Ageless if you Dare - Loulou's Facial Exercises
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » Skincare Tools & Do-It-Yourself Skincare

free skin care · Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:33 am

Not Cm, but its important to note that with FlexEffect your better off speaking with Claudia or one of their trainers to get official advice on them.

I think your doing what they call "Spot training" and so maybe not exercising the eye is part of the problem, but I'm not expert so really think its better to speak with one of the trainers. Be warned your get 101 questions though, but it is worth while answering them as although I have been cross about their posting of questions in the past with my simple problem, often they explain what factors are effecting things etc and then recommend a plan of action. I have to hold hands up and say I haven't always followed the plan though - as sometimes it seemed silly, but its always come back to bite my rear end. When I do, I get the results.

You may want to do massage in that area though.

summer2004 wrote:

Are the eyes exercises of FlexEffect good enough to build the eye area?

I have done FE for 1 month (everyday I only do exercises 12-17 for the cheek) but stopped it for 2 weeks.

The reason is that I find that the wrinkle under my right eye becomes more pronounced. The wrinkle was formed after 4 months of doing Ageless.

Your advice is highly appreciated!

free skin care · Tue Apr 27, 2010 6:56 am

Hi TheresaMary,

Your advice is helpful & candid.

I know that I should not have just focused on one area (the cheek); the wrinkle under my area is a good lesson for me & I have to pay for it!

free skin care · Tue Apr 27, 2010 7:43 am

No probs, and hey I've been there done it and got the t-shirt too! I guess there is stuff you can do but think the best place is to get advice from the trainers rather than here simply as they train people and will know how to make it work for you better. People have shared their opinions with me in the past, and I have gone off and done it and had disasterous results, but when I told the trainers what I did, they would often explain why it worked for that person and not me, so its rather complex for sure.

summer2004 wrote:

Hi TheresaMary,

Your advice is helpful & candid.

I know that I should not have just focused on one area (the cheek); the wrinkle under my area is a good lesson for me & I have to pay for it!

free skin care · Tue Apr 27, 2010 8:05 am

TheresaMary,

Couldn't agree anymore!

free skin care · Tue Apr 27, 2010 9:32 am

Hey TheresaMary Smile

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

Here (http://www.flexeffect.com/debpic.htm), Deb to me for years looks like she's in her twenties in her photos, as if she's totally stopped time, but then somewhere in her mid- to early fifties, it seems that she starts to age a bit more, though certainly not as fast as your average person, but still it's noticeably more than before.

But is that the style etc of the photos rather than her face itself. For example I know what you mean re the 40's photos, but they are obviously photograph posed shots. Whereas the black and white ones were done after people were complaining. I think also her hair is much shorter in the good shots, whereas the recent ones have her with longer hair which maybe ages people.

I took into account the changes in hairstyle and the poses, etc., but still actually think her face itself looks like it's not aging in her 40's and that she looks like she's in her twenties, but like she starts to age a bit in her 50's. As I said before, I don't expect to be able to stop the clock, so that's not a critique at all, but rather my personal observation. Deb does look absolutely amazing to me, no matter how you slice it! Smile

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

Similarly, for Carol Maggio, she looks for the ~15 years while doing facercise like she has stopped time. You can see how young-looking and natural she looks here at age 52: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPJnwzGQwBU&feature=related (scroll to 1:50 minutes). And here, I believe this clip is just a 2-4 years later, she has suddenly lost considerable volume in her face, volume that would soften her look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9202U2JCIQ&feature=related.

I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean about volume. Her face doesn't look like its lost volume to me. I can see how the portions of her face have changed but think that’s due to the hairstyle rather than the face itself.

To me, it looks like the softness and fullness in both her upper and lower cheeks has diminished. For example, in her lower cheeks, it looks to me like that area has started to suck in more, with a dip starting from the edge of her orbicularis oris and extending over the buccinator region. She doesn't have that same dip in photos from her early 50's, and again she does not have it in photos and images that are recent. It doesn't look like a hairstyle change to me, but that's just my opinion.

What are the changes in facial portions that you see?

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

No, I'm not saying that they're not following their talk, but rather that hormones can influence our results dramatically, and I'm just arguing that I suspect that part of the great changes in Loulou's photos are due to fixing hormonal issues. It's just that I don't think changes of the magnitude that Loulou experienced are typical from only doing facial exercises. Plus in her before pictures, she looks much older than her age, which again, suggests those hormones issues in part caused her face to sag.

