April's CR Diary: April 2008 Archives

« March 2008 | Main | May 2008 »

April 30, 2008

Look How All the Kids Have Grown Up...

Well, that's it. We ratified a contract at the younger of the twins, in Scranton. And it's a great first contract. A landmark 30 year wage step, doubled the employer's contribution to the pension, huge wage increases, actual roll backs on health care costs, lots of other stuff. My nurses have much to be proud of.

Tonight after the meeting the real Anna and the blog-named Anna and a a few others went out for a drink with us. I was working on the flyer, Danny California was doing the math for me, Edward was on his last few breaths after doing meetings all day on no sleep, and it wasn't long before Diana, one of my all time favorite nurses, showed up. I was glad to see her. I was feeling old and ugly and tired... the meetings today were hard, and it was just a few minutes before that a few of my nurses suggested that maybe I should go for a professional haircut. So I've gained weight (I mean, I'm at 111 now but that's up from 102!) and now I have bad hair. Ugh.

I look in the mirror and feel like I've aged a decade. But I know that's just the exhaustion. It'll go away when I get proper sleep and proper nutrition. A lot of people a lot younger than I am look a lot older.

So my Anna was there tonight, and as we left I gave her a big hug. I wonder what would have happened if I'd never met her. I wish I could remember the moment when I first realized that the only thing that really matters is that Anna is never going to lose again.

I miss MR. I miss home. I want Edward to get some sleep. I had a wonderful experience this weekend when a nurse whom I'm going to call Annie, because she is a little Anna, told me about how she found organizing the union to be an empowering process. More about that soon.

I feel old and ugly and tired tonight. Oh well. These nurses have a great contract, and I have a wonderful man who overlooks my flaws and picks me little flowers on his morning run and arranges them in a giant red wine glass. I am very blessed. I should do better than I do. But tonight I have to sleep, knowing that my twins are off to school. The kids have grown up. Those who thought they would never have a voice have won their contracts. I am proud of them.

Look how all the kids have grown up
We have changed but we're the still the same
After all that we've been through, I know we're cool.

Posted by april at 10:27 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

April 27, 2008

Blog Break

Between the fact that I'm feeling remarkably awful but sick of listening to myself whine and that it's major crunch time between our annual assembly (statewide) and crunch time in Scranton, I think I'm going to have to take a blog break, if only for a few days. I am not dead. Thank you for your support.

I am reminded, these days, of a line from a Kate Bush song that was one of my favorites in high school. One night, after a particularly bad fight, a good friend left a note in my school mailbox (this was how we communicated back then, though notes, it was our pre-historic version of email, yes I am very old) that quoted, and the line is remarkably apt for a blog about CR:

Don't ever think that you can't change the past and the future.

Posted by april at 9:30 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack

April 25, 2008

Friday Morning, Scranton, PA

It's a lovely day and I just got done with a treadmill meeting with Edward. It makes a lot of sense to take meetings to the gym -- we get a lot done while we're working out.

We're going to be here pretty late tonight, then one day at home, then off to our annual statewide assembly, then back to Scranton. I miss MR, but I love being with my co-workers. I miss my real food though. MR packed me a lot, but it's hard when the gang is going out. I've managed to eat fairly well in restaurants though, and my new banana megamuffins are amazing! They taste like a fresh banana. I love them. Andrea specially engineered them for me, but I bet she'd make some for you too!

Posted by april at 6:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 24, 2008

We Were Strangers, Starting Out On A Journey

We had our strike vote in Scranton last night. Today we had negotiations. It started to dawn on me that fairly soon, whether it be a few weeks or a few months, we will wind up the first contract on this, the younger and stronger of the twins, and that I would be moving on to another campaign. And the though of leaving Anna and the real Anna (the funny this is that there is an actual Anna as well as the blog-named Anna, whose name is something else) almost made me cry. I suspect I'll be up here every month, having lunch with Diana and dinner with Anna and Anna and Anna.... and the real Anna too. These folks restored my faith in organizing nurses.... and I helped them get back their faith in themselves. I've been working with these people (in addition to others) for more than two years now.

