Swindon Advertiser'Ugly duckling' becomes slim swan after shedding 15 stones (From Swindon Advertiser)

Get involved! Send photos, video, news & views. Text SWINDON NEWS to 80360 or email us

'Ugly duckling' becomes slim swan after shedding 15 stones

Swindon Advertiser: Alexandra Haynes now after her dramatic weight loss Alexandra Haynes now after her dramatic weight loss

A self-confessed ugly duckling who became a swan after losing a colossal 15 stones is now giving the benefit of her experience to other would-be slimmers.

Alexandra Haynes, 29, had endured a miserable school career as the much-bullied class “fattie”.

At the age of 22 and weighing in at 28.5 stone, she knew she had to take herself in hand and signed up at the local branch of Weight Watchers.

The mum-of-two said: “If I had thought about the enormity of the challenge I had ahead of me, I would never had set out on it.

“But I never set myself a target. I just wanted to lose as much weight as I could.

“My father, Graeme Brady, was my big inspiration, although my mum and brother helped too. I felt like every little goal I got we reached together. His saying was, I always knew you would become my beautiful swan.”

“This is something he often told me when I was growing up, particularly when bullies made life difficult for me at school.”

Mrs Haynes continued to lose weight and when she reached 17.5 stone she became pregnant with the first of her two sons. While she was pregnant Mr Brady continued to encourage her to eat healthily.

Sadly, Mr Brady died suddenly a few years ago, leaving Mrs Haynes devastated and angry.

She said: “Rather than giving up, I looked through my dad’s photos and reminded myself just how far I had come and why dad would want me to continue.

“I miss dad every single day but I know just how proud he would be of me and ‘the swan I became’.

Swindon Advertiser:

Mrs Haynes in her heavyweight days

 

Now Mrs Haynes, from Devizes, tips the scales at a dainty 13.5 stone and has trained as a Weight Watchers leader, even leading classes in Swindon. This month she started her first meetings, helping other residents with weight problems realise their goals.

She said: “I have now become a leader and run several meetings a week in Swindon.

“Now I am privileged as a leader to have been given the chance to support others in changing their life as Weight Watchers has mine.

“If I can help give back the support I received from the fantastic leaders I had I can not think of anything more rewarding.

“They can see what a difference weight loss has made for me and if I can do it, so can they.”

Mrs Haynes’s husband Paul, although he is delighted with his wife’s achievement, is not overwhelmed.

Mrs Haynes said: “Paul knew me when I was at my heaviest, so he loves me whatever size I am.”

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:05am Wed 5 Feb 14

house on the hill says...

Well done to her and proof it can be done. I do hope she manages to stay as she is which will be a challenge in itself. Lets hope this helps to inspire others who are truly unhappy with their weight to make the change.
Well done to her and proof it can be done. I do hope she manages to stay as she is which will be a challenge in itself. Lets hope this helps to inspire others who are truly unhappy with their weight to make the change. house on the hill
  • Score: 24

9:22am Wed 5 Feb 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

Sadly using weight watchers she's most likely starving herself and unlikely to keep the weight off in the longer term as her body uses its muscle store rather than burning fat. Hopefully she has included a program of exercise as well to improve her fitness which will give her a much greater chance of keeping the weight off.
Sadly using weight watchers she's most likely starving herself and unlikely to keep the weight off in the longer term as her body uses its muscle store rather than burning fat. Hopefully she has included a program of exercise as well to improve her fitness which will give her a much greater chance of keeping the weight off. The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: -10

9:54am Wed 5 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

The age old myth that the body burns muscle tissue rather than fat stores has long since been debunked.

In fact, even basic common sense tells us that the human body will always use the fat it's laid down in preparation for times of starvation than the muscle is had built for the purpose of being ready to obtain food the next time it's available.

The entire point of the fat/energy storing biology of our bodies is that it is used when food is unavailable (either by circumstance or choice).


Jeff Novick, M.S., R.D.

A common dieting myth held by people is that they may not be losing weight because they are in the "starvation mode" from eating to few calories. And, in response to the intake of this low calorie level, their body has gone into "starvation mode" and slowed down their metabolism and is holding on to the weight. The usual recommendation to get out of starvation mode and allow the body to lose more weight, is to consume more calories. Eat more calories, to lose more weight.

Really?

Well, for anyone struggling to lose weight, this may sound sensible, but as you will see, it, like most other dieting myths, it is inaccurate. A few things to consider before we get to the "starvation mode."

First, the human body, as is our world, is governed by the laws of physics. Body weight is a product of energy balance. We can not violate the laws of physics and thermodynamics. The energy we consume must go somewhere and to maintain a certain level of weight, and equivalent amount of energy must be consumed and an equilibrium must be achieved.

Second, in regard to metabolism, about >70% of our base metabolism is driven by our brain and other vital organs and is not really effected by food consumption as I discussed in the metabolism blog. We have little impact on this basal metabolic rate.

Third, most attempts to accurately track food consumption under report (intentionally and/or not intentionally) by about 30 and attempts to tract exercise and activities levels over report by up to 50%. Even professionals can be as much as 30% off or more. This is usually part of the problem that people are not accurately determining their caloric intake and output.

Now, in regard to the "starvation" mode, someone who has extra body weight and body fat is not in any "starvation mode" where they need to 'kick start" their metabolism by eating more calories. You can not "eat more" calories to force your body to "lose weight".

In regard to metabolism, if you are overweight/overfat, you can not cause your metabolism to decrease below a level needed to lose weight while you have extra weight/fat on you, and you can not "lose more weight by eating more calories/food." This is a misunderstanding of the principles of metabolism that does not apply to overweight people trying to lose weight.

Let's say we look at someone who says they are only eating only 800 calories and not losing weight. A well meaning and good intentioned friend (or professional) has told them they are in starvation mode and in order to lose weight and/or kick-start their metabolism, they need to eat more. But, what if instead of eating more, what do you think would happen if instead they just stopped eating altogether? Would they go further into starvation mode and continue to stay at the same weight or maybe even "gain" weight?

Clearly, they would lose more weight if they stopped eating altogether.

We all know (especially those who are familiar with fasting) that if you were to stop eating completely and just live on pure water, you would start to lose weight almost instantly and would continue to do so.

But according to this theory of the "starvation mode," if you were really in it and you fasted, by its own rational you would lose less weight if any at all, not more. We know this is not accurate.

So, where did this myth come from?

There is a true phenomenon known as the starvation response and it is well documented in the Minnesota Starvation experiments and the Hunger Fasts that have been studied. However, it only happens in humans when they lose enough body fat that they fall below the level of essential fat. In a man, this would be below around 5% fat and in women just above that.

Most humans will look like holocaust survivors at that time. Here is a picture of some of the subjects from the famous Minnesota Starvation experiments from the 1940s. Even at this point, after months of a low calorie diet with heavy exercise, they were not yet in the so-called "starvation mode" where they experienced significant metabolic changes.

In addition, when this point is truly reached, the body does make several metabolic shifts to preserve itself and if it is not feed more calories, can cease to exist. It is a matter of life and death. Hence the name.

This is not the same thing that happens when someone who is overweight and has a high percentage of body fat, is not losing weight. Usually it is due to an inaccurate assesment of their energy balance.
The age old myth that the body burns muscle tissue rather than fat stores has long since been debunked. In fact, even basic common sense tells us that the human body will always use the fat it's laid down in preparation for times of starvation than the muscle is had built for the purpose of being ready to obtain food the next time it's available. The entire point of the fat/energy storing biology of our bodies is that it is used when food is unavailable (either by circumstance or choice). [quote] Jeff Novick, M.S., R.D. A common dieting myth held by people is that they may not be losing weight because they are in the "starvation mode" from eating to few calories. And, in response to the intake of this low calorie level, their body has gone into "starvation mode" and slowed down their metabolism and is holding on to the weight. The usual recommendation to get out of starvation mode and allow the body to lose more weight, is to consume more calories. Eat more calories, to lose more weight. Really? Well, for anyone struggling to lose weight, this may sound sensible, but as you will see, it, like most other dieting myths, it is inaccurate. A few things to consider before we get to the "starvation mode." First, the human body, as is our world, is governed by the laws of physics. Body weight is a product of energy balance. We can not violate the laws of physics and thermodynamics. The energy we consume must go somewhere and to maintain a certain level of weight, and equivalent amount of energy must be consumed and an equilibrium must be achieved. Second, in regard to metabolism, about >70% of our base metabolism is driven by our brain and other vital organs and is not really effected by food consumption as I discussed in the metabolism blog. We have little impact on this basal metabolic rate. Third, most attempts to accurately track food consumption under report (intentionally and/or not intentionally) by about 30 and attempts to tract exercise and activities levels over report by up to 50%. Even professionals can be as much as 30% off or more. This is usually part of the problem that people are not accurately determining their caloric intake and output. Now, in regard to the "starvation" mode, someone who has extra body weight and body fat is not in any "starvation mode" where they need to 'kick start" their metabolism by eating more calories. You can not "eat more" calories to force your body to "lose weight". In regard to metabolism, if you are overweight/overfat, you can not cause your metabolism to decrease below a level needed to lose weight while you have extra weight/fat on you, and you can not "lose more weight by eating more calories/food." This is a misunderstanding of the principles of metabolism that does not apply to overweight people trying to lose weight. Let's say we look at someone who says they are only eating only 800 calories and not losing weight. A well meaning and good intentioned friend (or professional) has told them they are in starvation mode and in order to lose weight and/or kick-start their metabolism, they need to eat more. But, what if instead of eating more, what do you think would happen if instead they just stopped eating altogether? Would they go further into starvation mode and continue to stay at the same weight or maybe even "gain" weight? Clearly, they would lose more weight if they stopped eating altogether. We all know (especially those who are familiar with fasting) that if you were to stop eating completely and just live on pure water, you would start to lose weight almost instantly and would continue to do so. But according to this theory of the "starvation mode," if you were really in it and you fasted, by its own rational you would lose less weight if any at all, not more. We know this is not accurate. So, where did this myth come from? There is a true phenomenon known as the starvation response and it is well documented in the Minnesota Starvation experiments and the Hunger Fasts that have been studied. However, it only happens in humans when they lose enough body fat that they fall below the level of essential fat. In a man, this would be below around 5% fat and in women just above that. Most humans will look like holocaust survivors at that time. Here is a picture of some of the subjects from the famous Minnesota Starvation experiments from the 1940s. Even at this point, after months of a low calorie diet with heavy exercise, they were not yet in the so-called "starvation mode" where they experienced significant metabolic changes. In addition, when this point is truly reached, the body does make several metabolic shifts to preserve itself and if it is not feed more calories, can cease to exist. It is a matter of life and death. Hence the name. This is not the same thing that happens when someone who is overweight and has a high percentage of body fat, is not losing weight. Usually it is due to an inaccurate assesment of their energy balance. [/quote] ChannelX
  • Score: 0

10:09am Wed 5 Feb 14

TKT1402 says...

I know Alex ,and she has done an amazing job!! - a true inspiration to all who are wanting to shift some weight- as for negative comments on here shows what true 'ugly ducklings are around.
....WELL DONE ALEX xx
I know Alex ,and she has done an amazing job!! - a true inspiration to all who are wanting to shift some weight- as for negative comments on here shows what true 'ugly ducklings are around. ....WELL DONE ALEX xx TKT1402
  • Score: 14

10:10am Wed 5 Feb 14

Davethered says...

Well done Alexandra , you look absolutely lovely , good girl.
Well done Alexandra , you look absolutely lovely , good girl. Davethered
  • Score: 13

10:24am Wed 5 Feb 14

urchy-101 says...

I'm sure it is called "banter" sic!
TKT... touched a nerve...

The fact of the matter is that person has chosen to keep putting on and putting on... it's only when medically they are deemed a health hazard to themselves that they actually think "I best start looking after myself"...
I'm sure it is called "banter" sic! TKT... touched a nerve... The fact of the matter is that person has chosen to keep putting on and putting on... it's only when medically they are deemed a health hazard to themselves that they actually think "I best start looking after myself"... urchy-101
  • Score: -12

10:35am Wed 5 Feb 14

swindondad says...

I am pleased to see a positive storey to balance the "bad news" statistic also published in today’s paper.

Surely it is better that those people who do need to improve their health / diet / exercise can follow Alex's example (carrot) rather than just being "Shamed into action" (stick) by the media / medical profession etc.
I am pleased to see a positive storey to balance the "bad news" statistic also published in today’s paper. Surely it is better that those people who do need to improve their health / diet / exercise can follow Alex's example (carrot) rather than just being "Shamed into action" (stick) by the media / medical profession etc. swindondad
  • Score: 10

10:43am Wed 5 Feb 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

Nice selective quoting, either by you or by Mr Novick, and seems to ignore many of the other conclusions from the Minnesota experiment.

Lyle McDonald (physiologist) puts it this way:
In general, it's true that metabolic rate tends to drop more with more excessive caloric deficits… But here's the thing: in no study I've ever seen has the drop in metabolic rate been sufficient to completely offset the caloric deficit. That is, say that cutting your calories by 50% per day leads to a reduction in the metabolic rate of 10%. Starvation mode you say. Well, yes. But you still have a 40% daily deficit.

But, keep in mind that apart from weight loss, semi-starvation has other not-so-cool effects on your mind and body. The other physical effects from the Minnesota study on semi-starvation included a significant drop in physical endurance, reduction in strength of about 10%, and sluggish reflexes. Those that were the most fit initially showed the greatest deterioration. In addition, heart volume shrank about 20%, pulses slowed and their body temperatures dropped. Concentration and judgment became impaired. Sexual function was reduced and all lost interest in sex. They had every physical indication of accelerated aging. But keep in mind, this was a year-long study, not something that happened in a just a few days or two weeks of eating restricted calories.

The more dramatic effects of semi-starvation from the Minnesota study were psychological, similar to what can be observed in anorexic patients. The men became nervous, anxious, apathetic, withdrawn, impatient, self-critical, emotional and depressed. A few even mutilated themselves, one chopping off three fingers in stress. They became obsessed with food, thinking, talking and reading about it constantly; developed weird eating rituals; hoarding, etc.

Now, let’s look at another aspect. The folks at Cambridge University in England did a study to determine the different effects starvation had on lean people versus obese people. The study can be found here: http://www.unu.edu/u
nupress/food2/UID07E
/uid0 7e11.htm. Let’s just cut to the chase with this study.

Does starvation mode slow down the metabolism? No and Yes.

In the first 2 days of starvation, there is a small absolute increase in basic metabolic rate relative to values obtained from overnight fasting. Overnight fasting is what every one of us does during our sleeping hours. So it is not true that going below recommended calories for one day is going to slow down your metabolism -- quite the contrary, it may speed it up just a little. Of course, this is just limited to the first few days. After that, studies in fact support that “starvation mode” slows down metabolism.

Does Starvation mode cause our bodies to catabilize (devour our muscles and other lean mass)? Yes and No.

Lean individuals lost great amounts of fat-free, lean tissue during starvation, but obese individuals lost much more fat tissue. The loss of lean mass is not as critical to the obese person simply because an obese person has more lean mass than a person of the same age and height but normal weight. Here we get to a basic idea that makes sense – fat storage – the same way animals build up bulk to rely on during the winter, obese people have fat stores they can use (to a limited extent) in times of need. This means that the effects of a semi-starvation diet upon a normal weight individual are of course much more devastating than the effects on someone who is obese.

Finally, some conclusions. Does all this mean I should reduce my caloric intake below the minimum recommended as an effective way to lose weight? If you think the answer is yes, then you haven’t carefully read everything here, so I will spell it out:

Let’s start by clearing up that major myth I see repeated over and over again in the forums: that a single day or even a few days of extreme caloric restrictions forces your body into starvation mode, significantly reducing your metabolism and causing you to lose muscles. Not true. You may, in fact, lose weight in the short term. Your body does not go into starvation mode after a few days of extreme calorie restricted eating.

However, let’s look again at the Minnesota study for further compelling evidence why semi-starvation is not a good idea for long-term weight loss. In the latter half of the Minnesota Starvation Study the men were allowed to eat ad libitum again. Researchers found they had insatiable appetites, yet never felt full, these effects continued for months afterwards. Semi-starvation diets don’t work long-term for this simple reason – under ordinary pressures, when eating resumes, people put the weight back on and oftentimes, gain more.

And let’s not forget the other physical and psychological effects mentioned earlier. Any of those sound appealing to you? Reduced concentration or sexual function anyone? The Cambridge study also looked at several deaths from people who undertook extreme starvation diets, particularly those that did not create a good nutritional balance in the calories that were consumed.
Nice selective quoting, either by you or by Mr Novick, and seems to ignore many of the other conclusions from the Minnesota experiment. Lyle McDonald (physiologist) puts it this way: In general, it's true that metabolic rate tends to drop more with more excessive caloric deficits… But here's the thing: in no study I've ever seen has the drop in metabolic rate been sufficient to completely offset the caloric deficit. That is, say that cutting your calories by 50% per day leads to a reduction in the metabolic rate of 10%. Starvation mode you say. Well, yes. But you still have a 40% daily deficit. But, keep in mind that apart from weight loss, semi-starvation has other not-so-cool effects on your mind and body. The other physical effects from the Minnesota study on semi-starvation included a significant drop in physical endurance, reduction in strength of about 10%, and sluggish reflexes. Those that were the most fit initially showed the greatest deterioration. In addition, heart volume shrank about 20%, pulses slowed and their body temperatures dropped. Concentration and judgment became impaired. Sexual function was reduced and all lost interest in sex. They had every physical indication of accelerated aging. But keep in mind, this was a year-long study, not something that happened in a just a few days or two weeks of eating restricted calories. The more dramatic effects of semi-starvation from the Minnesota study were psychological, similar to what can be observed in anorexic patients. The men became nervous, anxious, apathetic, withdrawn, impatient, self-critical, emotional and depressed. A few even mutilated themselves, one chopping off three fingers in stress. They became obsessed with food, thinking, talking and reading about it constantly; developed weird eating rituals; hoarding, etc. Now, let’s look at another aspect. The folks at Cambridge University in England did a study to determine the different effects starvation had on lean people versus obese people. The study can be found here: http://www.unu.edu/u nupress/food2/UID07E /uid0 7e11.htm. Let’s just cut to the chase with this study. Does starvation mode slow down the metabolism? No and Yes. In the first 2 days of starvation, there is a small absolute increase in basic metabolic rate relative to values obtained from overnight fasting. Overnight fasting is what every one of us does during our sleeping hours. So it is not true that going below recommended calories for one day is going to slow down your metabolism -- quite the contrary, it may speed it up just a little. Of course, this is just limited to the first few days. After that, studies in fact support that “starvation mode” slows down metabolism. Does Starvation mode cause our bodies to catabilize (devour our muscles and other lean mass)? Yes and No. Lean individuals lost great amounts of fat-free, lean tissue during starvation, but obese individuals lost much more fat tissue. The loss of lean mass is not as critical to the obese person simply because an obese person has more lean mass than a person of the same age and height but normal weight. Here we get to a basic idea that makes sense – fat storage – the same way animals build up bulk to rely on during the winter, obese people have fat stores they can use (to a limited extent) in times of need. This means that the effects of a semi-starvation diet upon a normal weight individual are of course much more devastating than the effects on someone who is obese. Finally, some conclusions. Does all this mean I should reduce my caloric intake below the minimum recommended as an effective way to lose weight? If you think the answer is yes, then you haven’t carefully read everything here, so I will spell it out: Let’s start by clearing up that major myth I see repeated over and over again in the forums: that a single day or even a few days of extreme caloric restrictions forces your body into starvation mode, significantly reducing your metabolism and causing you to lose muscles. Not true. You may, in fact, lose weight in the short term. Your body does not go into starvation mode after a few days of extreme calorie restricted eating. However, let’s look again at the Minnesota study for further compelling evidence why semi-starvation is not a good idea for long-term weight loss. In the latter half of the Minnesota Starvation Study the men were allowed to eat ad libitum again. Researchers found they had insatiable appetites, yet never felt full, these effects continued for months afterwards. Semi-starvation diets don’t work long-term for this simple reason – under ordinary pressures, when eating resumes, people put the weight back on and oftentimes, gain more. And let’s not forget the other physical and psychological effects mentioned earlier. Any of those sound appealing to you? Reduced concentration or sexual function anyone? The Cambridge study also looked at several deaths from people who undertook extreme starvation diets, particularly those that did not create a good nutritional balance in the calories that were consumed. The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: -1

10:46am Wed 5 Feb 14

Alexandra5289 says...

It has taken 8 years and came from me and no one else's orders. I did it for me and no ones orders, think that is one of the reasons it has worked so successfully! Certainly like food too much to starve. I was one of the lucky ones who with weight watchers help I have broken the cycle. As for exercise 6 mile walks, the gym and martial arts that I have developed a massive passion for see to that side of things being covered.
It has taken 8 years and came from me and no one else's orders. I did it for me and no ones orders, think that is one of the reasons it has worked so successfully! Certainly like food too much to starve. I was one of the lucky ones who with weight watchers help I have broken the cycle. As for exercise 6 mile walks, the gym and martial arts that I have developed a massive passion for see to that side of things being covered. Alexandra5289
  • Score: 25

11:06am Wed 5 Feb 14

The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man says...

Alexandra5289 wrote:
It has taken 8 years and came from me and no one else's orders. I did it for me and no ones orders, think that is one of the reasons it has worked so successfully! Certainly like food too much to starve. I was one of the lucky ones who with weight watchers help I have broken the cycle. As for exercise 6 mile walks, the gym and martial arts that I have developed a massive passion for see to that side of things being covered.
Fantastic, keep it up! :)
[quote][p][bold]Alexandra5289[/bold] wrote: It has taken 8 years and came from me and no one else's orders. I did it for me and no ones orders, think that is one of the reasons it has worked so successfully! Certainly like food too much to starve. I was one of the lucky ones who with weight watchers help I have broken the cycle. As for exercise 6 mile walks, the gym and martial arts that I have developed a massive passion for see to that side of things being covered.[/p][/quote]Fantastic, keep it up! :) The Artist formally known as Grumpy Old Man
  • Score: 8

11:16am Wed 5 Feb 14

Davey Gravey says...

Well done to Alexandra. Ignore the idiots.


Regarding muscle burning. That isn't a myth and has been proven. Only last week there was a programme with identical twins that showed muscle decrease when eating a certain diet in one of them.
Well done to Alexandra. Ignore the idiots. Regarding muscle burning. That isn't a myth and has been proven. Only last week there was a programme with identical twins that showed muscle decrease when eating a certain diet in one of them. Davey Gravey
  • Score: 2

12:27pm Wed 5 Feb 14

swindondad says...

From a health standpoint I would advise people to stay away from "extreme forms of dieting". I know there is one doing the rounds ATM that is 500 calories a day combined with pills.

You will undoubtedly lose weight (and money) but you could do serious harm you your body.

IMHO you are better off with a balanced diet (if you find it helpful to have someone else count the calories or prepare the meals that is up to you) and regular exercise.
From a health standpoint I would advise people to stay away from "extreme forms of dieting". I know there is one doing the rounds ATM that is 500 calories a day combined with pills. You will undoubtedly lose weight (and money) but you could do serious harm you your body. IMHO you are better off with a balanced diet (if you find it helpful to have someone else count the calories or prepare the meals that is up to you) and regular exercise. swindondad
  • Score: 5

1:39pm Wed 5 Feb 14

house on the hill says...

Alexandra5289 wrote:
It has taken 8 years and came from me and no one else's orders. I did it for me and no ones orders, think that is one of the reasons it has worked so successfully! Certainly like food too much to starve. I was one of the lucky ones who with weight watchers help I have broken the cycle. As for exercise 6 mile walks, the gym and martial arts that I have developed a massive passion for see to that side of things being covered.
Alex, the secret to what you have done is attitude and you clearly have the right one, I do hope your positive approach inspires others. As many know it isnt about a diet it is about a complete lifestyle change, maybe you should set up your own group and pass on your achievements to them.
[quote][p][bold]Alexandra5289[/bold] wrote: It has taken 8 years and came from me and no one else's orders. I did it for me and no ones orders, think that is one of the reasons it has worked so successfully! Certainly like food too much to starve. I was one of the lucky ones who with weight watchers help I have broken the cycle. As for exercise 6 mile walks, the gym and martial arts that I have developed a massive passion for see to that side of things being covered.[/p][/quote]Alex, the secret to what you have done is attitude and you clearly have the right one, I do hope your positive approach inspires others. As many know it isnt about a diet it is about a complete lifestyle change, maybe you should set up your own group and pass on your achievements to them. house on the hill
  • Score: 6

2:38pm Wed 5 Feb 14

Alexandra5289 says...

I love my job with weight watchers and find it so rewarding. To all those that mention muscle mass. Through weight watchers it has not been extreme or massively quick. It has taken me 8 years of a balanced diet and behaviour change to food. I have gradually added in and increased exercise over the last 8 years in line with my weight loss to help maintain a steady loss and tone.
I love my job with weight watchers and find it so rewarding. To all those that mention muscle mass. Through weight watchers it has not been extreme or massively quick. It has taken me 8 years of a balanced diet and behaviour change to food. I have gradually added in and increased exercise over the last 8 years in line with my weight loss to help maintain a steady loss and tone. Alexandra5289
  • Score: 6

2:55pm Wed 5 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

Davey Gravey wrote:
Well done to Alexandra. Ignore the idiots.


Regarding muscle burning. That isn't a myth and has been proven. Only last week there was a programme with identical twins that showed muscle decrease when eating a certain diet in one of them.
'Starvation mode' IS a myth, even basic common sense over human physiology and biology tells us that.

Why would a body system lay specifically lay down fat as an energy store only to then use muscle tissue for energy when food isn't available?

If you have less than 5% body fat then it may start to happen. But if you have 5% body fat or less you're highly unlikely to be on a fasting diet.
[quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: Well done to Alexandra. Ignore the idiots. Regarding muscle burning. That isn't a myth and has been proven. Only last week there was a programme with identical twins that showed muscle decrease when eating a certain diet in one of them.[/p][/quote]'Starvation mode' IS a myth, even basic common sense over human physiology and biology tells us that. Why would a body system lay specifically lay down fat as an energy store only to then use muscle tissue for energy when food isn't available? If you have less than 5% body fat then it may start to happen. But if you have 5% body fat or less you're highly unlikely to be on a fasting diet. ChannelX
  • Score: 5

3:22pm Wed 5 Feb 14

urchy-101 says...

Are you a doctor?
Are you a doctor? urchy-101
  • Score: -1

10:04pm Wed 5 Feb 14

1 2 Could B says...

No.
He isn't
No. He isn't 1 2 Could B
  • Score: -2

8:11am Thu 6 Feb 14

ChаnnelX says...

You don't need to be a doctor to use Google - all the facts are there and you lot would do well to educated yourselves before having the audacity to question *my* knowledge.

Anyway, more often than not doctors are wrong.
You don't need to be a doctor to use Google - all the facts are there and you lot would do well to educated yourselves before having the audacity to question *my* knowledge. Anyway, more often than not doctors are wrong. ChаnnelX
  • Score: -1

8:11am Thu 6 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

urchy-101 wrote:
Are you a doctor?
Ah, I see, you have to be a doctor to know how basic human biology works. OK.
[quote][p][bold]urchy-101[/bold] wrote: Are you a doctor?[/p][/quote]Ah, I see, you have to be a doctor to know how basic human biology works. OK. ChannelX
  • Score: 1

8:12am Thu 6 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

ChаnnelX wrote:
You don't need to be a doctor to use Google - all the facts are there and you lot would do well to educated yourselves before having the audacity to question *my* knowledge.

Anyway, more often than not doctors are wrong.
Ah, my clone's back. Good to see you.
[quote][p][bold]ChаnnelX[/bold] wrote: You don't need to be a doctor to use Google - all the facts are there and you lot would do well to educated yourselves before having the audacity to question *my* knowledge. Anyway, more often than not doctors are wrong.[/p][/quote]Ah, my clone's back. Good to see you. ChannelX
  • Score: 0

8:12am Thu 6 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

1 2 Could B wrote:
No.
He isn't
Interesting how my clone showed up just after you'd done your usual trolling.
[quote][p][bold]1 2 Could B[/bold] wrote: No. He isn't[/p][/quote]Interesting how my clone showed up just after you'd done your usual trolling. ChannelX
  • Score: 0

4:05pm Thu 6 Feb 14

urchy-101 says...

Google? If well all resulted to google we would be self diagnosing ourselves with bites that will make your arm turn in to a leg and a cold that will make your brain explode.

Please do not question my education when it is I who is in fact the doctor.

You have showed a clear lack of knowledge by quoting Google.. shame on you.
Google? If well all resulted to google we would be self diagnosing ourselves with bites that will make your arm turn in to a leg and a cold that will make your brain explode. Please do not question my education when it is I who is in fact the doctor. You have showed a clear lack of knowledge by quoting Google.. shame on you. urchy-101
  • Score: -1

4:08pm Thu 6 Feb 14

urchy-101 says...

If we all*

Darn my fingers - it must be gout!
If we all* Darn my fingers - it must be gout! urchy-101
  • Score: -2

6:00pm Thu 6 Feb 14

ChannelX says...

urchy-101 wrote:
Google? If well all resulted to google we would be self diagnosing ourselves with bites that will make your arm turn in to a leg and a cold that will make your brain explode.

Please do not question my education when it is I who is in fact the doctor.

You have showed a clear lack of knowledge by quoting Google.. shame on you.
'Quoting Google'? Er, no.

You're a doctor? In what, may I ask?

Are you, as a doctor, categorically stating that everything published on the Internet is, in fact, wrong?
[quote][p][bold]urchy-101[/bold] wrote: Google? If well all resulted to google we would be self diagnosing ourselves with bites that will make your arm turn in to a leg and a cold that will make your brain explode. Please do not question my education when it is I who is in fact the doctor. You have showed a clear lack of knowledge by quoting Google.. shame on you.[/p][/quote]'Quoting Google'? Er, no. You're a doctor? In what, may I ask? Are you, as a doctor, categorically stating that everything published on the Internet is, in fact, wrong? ChannelX
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree