to think that women who are a size 6/8/10 are permanently on a diet?

[SabineUndine]

I don't mean diet as in counting every calorie, but diet as in they hardly eat any carbs and don't eat cakes, biscuits etc more than a couple of times a year? I am not a thin person (you guessed?) and I look at what my really slim female colleagues eat and it's salads with no carbs and just a tiny bit of protein, or soup or smoothies. Is that what it takes to be a thin person?

Gwenhwyfar, the 'Feeling smug?' opening sets up the spiteful feeling to the whole article; even its close say that the writer thinks women are
'Squeezing' themselves into the (increased) sized.

The writter comes across as if he's not at all happy that women might be ok (that is in any way happy) about their size and it's really not okay that the average woman now has bigger body measurements.

If I'm going to be extreme in my analysis there's a real "All women should be 36-24-36 how dare they not" type bitterness.

Added to which, unless you eat very carefully indeed, 1000 calories a day, long term, is going to leave you short of essential nutrients and potentially be a disaster health wise .

The consensus that I can see is that the women who do fit the OP's description are women who have dieted in the past. Women who maintain size 6, 8, 10 and eat plenty have never dieted.

Also being ona diet is a state of mind, mainly based on deprivation, restriction, guilt and punishment. Whereas the people who simply have a diet don't attach such values and judgements to food or their bodies.

There's actually a growing body of evidence that a calorie restricted diet and below-BMI guideline weight is very healthy. But it's not fun, no.

I know a few people this size including my sister and they all eat a healthier more balanced diet than I do and exercise. It isn't a 'diet' though its just how my sister eats, she loves veg and isn't that gone on carbs. Conversely I will have at least 4 carb portions a day across bread, potatoes, pasta, etc. I eat small portions but of the wrong stuff!

There's actually a growing body of evidence that a calorie restricted diet and below-BMI guideline weight is very healthy

Below BMI guideline weight is very healthy?!
I thought the latest findings were the opposite - that top end and just above BMI guidelines were healthiest?

www.fightaging.org/archives/2002/11/calorie-restriction-explained/

I thought the latest findings were the opposite - that top end and just above BMI guidelines were healthiest?

I'd be shocked if this were true. Has anyone seen the documentary about the guy who cured his autoimmune disorder by eating only micronutrients for several months?

YABU. Think it's a bit broadbrush to assume, in answer to your original question. There's a big difference between dieting & choosing a healthy lifestyle balanced with exercise.

AppleSetsSail that's a link to a dieting website trying to sell a book, of course they are going to say that calorie restriction is healthy.

Here's some actual papers that say being fat and fit is healthier than being a normal weight and not fit.

g-se.com/uploads/biblioteca/fitness_vs._fatness_on_all_cause_mortality_a_meta_analysis.pdf

& the healthiest weight range is 22 to 24.9

in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-53286920101201

The being heavier = healthier thing is to do with longevity of health I think.

It's better for your bones to be slightly heavier (that's why strength based training is recommended to complement CV fitness).

Calorie restriction definitely slows ageing, fitfatty. Just google it.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11683736/Five-day-fasting-diet-slows-down-ageing-and-may-add-years-to-life.html

That article is talking about intermittent fasting, so eating a calorie restricted diet once or twice or week, or even 5 days out of a month, not constant calorie restriction like you suggest.

Also you said: below-BMI guideline weight is very healthy.

No, it isn't. It's linked to severe health problems and death:

www.livestrong.com/article/273015-health-risks-of-a-low-bmi/

healthyeating.sfgate.com/low-bmi-women-7300.html

healthland.time.com/2010/12/03/whats-the-ideal-bmi-for-longevity/

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2594267/Is-thinness-MORE-deadly-obesity-New-study-links-low-BMI-higher-risk-premature-death.html

Just read that article Apple, it's talking about intermittent fasting, not long term open ended calorie restriction.

Do you actually bother to read the things you link to?

How is intermittent fasting not calorie restriction?

It is, but not constant, every day, calorie restriction. Restricting your calories every so often might seem to have some health benefits, but long term,daily, calorie restriction means you are losing out on essential nutrients and its going to cause you health problems in the long run.

There is lots of evidence to show intermittent fasting to be beneficial but as has been pointed out, that is not the same thing as a long term vlcd. There are also cases where conditions such as diabetes and auto-immune disorders can be controlled well through restricted calories - but that's not the same as a healthy body adopting the method. The link also doesn't specify what level of calorie restriction is appropriate (suspect you have to buy the book ) - but the following bits of it would make me question the theory and even there it says what I said about it being unlikely that you will get the requisite nutrients

there simply isn't enough data yet to pin down the effects on life expectancy. It is plausible that they are at least as good as those resulting from exercise. If so, it could mean a difference of 5-10 years of life

So far a great deal has been learned, but little headway has been made towards calorie restriction mimetic therapies. The genes and processes that control metabolism are notoriously complex, and scientists do not yet have a complete understanding of even this one narrow slice of the bigger picture.

In theory it's perfectly possible to obtain all the vitamins and micronutrients you need from your food. In practice, for most people living busy, working lives, this just isn't going to happen. Remember to take your supplements.

Sorry - I'd prefer to eat a nutrient dense diet that provides an appropriate level of calories and stay active than deprive myself and feel hungry and risk conditions such as osteoporosis, anaemia, digestive problems and dementia. If that means being a dress size or two bigger then so be it.

Sorry for upcoming derail.....

Birdsgottafly, you mentioned yesterday on this thread that you were having an operation today - hope it went well and that you have a speedy recovery

www.runnersworld.com/runners-stories/ultra
A very interesting article here, about Mirna Valerio the overweight long-distance runner. At the end of the article it says thinness does not equate health and longevity - but exercise and good eating (not dieting, but a balanced diet) is what is best, even if you are a bit overweight it doesn't matter (but not obese) as long as you keep active. Also it says that there are various body types, so some things you can't change.
"weight loss, gain, and control are complex biological processes. “It's a combination of genetic, behavioral, environmental, and psychological factors, and varies tremendously from individual to individual,”
I also liked this quote:
“our bodies are all wired with their own distinctive genetic makeups. We can modify our BMI through exercise and diet, but only to an extent.....one type isn't inherently ‘better’ than another. We can be healthy and happy no matter how much we weigh.”

There are essentially 5 aspects to our lifestyle that impact on our health

• diet
• exercise
• alcohol intake
• whether we smoke
• weight

People often become overweight as a result of poor habits, particularly with regard to the first two or three of these. That, to my mind, is where BMI levels can serve a purpose - if you are gaining weight because of the way you live then without change, you will continue to gain weight and develop health complaints. You can of course also develop those same health complaints if you aren't overweight but make poor lifestyle choices. And obviously when you become morbidly obese then there is a chain of horrible health complications. However if you are 'overweight' and that weight is stable and you have good habits wrt to the first four then the difference in your life expectancy compared to someone a 'healthy' weight and same habits appears to be minimal. And there are the studies cited above where life expectancy in fact seems to be better if you are overweight...this may, however, be because if you get a life threatening illness such as cancer, you have a better chance of surviving the associated weight loss, you have better 'reserves' as it were. The reasons are unclear at the moment.

But we need to stop drawing a direct link between health and weight and even more importantly, dressing up our prejudices against bigger bodies (whether our own or other people's) as concern for health.

Sleep - yes I agree, that's where my thinking is at. It's also basically what the doctor said when I had my 40 year health check as I was worried about being over-weight. He said you are not obese, you don't smoke, you don't drink too much, you eat healthily and do exercise, then you will be fine. As you say it's not the weight itself that's the issue but the behaviours that could potentially be causing the weight. I do think it's a shame when people are worrying about the difference between a size 8 or 10. After reading this thread I have come to the conclusion I am going to get more active, cut out crappy food (which I don't eat that much of anyway so not a big change), and not worry about the whole size 8/10/12 thing.

I've just started doing MFP and its a real eye opener... ive painstakingly logged everything I have eaten over the last few days and input the exercise I do..
According to MFP I am UNDER eating by around 500 calories per day.
Yet today I have had 2 x doorstep toast with golden syrup.
Greggfest lunch consisting of Tomato Soup, cheese and ham toastie, Apple Danish and a packet of crisps.. apparently I have another 1000 calories to use up today.
I'm stuffed and there is no way I'll do that.
But its hardly diet food is it?
So as a size 10 nearly 6ft I need 3000 calories per day to remain the same size.
Thats rather a lot!

^^^ I hate you lol
If I are that in a week is be the size of a house 😂

In theory it's perfectly possible to obtain all the vitamins and micronutrients you need from your food. In practice, for most people living busy, working lives, this just isn't going to happen. Remember to take your supplements.
What I don't see is why people with busy lives can't get all the nutrients they need from good.
It resembles more a sales pitch for supplements.

Food. Not good!
Well, good food.

That quote was taken from the link espousing calorie restriction as a healthy way to live Lweji, basically saying that when you restrict calories you are unlikely to get sufficient nutrients - so yes, you are right

dona is that a typical day for you? What's for dinner?