Diet

I agree with you to a point, but it seems as if the people who count calories are the ones most often complaining of hunger pangs (I was always hungry on a calorie-restricted diet). Now that I've incorporated a much higher proportion of saturated animal fats into my diet (butter, cream, cheese, bacon and other fatty meats, all from pastured animals), I'm almost never hungry and often go all day without eating between breakfast and dinner. Although much of the food I eat tends to be expensive, I eat a lot less of it, so it probably balances out in the end, cost-wise. Nowadays, when I think of what I used to eat, I can hardly believe the quantities I put away. Interestingly, I experienced a lot of my initial weight loss when I stopped drinking Diet Coke (or any other soda). I used to drink probably six to eight cans a day. Obviously, at zero calories, the Coke itself wasn't responsible for putting on the pounds, but I noticed that whenever I drank a Coke, I immediately sought something to eat afterward. It may have been that the food was neutralizing the acid in my stomach. Here's a story that I think is quite typical of a lot of people who join Weight Watchers to lose weight: www.marksdailyapple.com/.../ Count yourself lucky you found a method that works for you and doesn't make you hungry. For the majority of people (despite what diet advertisements led you to believe) being hungry from time to time while dieting is going to happen. For me personally, I find that calorie restriction is easier than worrying about healthy food/cutting carbs/etc. I can eat 1500 calories a day, but not if I can't satisfy my craving for a twix bar every once in a while. Besides, most diets that don't involve directly counting calories still work via calorie depletion. i.e. if you don't eat carbs you are probably eating much less calories as well. (Yes, ketogenic diets work on more than calorie depletion but people even on "ketogenic" diets rarely actually get into more than 'barely ketosis')

Why do you think running is any better than swimming for weight loss? For someone who is only doing one exercise provided they can swim reasonably well I would argue swimming is by far superior as it burns similar calories/hr and builds more overall body muscle which will in turn raise metabolism etc. The reality is though, calories in vs calories out is pretty much all that really matters. I think whatever exercise will burn more calories depending on the individual who is doing them. I, for example, probably would burn more calories attempting to run, than I would swimming. I base this on the fact that I am very efficient in the water, and will burn calories, but not at the same rate as something less effiecient such as running (for me). This is where cross-training and rotating what you do can have more of an effect that just doing the same thing day after day. Your body has to readapt to the changes with each different exercise routine/sport.

one way of combining calorie counting and dietary change is to figure out how many calories it will take to maintain your target weight, then just eat that amount. For you, at a moderate activitely level, that would be about 2250 calories. So if you eat that many calories a day, you will eventually weigh 185 pounds with the bonus that you will have practiced eating to maintain that weight already. Any exercise you do above a moderate level will be a bonus weight loss! And allow for the inevitable alcohol/junk food sessions.

I believe the idea that swimming does not generally promote weight loss is common knowledge - especially for those who are fairly good at it. However, I do believe that coming back into or starting the sport would initially promote a moderate punt of weight loss. Whether you diet or not.

Hi martin - I am not the sleekest cat in the pool, but I do counsel people on weight loss a lot - In our office we recommend the South Beach or Dukan Diet, because they are sensible diets that include carbohydrate & fat reduction, and are physiologically friendly. They are actually probably ADA type diets. I have tried myself to go totally protein, and let me tell you, those carbs come in handy when you want to do a hard set. Do NOT eliminate them entirely! Simply by returning to the swimming world, if you will work out & write down every morsel of food that goes into your mouth (the idea being that you may not want to write down that you ate an entire box of Oreos, and so you don't eat them) you will naturally lose weight. It may seem at first as if you are toning your body more than losing weight at first, but both will happen. Someone here said that you didn't put the weight on over night, so don't expect it to come off over night either. Cross Training, or mixing it up is also helpful. Someone once suggested you change the activity you cross train with every six weeks for maximum weight loss. Swimming is not the activity of choice for weight loss, unfortunately. Running is - but of course, it's not necessarily as much fun!! Buena Suerte!!:D Why do you think running is any better than swimming for weight loss? For someone who is only doing one exercise provided they can swim reasonably well I would argue swimming is by far superior as it burns similar calories/hr and builds more overall body muscle which will in turn raise metabolism etc. The reality is though, calories in vs calories out is pretty much all that really matters.

Anything that burns calories and promotes some muscle gain is good for weight loss. It's quite silly to think otherwise. Also, the amount of comparisions on this site of swimming to walking (which is essentially what you compare it to if you think it does not promote weight loss) are quite crazy. It might be silly, but there is tons of anecdotal evidence. I can't explain it, but when I just swim and lift weights, it is really hard for me to lose weight. If I add a couple of days of treadmill at 45 minutes in the 140-160 heart rate range, fast walking, I can lose a few pounds fairly easily. YMMV.

I believe the idea that swimming does not generally promote weight loss is common knowledge - especially for those who are fairly good at it. However, I do believe that coming back into or starting the sport would initially promote a moderate punt of weight loss. Whether you diet or not. Anything that burns calories and promotes some muscle gain is good for weight loss. It's quite silly to think otherwise. Also, the amount of comparisions on this site of swimming to walking (which is essentially what you compare it to if you think it does not promote weight loss) are quite crazy.

Not discounting what you're saying, and calorie monitoring is not for everyone, but counting calories, done right, is not the same as dieting -- it's a proven way of figuring out the best way to eat. After a while, eating the right amount becomes habit. I agree with you to a point, but it seems as if the people who count calories are the ones most often complaining of hunger pangs (I was always hungry on a calorie-restricted diet). Now that I've incorporated a much higher proportion of saturated animal fats into my diet (butter, cream, cheese, bacon and other fatty meats, all from pastured animals), I'm almost never hungry and often go all day without eating between breakfast and dinner. Although much of the food I eat tends to be expensive, I eat a lot less of it, so it probably balances out in the end, cost-wise. Nowadays, when I think of what I used to eat, I can hardly believe the quantities I put away. Interestingly, I experienced a lot of my initial weight loss when I stopped drinking Diet Coke (or any other soda). I used to drink probably six to eight cans a day. Obviously, at zero calories, the Coke itself wasn't responsible for putting on the pounds, but I noticed that whenever I drank a Coke, I immediately sought something to eat afterward. It may have been that the food was neutralizing the acid in my stomach. Here's a story that I think is quite typical of a lot of people who join Weight Watchers to lose weight: www.marksdailyapple.com/.../

The book "The Omnivores Dilemma" is pretty good too. Kind of scary when you realize that most foods are industrial products. Thanks for the tip on The Omnivore’s Dilemma, A Natural History of Four Meals... my Mom loves The Botany of Desire (which I saw as a PBS documentary... very interesting)... I'm for sure going to check this out. ;)

...I lost just under 100 pounds about 7-8 years ago by following these precepts and have kept it off since.... WOW! That is amazing... Thanks for posting that... and the link. ...it seems as if the people who count calories are the ones most often complaining of hunger pangs.... Now that I've incorporated a much higher proportion of saturated animal fats into my diet (...all from pastured animals), I'm almost never hungry.... Yep... I'd agree. When I eat high quality foods, I can eat my fill and maintain a good weight... IF I exercise enough, and I mostly just swim... usually not more than 6-9K yds/wk. I know for most folks this is not easy to achieve, but if you can, it seems to be a healthy path. I'm convinced that the industrialized food processes used in most common food market items are a key source in obesity. Another eye-opener documentary I saw recently was Killer at Large (2008). :-|