<p>Basically we ease up a little on the calorie restriction but continue to stick to a low-fat, low-carb diet, and also continue to self-monitor our weight on a regular basis. I am summarizing the conclusions drawn by the research, but use “we” because I’m one of those people who succeeded with a diet that I began the year that I turned 50. (Lost about 70 lb over the course of 15 months and have now kept it off for a decade). </p>
<p>I don’t know why you feel the need to bash the idea of diet and exercise. I’m not claiming it works for everyone, but a significant percentage do succeed, and maybe more would if they were getting better quality advice and support along the way. </p>
<p>I’d weigh in on this topic but I’m also a notorious backslider I did lose 40 lbs this year by tracking my caloric intake and increasing caloric expenditure. But I didn’t and don’t call it a “diet”
My sister lost about the same after a surgical implant (not band) that was expensive. She drifted back up a fair bit once the implant was removed. </p>
<p>My consolation is that if I regain some or all of the weight in future years, the only downside was that I ate healthy, learned to estimate caloric value and portion size, and felt good for a while…not that I blew a whack o cash :). </p>
<p>“So my fiance JUST got notice that his work is switching over to a non-ACA compliant plan for those under 30 hours and encouraged him to use the healthcare.gov site instead. (His other job does not offer any benefits)”</p>
<p>How can they be switching over to a non ACA compliant plan? I thought all insurance must now be complaint. Do you mean they are switching over to an ACA approved catastrophic plan? </p>
<p>Here is a article on ACA catastrophic plans. They do not make sense for most people as they are not much cheaper and there is no subsidy - as your fiance has found out. </p>
<p>So, I don’t know how you measure the success or failure of dieting based on statistics since it’s not as though everyone who changes their diet successfully (people do, congrats kmcmom) is checking in with some central clearinghouse to report results. And, there can be some rather unpleasant and dangerous side effects of surgery, too.</p>
<p>And, Emily, that Romani post confused me as well.</p>
<p>Okay…still out of here for any health insurance stuff … but…
</p>
<p>Yup. As long as one considers it a ‘diet’ one will be counting the days until one can get ‘off the diet’ and back to ‘normal’. It’s not a DIET it is a lifestyle. It’s how you do your day, week, month, year. It’s balancing what you do on Weds. with what you did on Sunday or plan to do on Friday. It’s not even having the fast food places, doughnut shop, Starbucks blended ice cream drink on your mental options/internal debate list. It’s answering without even thinking …I’ll have water…when the waiter asks, and saying ‘no’ to the desert menu. It’s taking the stairs whenever remotely possible. It’s thinking about your daily schedule and planning on what you will need to have ‘grab ready’ when hunger hits. Done long enough (what is it…6 weeks to form or break a habit) the lifestyle becomes just that a lifestyle…second nature…</p>
<p>I only have one outstanding employee on a visa status yet to be enrolled which I consider a major achievement!</p>
<p>We are running into issues with his family. The work visa holder families are not issued any SS numbers which seems to be an issue. We will probably enroll only him and see if we can get them added later or get separate coverage if it does not work.</p>
<p>You’ve got me. This is the note on the benefits site: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s listed as a “supplemental plan”. This is ONLY for those under 30 hours. Those above 30 hours get full insurance. </p>
<p>All I know is before we thought he didn’t qualify for the exchange because he had employer-sponsored healthcare. Apparently, he does not so exchange we went and plan we got! </p>
<p>It would be like saying a change in eating/exercise habits doesn’t benefit a cardiac patient, someone allergic or diabetic. Unless the thread gets serious about all this, I’ll skip my own success story. </p>
<p>Re: romani’s fiance- he’s now enrolled through the exchange, it’s cheaper and better than prior. Right? When I revisited T’s visa issue, I ran into some info about supplemental and gap policies. </p>
<p>^ Absolutely. He’s now in a BCBS plan that is accepted virtually everywhere around us. Honestly, I’m so relieved even though he’s probably the healthiest person I know. </p>
<p>It’s an “excepted” benefit - whatever that means, so not subject to ACA law. </p>
<p>“Now you have an alternative medical benefits plan for your part time and seasonal workers who are not eligible for other employer-sponsored medical plans. Since it is considered an “excepted” benefit* under Health Care Reform, our new Aetna Voluntary Group Medical Plan is simple to offer and is not affected by the new regulations impacting traditional group medical plans. Plus, this fixed indemnity medical plan includes Aetna’s national provider network to save your employees even more money.” </p>
<p>So if you define short term weight loss as long term weight loss, still only 20% of people are successful. A year is not long enough. What are the stats for three years or five years?</p>
<p>There is other info about seasonal and temporary, btw- eg, how income is calculated. We really haven’t gone there, in these discussions.</p>
<p>Tpg, I think you’re on the right track. There is a lot about “mixed-status families.” Here’s one (copy whole line)-
file:///C:/Users/Owner/Downloads/FAQ-ACA-and-mixed-status-families-2013-10-31.pdf</p>
<p>One quote: “Applicants and nonapplicants will be asked for their SSN, but they do not have to provide one if one was not issued to them. (People’s SSNs are requested so that their income can be verified with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).)
Individuals who are not eligible for an SSN may include lawfully present immigrants as well as undocumented immigrants. These people may file income tax returns using an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN), which the IRS issues exclusively for tax purposes. Individuals do not need to provide an ITIN on the health insurance application, as the IRS will not verify income for people with ITINs. If a member of a mixed-status family is eligible for a subsidy in the marketplace, the household must file a tax return for the year the person has coverage, and may do so with an ITIN”</p>
<p>Same as before on this issue- we’re trying to take pieces of info they offer and make some sort of whole sense. </p>
<p>I’m slightly worried about how they’re going to do income eligibility for Medicaid. When I was on Medicaid in the past, it was month-to-month. Did they reform that under the ACA? If so, it might negatively affect a lot of migrant/seasonal workers who make decent money for 3-4 summer months and pennies the rest of the year. </p>
<p>In particular, I’m thinking of lowly students who make dogfood during the year but who might have decently paid summer internships. <em>whistles</em> </p>
<p>This quote is from a Psychology Today blog about-- well about what Fang is saying (ends up disputing the notion dieters are doomed) - It’s from a recently published study of something called the Look AHEAD trial where Tom Wadden and colleagues studied those factors associated with long term weight loss success. The factors? Paying attention to intake, exercising, and applying the education they received from their expert research team. And would you take a look at that graph! By year 4, of the folks who’d lost more than 10% of their weight in the first year, some did indeed gain it back, but 42.2% kept off nearly 18% of their presenting weight for the full 4 years! In fact they kept off virtually all of their year one losses. Moreover, looking at all comers of the trial and not just the folks who lost a pile in year one, nearly 25% of all participants maintained a 4 year loss greater than 10% of their initial weight.</p>
<p>The study is complicated reading, but this statement is incorrect. Of the 2419 people who completed the first four years of the intensive intervention, 347 maintained a 4 year loss greater than 10% of initial weight. That’s 15%, not 25%. </p>
<p>However, 15% is pretty good. It sounds like the intensive intervention was intensive indeed: weekly meetings for the first six months tapering to monthly meetings by the end, plus free meal replacements supplied to participants. The participants were volunteers who had good reason to want to lose weight over and above the usual reasons, as they were all diabetic.</p>
<p>Is a 15% success rate good enough to justify insurers paying for this intervention? Yeah, I’d say it is if the success rate can be replicated in the real world.</p>
I did lose 40 lbs this year by tracking my caloric intake and increasing caloric expenditure. But I didn’t and don’t call it a “diet”