ADF/WW: Day 8

December 15, 2008 at 11:17 am 13 comments

Weigh-in today.  Results below the cut.Well, despite my setback of yesterday, it would seem that I’m doing pretty good.

Starting Weight:  241 (Wii Fit), 245 (Bathroom Scale)

First Week:  237 (Wii Fit), 239 (Bathroom Scale)

Scond Week:  234 (Wii Fit), 236 (Bathroom Scale)

Third Week: 232 (Wii Fit), 233.2, (Bathroom Scale)

First Week, Round 2:  229 (Wii Fit), 231 (Bathroom Scale)

Right now, I love the Wii Fit.  Still not sure what the disparity is between the scale and the Wii Fit, although the clothing adjustment seems to be the issue again this week.

Even so, it was SO NICE to see the little arrow hovering BELOW the 230 mark on my TV screen.   And I’ve lost between 2 and 3 pounds this past week, and 12-14 pounds overall!  I am now at what I weighed when I was pregnant with Luke, so I have ‘undone’ two years’ worth of careless weight gain now.  Whoopee! 🙂  *throws confetti*

I’m following Weight Watchers’ wisdom and shooting for 10% first.  That would be 24-25 pounds, and would put me at 220-221 pounds.  I’m only 9 pounds away, according to this week’s weight on the Wii Fit.  I love how attainable that sounds.


Entry filed under: Uncategorized. Tags: , , , .

Sidenote: Setbacks ADF/WW: Day 9


  • 1. Pangie  |  December 16, 2008 at 12:04 pm

    That’s so awesome that you’re still going down! Yay Jen!

    Can you tell me more about the WW 10% theory?

  • 2. Jennifer  |  December 16, 2008 at 1:22 pm

    I think it’s just Weight Watchers’ primary method for setting your first big weight loss goal. They tell you that rather than shooting for the big goal, you instead make your initial goal to lose 10% of your starting weight. If you’re attending meetings, they make a big production of the day you cross the 10%line. You get prizes and such for achieving it.

  • 3. Pangie  |  December 16, 2008 at 2:02 pm

    I like doing big goals in the form of several consecutive small goals. It makes things much more reasonable. Much like our 21-day plans! 🙂

  • 4. melalvai  |  December 16, 2008 at 4:48 pm

    I was just thinking the other day, that setting a weight goal is kind of tricky, because what if you get within 10 pounds but never reach your goal? That’s clearly a notable success and yet, you never reached your goal.

    So I approve of the 10% goal! In fact if you always make it 10%, the next goal is always smaller than the last one. That’ll be important when you hit those stubborn pounds that simply do not want to come off. I remember when my mom hit those!

  • 5. Feaelin  |  December 16, 2008 at 6:05 pm

    Haven’t you hit those as well, Melalvai? You’d like a small bit of change, but can’t quite get there…

    10% goal is a clever idea. I should think about that.

    Or use rule of 72!

  • 6. Jennifer  |  December 16, 2008 at 6:24 pm

    What is the rule of 72, then? 😉

  • 7. Feaelin  |  December 17, 2008 at 8:20 am

    First of all I should have said ’78’.

    With some types of loans, it is how the interest charged to the customer is figured. The summation 1+2+3+…+12=78. So they collect 12/78ths of the interest the first month of the “year”, 11/78ths of the interest the next month, and so on, so that the last month, they collect 1/78th, but at this point, over the whole year have collect 78/78ths of the annual interest.

    How this would be implemented for weight-loss in practice, I’m not sure, but it’d be interesting. 😉

  • 8. Jennifer  |  December 17, 2008 at 1:42 pm

    Hm… So you’d set a yearly goal, and try to lose 12/78ths of the goal the first month, 11/78ths of the goal the second month, 10/78ths of the goal the third?

    Yeah, that gets a little tricky. 😉 Interesting idea, though. If I want to lose 100 pounds in a year, I’d need to lose 16 pounds in the first month, which would be an average of 4 pounds per week. 😉 A nice idea, but probably not going to happen, sadly.

    I could see doing that in lots of other things, though.

  • 9. Pangie  |  December 17, 2008 at 2:12 pm

    Yeah, I like the theory. But in practice, I don’t think it works quite right for weight loss, because that needs to be more steady. Unless you’re not fixing it to the monthly outline. Just making 12 milestones to shoot for, all the while progressing at 2 pounds/week (or whatever works for you.) That could be interesting. So Jen would celebrate the first 16 pounds lost, then the next 14, then the next 13, etc.

    That could be interesting, since as you approach the goal it tends to get harder to lose, so nearing the end where you’re celebrating a couple pounds lost as a milestone, then you could stay motivated.

  • 10. Feaelin  |  December 17, 2008 at 2:18 pm

    Yeah, I wasn’t thinking monthly. More a series of goals. And the “Rule of 78” can be applied to any summation series…some more trivially than others.

    e.g. 4 months: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4=10. 4/10+3/10+2/10+1/10, of a goal for 4 months. Depends on the goal you set. 🙂

    I suspect it works better to say “I’ll lose 2 lb per week” than somethng else, and then calculate goals that way, though. 🙂

  • 11. Feaelin  |  December 17, 2008 at 2:20 pm

    Don’t forget (or if you’ve not studied this), if you want the total of 1+2+…+N, you can perform (N*(N+1)) divided by 2.

    So even really large N are easy:

    48 weeks: 48 * 49 / 2 = 1176. So 48/1176 first week…

  • 12. Jennifer  |  December 17, 2008 at 3:16 pm

    Or, to suit Mel, two inches, or a BMI of so much…or so many miles walked, or whatever.

  • 13. melalvai  |  December 17, 2008 at 5:28 pm

    I think it should be fractal.

Recent Posts

Check it out!

  • 9,479 people are watching me!

%d bloggers like this: