Glenn...
So...what is the solution?
I'm over 40, eat moderately and exercise regularly ( 3 or 4 days a week).
I know many like myself.
I eat low fat and try to keep my consumption of carbohydrates low to moderate. I suspect sugar is a bit of an issue for me, because it just seems to make matters worse.
I don't eat bread or sugar daily and when I have a sugary dessert, I eat very small amounts. I don't eat processed foods.
Yet, I'm having trouble losing weight at this time.
One exception: If I count calories, keep them very low, drink lots of water and exercise about 5 to 6 days a week. Anything short of this, results in basically no weight loss. However, I find keeping this routine up regularly tiring.
Are there indications here that I should see the doctor for a blood test?
What kind of exercise are we talking about that makes the difference for those of us who might be resistent like this?
Thank you.

It is difficult to lose weight--
 

--even on fairly restrictive diets, when we get to a "certain" age and tendency towards insulin resistance.

The body metabolism, regulated by the hypothalamus and the pituitary gland, thorugh the thyroid, has a certain "set point" for weight, and that tends to rise with increaes in age and body fat. Unfortunately, the body tends to defend the set point, meaning that as we restrict calories, the body gets more metabolically efficient, and it's actually tougher to lose weight. (This happens up to a certain point--if you take in NO calories, you will eventually drop weight, but that's not generally a good idea. Some people do several day soup fasts, though . . .)

The best way to lose weight is to re-set the set point, and exercise is the best way to do that. Paradoxically, though, there's some decent research now that seems to indicate that weight bearing exercise might actually be slightly better for this than aerobic exercise, especially as regards insulin resistance. This is likely at least in part due to the fact that muscle is a more efficient receptor of insulin than many other body tissues, so it takes less of that to shove glucose into muscle to fuel those cells--so the more muscle you have, the more efficiently insulin will be used, and the less likely excess calories will be stored as visceral fat. (This is also aided by the fact that exercised muscle suffers little tears and other damages during the process, and the repair that causes them to grow bigger and stronger needs considerable energy, upping our metabolic rates for a time even after our workout is over.)

I know a number of people who've had more luck losing fat when they've added strength building routines to their aerobics. Still, anyone, especially those of us around middle age, should have our metabolic rates regularly checked--mostly this involved thyroid testing--especially if our middles seem to be growing despite decent exercise.

check this out...
 

AICAR--- a new research discovery.

Basically it has been learned that people vary in how many mitochondria we have. People with lower concentration in cells, become heavier than people with many more.

http://www.latimes.com/features/heal...,4249687.story

It might just be that those of us with the slower metabolisms may have a solution in the near future!
http://www.emaxhealth.com/69/23617.html

This will really put GSK (Glaxo) back on the map if it pans out!

In the meantime, acetyl Carnitine is all you can do. With some CoQ-10 may help. I know that acetyl Carnitine helps me exercise. Both are mitochondrial enhancers.