Halle-freaking-lujah.

Now before we get too excited here, I have to add the condition that .9 lbs of this loss came from a change in scale. (My previous scale weighed only in 0.5 lbs, and absolutely desperate to see any sort of change, I thought getting one that showed weight in 0.2 lb increments might help.)

Still, I get to claim a 2.3 lb loss for the week. Finally!

So apparently, for me, the low-glycemic diet and the less-intense workouts were key. (Assuming this success continues, I think we can safely deem this a winner.) On the question regarding why the lower-intensity workouts — when I had the anaerobic threshold test done that I mentioned here, they determined that my most efficient fat burning zone was the lowest zone (zone 1). For me, this translates into a target heart rate of 116-125 bpm. Apparently, this is the case for many “sugar burners”… as soon as the body starts working anywhere near close to hard, it decides that it’s time to burn sugar instead of fat, and the weight loss resulting from exercise is pretty much nil. I was also told a classic hallmark of a sugar burner is someone who is flabby, even when reasonably fit — and this has always been the case with me.

For the diet, it’s starting to get a bit easier. I’ve noticed that days where I start to get a little hungry are days followed by downward changes in the scale. Noticing this has made it easier to deal with the hunger in telling myself I’m literally burning fat off my body at that moment. My new favorite discovery is the steel cut oats for breakfast — I make them in the crockpot overnight, and wake up to a nice hot breakfast. I’ve also discovered my local farmers market, which I’m super excited about — I’m looking forward to finding new and sexier ways to get in what feels to be my 86 servings of vegetables per day. My new easy vegetable fave is the steamfresh (I think it’s called; one of those steam-in-the-bag brands) garlic cauliflower dipped in Emeril’s horseradish mustard — super yum!

My challenge for the next 10 days is that I’m at my in-laws ranch, so I’m away from the safety of home and the gym. The good news is that my in-laws are very physically fit people, and are completely supportive of my efforts. My trainer put together a travel workout that I’m doing every weekday during the week (as I would be at home), and my husband graciously offered to briskly walk to the mailbox and back with me so as to help me avoid getting eaten by a bear. (To-and-from the mailbox may not sound like much, but given that the mailbox is over a mile from the house, it’s about a 50-minute round trip at my lame-o zone 1 pace.)

So that’s my report for the week. I still have a ton of fat-related thoughts I’ve been contemplating I want to discuss, but if I actually lose again next week, I won’t have much to bitch about — so I’ll save it for something to write about then. Thanks for checking in with me!

I give my kids nutritious food when I can; that doesn’t mean they never have chips or ice cream. But a few foods, like gummy bears, are strictly prohibited (for now at least, and for as long as I can get away with it) in this household. I’ve heard that gummy foods like that can do a real number on little teeth because they stick so well.

I may have to rethink my anti-gummy stance in the future. Investigators are checking into whether sugarless gummy bears containing xylitol can actually help prevent cavities in children.

Xylitol is a natural sweetener found in various berries, corn, birch and other plant sources. Research has shown that the sugar substitute reduces levels of mutans streptococci (MS) bacteria, which are known to cause cavities.

Is there hope, then, that candy might actually become a cavity-fighting ally? All I know is that if they make a good-for-your-teeth Milk Dud, I’m there.

Posted by Sunshine.

I never did make it back, did I? Sorry about that. The only thing with which I struggle more than my weight at the moment is my time management.

As you can see, this week represents my first real loss — 1 lb. I don’t think I’ve ever worked so hard for a one pound loss in my life. My workouts continue, but we’ve tweaked things a bit. For cardio, I’m doing cardiovascular endurance building (working out just below my anaerobic threshold) three days a week with my “Team” (aka fat club), and then working out in my lowest fat burning zone (about 60% of my maximum heart rate) for the other three workouts (for a total of six cardio workouts per week). The move to a lighter workout on my non-team days was very counterintuitive to me… apparently, I most efficiently burn fat in my lowest zone, so that’s where we’re focusing for now. It’s miserably boring… an hour at a time on the treadmill at an almost literal crawl. I’m going to start downloading some audio books to get me through… I’m open to recommendations!

For my strength training, I’m still working with my trainer 5 days a week, but two of those days have become dedicated to private yoga lessons to boost my overall muscle condition and flexibility. I’m finally starting to hit a stride to where this workout schedule isn’t feeling quite as heavy.

We tweaked my diet pretty significantly, too. My nutrition coach took me to a low glycemic diet — which essentially means that anything remaining before that was quasi-fun (i.e. whole wheat bread, sweet potatoes) is now gone. Apparently, I am what they call a sugar burner… my body gives complete preference to burning sugar over fat whenever it can find it, so the cure is to strip it from my diet. No, this is not fun at all. If I don’t eat every three hours, I get a pretty substantial headache… but as long as the scale keeps moving downward, I’ll find a way to deal. If it would pick up its motion by another pound a week, I’d be thrilled.

I’ve also started chiropractic treatment to correct some posture and muscular imbalance issues we’ve stumbled upon during my training. My chiropractor is amazing — his specialty is applied kinesiology, and the wide scope of treatments he offers is unlike anything I’ve witnessed before. Unlike other chiropractors I’ve had, he’s not solely interested in performing adjustments… he’s also interested in diagnosing (and, as possible, treating) the underlying biomechanical issues that are causing problems. With all of the folks I’ve got working on me right now, I’m definitely feeling like Humpty Dumpty… I just hope the King’s Men have better luck this time.

A study authored by Jean Decety, a psychology/psychiatry professor at the University of Chicago, implies that this may be the case.

Using functional MRI scans on normal kids aged 7 to 12, researchers found the parts of the children’s brains that were activated when shown pictures of people in pain, according to findings published in the current issue of Neuropsychologia.

This seems to suggest that children’s capacity for empathy is hard-wired into their brains, rather than being instilled in them purely through nurturing.

When the children viewed the images of people in pain, their brains showed an increase in activity in the same part of the brain that registers pain inflicted on their own bodies.

I could have told you that my three-year-old has pretty much always shown empathy toward other people when they seem sick or sad or hurting. It doesn’t seem to stop her, however, from inflicting pain on her baby brother. I guess empathy only goes so far!

Posted by Sunshine.

Wow, what a week.

Not in terms of weight loss, obviously, but in terms of time crunch. I have so much I want to talk about, and so little time. Part of the downside to finding my early mornings once again (with these workouts that begin at 6 am) is that my night time — my most productive time — has evaporated in exchange for sleep.

I’ll come back in the next day or two to get to the discussion I’d like to have, but I promised myself that come hell or high water, I would post these pictures on Tuesdays.

And so here it is — I lost that mysterious 1.5 lbs (it was actually gone the very next morning; we’ll see in a few days if your ovulation theory is correct, mommasteph), and that’s it. I’ve got a one-on-one scheduled with the nutrition coach (who is a registered dietitian) for Thursday afternoon to attempt to figure out what exactly is going on.

Be back soon. Thanks for keeping me company on what has thus far been an extremely frustrating journey.

You already know that your parenting style is either more permissive or more authoritarian than some of your friends’ styles. But did you know that your general approach to parenting could greatly influence your child’s diet and eating habits?

I’m not sure I ever really thought of it that way, but it makes sense. Extremely authoritarian parents probably don’t let their kids slide with eating half a chicken nugget and then moving along to dessert. Very permissive parents are less likely to stress a ton about what their kids eat, as long as they’re eating something. (Yes, I’m sure there are exceptions.)

Experts are now suggesting that neither extreme is particularly productive when it comes to instilling healthy eating habits in our children. Better is the authoritative parent — the one in the middle. She is more likely, they say, to have children who eat more balanced meals because she uses positive reinforcement and sets a good example with her own diet, which therefore lowers her children’s risk of childhood obesity.

Well, I have to admit that my diet isn’t the greatest in the world, and I probably err on the side of permissive parenting at times. Maybe if I crack down on my own eating habits, my children will eventually adopt those new, healthier standards as they get older?

In sum, the researchers conclude that that efforts to control childhood obesity need to consider family dynamics.

Posted by Sunshine.

