Weight Gain Through the Mirror

Originally published 2.4.2014; reformatted and corrected 5.20.2015; reformatted 9.19.2015
So I went back to my favorite BMI simulator and put in the data for how I ate before I changed my eating.

An aside: The NIH calorie simulator remains my favorite, but unfortunately, it requires Java to run. And for whatever reason, I can't get Java to function on my Mac. Added 9.19.2015: The NIH has simplified the interface of its calculator. It still uses Java, but runs fine now on my Mac. It remains the calculator I use. So I have begun to use a different site. It has a much simpler user interface, but doesn't offer the same level of flexibility. One thing I DO like about it is that it puts walking and standing in the same category, which means my treadmill desk walking belongs there and it's not likely over estimating the energy burned while plodding along.) The number presented in this piece were calculated using the NIH simulator.

The following table shows the numbers I got in my experiment. The first two columns are the inputs, The third column is the output. I input my age and weight and looked at the number of calories their model predicts that a woman of my height at that age would be eating to sustain that weight. Other constant assumptions were that I was sedentary except for 30 minutes of moderate exercise a few days a week. Those conditions reflect my lifestyle prior to changing my diet and exercise habits. A further note about the NIH simulator. It does not account for nay effects of yo-yo dieting. I didn't diet through this time. I decided in my early 20s that deprivation was not how I wanted to live my life, and thus I would not diet. I don't have a history of trying every diet under the sun, therefore.

The one exception to this rule is my short term experiment with low carb dieting in my early 30's, specifically I tried the Protein Power diet designed by the husband and wife team, the Doctors Eades. My husband and I did it together after seeing how much weight his parents were losing following it. But it was a short lived experiment. We both lost about 10 pounds, decided the diet was boring and went back to eating 2000 and 2500 calories a day as we had been. And the weight came right back.

For a 40 year old sedentary (desk job) 4'11" woman who did 30 minutes of exercise a few days a week and who ate 2000 calories (which is the total recommended for the "average" woman to eat and what I tried to do) would weigh. And the number was 147**, which is what I weighed when I turned 40, my non-pregnant chubbiest.



**147 is the weight my old scale measured. When I upgraded to a digital scale, I realized that the analog scale had been off by 3-4 pounds. My highest weight was likely closer to 150— which would in fact mean that my BMI crossed the magic 30.

The weights in the table are what I weighed at each of those ages. I was fairly sedentary, having given up sport to get a part time job to make money for college. And I easily consumed this many calories, meals were meat and starch heavy. Those numbers are from the model, but they reflect exactly what I weighed. And the calorie totals are close to what I tried to eat daily because I thought 2000 was the number of calories for a woman.

I've never been obese though (These words were written before I realized that my scale was inaccurate). Why is that? Part of it is how I changed my diet over the years. While still an undergraduate, I gave up full sugar soda as a way to "save" calories, though I didn't actually consume less— I just looked for a way to stay within the "magic" 2000. I preferred to eat my calories rather than drink them, with the exception of adult beverages (beer or wine), which I enjoy drinking with dinner.

Another aside: I feel so stupid even writing those words, but the truth is that I never questioned the notion that 2000 calories is what the average woman should eat. Or rather, I never questioned as to whether or not I was actually an averaged sized woman or if I should be eating as much as one. At 59 inches, I AM NOT average size. Added 9.19.2015: Actually, I am 60 inches tall. There was some confusion based on imprecise height measurements, but at the specialist using their very accurate device, I am a full 60 inches tall. That extra inch changes the table number a bit, but not enough to warrant the time to remake the table. The points remain the same. I am smaller than the average woman and therefore, like it or not (and let me tell you I don't like it) all other things (amount of exercise, health) being equal, I MUST eat less to maintain a normal weight/BMI than the typical American adult female.

So through the years, I made changes with which I could live. I stopped having cookies, candy or ice cream in my house, except on special occasions. I took up jogging, but that only lasted through my undergraduate years because I developed knee and foot issues. I became vegetarian, which both saved me the cost and calories of meat (note: I am no longer vegetarian). My jobs since graduation have been sedentary. I stopped having desserts routinely when eating out. I stopped eating the bread that comes to the table when eating out (that was actually the only part of low carbing that stuck). I was aware of calories on a basic level, though I never measured or counted with any conviction. Eating about 2000 calories, particularly after giving up soda and regular consumption of sweets was not difficult. I ate well, and even drank wine with dinner within that number. And slowly, over time I put on weight, despite not overeating according to conventional wisdom.

I never sat down until just before I turned 40 to actually try and calculate whether or not 2000 calories was truly the correct number I should be ingesting, given my sedentary lifestyle. I've described this process previously. Given my height, to maintain a normal weight (as defined by BMI) I needed to eat less than 2000 calories (kcal). Another complicating factor is that as you age, the number of calories you need decreases. So by not changing a single thing, my weight continued to increase, just as the model suggests that it would.

Disclaimer