No one told me I was going to find you
Unexpected, what you did to my heart
When I lost hope, you were there to remind me.

This is the start.

We were strangers, on a crazy adventure.

Posted by april at 10:46 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 23, 2008

Junk Food and Motherhood

Sorry bloggiefriends and bloggiefoes, I'm still extremely busy up here in Scranton, so I'm linking instead of writing again.

This is an interesting blog. I'm linking this post about Angelina Jolie feeding her toddlers junk. Comment?

Thanks to all for the comments on the previous issue. I love the discussion! Someday I will get around to writing again! In the meantime, thanks for keeping my brain busy and reminding me that there is life outside of Scranton!

Posted by april at 8:44 AM | Comments (8) | TrackBack

April 21, 2008

Banning Images of Thin People?

Maybe it's a cheap trick to link to someone else's post when I don't have time to write, but I'm going to do it again. It seems to inspire interesting comments and discussion.

Check out this post on The Weighting Game, from which this is a short excerpt is taken:

A bill adopted Tuesday by the French Parliament's lower house recommends fines and prison sentences for offenders who encourage "extreme thinness," according to an AP story. More specifically, the bill would make it illegal to "provoke a person to seek excessive weight loss by encouraging prolonged nutritional deprivation that would have the effect of exposing them to risk of death or directly compromise health," slapping offenders with a prison term of up to two years and fines of up to $47,000...with punishment increasing to three years in prison and a $71,000 if a victim dies of an eating disorder.

This means that, if the bill passes in the Senate (full disclosure: I slept through government…and geography, for that matter…in school and as a result, have little-to-zero knowledge regarding a) legislative activity or b) the process of locating Rhode Island, South Dakota or Kansas on a map), fashion designers using models with BMIs of 15 could wind up in ze slammer!

Wow. How long will it be until they ban thin people all together?

Check out Mary's post on the topic here too.

Posted by april at 4:47 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

April 20, 2008

Lemon Scallops in White Wine with Cilantro

I think this is my best scallop dish ever. Bay scallops (half the price of sea, but you could certainly use sea to great effect) cooked in dry white wine plus grape tomatoes. Add a ton of cilantro and the juice of one half a fresh lemon, well-squeezed, per person. Cook till scallops are done and tomatoes are shriveling. Add almost imperceptible dash of garlic powder.

I served these stand alone, with a cauliflower side dish (steamed with lemon and garlic.) However, you could easily serve this over greens, or pasta, or rice, if you were looking for a non-CR type of dish. You could also stuff them into firm napa cabbage leaves for a fancy finger food appetizer.

I made this for our Saturday night dinner (which I try to make a little fancy) and I'm having it again for Sunday lunch! MR only eats meat once a month, but I am quite happy to have scallops till they run out!

Meanwhile, Happy Passover to all who are celebrating! Many of my friends have been hard at work all weekend cooking for family. I wonder if anyone is doing a CR-friendly Seder. That would be pretty neat.

Posted by april at 7:01 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

April 17, 2008

In Case You Were Wondering Who Opposes Calorie Information

on menus... except for the restaurant industry, who fear profits going down when people find out how much they're eating...

Dr. Stacey writes about it here. She doesn't draw a conclusion, just raises the question. But read the comments. Some are in favor, but keep scrolling down and you'll find quite a few who strongly oppose posting calorie information.

Here are a few favorites. Keep in mind, this is in response to Starbucks posting calorie information on the menu. Not banning transfats, not removing items from the menu, POSTING INFORMATION! Yes, giving you information somehow violates your rights.

To be clear, these are the words of commenters, not Dr. Stacey herself.

