I have been carrying a Fitbit now for about two months, and have dropped about 10 pounds in that time. I was really shooting for 12, but honestly didn't fully commit at all times. In fact, today was the worst, where I actually ate just slightly more than I burned. I was stress eating today due to Diana's foot surgery and a number of other things on my mind.
Today aside, I'm really pleased with the practice of tracking activity vs. food. I've said this for a long time, that weight loss isn't that complicated, but it's certainly more effective when you can measure things in a low friction way. That's what's cool about the Fitbit, or more specifically, the online component. The calories burned is definitely a best guess based on your height and weight, but the food part is reasonably accurate. Most weeks I come in about 4,000 to 6,000 calories under-budget.
As much as I may focus on the weight loss as a result, it isn't exactly the primary goal. I dropped about 30 pounds back in 2005, under the pressure of a failing marriage and a decade-early midlife crisis. But even then, that was more an exercise in learning how to eat right, and in the right amount relative to my activity level. That's largely what I'm trying to do now, but also be accountable to some minimum bar of activity, primarily walking. I'm not eating differently as much as I'm eating less. I know I still need to back off the sodium to a certain extent (mainly from eating out).
I'm not sure where I'll level off. In my mind, I'd like to drop another 20. That's still not quite the ideal range by various measurements, but those tend to suck and don't account for things like muscle mass or bone density. I mean, I had a 24-inch vertical leap when I was 32, which is off the charts high. It's probably not that high now, but I can feel when I get on a bike that much of that muscle is still there.
It only gets harder to take care of your body as you get older. Officially in the 40-and-older range, now would not be a good time to slack off.
No comments yet.