I thought of a million different ways to open this post expressing my disappointment in this number, but I don’t feel like being clever. I’m too defeated at the moment.

All of my hard work and nearly perfect eating (save my Saturday night wedding reception binge that consisted of vegetables and 10 glasses of champagne — but no cake!) resulted in a 1.5 lb gain.

I’m going to call this water weight and move on. I had maintained the 2 lb weight loss for the entire week (which I wasn’t necessarily pleased about, until I saw THIS number), and then BAM — the scale *this* morning shows this overnight 1.5 lb gain. Fanfriggingtastic. Maybe it was the Chuck E Cheese pizza and birthday cake last night from my daughter’s third birthday that I DIDN’T EAT. (Grr…)

If not, my friendly nutritionist and I are going to have a little talk. Granted, she’ll probably argue something about the 10 glasses of champagne… blah blah blah. I had saved all of my fats for the day, and used them then. So while it wasn’t pretty, it’s not like I hadn’t planned. (Well, I hadn’t exactly planned on drinking 10 glasses of champagne. I don’t think that’s necessarily something one plans on doing… or at least, not something one admits to unless they’re hoping to be featured on an episode of A&E’s Intervention. What if I say there were extenuating circumstances that tempted me to do it? Does that make me more or less of a problem drinker? But I digress…)

Other than what the scale says, the week went fairly well. I ended the week very tired — my poor body is quite obviously not used to exercising 2 hours a day for 5 days in a week. I’m already feeling stronger though, and that’s pretty cool.

Last week, I had promised a discussion of the reasons I stay fat (and I’m not talking the obvious eat-too-much/exercise-too-little, but rather emotional ones), but the idea is still baking in my mind. (Maybe it weighs 1.5 lbs…) I’m thinking about the times in my life where weight management has been a priority — and the times that it clearly hasn’t — and trying to identify some trends. I’m curious… do any of you have any thoughts on when weight control was more of a priority for you in your life, and why? I’d love to hear them. It will give me something else to think about other than this poor result whilst I’m crying in my V8.

At least one woman says it does. Hara Estroff Marano, editor-at-large of Psychology Today, claims that our heavily invasive parenting methods make life too easy for our children, who then don’t learn normal coping strategies. Then, she argues, when they do face problems down the road, they break down because they never learned to deal with the conflicts that arise in adult life.

From her book: Behold the wholly sanitized childhood, without skinned knees or the occasional C in history! Kids need to learn that you need to feel bad sometimes. We learn through experience, and we learn especially through bad experiences. Through disappointment and failure we learn how to cope.

She also states that parents rush to have their kids labeled so they can receive interventions instead of learning to work around issues, and that play is undervalued as a normal tool for social development (like learning self-control).

On that last point, we agree. The rest, I’m not so certain I buy. Yes, there are advantages to not giving your kid everything he wants; he learns patience and moderation. Disappointments are a normal part of life, and I don’t think kids should be shielded from every single one of them.

But I’d be a hypocrite if I didn’t admit that I don’t want to see my kids hurting, even if I know it’s a normal part of life. It’s hard not to jump in and immediately fix everything. And where do you draw the line?

Thoughts? Are we really screwing up our kids by being too involved?

Posted by Sunshine.

Today marks the first year of MomSquawk at our new site! We’ve come a long way from our roots on the old site. Thanks to all of you for making it possible - and here’s to another great year!

When I think about high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and other heart health issues, I envision a middle-aged or older guy with a beer gut and thinning hair, chomping on a huge greasy burger for lunch every day. Not my three-year-old daughter. The idea of her having problems like those seems ridiculous.

I just read an article that made me think twice about the absurdity of the possibility there.

Some children as young as two should be screened for high cholesterol, high blood pressure and other heart disease risks, according to new guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Say what? That’s right — the AAP is recommending that kids who are obese, whose medical history is unknown, or who have a familial background including high blood pressure and the like should be screened for early signs of problems that can lead to heart disease. If necessary, children of at least eight years of age would even receive medication to help lower their cholesterol.

The AAP recommends that the screenings, which include the fasting lipid profile, take place between the ages of 2 and 10 years.

Posted by Sunshine.