"I hate it. I think it is another sign of the pervasive nature of the Diet Culture and I oppose it. I don't believe calorie restriction is healthy nor is it the responsibility of the restaurant to make healthful choices for me. I particularly dislike menus that contain this information - I'm eating out to enjoy the experience of eating out, not to participate in the weighing and measuring of every single thing I put in my mouth."

"I don't think counting calories should play a part in a healthy person's food choices. I consider it a part of a "dieting" mindset and/or eating disordered thinking."

"The decision to eat or not eat a goodie at Starbucks should not be made based on calories if we're trying to promote long term balanced eating."

"I absolutely hate it (and I don't even GO to Starbucks). The move to start listing calorie information on menus so infuriates me that I will not patronize any restaurant that starts doing that. I don't need Mommy to tell me what I should and shouldn't eat.

And honestly, the "calorie theory" (yes it's a theory, like many others) is not entirely accurate anyway. Check out a very interesting, technically sound, non-diet, book called "Good Calories, Bad Calories". It's very enlightening."

BOOOOO. All I'm gonna say is, by this NYC law, they only make "fast food" places list their calorie counts. Nobody's gonna make Peter Luger's tell you how many calories are in the 28-ounce Porterhouse, capisce? It's pure classism, methinks. If they were going to list ALL the ingredients including potential allergens, fine, but this is all about GUILT TRIPPING WORKING CLASS WOMEN over the rare treats that they allow themselves to alleviate their stress (you think 98% of men give a crap how many calories are in a Rice Krispies treat?).

I am amazed at the idea that by providing information, the restaurant is somehow making choices for people. I always thought that the beauty of information is that it empowers us to make choices for ourselves. I am all for the ability of people to make their own choices... if you want to eat a 500 calorie muffin and wash it down with a 700 calorie coffee drink, go ahead. Is it going to hurt you to know it? Those of us who actually do not want to consume that many calories in a nutrient-free meal can make our own decisions, based on accurate information. When we have information, we can make decisions that help us reach our goals, whatever they may be.

Why are people offended by the public display of facts?

Posted by april at 4:43 AM | Comments (20) | TrackBack

April 15, 2008

Our Food Prices Aren't Going Up...

"It's feeding time for the big pink pigs," went the intriguing headline on NPR this morning. It was a story about the rising price of pork in China. Apparently, pork is the main meat eaten in China. With the global oil crisis, much corn was being used to make ethanol, and now there's not enough corn for the pigs to eat. There was also an epidemic of some kind of pig disease, but the point being, those who eat a lot of pork are seeing their food prices rise.

This was one of many NPR stories about rising food prices around the world, including right here at home. Between oil becoming so expensive, making transport of food more expensive, plus global increase in corn use for making ethanol, making grains and grain-fed meat more expensive, food prices are rising for most.

MR observed on Sunday that our food prices don't seem to be going up. He watches our food bills like a hawk, and he knows what costs what. After listening to yet another of these NPR stories about rising food costs, he observed that the things we eat don't seem to be as affected by the crisis. We eat very little meat, so we're not hit by grain-fed meat prices going up. We eat almost no grains. We eat very few processed foods that have to be flown around, produced in factories, etc. (Quorn being the major exception, which MR eats several times a week, and I eat about once a month.) Even our consumption of eggwhites has gone way down since MR became moderately concerned about methionine. We try to eat as locally as possible, though on some foods we choose organic instead of local. We're lucky to live so near the mushroom capital of the world in PA, and the home of the wonderful Jersey tomato.

The big ticket items in my diet are my organic dairy. Nancy's Organic Cottage Cheese and Butterworks Farms plain nonfat yogurt are staples that I eat almost daily. Those are pretty expensive, but well worth it for me since they are a) among my favorite foods b) great sources of calcium and protein c) I eat so much dairy that I insist on organic to avoid the creepy chemicals they put in non-organic fed cows.