Ok but if they know the importance of hormones, then surely they would have done something about it. I know both Deb and Carole who I have spoken to on the telephone both emphasised how important hormones were, but from what your saying, if they've changed for the worse due to hormones, then they are either not following the same advice they're giving to others, or the advice they are following is incorrect which is what I find troublesome.

I guess I'm confused by what your saying. Could you give me some examples of things that they could be doing?

To try to explain where I'm coming from, I'm not saying that our hormones should necessarily automatically be manipulated during menopause, or anything like that. But if they are way out of balance (e.g., stress or a hormone imbalance), then fixing them would likely bring about significant improvements in our apparent facial health. To my knowledge, I had not heard that either Deb or Carol have experienced hormonal issues, so I would expect that they are just going through the normal large changes in hormones associated with menopause. But Loulou did admit to hormonal imbalance, which she corrected.

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

Basically, I don't want people doing Ageless to give up prematurely on facial exercise because they don't have as dramatic results as Loulou has or in as short of a time as Loulou claims is possible (6 months until maintenance is what she says on her website, which I think is clearly unrealistic).

Ok did you follow Ageless exactly as Lou laid out as I know from before you adapted FlexEffect with your knowledge. Did you do the same with Ageless?

What I was trying to get at is the meta idea of what is a reasonable expectation for what results are possible and what is a reasonable time frame for expecting them.

One of my weakness in conversation is that I often bring up too many points, which clouds my main message, so I apologize for that. My main message was that I now have serious doubts that changes of the size that Loulou had in the timeframe she experienced them (only 2 years) are a realistic benchmark to use in setting expectations. One, I have only once see changes that dramatic, and two, the whole hormonal imbalance and internal and topical hormone use makes me wonder if a large part of her results can be explained by correcting her hormones levels. Of course, no one is going to get a beautiful, firm, exquisitely muscled and shaped face like Loulou from just taking hormones--she clearly did a fantastic job with facial exercises. But rather, I suspect the difference in her before and after pictures would be smaller if she never had those hormonal issues, in that her before picture would look better and have a lot less sag.

Now, I bring this up not because I think the typical person simply cannot expect to have changes as large as Loulou did or as fast as Loulou did. I'm just advocating for setting appropriate expectations. I know when I set my expectations too high and don't have amazing results, I want to give up or I want to think that something doesn't work. Take weight-loss, for example. When I was at my heaviest, I would get very down if I only lost a pound in a given a month. But when I finally talked to the right person--an expert in natural bodybuilding--and did the math, that was exactly in the range of the amount I should expect to lose based on my body type and size, a 20% calorie deficit (which is a more realistic calorie cut), and my health history and personal challenges. But it wasn't until I made this mental breakthrough that I was able to have the patience to stick with it.

So that's all I'm advocating here: appropriate expectations. And since this is a thread on Ageless, I'm saying that I don't think that Loulou's Before and After photos, or her website claim of 6 months until maintenance, are realistic benchmarks to use in setting one's expectations. I think FE, Facercise's, and even Carolyn's Facial Fitness photos and advice on when you will see results are much more realistic.

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

But I think clearly 14 months is plenty of time to test out a program to see whether it agrees with you. Smile

14 months – I thought they all gave a year (but Ageless gives 6 months as you say).

Yes, FE says to give it a year. I was just responding to the poster who said she tried Ageless for 14 months and didn't like it, and I was just confirming that that is certainly long enough to try a program out to see whether it would give you the results you want.

Just my thoughts. Smile

I know many people might not agree, but I do appreciate the space to speak candidly, and I hope I've been fair and respectful, while trying to talk about these sensitive topics Smile

free skin care · Tue Apr 27, 2010 9:44 am

summer2004 wrote:

Hi cm5997,

Are the eyes exercises of FlexEffect good enough to build the eye area?

I have done FE for 1 month (everyday I only do exercises 12-17 for the cheek) but stopped it for 2 weeks.

The reason is that I find that the wrinkle under my right eye becomes more pronounced. The wrinkle was formed after 4 months of doing Ageless.

Your advice is highly appreciated!

