Can you overcome lifelong obesity?

Factual Questions
1

I recently scored a copy of all my pediatric medical records - my brother’s now dating the pediatrician’s daughter :slight_smile: It’s got all my doctor visits and a weight/height chart from the ages of 0 to 16.

At present, I am 26, 5’7" and 245lbs.

When I was 13, I had stopped growing, so I was 5’7" and ~270#

According to this chart, my weight and height went up at a regular pace - no huge jumps or dips. Apparently the weight part of the chart is more steep than most people. The chart actually stops at 16yo but in the “visits” part of the records, it says I was 288# at age 17. By the time I was 24 and began to LOSE weight, I was 314#.

Anyway - my “goal” weight, which I’ve determined is pretty normal for my height and body type (large frame) is about 170.

Problem is, my body has NEVER been 5’7" and 170. Last time I weighed 170, I was 10.5 years old and 4’3" tall. Heck, right now I am at the weight I was at when I was 12 and 5’1".

Am I going to be able to overcome this weight “hurdle”? Is it harder for someone in my situation to lose weight than, say, someone that was a size 2 in High School and put on a bunch of weight? (not knocking people who have experienced that - losing weight is hard for ANYONE!)

I lost 90 lbs like nothing…put on 25 over a year and seem to be stuck here at the weight I was when I hit puberty. In fact, I notice my hormones are ACTING like I am in puberty again…like they’re able to “work” again now that I’m at a less-obese state.

My question isn’t really if I can get down to my goal weight or not…but more a question of the difference in the science of weightloss between someone who has grown up with stats like me as opposed to someone who has a vastly different-looking height/weight chart - one with large jumps and dips.

Do I still have the fat on me from when I was 12? 11? 10? Is this “old fat” harder to shake than “newer” fat? Does fat grow in layers like Sedimentary Rocks?

Sorry if I rambled a bit. Sort of hard to explain what I’m thinking. Hopefully someone with some knowledge will help me understand.

2

You are right about the difficulty. Most people, during development, stay on their curve from early childhood, so if you are a 75% 3-year old, you mostly end up as a 75% adult. The problem is, if you look at a BMI or weight curve (like those here but I am sure there are better examples), the difference between 50% and 90% at 3 years old may be 10 pounds and by 10 years old can be 75 pounds. So it becomes very difficult to cross curves – often the best you can do in childhood is to keep a child’s weight constant and let them “grow into” the weight.

The research on obesity is voluminous, confusing, and often self-contradictory, though. It is, of course, possible to reach your ideal weight and that is a goal that you should set for yourself. Nobody said it will be easy, and especially with rapid weight loss, things can go awry as the body is used to carrying around more weight.

Your OP seems to want to know if there is adaptive responses by the body to chronic obesity, and the answer is most definitely yes. The most obvious of these is a progressive development of insulin resistance. When this crosses a defined threshold, we call it type II diabetes. This is often directly related to obesity and caloric intake, and the body does all it can to deal with a chronic energy excess. This includes downregulating insulin response, which means that cells uptake less sugar. Unfortunately, this leaves sugar (and lipids) in the blood which leads to the disease aspects of diabetes. Weight loss can help this, and in many cases can control or reverse the disease. There are other such responses, for instance I’m sure semi-permanent alterations of metabolic rate, of digestive processes, of appetite, and even things like stomach size and bone density. I am unaware of any of these becoming a problem in weight loss (they are all I think reversible).

I don’t know about actual turnover of fat molecules in adipose cells or how long it sticks around. It is a robust, stable energy source, so it is quite possible that it has a very slow turnover time and you may still be carrying around fat from childhood.

3

Well, to be honest, that’s a bit like asking if you can overcome lifelong shortness - probably not.

That being said, I think it’s totally doable to be at a normal, healthy weight for you. As is often said, BMI is not the be all and end all when it comes to weight - while it tends to be accurate for populations, it’s often not accurate for individuals.

Firstly, I think it’s important to look at your family members - if your mom, dad, grandparents and siblings are all around 5’7" and stocky, you’re never going to achieve waifishness - it just won’t happen. People come in all shapes and sizes, and for some they are above the ‘normal’ range purely because of genetics. Obviously, for you there was a lifestyle component because you were able to drop 90 lbs with relative ease, but perhaps your current weight is your body’s ‘set point’ - that is, the point at which your body weight tends to settle around normally, for it.

4

The challenge becomes driven by your mind. It’s a staggering challenge to eat 1,500-1,700 calories day in and day out for years, while exercising, especially if you have no track record of doing it. If you view your goal in light of the regiment and the time span required to hit it, the odds of hitting it become staggering.

Someone who was 5’7" and 170lbs has no better shot at getting back and staying there. It’s calories in versus calories out. Sounds simple, but we are up against our minds/ bodies who will fight us non-stop, no matter how long we decide to fight.

Take a few years and eat no more than 1500-1700 calories, exercise 1-2 hours per day 4-5 times per week and report back. Slaves and world class athletes might confidently manage these objectives.

5

Absolutely. Good point, alice.

ZipperJJ, I am right there with you. You’re story could be mine.

Thing is, all the BMI tables and whatnot say that, at my height, I should be around 180 lbs. However, the times in my adult life when I was at my most athletic and in my personal best cardiovascular health, I weighed around 215-220 lbs. Yeah, I still had a gut – but I could run 5 miles at a stretch and play basketball for three hours straight with only water breaks.

The only time in my adult life I approached the “ideal” of 180 was after a severe bout of food poisoning caused me to … “expel” … enough fluids to end up at 192 lbs.

So anyway … things aren’t so rosy now. I’ve got about 75 pounds to lose.

IZipperJJ: it will be a challenge, to be sure, to get to a comfortable weight for you. I don’t mean what the BMI table says … I mean getting down to a weight to where your heart isn’t working so hard and you’ve got some renewed vigor. If you’re at 245 now, you might well feel like a million dollars at 210. You just have to see for yourself.

As you embark upon a weight loss journey, trust what your body tells you along the way. Don’t be married to the scale – if you decide to keep progress by the scale, I’d suggest checking infrequently (monthly or semi-monthly).

6

This kind of dedication might be necessary for Zipper to get down to the artificial ideal of 170 lbs – especially to break through the plateaus that invariably come with starvation dieting to lower than an indivdual’s healthy weight.

But to drop 30 lbs wouldn’t take years. Heck, you get 10 to 15 of those pounds off in the first three weeks … conservatively.

7

I would appreciate clarification on a related matter. I’ve heard that once a person acquires fat cells, these fat cells can be reduced in size through proper diet and exercise, but cannot be eliminated from the body. The implication is that one should eat in moderation and thereby reduce the number of fat cells one produces over the long term. A related claim is that once these fat cells develop, any weight loss one achieves can also be quickly reversed.

If any/all of this is true, then can it be assumed that if one really indulges during a vacation and gains 10 lbs., that the fat cells produced during this semi-binge will lead to a permanent gain in fat cells? In other words, even infreqeunt overeating can predispose one to long-term weight gain and that occasional overeating can have long-term, possibly lifelong, consequences.

Sorry if this doesn’t make sense, but I’m guessing you can connect dots and extrapolate from my murkiness.

8

http://www.biomed.lib.umn.edu/hmed/2003/10/20031013_nsi.html

A new electrical device called an implantable gastric simulator has been shown to reduce weight in a small, early study. The device works like a pacemaker in the stomach, it sends out electrical pulse to fool the stomach into thinking it is full. A study of 30 obese volunteers has been done. After a year, two-thirds had lost an average of 18% of their excess weight.

9

I was always heavy for my age and height, unless you count a brief period in high school when I reached my ideal weight due to getting a lot of exercise from sports and my summer job.

In college I got really heavy and continued to gain weight throughout my twenties and early thirties, and I technically reached obesity levels when I was about 23 or so.

So most of my life, I’ve been heavy at a minimum and obese for a good portion of that.

In December I decided to change my eating habits and try to get more exercise. The exercise is very tough because I have no free time during daylight hours during the week, but I’m trying to get exercise during the weekends by taking bike rides, going hiking and swimming laps (while the pool’s open).

The thing that made the difference for me was getting on the South Beach Diet, which is the only diet that has worked for me over the years. When I started in early December, I was 315 lbs (at a height of 6’4"). Yesterday I hopped on a scale and I’m 260. I’ve still got fat around my midsection, but things are a lot more manageable.

So I guess you could say yes, it’s possible to overcome lifelong obesity (or something close to lifelong) by making some adjustments. I always suspected that it would take me longer than most, given my history with my weight, but for me, the key has been patience in sticking to the diet and realistic expectations regarding undoing years of damage and poor habits.

I expect that at the one year mark, I’ll be in reasonable shape to the extent that I’ll move to the “maintenance phase” of South Beach only, and be able to safely step up the exercise regimen to build cardiovascular health and muscle tone. I think another key thing for me was that I didn’t have unrealistic expectations regarding exercise like I had in the past. When I was up over 300 lbs., I often thought I could jump right into a strenuous exercise routine without too much ill effect, but what always ended up happening was that I would work out strenuously for two weeks or so, get discouraged by being in constant pain from lifting weights and whatnot, and discontinue the program.

Based on my personal experience, I’d say the key factor is patience. You can’t undo years of obesity overnight.

10

I was always far overweight, for as long as I can remember (so we’re talking back in elementary school). Overweight like being 250 or 260 in high school (when I was about 6’, give or take an inch).

When I was 25, I weighed around 305-310 (depending on the week). At that point, I decided to diet and lose the weight.

Inside of about one year, I weighed in at around 200 lbs. Inside of about one and a half years, I weighed in at 180. I have been between 175-180 ever since (I am now 31).

It can be done. I had no surgery, did not go on any special diets, food purchase programs, exercise programs, etc. I simply ate a lot less food.

11

10-15 pounds in three weeks? 10-15 pounds of fat? No.

The OP describes theirbody as such: At present, 26, 5’7" and 245lbs

To get this person down to 170 lbs, they will need to lose 1.5 pounds per week for a year. And then,** it ain’t over…**because at 170 lbs this person would be limited to about 1800 calories per day for life, or a little more calories if exercise is inlcluded daily.

A complete human turnaround over a number of years, with no track record, and rivals the accomplishments of proven world class athletes. That is **why ** the odds are staggering and why people fall short consistently. It’s an incredible achievement managed by a tiny % of the population.

12

Think we have a conceptual issue here (sorry, if it’s already been corrected).

A person, in the general sense, has the same number of fat cells at 10 that they have at 34. Fat cells do not “multiply” when you gain weight, they engorge. The get bigger.

Of course, cells die off and are replenished, the exact mechanisms surrounding fat cells are beyond my knowledge of the subject, but big picture you have the same number of fat cells now that you always did.

As such, the logic you’re implying above fails. Can’t say if this answers the OP though, no idea if fat cells are harder to shrink if they’ve always been overgrown.

Honestly, I think if there is a biological hurdle involved here which makes perpetual weight harder to drop, it’s significance pales in comparison to the lifestyle habits and imprint that your upbringing instilled in you.

The main reason its probably harder for you to lose weight than someone who was once skinny, is becuase you don’t know anything different. Don’t know what it’s like to eat smaller portions and to be active often as part of typical (non-dieting) life.

13

Sorry … didn’t mean to imply that all the initial weight loss is pure body fat. You are absolutely correect. It’s mostly fluid. But it does loosen your clothes, ease the burden on your joints, and show up on the scale when you weigh in.

Wasn’t talking about getting down to 170. One of my points was that it’s likely that 170 lbs – a figure derived from averaging many thousands of inidividuals of varying body types that happen to be 5’7"-- is far underweight for the OP.

I think you’re overstating the case here for simpler weight loss goals. Yeah, knocking off, say, 300 lbs by dieting and exercising for 4 years is a tremendous, rare achievement. But dropping 30-40 lbs over six months? For a (presumably) healthy 26-year old?

14

On doing a litle research it looks like I oversimplified things here, and was building off some antiquated concepts.

This article does a decent job of updating the concept. In fact you can gain fat cells, though only under certain conditions.

As it seems, you probably grew too many fat cells in certain formative periods, namely years 2 and/or in adolecence.

Your OP sounds like it very well could have merit. A person who made it through adolecence without becoming overweight seems likely to have not increased his number of fat cells beyond the typical threshold. Then, if that person gains a substantial amount of weight, depending on how much, they may not add fat cells. The fact that their extra weight has not led to more fat cells, might indeed make it easier to lose the weight, and certainly would allow them to reach a lower BMI when it’s all said and done. Of course, if that weight gain exceeds around 50% of ideal weight they’ll start adding fat cells. then they will end up in a similar situation to yours.

All this does not necessarily mean that one case loses weight easier than the second, but it would indicate that the two subject do have slightly different body makeup.

Of course, I still believe that the social/lifestyle issues are a much bigger factor than the biological ones.

15

On doing a litle research it looks like I oversimplified things here, and was building off some antiquated concepts.

This article does a decent job of updating the concept. In fact you can gain fat cells, though only under certain conditions.

As it seems, you probably grew too many fat cells in certain formative periods, namely years 2 and/or in adolecence.

Your OP sounds like it very well could have merit. A person who made it through adolecence without becoming overweight seems likely to have not increased his number of fat cells beyond the typical threshold. Then, if that person gains a substantial amount of weight, depending on how much, they may not add fat cells. The fact that their extra weight has not led to more fat cells, might indeed make it easier to lose the weight, and certainly would allow them to reach a lower BMI when it’s all said and done. Of course, if that weight gain exceeds around 50% of ideal weight they’ll start adding fat cells. then they will end up in a similar situation to yours.

All this does not necessarily mean that one case loses weight easier than the second, but it would indicate that the two subject do have slightly different body makeup.

Of course, I still believe that the social/lifestyle issues are a much bigger factor than the biological ones.

16

Thanks for the replies so far.

Just to clarify a few things…

I’m not actually much of an over-eater. I grew up with a healthier diet than most people I know: mom watched sugar and fried food intake, fed us alot of fruit and veggies.

Have come to realize that while I don’t overeat, I do eat the wrong stuff. Namely, carbs. Dad’s a skinny metabolism machine and likes potatoes, bread, pasta and rice with meals. Didn’t work out for me growing up. When I was old enough to figure it out for myself, I “did the low carb thing” and that’s how I lost the 90 lbs.

As for being “healthy” growing up - I say yes. I played softball for 13 years, worked physical jobs in my late teens, and endured 4 years of marching band, all while obese. And I always got an A in gym.

Blood pressure is a constant 120/70.

Right now I work out, not as hard or as much as I wish I could but I walk my dog for a mile or more every day, go on one hike a week, swim laps for 50 mins 1 or 2 times a week and lift weights. Oh and 90 mins of karate a week.

170 might be pushing the envelope, you guys are right. I honestly have no frame of reference - how could i? :slight_smile: I am quite obviously carrying around extra fat right now in my gut, thighs and arms. Maybe not 75 lbs worth, but maybe so!

I think I will know when I get there. My brother is the only person in my family built anywhere near my size. My maternal side is short and fat and my parernal side is tall and thin. I got the best of both - tall and fat (with monster sized hands, feet and torso). Anyway, my bro is down to about 190-200 at 5’7", and while he looks kind of pudgy some days, he does ok. I do believe I have alot more muscle than him since he’s never worked out to the extent I do.

So is calories in/ calories out going to cut it for me? Do i need to do it all - build muscle, do cardio, watch every calorie, pray to allah and take Trim Spa? Should I focus more on one thing or the other to shed this “baby fat”?

Just kind of frustrating if I think about what I may have to endure to get rid of excess fat. The “keeping it off” part doesn’t sound so bad from where I stand - getting there is the hard part.

Oh and bariatric procedures won’t do it for me. Like I said, I don’t overeat as much as eat the wrong stuff for my body, and don’t exercise as religiously as I should.

Gah. Rambled again…thanks tho!

17

Have you read the the hacker’s diet? Interesting insights from someone who did exactly what you are hoping to do.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/hackdiet/

18

Calories in/calories out will undeniably “cut it” for you if your goal is merely to lose weight. If you want to maintain muscle tone, and cardiovascular health, some believe you need to be on an exercise regimen. I believe this is very dependent on what your normal everyday activity is like, and whether you want to look fit or just be generally healthy.