But we don't eat bread, chips, beef, pork, or gasoline. We don't seem to be seeing an increase in our food bills. Which is great, cause I'd rather spend the money on wine. Or on paying off the mortgage earlier. Right... ;)

Posted by april at 5:32 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack

April 13, 2008

Chilled, Dilled Cauliflower Soup

Introducing the herb of the week: dill!

Serves four, 12 oz each without yogurt:

Cauliflower, raw 1078 g 269.5
Dill weed, fresh 100 g 43.0
Garlic, raw 20 g 29.8
1/2 cube vegetable broth, no salt added, 25

Then add: juice of one fresh lemon, no-salt to taste, pepper. We blended it to perfection using the hand blender that MR's mom got us for Christmas.

MR had his without yogurt. I am going to have mine with a half a cup of yogurt, nonfat plain from Butterworks Farms, because I feel it will add zest, and it will also add calcium.

In the meantime, I have made several other dishes with dill. Last night I made a raw squash salad with yellow squash, fresh dill, tarragon vinegar, and pepper. Topped with olive oil. Tonight I added dill to MR's main dish of asparagus, squash and quorn with a ton of diced lemon peel. Lunch included lemon peel (limonene, using up the lemon I squeezed for the soup!) and curry with Quorn, asparagus, and a host of other veggies.

In a lot of ways I love being on the road, but I miss being able to cook. Cooking is my big expression of creativity, and when I don't get to do it I feel somehow blocked. But alas, I am on the road three to five days a week now. Will do the best I can.

Posted by april at 6:27 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 11, 2008

Mary Writes On Long-Term CR

I loved this entry from Mary about how and why she's maintained long term CR. She writes:

If I think about why I can do CR - why I succeed - it is a complex thing. It's not that I am into self-denial. I am not really obsessive. I love food. It's really that I am aware of the two paths I can take. I've taken them both and I know them well. One path is paved with excuses, a loss of self control, guilty pleasure, socializing with food, and health problems. The other path is paved with focus, discipline, optimal health, beautiful food, and social stress. I just choose that second path, day after day. It's a day to day thing. My image of myself is a person on that second path now. That is who I am. I was on that first path for a long time. I did not care for it. It is a sad path. This one is a joyous one. I enjoy my CR life. It's part of my joy.

I've gone back to strict counting and consistency, varying my calories only when my exercise varies, and I feel a whole lot better. Consistency really helps.

I definitely agree that I enjoy being the person on the second path much more than I enjoyed my life when I was on the first path. It's not always easy, but it does seem to work.

Posted by april at 4:31 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack

April 10, 2008

Does Anything Last Forever?

"Five years is a long time," said a mutual friend of ours over lunch today, in a totally different context. My best friend and I looked at each other and agreed. "Yes, yes it is."

We are right on the five year mark. Best friends, five years. It hasn't always been easy, and we've had our share of fights, but we've remained committed to working it out and making it work. At this point, I'm fairly sure that if we haven't killed each other by now, we're not gonna.

Sara points out in her comment re: Yvonne's statements that weight loss doesn't count as permanent if one hasn't kept it off for five years or more:

I agree with you, but I think another part of her argument was that it hasn't been five years for you yet, and they see five years as a magic marker. So maybe you could say something about that--like there is nothing magic about five years, and four years is a good amount of time... or whatever.

Do you know what is significant about the five year marker?

Note how it's cited for both cancer survival and weight loss.

So it must have some sort of import, wouldn't you think?

Yes, you would think. Or I hope you'd think. There is evidence that most of my readers think.

But you'd be wrong. There is nothing significant whatsoever about the five year mark. There is no magic that happens at five years. It could be four years, it could be ten years, it doesn't matter. Nothing changes biologically in the body of a person who has kept weight off for five years. Just like the legend of the seven year itch doesn't force people to cheat on their spouses at year seven, nothing forces people to gain back weight at or before five years.

It is completely arbitrary.

