Monday, July 19, 2010

How Far are You Willing To Go?

Whenever I meet someone new - either at a social gathering (when they hear that I'm a personal trainer) or when I'm first working with them at the facility, I get the inevitable first question:

"What's the best way for me to lose weight?"

At this point, I tell them that it's actually quite simple - eat better.

From here, the responses go from denial ("But I eat well") to justification ("I'm just too busy to plan my diet") to blame ("Oh, my wife/husband eat badly, so I wind up eating badly too").

The truth is, I have a response to each and every one of these - but out of social courtesy and/or a effort to be inspirational rather than demotivational, I don't point out that they're all just excuses. See, the thing is, while some might argue that they are doing everything right but they just can't lose weight - if there's a medical cause, they could find out by seeing their doctor.

But most don't even check, because that would take away their excuses.

Or, if it's genetics, the simple answer is that while this may contribute anywhere from 25-40% of their potential - they can still take control over the majority of it themselves. Some people will simply have to work harder than others for the same result - but hey, that's life.

The problem is, people want an easy solution - one that's not there. Even as a trainer, while I can help you get stronger and faster, help improve your cardiovascular health, balance and flexibility - when it comes to weight loss, if you don't eat properly, you're not going to see the changes in your body composition that you want. Which is why the title of this post is a question, and one that you need to answer honestly before you ask me what you need to do to lose weight - because you might not like the answer I have for you.

So - how far are you willing to go?



Flagel, Katherine M., Carroll, Margeret D., Ogden, Cynthia L., and Johnson, Clifford L. (2002). "Prevalence and Trends in Obesity Among U.S. Adults 1999-2000." Journal of the American Medical Association 288(14):1723-1727

No comments: