(2008-09-30) NS-RFC: Going on a diet

PeterLucas wrote:




I think most experts would disagree. That's a very rapid rate
of weight loss, and four months is far too short of an interval to be
claiming any sort of success. It could well be the beginning of
(or the continuance of, depending on history) a cycle of yo-yo
dieting.

I would be more inclined to say he's doing bloody well if the
weight loss were more moderate. (Depending on scenario; there are
situations, such as the need to lose weight for a medically
necessary surgical procedure, when you do really need to lose
weight that rapidly.)

However I do wish kili's buddy luck, and hope he meets his personal
goals on a sustained basis.

Steve
 
Serene Vannoy wrote:


There are thousands of citations in the scientific literature; Google is
your friend. However here is one for you to get started: Obesity
Research (2001) 9, 1S?5S

It's basic biochemistry under normal circumstances: calories in (eaten)
*equal* calories out (activity level and normal metabolism) means
neither weight gain nor loss. Calories in *greater than* calories out
means eventual weight gain. Calories in *less than* calories out means
eventual weight loss. Amounts relative to intake/decrease.

This is for otherwise healthy people. Certain acute disease
states/pharmaceuticals/etc will upset that balance. It doesn't take into
consideration going on a starvation-level diet, which can result in
little or no weight loss long term. The brain will kick in to try to
maintain current weight in self-defence. The key is a small decrease in
caloric intake to lose the weight and then finding the correct intake to
maintain it. It's not rocket science.
 
Dimitri wrote:

One of my friends retired and he lost all of the money in his 401-K, so
he went back to work for the company. This happened a couple of months
ago. He was not thrilled about going back to work.

Becca
 
Becca wrote:


A friend of mine lost her job with the government when their branch was
downsized and she got a generous buy out. She invested most of it in
Nortel when it was doing well. Then Nortel had serious problems and the
stock plummeted. She lost almost all of her investment.


I admit to not understanding a lot about the business world. I really
can't understand how it is that energy stocks are not doing well when
oil companies are making record profits. Look at the stuff that is going
on these days. Stock prices are dropping like mad as people dump their
assets. A few days later prices are climbing, then dropping, then
climbing, then dropping. Now the US government is going to bail out the
companies whose CEOs are getting many millions of dollars pl;us many
millions more in bonuses. I must be too much old school because I always
thought that you got a bonus for doing well.
 
"Becca" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

He lost ALL of the Money??? what had he invested in? pets.com?
Market isn't down that much and he should have only been like 60%
stocks. Even if 100 percent in nasdaq stocks, only down about 30
percent. Didn't learn lesson of Enron?
 
Hi dear,
I just want to advice you don't loss your heart due losing weight... Because it will be cause of depression for you.. So yu must join the maximum public community to be busy..
 
On Sep 30, 7:01?pm, Dan Abel wrote:

That sounds like my retirement plan:

My 401K is in the crapper, so I may as well have some cheesecake.
That way, I'll enjoy myself and not outlive my savings.

Cindy Hamilton
 
Becca wrote:


There are actually things that you can be doing right now,
but they are mainly of a defensive nature. Various retirement
products that are not federally-insured or treasury-backed
can be moved into products that are. The products you
might want to move defensively include annuities,
some types of investments that occur in 401(k) accounts, and
any cash that is sitting around uninvested in a brokerage account.

But if it's a typical stock-market mutual fund, there are
no defensive moves really necessary.

(The above is U.S.-centric.)

Steve
 
Back
Top