river-tucky, california

also known as riverside. where my parents live. I arrived this afternoon.

Day 1: I see a white pickup truck with a $7000 suspension. The back window is lettered. It reads, "(this truck is) raised because fat chicks can't jump." The driver has a 4" goatee hanging off his chin.

dirty mexican food is unbelievably freaking good. I sure missed it.

Tomorrow, I go to Mammoth.

-steve

abject silliness

not much to report on the diet front.. so in lieu of that, here is a fun link:

One Click!


Here's a nifty little quote I picked up off of Dean Karnazes' Blog.

The Marathon is not about running, it is about salvation. We spend so much of our lives doubting ourselves, thinking we’re not good enough, not strong enough, not made of the right stuff. The Marathon is an opportunity for redemption. “Opportunity,” because the outcome is uncertain. “Opportunity,” because it is up to you, and only you, to make it happen.

There is no luck involved in finishing a marathon, the ingredients required to tackle this formidable challenge are straightforward: commitment, sacrifice, grit, and raw determination. Plain and simple.

299.8!!

as of this morning, I finally broke 300 lbs!!

this is the lightest i've been since high school.

-steve

the best organization tool money can buy

many of us deal with clutter. we crave organization. entire industries are based on it. and we love stores like the container store and ikea, because they offer a wide range of organization solutions. For years, I have been attempting to de-clutter-tize my house with products from these stores, with varying degrees of success. the main problem has been maintaining the clutter-free house after i've organized it. my house, therefore, has been cluttered and messy more than not. if that makes sense.

well, last week, i discovered the best decluttering tool money can buy. it is something you can buy at container store and ikea, but i have a feeling that you'll get the best one at your local hardware store.



called a "trash can," you put your stuff in this receptacle until it fills up. then, you empty it into a dumpster outside your building (where some mystical process removes it within a week), and repeat. you won't have access to your stuff anymore, but that's ok, because i'll have plenty of time to remember it in my nice, clean, organized, clutter-free house.

and i got rid of a lot of stuff. things that most people would ask, "why the hell are you getting rid of that perfectly good xxxx?" well - remember, boys and girls - less is more.

=====

on the diet front, i can't describe or explain the reasons, but i just *know* that i am on the verge of blasting through this plateau and killing it in the next couple of weeks. i have resorted to slim-fast, which, along with a little edamame, kept me full most of the day. (one for breakfast, one for lunch, then you're on the way to the emergency room when your blood sugar drops! - robert schimmel) For dinner, I had a piece of fish with cajun seasoning and steamed broccoli. how the hell can i stay at 300-lbs with that diet?

yesterday i went to wal-mart and dropped $10 on a pair of size-40/34 jeans, and $11 a 40" belt. the belt fits fine, the jeans - not really. maybe in a week. I got rid of (by methods similar to what's described above) about 100 lbs of clothes that were either too big for me, or took up too much room in my closet. all my size-46 and 48 pants are now gone, i'll never have that waist size again.

went to the drug store yesterday to pick up a prescription for my wife, and while i was waiting, i test-drove their blood-pressure tester. result: 128 over 74, with a heart rate of 53. the heart rate is what really surprised me, my resting heart rate must be in the high 40s now. that's pretty cool. that's the kind of RHR that elite endurance athletes have. interesting..

====

in 2007, i will become proficient in java, eclipse, and the spring framework. i have no choice.

it's going to be a good year.

on cross training, centuries, goals, and weight-loss plateaus

The workout schedule I'm writing for my marathon in November includes 4 specific running workouts per week, two days of easy running (which are recovery days), and one day of no running at all. Those two days could be replaced with cross training - activities such as cycling, swimming, hiking, and weight-lifting. I've been pondering this idea for the last week - giving my legs a break from the running, yet still building the cardiovascular endurance, is a very good idea, particularly for a guy my size.