And for my next trick: the entry completely debunking the statistic that 98% of people gain back the weight they've lost. You'll have to wait for that though because I'm on the road all week without access to the relevant back up info.

And while Eris points out that it is quite silly that even those of us who are CR folk get sucked into feeling defensive about our weight (good point!!!), she also writes:

I think the fat acceptance people go too far in asserting that being obese is healthy. It's in response, however, to everyone else saying that being any degree at all above a certain weight is de facto, unhealthy. As for the five year mark, I hardly think that really refers to you, April (since, even at 137, you were never obese, just slightly overweight). With Robin, if she started out at a high normal weight, gained more weight through pregnancy, and then lost it, this is still not being morbidly obese. Such weight loss really should not be compared to those who are 100+ pounds over their normal weight. That's where the five year mark truly is hard to achieve - for those people. In fact, they not only gain back their weight, but put on even more. It's like a boomerang flying back to hit them in the head.

I agree that moderate weight loss is a very different animal from extreme weight loss of 100 pounds or more, but I'll also point out that Kate Harding doesn't make the distinction in the comments that Yvonne eventually referenced, or anywhere else to my knowledge (though feel free to point out if she does somewhere I haven't read.)

As Yvonne quotes Harding:

"If your lifestyle change involves putting restrictions on your food intake," she concludes, "you will almost certainly be fat again in five years."

That's just absurd. And Robin's point is that everyone on the national weight control registry is evidence that this is not a forgone conclusion. It may be true for some people. Those who go back to consuming more calories or exercising less or both.

I appreciate Yvonne's clarifying comments, and I will repost them here to save all the trouble of scrolling and clicking:

April--I didn't mean to imply, in my original comment, that you were above normal. Lord, no. Just that you were above where you personally wanted to be right now, which is the impression I got from your blog.

The CR-osphere and the fatosphere are divided between people who believe, and people who do not believe, that they can exert control over their weight long-term. Not their health, but their weight.

Fatosphere people have tried, often for many years, and failed. For them, doing what Katerina did didn't work--or at least not for long. If you read their narratives, there's lots of heartbreaking stories of initial triumph followed by a breakdown of the system (whether through an unexpected onslaught of extreme hunger pangs or an unexplained weight gain despite still following the system), partial or total re-gain, confusion, guilt, self-blame, an effort to get back on the straight-and-narrow, a harder time losing the weight this time, another and much greater re-gain, more self-blame, more efforts, the realization that they're in real trouble, and the painful beginning of letting go of the dream of weight control. After having been through all this, often over a period of many years, many fatosphere bloggers are understandably angry, defensive and cynical. Some discuss trying to recover from overwhelming feelings of shame and failure. Understandably, these vulnerable people lash out hard at anything that may seem like a judgment of them or their experience. Even if it wasn't meant that way.

CR-osphere people, on the other hand, have tried and (thus far) succeeded. The earlier in their trajectory they start blogging, though, the more likely it is that they'll end up falling off the wagon. Remember when April wondered where all the new CR blogs had gone? Remember when some of her friends felt guilty because they'd fallen off CR, and she had to reassure them that it was okay?

Both camps have strengths and weaknesses. In my opinion, the main weakness of the fatosphere is its overreliance on the blog "Junkfood Science" for "proof" that fat is Just Great! and we should all relax. (They can and do cite any source at all for evidence that 98% of diets fail over the long term, but for evidence that being fat poses no health risks, the links to Junkfood Science rise alarmingly. In my opinion, it doesn't matter whether fat is "healthy" or not--it just is, and most people have to live with it.)

The main weakness of the CR-osphere, imho, is its naive rugged individualism, its faith in its own efforts, and its occasional confusion of the power to eat healthy food with the power to affect the outcome of that choice (thinness, longevity, freedom from heart disease).

The fatosphere is more realistic about how things really are; the CR-osphere has great recipes and tips :) and has a wonderfully optimistic atmosphere.

When Robin scolded the fatosphere's failure to bow in awe at those who achieve a one-year weight loss, however, I felt impelled to speak up. Lots of people in the fatosphere *have* lost weight for a whole year, and often more. They have a long-term perspective which the CR-osphere sometimes lacks. I felt that that needed to be said, both for the sake of fairness and also clarity in terms of what we mean by "weight loss."

A few clarifications from me:

1. CRON is not a weight loss diet. Most people who start CR are not overweight, and certainly not obese, though some are. Most who started CR blogs were not overweight to begin with. They were interested in CR because it is the only method that has actually slowed biological aging in mammals. Not to lose weight. Weight loss is a side effect. Some people like it, some people don't. MR doesn't. He's love to be fifty pounds heavier. He's just not willing to risk an earlier death for it.

2. Doing long term CR is a whole different animal from long term healthy weight loss. See previous entry.

3. While there are many huge tremendous differences between weight loss achieved by those who lost moderate amounts of weight on CR and those who've lost 100 pounds plus, they do have a few things in common. Most notably that consuming fewer calories leads to weight loss.
Many folks have found the tools that CR people use to maintain their CR are also helpful to those looking to lose weight. For instance, that eating high nutrition food makes it easier to maintain a lower calorie intake than eating less nutritious food.

That being said, here is what really strikes me as problematic about Yvonne's attitude, and an attitude I see reflected throughout the fatosphere (which btw I think is a very clever name.)

In my opinion, it doesn't matter whether fat is "healthy" or not--it just is, and most people have to live with it.

Hmmmm. Two things.

1. I believe it does matter if fat is unhealthy. It matters a lot for those who are fat, and also for the future of our health care system. If people are becoming sick and dying due to a factor that is preventable or modifiable, shouldn't they know about it and have the option to do something about it? We educated about smoking and seat belt use. Some people still choose to smoke or not wear seat belts. But they know they're taking a risk. If the there are risks, but obesity is not preventable, then our health care system had better work overtime to prepare for the onslaught of those needing care.

2. If fat just is, and some people just have to live with it, then why are so many people fatter now than at any point in history? Did a genetic mutation occur in the last thirty years, or is it possible that people's lifestyles have changed? I don't mean to be flippant, actually. Some people do assert that people are just "naturally" fatter now. But most don't. Some blame the food environment, some blame the individual, but very few folks think that it just happened.

If the numbers of those addicted to drugs were to suddenly skyrocket, with demonstrable health consequences, would people state that drug addiction just is, and that some people just had to live with it? Or that alcoholism just is, and that alcoholics may as well accept their condition because alcoholism is after all genetic? There most certainly are genetic components to alcoholism, and likely to drug addiction too. But we don't just sit back and let it be: did anybody notice the "War on Drugs?" The stigma surrounding alcoholism I'd venture is even worse than the horrible stigma surrounding obesity. Very few people would argue that alcoholics should be protected by anti-discrimination laws, yet alcoholism has a firmly genetic component that some people just get and others don't. Yet... we accept that alcoholism and drug addiction are treatable. And that while it's really really hard to get over both, it can be done. Look at Eric Clapton for heaven's sake!

I'm not arguing that discrimination against those who are obese is a good thing: as all who have been reading for a long time know, I've written extensively against weight bias. But to say that people should be treated with dignity and respect is different from saying that people who are overweight or obese are doomed to remain so forever and must learn to accept it.

Many long term alcoholics don't get Korsakov's syndrome or chirrosis, yet an alcoholics' acceptance movement would be laughed off the internet. Why? Because the health risks of substance abuse are undeniable and well documented. So are the risks of obesity... they just take longer, in some cases, to manifest. Addiction to substances is hard to kick, but everyone knows it can be done, often with a great deal of treatment and support and sometimes with medical intervention. The same is true of obesity and I think that the attempt to turn it from a health problem into a cultural issue is both dishonest and dangerous.

Posted by april at 2:11 AM | Comments (13) | TrackBack

April 8, 2008

Why Do Cardio?

Mary asks why I do cardio at all, when it's a calorie-burner and makes me hungrier.

This is not the entry where I address that question in depth.

The is the entry where I simply say that when a ton of people are waiting in line for the extremely slow elevator in my office building, it is a wonderful thing to be able to hippity hoppity skip skip skip up the stairs to my fourth floor office.

Posted by april at 7:50 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

April 6, 2008

Cucumber Celery Salad

Oh this is so good. And extremely low calorie: 14 calories per hundred grams.

Here's how I did it:

355 grams of celery
345 grams of cucumber
tarragon white vinegar
red wine vinegar
garlic powder
dried tarragon
1 tablespoon hoagie topping style hot pepper blend... 5 cals per tablespoon

Dice the veggies, mix all together in a bowl, allow to marinate.

I'm serving this for lunch over romaine with Quorn tenders, cubed eggwhites, avocado and olive oil, with a steamed lemon cauliflower dish with fresh parsley, garlic, and fresh pepper on the side.

I haven't been cooking much since I've been on the road nearly every day of the week, so it's very exciting to finally be home and be able to cook again! Of course, I'm back on the road next week...

Posted by april at 11:35 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack

April 5, 2008

Giant Tower of Cheese, Take Two

Robert C. Ufberg: Is Edward in there?

April: No, I thought he had gone to find you and see if your committee was ready to come back in.

Ufberg: No, he's not with us.

Lisa: I think he went upstairs.

April: Well then I'll go get him.

Ufberg: Can I come in there just for a minute to grab a bite of... what do you have?

April: A giant tower of cheese?

Ufberg: No, *I'm* the giant tower of cheese.

April: That's what I hear.

The elevator door closes.

Posted by april at 5:28 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack

April 4, 2008

My Patience, Tried

Yvonne writes, in response to an entry by Robin on how yes, one can lose weight and keep it off, that the fat acceptance folks are just waiting for us to regain our weight at or before the five year point, and that since Robin is only a year or so in, she doesn't count.

Then she (Yvonne) writes:

Since April is only in her fourth year of CR (and is currently engaged in a bet to shed something like ten pounds as rapidly as safely possible), she doesn't count as an example of permanent weight loss either. Close, but not yet.

Uh, no.

Pre-CR, I weighed 137 to 140 pounds (depending on which scale you believe) at 5' 2". Throughout my adult life, I struggled with weight, finding it nearly impossible to lose weight until I discovered the magic of the RDAs via calorie restriction. My current 115 (actually I think it's a bit lower now but I'm not sure cause I'm on the road with no scale) is above my CR low weight, and I want to keep my calories lower than I have in the last six months, but it also reflects a tremendous uptake in exercise, with resulting muscle mass. And guess what?

You don't have to be a body image counselor to recognize that 115 is not overweight!

Maybe it would be if I were four feet tall.

So let's see... I've maintained weight loss, at a weight that is undeniably in the "healthy" range, with excellent nutrition, increased muscle mass (pre-CR I did not exercise, yes, friends, that was all fat) and excellent health.

To me, that sounds like permanent weight loss.

I happen to want to take it one step beyond, to actual CR, which is quite different from losing weight and maintaining a weight that is healthy in terms of reducing disease risk but being unlikely to actually slow biological aging. Difficulty in doing that does not indicate that I am somehow fat by nature and that long term weight loss is impossible. Long term CR is hard as hell, but for me, maintaining my *healthy* weight is so easy that I'm often shocked. Just by maintaining the very rudimentary basics of my CR practice (such as the high protein breakfast and avoiding high sugar drinks, etc.) I can still indulge in an extra glass of wine, go out for a huge fancy dinner, eat desserts, order two sushi rolls (the whole roll, eight pieces total) instead of sashimi, and stay thin! Yes, a size four! And healthy! Not anorexic, bullemic, or freakin' nuts.

I mean, at least not nuts about this. I can be pretty nutty about other things, just ask my co-workers.

Point being, let's not confuse the difficulty of doing hardcore CR with some kind of difficulty maintaining healthy weight loss. If I were to gain back up to 137 again, then I'd say you have a point. But I'm not. I've remained steady in the low end of the "healthy" range thoughout this little detour from the hardcore CR path. This time, I'm going back to hardcore, but with exercise, which means I eat a little more than I did when I was sedentary.

But here is what really tries my patience. I get the feeling that Yvonne is a very nice, genuinely curious person. I trust that she means well. She seems to be somewhat confused at the difference between healthy weight loss and maintanence and actual CR, but a lot of people are, and that's okay.

But the message that she's sending, by saying that by going from 102 (my CR low weight... well, I did briefly hit 99 but not for long so I don't count it) which is decidedly *underweight* (likely result of calorie restriction, go figure) to a weight of 115 which is dead center of healthy on all the weight charts, that I am somehow failing to maintain long term healthy weight loss, and somehow proving that the contention that long term weight loss is impossible... well, that's just absurd.

You can't have it both ways. You can't say, "Oh, no, is CR really healthy, is it really healthy to be that thin, shouldn't you just be a 'healthy' but higher weight and eat 'healthy' but not restrict so much isn't that healthier than real CR?" and then turn around and say, "Aha! You are now no longer at your all time low, underweight super-CR'd no muscle weight! You prove that long term weight loss is impossible!"

(Actually, you can't even have it one way... even someone who had never questioned whether or not CR was healthy would be dead wrong to call my weighing 115 as opposed to 102 evidence that long term healthy weight loss and maintainence is impossible. Again: pre-CR, I was overweight at 137 - 140. Now, four years later, I weigh 115, solidly in healthy range, well below my previous adult weights. I guess I would just find it somewhat less annoying -- though no less incorrect, if you wouldn't dislike a double-negative -- coming from someone who didn't have a history of asserting -- also incorrectly -- that "healthy" higher weights are actually *healthier* than CR'd underweight weights. Healthy weights may be healthy, but they won't slow biological aging. CR might. CR leads in most cases to being underweight... we've been round this mulberry bush quite a few times.)

It's a good thing I'm not anorexic, or otherwise eating disordered, because those kinds of statements (along with the charming media saying "You're not skinny enough!" when I actually was 102!) would definitely trigger someone who had an unhealthy relationship with food to starve, purge, or whatever. Luckily, I have the sense to say "Think about it people! 115 is not overweight! Size 4 is not fat!" I am in great shape, great health, not as thin as I was when I was at my lowest calorie level, but without a doubt, a healthy weight. I am an example of maintaining healthy weight loss over a long period of time... not quite at the five year mark yet, but I'll be sure to report when I am. If I go back to being overweight, I'll be sure to let you know.

And while I'm at it, the reason why I gained weight from my CR absolute low point is not because I'm genetically doomed to weigh 115 (or any other weight.) It's because I ate more calories! Yes, eating more calories makes you gain weight. And you know why I ate more calories? Not because the evil food environment forced me (though it didn't make things easier) not because my metabolism mysteriously slowed down, but because I made choices, all too frequently, to eat more! Aha! Yes, at the root of my apparently scandalous weight gain, is not immutable facts of biology over which I have no control, but my very own choices. Perhaps I am a biological anomoly, but I find that eating more calories causes me to gain weight, while consuming fewer causes me to lose.

Real CR is hard, much harder than maintaining a "healthy" weight, and should not be confused with simple obesity avoidance. Difficulty in doing real, hardcore CR should not be confused with difficulty maintaining healthy weight.

Though if people were to stop confusing CR with obesity avoidance, it would eliminate one major topic of blog entries. I'd have to post more recipes, I guess.

April's CR Diary