Do You Keep Track?

I keep my carbs at 20 or under. I have learned that the more carbs I have, even while staying in the "low carb camp" of many, really messes with my, um, hormones?

No idea, but I DO KNOW that if I go over 100 for the day, I'll be in for a fun night full of hot flashes.

I've also learned that the closer I stay to zero, that I can stave off my stupid %*&^(%! period THAT WILL NEVER GO AWAY UNTIL I'M 90, for 35 days or so instead of 23/28.

In the middle of my Keto Quest last year I actually avoided it for NINETY DAYS. Man, it was great. And no, it wasn't because I was underweight or yadda yadda yadda. What it was, was pure bliss. Too bad keto doesn't help with a spontaneous uterinectomy. I would pay top dollar.

~Anonymous

KetoJulia, just wanted empathize. I'm 61 and still haven't gone a full year without a period. Last year I went 50 weeks, to the day, without having a period only to have 3 in a row. And, IIRC, you're 49, which means I've been having periods longer than you've been alive.

OH MY GOD I AM DOOMED!!!

Take it back, Marcadav, TAKE IT ALL BACK! NO NO NO NO NO!

Man, that sucks so bad. So sorry that it continues to mess with you.

I might have a glimmer of hope for 52 since that's when my sister's finally stopped.. but yanno,
that doesn't mean anything since we're not twins.. ha ha..

I had blood work done last June and my Dr. said my FSH (or whatever the heck it is) was that of a 30yo.

GREEEEAAAT. So it sounds like not only will I have Shark Week for another 50 years, but I'm also fully capable
of still getting knocked up and having a child with 43 eyes and limbs.

Maybe you and I can both go in for a Buy One Get One partial hysterectomy. Who needs that stupid uterus
anymore anyway!?

Julia

But Julia, please try to look on the bright side. You are loving your strength, and fitness and the figure you are able to maintain.

You don't want to hear it but I'm 53, periods still coming though less regularly. At first I was annoyed too, because I had thought 40 was the normal cutoff (not sure where I heard that, but too bad it's off by more than a decade).

Oh I know, I know.. I count my blessings every day!

Wow, 40, yeah, that's super early.. but boy wouldn't it be great??

Speaking of fitness... GUESS WHO DID 12 CHIN UPS TODAY.. OH YEAH, THAT'D BE ME.

So I guess I'll stop complaining.. but only if it would give me some freaking warning.. Back in the Land of Many
Carbs, first I'd get super bitchy so I'd KNOW it was coming.. but now, NOTHING..

Nothing but the resounding F-WORD in the bathroom stall at work.. because it ALWAYS HITS AT WORK.

Yeah, the lack of warning is interesting, isn't it? It's a surprise every time.

Or you could be me, having a period that lasts for 2 weeks every 3 weeks or so. Three gynecologists recommended a hysterectomy, after a D&C failed to correct anything, and they found an egg-sized mass in my uterus. Fortunately, after removal of the uterus, the tumour tested benign. But that's when surgical menopause began its sneaky toll on a genetically-prone person, and I ended up with a major stroke 7 years later. IOW, be careful what you wish for w/o knowing that menopause removes your youth in a most decisive manner. FWIW, when 20, I wished for the ability to bear children as long as possible. Six kids and 20 years later, I was tired of the whole monthly cycle, but still harboured a guilty longing for more babies. Anyway, now have 11 grandkids and 8 greats, a fluctuating number. I'm finally over my baby fetish.

On vacation in Sarasota, FL (On The Bayou origin) and topically, Kirsten is on her third period since she resumed, well, you know......... with me in November. Told me it's now more regular than before.

Age 52, was six months since last spotting. Then resumption of active sex life. Which also has jacked my testosterone. It's so obvious.

No wonder men have always thought women inexplicable, all the hormonal swings. Not said negatively, just fact. I at long last get "it" now and I relish the differences .
FYI, perfect weather. Kirsten acknowledges that where I used to live is unique and almost Never Never Land. Not even being on the bayou anymore.

I only count calories once in a while and only keep a food journal once in a while. I know that if I am strictly on the autoimmune protocol I need around two hours less sleep every night, and have more energy throughout the day, and also have zero stomach issues. However that diet is simply too restrictive for me and I fall of the wagon way too often... which is really bad for my health and energy. So I am working really hard on introducing as many foods as possible. In that process I do keep track of new foods I introduce and what happens when I introduce them. I also do count calories once in a while, just to get a ballpark idea of how much I consume in a day - but if I do it everyday I start obsessing and that is not a healthy place for me either...

Balance...

I've been keeping a journal for 2 1/2 years now--with what I eat, when I skip meals, any meds I take, how much and well I sleep, and some idea of activity level. It's become such a habit I'm not sure I can stop now! It's been incredibly helpful in helping me nail down foods or drinks that interfere with sleep, how to keep my weight down, and steers me towards a better diet overall. If something happens once, that certainly doesn't prove causation, but if I can go back and find the same reaction twice or more before, that is quite strong evidence for a direct relationship.

I don't measure anything, or count calories or carbs, but I do try and keep carbs down. It's very clear that if I eat more than a certain level of carbs my weight will rise, but I can eat a lot of calories (fat!).

mudhenny wrote:I've been keeping a journal for 2 1/2 years now--with what I eat, when I skip meals, any meds I take, how much and well I sleep, and some idea of activity level. It's become such a habit I'm not sure I can stop now! It's been incredibly helpful in helping me nail down foods or drinks that interfere with sleep, how to keep my weight down, and steers me towards a better diet overall. If something happens once, that certainly doesn't prove causation, but if I can go back and find the same reaction twice or more before, that is quite strong evidence for a direct relationship.

I don't measure anything, or count calories or carbs, but I do try and keep carbs down. It's very clear that if I eat more than a certain level of carbs my weight will rise, but I can eat a lot of calories (fat!).

Interesting post. That's a lot of work, but certainly could be effective in learning how your body responds to your food choices in your environment. I, too, observed that my weight responded quickly to carb intake while being unresponsive to higher calorie intake from fats. I've been on a mission for the last few years trying to understand the "why" behind my personal observation. Some folks have the opposite response. For others, it doesn't seem to matter much whether they ingest carbs or fats predominantly. Keeping a journal, as you've done, would certainly help frustrated folks to get to know themselves.

Depending on the concept of "Calories In Calories Out" for weight maintenance will be a frustrating experience if one doesn't know the difference between their personal responses to fat intake vs. carb intake.

It is well known that people starting a low-carb diet lose a lot of water. When they eat more carbs again, they will regain water. The initial loss of water is not progress, and the regain of water is not a setback.

Wait! The whole water means nothing thing...

I've never made a secret of my trials to keep my weight at healthy levels. So here's the thing...

If I haul my (sometimes) fat azz onto the scale and I haven't been watching what I eat, should I just deduct the up to eight-pound difference between what I weigh that day and what I weigh when I'm staying in the range of ~100 gms of carbs?

IMNSHO, fluids/water matters a lot. One of the first things they give people with high BP, is a diuretic. Edema is not a healthy state (nor is dehydration). So, if lower or low carb rushes some excess fluids out of one's system, that's a very good thing. And for good health, it may very well be progress!

Though this is a bit tongue in cheek: if it counts when I can't zip up my skinny jeans, then it counts when I lose it and get back into them.

Peace

I'd pretty much agree, LoonieJ on this, and it is a rare event when I find myself disagreeing with Sharperhawk. Water loss may be cheap and easy but it is still a loss, and if it helps your mental state to see that loss, it is all good. Seems to me that if I'm toting around 10 lbs less weight every day that is a good thing, even if some of it may come back someday in the whenever future if the diet changes. And when you visit your MD for your routine checkup and are put on the scale, nobody is gonna ask you how much water loss you think you have that shouldn't be counted.

OK guys, can I input my 2 cents worth? I have had a weight problem since my first year of life, and it only has worsened throughout life. Most diets I blew off as unsustainable both for quality and quantity , especially quantity! When I reached my absolute heaviest following a stroke, the only thing that brought my weight down was the original Atkins diet, minus the low carb junk foods.  Real foods, mainly meat and a few veggies. The only time I could honestly blame any regain on water was when my congestive heart failure was active, and when meds brought it under control, the gain disappeared as fast as it came. For most of this winter, my weight loss consisted of a few ounces per week, but the direction was down, not up. My former doc would be pleased; my new doc doesn't remember me way(weigh) back then.

I’m in with Rig and Loonie. While water weight loss may reappear at some future time, fat loss can also do the same if proper eating is not maintained.

I for one can notice it in my clothing as does Loonie. Not only that, I can see the bloat in my skin. Neither are good for mental or physical health. It tells me there is inflammation going on and I’d better step up and do something about it.

Generally speaking if you lose the water and continue with good eating, it won’t reappear, and it won’t even it you go off the rails a day or two. It only happen if you stay off the rails. In which case you deserve the scale number or the tape measure number to go up.

We have to distinguish between excess fluid retention (edema) vs. the water that is incorporated within glycogen. Water weight loss, associated with initial low carbing, is a signal that glycogen stores are being utilized for fuel, necessary before significant fat loss begins. The water weight loss is a good sign. Conversely, if we resume higher carb intake, glycogen storage will manifest quickly in the form of water weight gain. A mere 100 grams of glucose requires about 500 grams of water to form glycogen. That 600 grams translates to almost 1 1/2 pounds of weight gain. Depressing news to a daily weight watcher.

John, it is depressing for a daily scale watcher, that’s why I stick to once a month. Things can come and go, if small will be unnoticed. However if more than small, my clothes will tell me all I need to know w/o a scale or tape.

Good info John. Always good to see the why of what is occurring. OTOH, the scale can't tell the difference, if just records how much force your bod is exerting on the scales due to gravity. The lack of water still "counts" as far as I'm concerned, and I'm glad to take any freebies mother nature wants to toss my way.

Right now I feel that a running average of weighing every day serves me best. IDK if it really is, but I feel I need to monitor my weight quite closely (i regained half of what I lost last year since Christmas bc. my Wii broke and I thought I could live without a scale...).

Water weight certainly counts - sure it isn't fat, but it is not a sign of health.

I also track calories and macros, I am below 20g net carbs a day, mostly around 10. My proteins are 50-100g. Fat arpund 100g. My cals are between 1200-2000 usually around 13-1400).

Dawn, I kind of like your running average idea. But I really think NM has the best approach, let your clothes tell you how you are doing. I also toss in the "how am I feeling index" which is, of course, exceedingly subjective.

I too am a daily weight watcher. I weigh every day, often multiple times and at times am overly compulsive with it. Over the last few years I now know how much I gain/lose when I eat breakfast, drink a mug of coffee, go to the bathroom, etc. However. I only "officially" look at my weight 1 x week and use a snapshot approach to track my progress, or lack of progress. I also complement that with a once a month weight and tape measure session of my key dimensions and this monthly info becomes my historical tracking tool.

Glycogen is a good thing. Losing glycogen is a cheap trick that works well for low-carb diet gurus, whose regimens get the credit for the fast and easy weight loss. Then at some point you eat some carbs, those pounds come back, and you blame yourself or are confused.

All I can say is that  low carb has to be a lifestyle, not a time-limited experiment. If People shun education in what that means, they will always be dazzled by neon ads promoted by fly-by-nighters and end up blaming the diet, not their own misapplication when the weight returns with a vengeance. Mine never did, because I never went back to a carb-heavy lifestyle. I won't say I never gained anything back when I loosened up a bit on carbs, but it was never anything I haven't since taken off by a return to more strictness. Since then, primal and keto have hogged the spotlight, but both are basically variations of low carb.