With that in mind, I was out skiing with a few friends, when they were talking about a century ride on flat terrain out on long island. well ok - there you go! I got the information this morning, and I'm very excited about this - riding a century was something I've always wanted to do. Now - here's the kicker - riding a century - 100 miles on a bike in a day - is something that's an ultimate goal for cyclists who've trained for it. Me? I won't have any significant training on a bike. woot.

I'm not particularly worried, however, because my cardiovascular endurance is actually very good - my resting heart rate is between 50 and 55 - and I won't be going for any records, either - my goal simply would be to finish and have fun. But let's say I'm way over my head and cannot finish? Well, the ride goes from Babylon to Montauk - and I can always bail out in Westhampton, where my wife will probably be hanging out anyway. But I really don't think that will be too much of an issue - I'll be taking it easy, and will be reading with some really good friends. It should be fun. Can't wait to write that trip report. And if you think I'm nuts, you're right.

Well, in other news, I've officially hit a plateau. I'm stuck at the same weight for a week now, frustrated as hell, wondering if I should keep doing what I'm doing wait for it to pass, then continue losing weight very quickly, or if I should modify things permanently. Google seems to think the latter, but I'm not sure yet. Yesterday I had a cheat meal, partially to regain some sanity, but also, maybe, to kickstart my metabolism out of fasting mode. It wouldn't be so bad if I had already passed the 300-lb barrier - but since I've been within 5 lbs of that magic number for ten days, stuck in some miserable plateau, I'm going nuts. Why couldn't this thing have hit at 295?? I would have been able to cope so much better! arg..

anyway, as a result of this, I want to stop focusing on 300 by looking past it, and thinking about my next goals..

275 (it's a nice round number)
259 (the threshold where I official go from "obese" to "overweight", according to the BMIndex)
250 (my minimum goal for July 12)
225 (my optimistic goal for July 12)
215 (the threshold where I officially go from "overweight" to "normal weight" - not sure if this is really what I want, but I'll know by the time I'm down to 235 - if I still have 20 lbs to lose, I guess it's what I'm going for.)

plateaus and speedwork

I have been stuck at the 302-305 weight for a week now. My clothes continue to get looser, but I can't imagine muscle gain going on. That wouldn't make sense. Maybe I'm retaining water or something; I don't know.

Whatever the physiological reason, I have convinced myself that there is a psychological basis to this - my mind is working against me, keeping me from crossing that elusive 300-lb barrier, something I haven't weighed since High School. It is an enourmous goal for me, the first significant goal of my diet. After losing 7-10 lbs per week, I have been stuck within 5 lbs of 300 for a week. Consciously, it's driving me nuts - but I have a feeling that there is some sort of subconscious factor which is preventing me from getting past 300. It may be manifesting itself with my eating habits; I haven't been as disciplined as I was a month ago - yet I've been careful to log every calorie I eat in fitday, and I'm still well under my BMR - so that shouldn't be it. It may be some sort of psycho-babble mind-body connection that I'm unaware of and unable to control. Who knows? I just wish I could see that scale read 299 so I can get on with this thing. I'm almost ready to fast until that happens; I'm that eager to blow through it.

"But no fasting yet; instead, I'm going on a 4-6 mile jog today."

and that was the attitude I had when I was driving to the course that I was going to run today, intending to run 5 or 6 easy miles. but on the way, I reflected on:

1. I think I have a psychological barrier to break through, and I'm desperate to weigh less than 300 lbs
2. I just had a nice little conversation this week about how much more effective intervals are than long & slow distance runs from a weight loss perspective.
3. in order to run the marathon in 3:40, what I really need is some speedwork

so that's what I did. 3x800 (800 meters (½-mile) of running fast followed by a period of jogging to recover; repeated three times.) my garmin gps does a really crummy job at logging it, but I ran the intervals at 9 minutes/mile, the recovers at 12. http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/activity/2462202

it was my first speedwork of the season.. good workout. now, a few hours later, I can still feel the endorphins flowing.

-steve

entering month 2

While I had stopped eating wheat and red meat for a couple of weeks prior, March 12 was my first day on the 1000-calorie diet.
Now that it's april 12, I am going to increase my daily calorie intake slightly - and increase my running as well. I'll aim for 1200-1400 calories per day, and run about ten miles per week.

By July, I'll be eating something between 2000 and 3000 calories a day, and running 20 miles per week.
peak marathon training, 45 miles per week, and as many calories as I need to support that (and maintain weight)

30-45 minute workout tunes

Heavy metal is a prevailing theme for these high-intensity runs.

1. B.Y.O.B. - System of a Down
2. Ten Ton Hammer - Machine Head
3. Chop Suey! - System of a Down
4. Down With the Sickness - Disturbed
5. Killing in the Name - Rage Against the Machine
6. For whom the Bell Tolls - Metallica
7. Caught in a Mosh - Anthrax
8. Mota - Offspring

I'm usually done at this point, but if I'm still out there sucking wind,

9. Metallica - Master of Puppets

at 8½ minutes, will usually carry me to the end of the workout. If not, I start over with System of a Down again.

Principals of my training program:

As I develop my training program, I'm trying to organize my thoughts about the different types of workouts I'll be doing. This is what I've come up with, and is subject to change.

Yasso 800s (or another form of speed training)
Purpose: Develop the ability to run faster, specifically, 8:23 miles it would take to run a 3:40 marathon.
Frequency: Weekly

Tempo Runs
Purpose: Raise my lactate threshold - a point where your endurance drops dramatically when you cross it. you can't run very long at a pace barely faster than the LT when compared to barely slower. weight loss and speedwork will get me to run 8:23 miles - tempo runs get the 8:23 pace below my LT, so I could maintain it for the duration of the marathon.
Frequency: Weekly

Long Runs
Purpose: Prepare my body for the stresses of running longer than 3 hours.
Frequency: Weekly, alternating between very long and moderately long runs

Hill Training
Purpose: Develop strength and power, improve speed
Frequency: once every two weeks

Fartlek Training
Purpose: Moderate speedwork, have the fun variety
Frequency: once every two weeks

Easy Miles
Purpose: Get weekly mileage in on recovery days.
Frequency: 1-3 times per week

Sample week
Monday: 5x800 (yasso) 3-4 miles total
Tuesday: 3 easy miles
Wednesday: 6 mile tempo run
Thursday: 3 mile of hills or fartleks
Friday: 3 easy miles
Saturday: 15 Mile Long Run
Sunday: off

yasso 800s

A month ago, I was reminded by a podcast of an article I read in runner's world a couple of years ago. The podcast was an interview of Bart Yasso, the namesake of the Yasso 800s - a workout described in the Runner's World article. Essentially, here's how it works - if you want to run a 4-hour, you do ten 800-meter intervals in 4 minutes, followed by 4 minutes of jogging. Apparently, it works for just about any time, and, according to Yasso, for about 95% of the runners he's seen.

So in my case, it will look like this: since I want to run a 3:40:00 marathon, I will run run two laps around a track in 3 minutes 40 seconds - 1:50 for each lap. You're supposed to start out with 4 intervals (4x800) and work your way up by adding one interval each workout until you're at 10x800 - that is, 800 meters in 3:40, followed by 3:40 of jogging, repeat ten times.

So while I have not set up my training schedule yet, I like the simplicity of this training concept, and will likely include it as speedwork.

-steve

easter gluttony

Had a nice big indulgent meal for easter yesterday.
It was yummy, but it's over now. time to get back on track.

the more I think about "340 to 3:40 in 2007", the more I want to go for it. So screw it, I'm going for it. A 3:40 marathon seems like a dream goal right now, but I know that it won't seem so unattainable this july.

The preperation looks like this: Two stages with a transition period between them - first, the weight loss stage - about 1/3 done. Characterized by light jogging a few days per week and very low calorie intake. In June and July, I'll gradually transition to the training stage - by consuming more calories to support the speedwork and hill training I'll be doing. By the end of July, 16 weeks from Philadelphia, I'll be in a traditional marathon training program.

"From 340 to 3:40 in 2007"

this is an idea i'm kicking around:

going from 340lbs to a 3:40 marathon in 2007.

it's very ambitious.. Because I know for a fact that I can run a sub-4:30 marathon - even a sub-4:00 seems likely with smart consistent training.. But I'd really have to work hard to get a 3:40 marathon.

I admit I'm harboring a dream of qualifying for boston - in which I'd have to run a 3:10 marathon. Something between a 7:25 and 7:30 min/mile pace for 26.2 miles. I'd like to turn that dream into reality. Last year, I proved that I could do a marathon. This year, I'm going to prove that I can do a marathon well.

The first stage is weight loss with base training.. losing over 100lbs (already lost 40), and building a base of 20 miles per week and starting to do speedwork. the second stage is, of course, marathon training - adding long runs into my schedule..

any thoughts?

nice day today

skied 12" of fresh blower powder at killington today. it's been a while since killington was so nice in april.
it would have been great if pico was open today, but they're closed for the season. still, it was almost worth hiking pico, because the conditions would have been that good.

some of the runs that killington didn't bother to reopen this week were in unbelieveable condition - on lower pipe dream, which I had to duck under a rope for, I found thigh-deep powder and my first ever face-shots (when the snow is deflected into your face as you ski it). It's nice to eat snow and ski at the same time..

dietwise, things are ok. had a 1000-calorie day today, 1200 calories yesterday. I hit 307 the other day, and I'd like to be below 300 by easter. we'll see.

in other news - the METS ARE KILLING IT RIGHT NOW!!
I just watched them win their fourth game, by a score of 11-1 against the previously undefeated braves, giving the braves their worst (or best?) home opener in franchise history. now, there are only two undefeated teams left in baseball, and the mets are one of them. awesome.

justification of the 1000-calorie diet

"I'm aware of all the physiological implications for severely cutting calories, but I have my reasons for doing so anyway."

That is the oft-repeated mantra that I've been telling the people critical of my 1000-calorie diet. In this post, I am going to do my best to explain the reasons. I'm not sure if I can explain this well, because it's something that might be a result of gut instinct or emotion rather than rational logical thinking - however - there are rational, logical reasons why I'm doing this. If they don't appear to be good enough for the naysayers, just get that there are also "emotional gut-instinct" reasons for doing this that cannot possibly be effectively articulated, especially in a blog post.

Like I said, there have been many people advising me not to do the 1000-calorie thing. I know that they have good intentions, and I guess that's the reason why I feel the need to post this explanation.

Here are a few examples:

pointedem: "There is one main reason why this is self-defeating. Your body will go into "conservation mode", and instead of revving up your metabolism (goal), you will actually slow your metabolism down. You may lose several pounds at first, but I can guarantee you will quickly hit a plateau with your weight loss." "every valid method to get healthy/ lose weight is going to tell you that cutting back to 1000 calories a day is self defeating and will leave you without energy."

Bernardo: "yeah, that's a good way to completely kill your metabolism and gain an extra 100lbs after you can't keep it at 1000calories/day."

cloudpeak: "For someone your size, 1000 cal/day guarentees that you're going to binge. I'm 5'7" and female, and on a 1000 cal/day, I'd be desperate for food all day long." "At your size, you probably burn almost 3,500 calories per day just sitting around. If you cut 500 calories/day and added a little exercise, you should be able to lose a pound a week and keep it off."

yentna: "just want to put out a caution. Restricting your calories too much isn't very healthy. I.e. less than 1500 calories a day when working out can cause harm to your body and slow your metabolism rather than speed it up."

and, my own mother: "Eating too few calories like that will put your metabolizm into starvation mode. When you go back to normal or even diet calorie amounts for your size, you will gain the weight back super fast."

--

what is amusing to me about all the above statements is that I'm aware of everything everyone has said. You see, I have done a considerable amount of studying and research related to fitness in general, and, unless you have a degree in nutrition or exercise science or read fitness and nutrition journals on a regular basis, there's a good chance that I know at least as much as you do. I don't say that to toot my own horn or to say I'm better than you, but rather just to point out that - yes - I know. So lets take a few criticisms and address them directly.

The main point of all the above posts seems to be metabolism, and how I'm not accomplishing the goal of revving it up. the problem with this logic is that revving up my metabolism is not a goal of mine - and while I'd prefer of course not to slow it down, that is not only inevitable as I'll explain later, but something that I'm totally prepared to live with. My plan of focusing on the caloric deficit - eating less calories than you burn - is the underlying idea behind nearly every diet in existence. In theory, if you burned 3500 calories more than you ate, then you'd lose 1 lb of fat. In practice, your metabolism does slow down as you eat less - so just eating 3500 less calories in your diet is not the same as cutting 3500 calories. But I also want to caution against overstating the effect of metabolism. How much can you alter your own metabolism, in either direction? 2%? 10%? 50%? Most people have no idea, I don't really know either, but I do know that people with a lot of knowledge are likely to severely overstate it because a small daily change of, say, 50 calories less burned, translates into a huge amount of weight gained over a period of time. I do seem to recall reading somewhere that you can slow your metabolism by 100-200 calories per day.. for a normal person. translated into a guy my size, that perhaps means I'm burning 300-400 calories less per day than I do when I'm eating normally - Or maybe even more, since by eating too much, I've revved up my metabolism by that much in the opposite direction - so I could be burning as much as 800 calories less a day than I do during a weight-gain phase.

How accurate is this line of thinking? Different sources put my BMR at different numbers - but it seems to be that, if I laid down flat all day long, I'd burn 3000-4000 calories per day, just because of my size. Factor in lifestyle and I'm pushing 4500-5000 calories a day. If I exercise, add another 500-1000 calories. What I have found in this diet is that I'm losing weight rapidly - over a pounds per day - which is translating into an average caloric deficit of about 4000 calories! Most days, I am eating 1000 calories, which means I'm burning about 5000 calories per day. Naysayers might point out that the 5000 calorie number is going to drop, ignoring that I have already been doing this a while - but even if it does, how much difference is that going to make? even if they grossly overestimate it to be a 1500 calorie drop in metabolism, I'd still be losing 5-6 lbs a week when eating 1000 calories per day! And regarding a long-term drop in metabolism? Well, that brings me to the next disadvantage - muscle loss.

When your body needs energy, it metabolizes glycogen. If the glycogen supply in the muscle and bloodstream is exhausted, or if the body is not in a particularly active state, it will instead metabolize fat, a process that takes longer. If fat doesn't cut it, however, a process called gluconeogenesis will occur, in which amino acids (proteins) are broken down by the liver to be transformed into energy. If you smell ammonia for no apparent reason, that is why. Your body gets protein from two sources - food and muscle. Muscle loss is seen as a huge no-no by many weight loss experts, because muscle, being metabolically active, effectively increases your metabolism just by being there.

To be certain, I am losing muscle every day that I'm on a 1000 calorie diet. I will be able to estimate how much muscle I'm losing in another month when I have some reliable long-term bodyfat analysis data to work with. Some people would think that I am nuts. These people don't realize that a 225-lb guy doesn't need the huge legs in his muscle that a 350-lb guy needs. I can't put on my gaiters because my calves, composed of rock-hard fat-free muscle, are too large. I also want to have a build suitable for endurance sports - not power lifting. I want to go outside and run hills, climb mountains, ski bumps. I want agility. I want speed. Lance Armstrong said that when he came out of chemotherapy, the muscle-burning effects of the drugs actually made him into a better cyclist - and that he was cautioned by his trainers to not do any sort of exercisethat would develop his upper body, like swimming, because he would get some unneeded extra muscle and that would hurt his cycling. Bottom line - I *want* to lose some muscle because that is consistent with my goals.

And that means that my metabolism will be permanently slowed - I will be burning less calories every day. If I were to gain 10 lbs, it would go on a lot faster when I'm 225 lbs than if I was 350 lbs. Of course, I'll be burning a lot less calories anyway, because it takes more calories to get a 350-lb guy around than it takes to get a 225-lb guy around. But the effect is enhanced by the absence of metabolically-active muscle. This amounts to the fact that if I am going to lose 100 pounds "and keep it off," I will have to make a permanent change to my lifestyle. I think that a lot of people who go on diets subconsciously assume that they're temporary. They can go on the diet, lose 30 lbs or whatever, then resume their normal diet (that got them 30lbs overweight), and assume that they'll keep the weight off. I am very aware of the fact that I can never resume my previous diet again. I have yet to decide what that is going to look like, because I'm only focusing on my diet right now - what is relevant right now is the next concern - that a 1000-calorie per day diet is going to cause me to binge.

Binging is a particular worry of mine because I have done it before. My entire lifestyle for many years was basically constant binging, and that's how I ended up 400 lbs back in 1997. So what is causing me not to binge this time? Well, I suppose the circumstances of the diet - that it's a competition - make a difference. There's a set end-date; that helps. I have a lot of support that helps. It's not the time of year when I would binge (like T-giving or christmas). But most of all, I think that there is simply an intense desire for the lifestyle that I would need to be in good shape to live. I can't explain it any better than that.

There is one thing that would cause me to abandon the 1000-calorie thing and maybe eat more - mental effects, particularly feeling light-headed. That hasn't happened though.

Now that I've written a rebuttal to the conerns, let me tell you why I'm doing it this way:

I have more than 100 lbs to lose. That's a lot of freakin' weight! I have read about other people who have successfully lost that kind of weight. One thing that I kept noticing (and having the same concerns as the people above had), were that they went on extremely-restrictive diets, usually liquids only, of about 800 calories a day, for a period of several months. This caused them all to lose a tremendous amount a weight initially and got them to a state where they could actually be active. The highest-profile person to do this is the former governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee, who has now run several marathons. I've referred to him in this weblog before. He is quoted as saying that when he was fat, he was afraid of an impromptu interview at the top of the steps to the capitol building, because he would be so out of breath from the ascent that he couldn't talk. Now, being the Governor of Arkansas, he had a tremendous amount of resources at his disposal - including that of dietitians and personal trainers, who presumably are experts in the field. They are the ones that recommended this diet to him. Of course, he's not the only one - and every now and then, an article will pop up in Runner's World, talking about a man who did something similar in the same way. They usually had dietitians telling them what to do. Being that I don't have the money to pop for a dietitian, and that I wanted quick results, I decided to mimic what I understood about this forumula, and combined it with my own knowledge of nutrition to make sure that I was still getting the proper nutrients - for example, I eat a lot of soy, because I know that soy contains all the amino acids that I need. I also make sure I get the minimum of most every vitamin and mineral.

You see, there are a couple of distinct advantages to doing it this way. Because I am concentrating on maintaining an extremely high caloric deficit, my daily weight loss actually almost exceeds the margin of error present in a bathroom scale. I get up every morning, take care of naturally-occurring bodily functions, then weigh myself, and my weight has been lower every single day that I expected it to be lower. Seeing daily results like that is extremely encouraging, because quantifying that is much easier and objective than saying to myself, "gee, these pants seem a little looser than yesterday." And it's coming off fast - a pound or more every day. I remember thinking at 319 that "never again will this scale be above 320." Didn't seem long ago, and now, not only am I saying the same thing about 310, I'd have to hold a brick for it to read 320. (Can't wait for that to happen with 300!)

But there's another aspect to the 1000-calorie diet that is particularly important to me - the discipline I'll develop by logging all the foods I eat, making sure I don't eat too much, and maintaining it for four months. Like smoking, overeating is a habit that is difficult to break - and it'll take an extended period of self-discipline to start to overcome the naturally-occurring need that I have to keep eating for pleasure, even when I'm feeling full. Discipline will still be required, of course, but it will be much easier to maintain. That is where the still-to-be-planned permanent lifestyle change comes in.

I am starting to develop a vague idea of what that will look like - what I can tell you is that there will be a concentration on healthy food - which is yet another aspect of this diet that is going to be good for me in the long run - when you are limiting yourself to 1000 calories a day, you look hard for the foods that will fulfill nutritional needs, give a feeling of satisfaction, and keep calories low. Turns out that these are the same healthy foods that I'll be eating when I start the permanent lifestyle in July. Soy is a big part of that, as is fish. Fruit is also in the picture. And when I do eat red meat, it'll be a reasonable-sized burger, not two monsters. I'll have two hot dogs instead of 4. I'll have 2 slices of pizza instead of 6. 1 bagel with cream cheese and lox, instead of 2. I'll occasionally allow myself those pleasures, but most of the time, I'll be eating soy (I particularly like edamame), fish, and produce. I am training my body to be satisfied with less food. And that is going to have to be a permanent change. Things that will completely be out of the picture will be salty snacks, french fries, etc. Super-high calorie empty snack foods will have no place in my future diet.

The need to lose weight quickly for motivation has already been covered, but there is another reason for rapid weight loss: On July 15, 2007, I'll be 18 weeks away from the Philadelphia Marathon, taking place on November 18th. In that 18 weeks, I'll engage myself in a vigorous training program, involving at its peak 50 miles per week of running. Last year when I did the Las Vegas Marathon, I managed 35 miles a week - but it was really rough putting a 325-lb frame through that much training. This year will be different - not only will I run more, but I will weigh less and therefore run faster and easier. But in order to accomplish that, I'll need to get this extra weight off pronto. That is the catalyst for this whole thing, and the reason for my goal of at least 100 lbs lost by mid-July.

Well, if you've made it this far, I appreciate that you took the time to read it. I hope you actually understood it - and absorbed it - because I find that people who continue to criticize this diet after I rationally explain myself really didn't listen to what I had to say. So assuming you did, I hope you understand why I am doing it the way I am doing it, and that your concern is alleviated. Even if it's not, at least you now know that I am approaching this from a rational perspective, as well as an emotional one. Even if you don't agree with what I said, hopefully you at least agree that it makes sense.

the weekend in review

Had a 935 calorie day on Friday. That evening, we drove up to Killington - Saturday was to be the Bear Mountain Mogul Challenge. I'd be surrounded by barbeque, beer, and chips. How will I ever survive?

In the morning, I had a banana and an MRP, put into a nalgene bottle, shaked and drank. So far so good.
Lunch.. I brought a tuna steak. Cooked it on the BBQ next to all those delicious burgers and chicken and steaks and oh god what am I doing to myself??! The tuna was yummy.

As far as beverages, I drank seltzer water. yum.

I skied a lot, too.

Then, when we went back to the skihouse, I had soime bay scallops, with garlic and oil, on top of shirataki noodles. Finished the day with 935 calories. Shazam!

Sunday, well. I knew I would do this one day in the spring, and sunday was the day to do it. A local restaurant to the skihouse, named sugar and spice, boils sap into maple syrup in the basement. You eat on a floor above the basement, in a room heated by the boiling sap and filled with the aroma. You buy pancakes (or waffles or whatever), and then go downstairs to get some syrup, still hot from the boiler, and put that on your cakes.

So that's what I did in the morning, on a day that would end up with 1780 calories. Boy, what a pig I am! (:

Yesterday, Monday, I had 992 calories, but cravings to go along with it, probably a result of the pancakes.

Today, so far so good. 282 calories so far.. no cravings yet.

Oh, and I weighed 310.8 on the scale this morning. I am down 30 lbs in just over a month! Shazam!




coming soon - a long post about the 1000 calorie diet, the controversy surrounding it, and why I'm doing it.

-steve