get arms" (and maybe some other body parts too, but arms has always been the one for me). As far as i know there's no genetic reason why my arms shouldn't respond approriately to appropriate forces for hypertrophic adaptation. However, i also want to walk the walk.I confer with lots of folks who are more into bodybuilding than strength. The interesting demographic is young lads and post 30's gals - in my experience anyway. So while i'm giving council like "eat more to gain" where have i been on that continuum? Strength and leanness.
So i figure now is the time to fish or cut bait. I'm not going into body building, but i am experimenting with how muscle mass growth can be stimulated, fed, supported, with what one might see as the *minimal* set of moves to achieve that goal, and where RTK right now is my main mission.
For now, part of the experiment is just figuring out how to be cool like a little fonzy with this weight gain thing while the mass gain thing comes along.
The basics: how one reacts to food.
The far more challenging part at least for me and perhaps for other women too who may want more mass (as opposed to weight, dam it. weight bad; mass good - we know what we mean) - is feeling ok about seeing the scale go in the usually dreaded direction.
The take away from this for me so far thinking about it is that it's been my work in nutrition that's let me feel comfortable exploring this uncharted territory in strength and mass (mass. ha! so far i say ha! we'll see. an eighth of an inch for pete's sake! ), not the workouts.
The workouts psychologically seem the eas(ier) part. There are certain principles to which muscle reacts when stimulated appropriately. Check. But the scale? Really, i think if i didn't have those other measures, and a faith that i know how to reduce the weight again, i couldn't do this.
The Way i've Found Thinner Peace.
I'm stealing thinner peace from a fabulous book on how we react to change and how to make habits successful called the Four day Win by Martha Beck (US || UK ) - recommended. If you want to see why, i talk about habits, and the change of pain that is changing one's dietary ways and how to do this with as little brain pain as possible over here. That's potentially a first place: to know how change can work safely. And whence from there?
For me, how i got to a place of really knowing my body in terms of nutrition is with Precision Nutrition that i've reviewed over time, and have been using now, literally for years. The thing i'd like to draw attention to here are three parts of that approach that i think are relevant to this weight going up mental safety zone.
- - the basic baselining
- - the individualization plan
- - learning about measures
We're complex systems. Why wouldn't it take that kind of time to get to know how these complex mechanisms interact with complex inputs?
So i think it's great that there's a base case from which adjustments can be made. Second, once the base case is established, time to look at parameters for individualizing to get on with one's body comp goals: where start sensibly to work towards losing weight or gaining mass? how tweak either calories or macronutrients? why? how do that again in the spirit of change one thing, maintain the change for two weeks, assess.
The third part is actually having guidance on how to do girth and skinfold measures and make sense of those measures. A lot of that material is in the PN guides that come with the huge amount of material available in the program. Much more comes from the feedback of folks on the PN forum. The experts there from a diversity of backgrounds are awesome. A breakthrough for me, for instance, happened when i'd seemingly hit a plateua doing everything i thought right, and a power lifter trainer from London, Alex Gold, said, that happened to me: i hate calorie counting, but why not check in with fitday for a couple weeks to get a reality check and see what happens?
Wow. super. Did it for a month, actually, and, combined with what i knew at that point, and advice on tuning my workouts (also from PN) i had it nailed - the light turned on and i got what it took to tune my intake for that particular goal. Now i might not always choose to do that of course, but i know what it is - at least in that direction. I am so grateful for that collision of practice, reading, and the space in which to consult with knowledgeable and simply more experienced people. The photo on the left is from a time just after this tuning process.Whither Voyager?
My modus operandi now seems to be figuring out how to use that knowledge from leaning up to muscling up (and then leaning again, leaving the mass in tact, more or less ).
What some folks may notice is that the above getting to know my physiology for food was a month here, two week tests at a time there - easily adding up to more than a 12 week body transformation. You bet. But, the point is, do it once, do it right, and the knowledge is there for well, so far, my life since then.
Diets suck. they're about temporary deprivation for the most part. They're not about skills or about self-knowledge to have confidence to take knowledge gained to new places.
With ETK (review) and the RKC cert (review), i learned a lot about single kettlebell work. Not everything, but a great foundation with solid moves that will also last a life time. Likewise i'm using that to transfer to the different beast (but related cousin) of double kettlebell work. I'm looking forward to the RKC II in feb 2010 to develop the vocabulary a bit further.
I guess the big thing here is foundations establishing a base of trust, and that trust comes from self-knowledge, and that the way to get that self-knowledge could be to hack around on one's own and hope to fall into it. Or it could be to get some good guidance, do some research, and find a space to ask questions to improve that practice.
With kettlebells it's been ETK and the RKC. With nutrition, it's been Precision Nutrition. In each case, i've gotten to a point where i'm gaining the confidence to fool around within the parameters of the space - play with a pump post the double pressing in RTK and explore IF that wiser people than I keep saying is cool.
The results of the good foundation and trust it perhaps this boldly going to a territory - weight gain - that previously would have devestated me and is now a new and if not undiscovered then potentially dangerous but with now acceptable levels of risk attached. That's likely a long winded way of saying it feels safe enough to have fun.
Does this process make sense to anyone else? hope if so, it helps :)
best
mc
Related Posts
- Return of the Kettlebell - double kb work prelim review
- the complete list of all the updates related to RTK at the b2d kb index
- exercise doesn't work without diet. - either way the weight goes, it seems.
- Myth busting: women are afraid to bulk up.
PDF
Monday, August 10, 2009
We're Happy happy Happy With our Fat - or maybe not
Follow @mcphoo
Tweet
We are amazing. We adapt to anything. Including our own states when 
they are less than our once-cherished ideals. We settle. We get on. We make the best of. Or so it seems. It seems that since 1987, at least white folks' idea of an ideal weight has increased - higher BMI is ok'er. And with that, it seems, a desire to move or adjust diet has gone down. Oh dear.
A new study - indeed it's published in the future because its date is Aug 15, 2009 and it's not quite that date yet - looks at exactly the steady progress of how heavier people have become happier with heavier selves. This is pretty amazing on the one hand considering how much we're inundated with images of the Super Lean, but then perhaps not considering the reality of the Super Size (and it's another kick at set point theory being set, ha!)
In the following, therefore, i'd like to review that study and its focus pretty much on concerns around food and movement that come out of the data, and top it off with some work that considers a focus on work other than diet and movement may be in order.
And so to begin, here's the abstract of our perception changing study.
First, it's cool to have a study say we're not exactly sure yet what to make of these finding, but something's going on. Second, the findings themselves are pretty interesting - especially considering the main sample is from three times more men than women, and this is unusual in the obesity area where folks tend to focus more on women.
So what's going on here?
The authors are motivated by a simple, intriguing question: since BMI has gone (and continues it seems to go) up, and so many people (65% in the US) are now classed as overweight, has the perception of what is a "normal" weight changed? There are some interesting tensions in that question: the research that shows obese individuals perceive higher body weight as healthy and attractive - that's one direction - and the media's still constant drive towards the other extreme with associated research showing resulting body dissatisfaction - that's the other. So where are we at, culturally, with perceptions of what's normal?
Cool question
Approach
So the researchers hit the Cooper Clinic and looked at the data from 1987 to 2001 as part of the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study. Only folks with at least 15 measures over that period were considered. It's amazing to find a data set that's relatively unchanged in the data gathering model for such a period. There are rich questions asked about health history here.
One of the key questions in the intake form is about self-reported ideal weight.
Finding: who's "ideal weight" view goes up? What the data showed is that "the slope of the rise in ideal body weight between 1987 and 2001 was greatest in obese and young adults (0.18 kg/year to 0.25 kg/year) and the smallest in older adults (–0.07 kg/year to 0.01 kg/year)."
Who's satisfied with their weight - over time? "Only 2% of obese men and one obese woman reported being satisfied with their weight. BMI, examination year, and ideal weight were all independent predictors of weight satisfaction...In the same model, with each passing examination year, weight satisfaction was 3%–4% higher (P <0.01)...Higher cardiorespiratory fitness also was independently associated with greater weight satisfaction (men: OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.18, 1.29; women: OR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.23, 1.48) and less intention to lose weight (men: OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.76, 0.89; women: OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.97; Ptrend <>"
What did folks more satisfied with weight do? The folks more satisfied with their weights had lower BMI's and lower percentages of body fat, but they also MOVED.
Intention to change. Almost everyone (93% men and 95% women) of the group who said they were dissatisfied with their weight said they planned to change their diet. About the same ratio (95%/94%) of all men and women said they planned to "change their stamina or physical condition)". 53%/63% of the whole group said they planned to change both. Folks who were happy with their weight had less intention to change their diet or workouts (duh?)
Lifetime: the magic 100. Men who'd lost more than 100 pounds over their lifetime had a lot of stuff going on than the satisfied with their weight.
What's it all mean?
here's where the researchers reflect on their findings, and what they find, overall, is that ideal reported weight has gone up (at least in this very large group) overall, but "particularly among obese individuals."
There main concerns is that younger overweight/obese folks are progressively happier, it seems with higher body weights (going up .3kg/year). Here's the crucial thing: higher body weight correlating with lower ratings of body weight dissatisfaction was also coupled with less intention to move, less consumption of fruit and veg, but also ironically more caloric restriction cycles with higher total pounds of fat lost (but not kept off) over a life time.
In other words, a lot of dieting cycles without super food choices that don't translate into persistent weight loss.
What the researchers are unsure of, is how to leverage these findings strategically for effective change. Is weight disatisfaction a good thing to help motivate change? How would that work, though, without a lot of readily available support? - Good questions.
These resaerchers are also concerned that of those disatisfied in weight who express an interest to change their diet don't also express an interest to change their activities - they feat that without getting physical activity into the mix, weight loss doesn't stick. I'm not so sure about that but am keen to check out the papers they cite to support that concern. If you wish to do so, too, here are the sources:
Today indeed in Science Daily, there's another cry to add to the above that the sedentary are setting themselves up for huge health collisions. Move it Move It. But as i'll come to below, the question may be if movement is such a great thing, why aren't folks doing it, hmm? Quit yelling at doctors to tell patients to move. Where's the support? This is sort of what the speaker, Steven Blair, is quoted as saying, too.
Limitations
The authors acknowledge that while the data they have is a super sample size looking at the same folks over a considerable amount of time (a) it's 95% white folks and (b) the measures are limited. For instance diet and movement were only assesed by single points like fruit and veg consumption and walking/jogging distance. And of course, these data are all self-reported, not objectively measured.
But where self-reporting might normally be an issue in a study if that's the sole measure, it's intriguing the authors highlight it, since after all, this study is about self-perception - and it's intriguing to see how one self-reports practice against attitude - regardless of objective accuracy - but maybe that's just me. And just in this case.
humans on the spaceship in Wall-E are sedentary blimps (above)
who see themselves as svelt (below)
Bottom Line
People (at least in the ACL study) are happier being heavier. That their ideal weights have increased across the board. Higher BMI's are ok. And this mayn't be ok. Let me quote the authors:
While these authors' work shows a thought-provoking trend around getting comfy with being heavier and more sedentary, work by Susan Roberts from Tufts, and her colleagues, has looked more at some of the *why's* behind the effect that gets folks overweight in the first place: eating more.
The authors of the current study touch briefly on the success of various approaches that look less at calories and more at behaviour/attitude around food, and say more work needs to be done to see how successful such non-calorie focused approaches are, and that may be true.
But when looking at Roberts' work, it's hard to deny what her colleague Nicolas Hayes and she found in looking at a particular age group of gals
In other words, what work Roberts' has been doing for the past while keeps showing is the strong correlation between eating as a response to particular situations and stressors. Consequently, one might say that looking at diet and activity alone (as the ACL study review above about ideal weight perception) is likely not going to be a solution for meaningful and lasting change towards health and healthy body weight.
Consider that the self-reporting in the ACL shows that the folks most dissatisfied with their own weight are those most likely to be dieting and have lost more weight overall than others more satisfied. Roberts' and Colleagues work tends to suggest that unpacking what's going on there and helping folks with those habitual responses may be key. She is certainly not alone in this view, but her work puts numbers and facts on this approach: dealing with habits is tough, but critical for health and well being. Tweet Follow @begin2dig
they are less than our once-cherished ideals. We settle. We get on. We make the best of. Or so it seems. It seems that since 1987, at least white folks' idea of an ideal weight has increased - higher BMI is ok'er. And with that, it seems, a desire to move or adjust diet has gone down. Oh dear.A new study - indeed it's published in the future because its date is Aug 15, 2009 and it's not quite that date yet - looks at exactly the steady progress of how heavier people have become happier with heavier selves. This is pretty amazing on the one hand considering how much we're inundated with images of the Super Lean, but then perhaps not considering the reality of the Super Size (and it's another kick at set point theory being set, ha!)
In the following, therefore, i'd like to review that study and its focus pretty much on concerns around food and movement that come out of the data, and top it off with some work that considers a focus on work other than diet and movement may be in order.
And so to begin, here's the abstract of our perception changing study.
Ideal weight and weight satisfaction: association with health practices.
York University, Toronto, Canada. jennkuk@yorku.ca
Evidence suggests that individuals have become more tolerant of higher body weights over time. To investigate this issue further, the authors examined cross-sectional associations among ideal weight, examination year, and obesity as well as the association of ideal weight and body weight satisfaction with health practices among 15,221 men and 4,126 women in the United States. Participants in 1987 reported higher ideal weights than participants in 2001, an effect particularly pronounced from 1987 to 2001 for younger and obese men (85.5 kg to 94.9 kg) and women (62.2 kg to 70.5 kg). For a given body mass index, higher ideal body weights were associated with greater weight satisfaction but lower intentions to lose weight. Body weight satisfaction was subsequently associated with greater walking/jogging, better diet, and lower lifetime weight loss but with less intention to change physical activity and diet or lose weight (P < style="font-weight: bold;">Although the health implications of these findings are somewhat unclear, increased weight satisfaction, in conjunction with increases in societal overweight/obesity, may result in decreased motivation to lose weight and/or adopt healthier lifestyle behaviors.
First, it's cool to have a study say we're not exactly sure yet what to make of these finding, but something's going on. Second, the findings themselves are pretty interesting - especially considering the main sample is from three times more men than women, and this is unusual in the obesity area where folks tend to focus more on women.
So what's going on here?
The authors are motivated by a simple, intriguing question: since BMI has gone (and continues it seems to go) up, and so many people (65% in the US) are now classed as overweight, has the perception of what is a "normal" weight changed? There are some interesting tensions in that question: the research that shows obese individuals perceive higher body weight as healthy and attractive - that's one direction - and the media's still constant drive towards the other extreme with associated research showing resulting body dissatisfaction - that's the other. So where are we at, culturally, with perceptions of what's normal?
Cool question
Approach
So the researchers hit the Cooper Clinic and looked at the data from 1987 to 2001 as part of the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study. Only folks with at least 15 measures over that period were considered. It's amazing to find a data set that's relatively unchanged in the data gathering model for such a period. There are rich questions asked about health history here.
One of the key questions in the intake form is about self-reported ideal weight.
Finding: who's "ideal weight" view goes up? What the data showed is that "the slope of the rise in ideal body weight between 1987 and 2001 was greatest in obese and young adults (0.18 kg/year to 0.25 kg/year) and the smallest in older adults (–0.07 kg/year to 0.01 kg/year)."
Who's satisfied with their weight - over time? "Only 2% of obese men and one obese woman reported being satisfied with their weight. BMI, examination year, and ideal weight were all independent predictors of weight satisfaction...In the same model, with each passing examination year, weight satisfaction was 3%–4% higher (P <0.01)...Higher cardiorespiratory fitness also was independently associated with greater weight satisfaction (men: OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.18, 1.29; women: OR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.23, 1.48) and less intention to lose weight (men: OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.76, 0.89; women: OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.97; Ptrend <>"
What did folks more satisfied with weight do? The folks more satisfied with their weights had lower BMI's and lower percentages of body fat, but they also MOVED.
Weight satisfaction was also associated with higher levels of walking/jogging per week, higher cardiorespiratory fitness, less restrained eating, consumption of more fruits and vegetables, and higher self-rated health compared with those reporting body weight dissatisfaction (all PWhat seems interesting to me here is that there is not a lot of difference - really - in the amount moved per week between the satisfied and the dissatisfied groups. 18.9km per week vs 15.9? 3km (about two miles) separating BMI levels of happiness and health? Food for thought there. And speaking of food for thought.0.01). Body weight satisfaction was associated with greater distance walked/jogged per week compared with those reporting body weight dissatisfaction, whereas BMI category was negatively associated with distance walked/jogged per week (men—overweight or obese: 18.9 km/week vs. 15.8 km/week, lean: 20.8 km/week vs. 18.6 km/week; women—overweight or obese: 14.4 km/week vs. 14.3 km/week, lean: 18.2 km/week vs. 17.3 km/week, respectively) after adjustment for age, ethnicity, and smoking for both men and women (P < 0.001).
For men, there was a significant interaction between BMI category and body satisfaction on fruit and vegetable consumption such that only the overweight or obese men dissatisfied with their body weight consumed significantly fewer fruits and vegetables (overweight or obese: 14.9 vs. 13.6 per week; lean: 15.1 vs. 15.1 per week; P = 0.01). For women, only a positive main effect of body weight satisfaction was observed (overweight or obese: 17.8 vs. 15.7 per week; lean: 17.4 vs. 15.6 per week; P < 0.001).So guys who are overweight to obese and dissatisfied with their bodyweight also tend not to eat their veggies. Hmm. Interesting habit.
Intention to change. Almost everyone (93% men and 95% women) of the group who said they were dissatisfied with their weight said they planned to change their diet. About the same ratio (95%/94%) of all men and women said they planned to "change their stamina or physical condition)". 53%/63% of the whole group said they planned to change both. Folks who were happy with their weight had less intention to change their diet or workouts (duh?)
Lifetime: the magic 100. Men who'd lost more than 100 pounds over their lifetime had a lot of stuff going on than the satisfied with their weight.
- higher BMI
- higher ideal weight
- more likely to report current dieting
- subtly lower cardiovascular fitness
What's it all mean?
here's where the researchers reflect on their findings, and what they find, overall, is that ideal reported weight has gone up (at least in this very large group) overall, but "particularly among obese individuals."
There main concerns is that younger overweight/obese folks are progressively happier, it seems with higher body weights (going up .3kg/year). Here's the crucial thing: higher body weight correlating with lower ratings of body weight dissatisfaction was also coupled with less intention to move, less consumption of fruit and veg, but also ironically more caloric restriction cycles with higher total pounds of fat lost (but not kept off) over a life time.
In other words, a lot of dieting cycles without super food choices that don't translate into persistent weight loss.
What the researchers are unsure of, is how to leverage these findings strategically for effective change. Is weight disatisfaction a good thing to help motivate change? How would that work, though, without a lot of readily available support? - Good questions.
These resaerchers are also concerned that of those disatisfied in weight who express an interest to change their diet don't also express an interest to change their activities - they feat that without getting physical activity into the mix, weight loss doesn't stick. I'm not so sure about that but am keen to check out the papers they cite to support that concern. If you wish to do so, too, here are the sources:
- Diaz VA, Mainous AG III, Everett CJ. The association between weight fluctuation and mortality: results from a population-based cohort study. J Community Health (2005) 30(3):153–165.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
- Nguyen ND, Center JR, Eisman JA, et al. Bone loss, weight loss, and weight fluctuation predict mortality risk in elderly men and women. J Bone Miner Res. (2007) 22(8):1147–1154.[CrossRef][Medline]
- Rzehak P, Meisinger C, Woelke G, et al. Weight change, weight cycling and mortality in the ERFORT Male Cohort Study. Eur J Epidemiol (2007) 22(10):665–673.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
- Provencher V, Bégin C, Tremblay A, et al. Short-term effects of a "health-at-every-size" approach on eating behaviors and appetite ratings. Obesity (Silver Spring) (2007) 15(4):957–966.[CrossRef][Medline]
- Saris WH, Blair SN, van Baak MA, et al. How much physical activity is enough to prevent unhealthy weight gain? Outcome of the IASO 1st Stock Conference and consensus statement. Obes Rev. (2003) 4(2):101–114.[CrossRef][Medline]
- Martins C, Robertson MD, Morgan LM. Effects of exercise and restrained eating behaviour on appetite control. Proc Nutr Soc. (2008) 67(1):28–41.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Today indeed in Science Daily, there's another cry to add to the above that the sedentary are setting themselves up for huge health collisions. Move it Move It. But as i'll come to below, the question may be if movement is such a great thing, why aren't folks doing it, hmm? Quit yelling at doctors to tell patients to move. Where's the support? This is sort of what the speaker, Steven Blair, is quoted as saying, too.
We need numerous changes to promote more physical activity for all, including public policies, changes in the health care system, promoting activity in educational settings and worksites, and social and physical environmental changes. We need more communities where people feel comfortable walking. I believe psychologists can help develop better lifestyle change interventions to help people be more active via the Internet and other technological methods.but i digress...
Limitations
The authors acknowledge that while the data they have is a super sample size looking at the same folks over a considerable amount of time (a) it's 95% white folks and (b) the measures are limited. For instance diet and movement were only assesed by single points like fruit and veg consumption and walking/jogging distance. And of course, these data are all self-reported, not objectively measured.
But where self-reporting might normally be an issue in a study if that's the sole measure, it's intriguing the authors highlight it, since after all, this study is about self-perception - and it's intriguing to see how one self-reports practice against attitude - regardless of objective accuracy - but maybe that's just me. And just in this case.
humans on the spaceship in Wall-E are sedentary blimps (above) who see themselves as svelt (below)
Bottom Line
People (at least in the ACL study) are happier being heavier. That their ideal weights have increased across the board. Higher BMI's are ok. And this mayn't be ok. Let me quote the authors:
Another Line
In conclusion, we have provided evidence that, in the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study group, there have been secular increases in ideal weight perception, which relate to increased body satisfaction for a given BMI. Body weight satisfaction is associated with lower intentions to change weight, physical activity/stamina, or diet. In combination with the known consequences of obesity, failure to change lifestyle factors may further compound future health problems.
While these authors' work shows a thought-provoking trend around getting comfy with being heavier and more sedentary, work by Susan Roberts from Tufts, and her colleagues, has looked more at some of the *why's* behind the effect that gets folks overweight in the first place: eating more.
The authors of the current study touch briefly on the success of various approaches that look less at calories and more at behaviour/attitude around food, and say more work needs to be done to see how successful such non-calorie focused approaches are, and that may be true.
But when looking at Roberts' work, it's hard to deny what her colleague Nicolas Hayes and she found in looking at a particular age group of gals
Aspects of eating behaviors "disinhibition" and "restraint" are related to weight gain and BMI in women.
D.W. Reynolds Department of Geriatrics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences and Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock, Arkansas, USA. NPHays@uams.edu
OBJECTIVE: The causes of adult weight gain leading to obesity are uncertain. We examined the association of adult weight gain and obesity with subscales of eating behavior characteristics in older women.
METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Current height and weight, eating behavior subscales (disinhibition subscales-habitual, situational, and emotional; restraint subscales-flexible and rigid; hunger subscales-internal and external) as assessed using the Eating Inventory (EI), and self-reported body weight at six prior age intervals were reported by 535 women aged 55-65 years. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the relationships between EI subscale scores and weight change from the age interval of 30-39 to 55-60 years and current BMI.
RESULTS: The strongest correlate of weight gain over 20 years was susceptibility to overeating in response to everyday cues within the environment (habitual disinhibition; partial correlation coefficient (r) = 0.25, P < r =" 0.17,"> and susceptibility to overeating in response to specific situations such as social occasions (situational disinhibition) was not associated with weight gain. Flexible control of dietary restraint attenuated the influence of habitual disinhibition in particular on weight gain and BMI, and was less effective in attenuating associations of emotional or situational disinhibition.
DISCUSSION: Lifestyle modification programs for prevention and treatment of adult-onset obesity currently focus on reducing situational and emotional overeating; the results of this study suggest that a stronger emphasis on strategies that target habitual overeating may be warranted.
In other words, what work Roberts' has been doing for the past while keeps showing is the strong correlation between eating as a response to particular situations and stressors. Consequently, one might say that looking at diet and activity alone (as the ACL study review above about ideal weight perception) is likely not going to be a solution for meaningful and lasting change towards health and healthy body weight.
Consider that the self-reporting in the ACL shows that the folks most dissatisfied with their own weight are those most likely to be dieting and have lost more weight overall than others more satisfied. Roberts' and Colleagues work tends to suggest that unpacking what's going on there and helping folks with those habitual responses may be key. She is certainly not alone in this view, but her work puts numbers and facts on this approach: dealing with habits is tough, but critical for health and well being. Tweet Follow @begin2dig
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
COACHING with dr. m.c. 