Hi Summer2004--Yes, I think the eye exercises are of FlexEffect are good enough to build the eye area. But to echo TheresaMary, she is right; your best bet is to talk to an actual FlexEffect trainer, who has way more expertise on these issues Smile

free skin care · Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:43 am

Hi Summer2004 - pm for you

free skin care · Wed Apr 28, 2010 2:46 am

Hi CM

cm5597 wrote:

Hey TheresaMary Smile

I took into account the changes in hairstyle and the poses, etc., but still actually think her face itself looks like it's not aging in her 40's and that she looks like she's in her twenties, but like she starts to age a bit in her 50's. As I said before, I don't expect to be able to stop the clock, so that's not a critique at all, but rather my personal observation. Deb does look absolutely amazing to me, no matter how you slice it! Smile

I think you raise a good topic, which I'm trying to understand here better. I know that its impossible to stop the clock (and nor would I want to), but just trying to work out where you think Deb has gone wrong in her approach. I mean hormones is a biggie – I've been there for sure and saw my face transform overnight when they were imbalanced, and thank God I was lucky enough to be stubborn to really make my doctor investigate. Otherwise who knows what I'd look like, but I'm wondering if the comments your making about Deb starting at age at 50 you can define more. As I don't see the differences and maybe it’s a good area for us all to be aware of and then we can take appropriate steps to ensure we don't go down that same route.

cm5597 wrote:

To me, it looks like the softness and fullness in both her upper and lower cheeks has diminished. For example, in her lower cheeks, it looks to me like that area has started to suck in more, with a dip starting from the edge of her orbicularis oris and extending over the buccinator region. She doesn't have that same dip in photos from her early 50's, and again she does not have it in photos and images that are recent. It doesn't look like a hairstyle change to me, but that's just my opinion.
What are the changes in facial portions that you see?

For me when I look at her beginners dvd, and the advanced, and even the ultimate, the hairstyles are all different, and I watched the advanced dvd again last night for information and thought that her face actually looked very gaunt, and in the ultimate dvd her face to me looks fuller (but I can't help but wonder about the fringe, whether its covering lines.

cm5597 wrote:

I guess I'm confused by what your saying. Could you give me some examples of things that they could be doing?
To try to explain where I'm coming from, I'm not saying that our hormones should necessarily automatically be manipulated during menopause, or anything like that. But if they are way out of balance (e.g., stress or a hormone imbalance), then fixing them would likely bring about significant improvements in our apparent facial health. To my knowledge, I had not heard that either Deb or Carol have experienced hormonal issues, so I would expect that they are just going through the normal large changes in hormones associated with menopause. But Loulou did admit to hormonal imbalance, which she corrected.

Oh I thought you meant that their changes were due to imbalance of hormones. I don't know if Deb or Carole has imbalances (and whether they would want to share – I can appreciate they might not) but I think if it is such a factor, then I would expert them being experts to have done something about it. I mean I'm no expert but having gone through the Big M myself, I can fully appreciate its not a fun time and does take a lot of work and effort to balance.

cm5597 wrote:

What I was trying to get at is the meta idea of what is a reasonable expectation for what results are possible and what is a reasonable time frame for expecting them.

That’s an interesting point. I never understood how Lou came up with that time frame. Also she's always rather candid in her responses about what she did with her FlexEffect routine, as I know she was pushed for time (and being a fellow mum myself I can fully understand why) but there's little mention of what her routine consisted of. I mean also the photos that are on the cover of the book, someone said earlier were her before and afters on the FlexEffect site, so I do feel at times like there is something we're missing out on.

cm5597 wrote:

One of my weakness in conversation is that I often bring up too many points, which clouds my main message, so I apologize for that. My main message was that I now have serious doubts that changes of the size that Loulou had in the timeframe she experienced them (only 2 years) are a realistic benchmark to use in setting expectations. One, I have only once see changes that dramatic, and two, the whole hormonal imbalance and internal and topical hormone use makes me wonder if a large part of her results can be explained by correcting her hormones levels. Of course, no one is going to get a beautiful, firm, exquisitely muscled and shaped face like Loulou from just taking hormones--she clearly did a fantastic job with facial exercises. But rather, I suspect the difference in her before and after pictures would be smaller if she never had those hormonal issues, in that her before picture would look better and have a lot less sag.

That’s a great idea that I haven't considered, that hormone imbalances contribute to sag. That makes sense to me now.

cm5597 wrote:

Now, I bring this up not because I think the typical person simply cannot expect to have changes as large as Loulou did or as fast as Loulou did. I'm just advocating for setting appropriate expectations. I know when I set my expectations too high and don't have amazing results, I want to give up or I want to think that something doesn't work. Take weight-loss, for example. When I was at my heaviest, I would get very down if I only lost a pound in a given a month. But when I finally talked to the right person--an expert in natural bodybuilding--and did the math, that was exactly in the range of the amount I should expect to lose based on my body type and size, a 20% calorie deficit (which is a more realistic calorie cut), and my health history and personal challenges. But it wasn't until I made this mental breakthrough that I was able to have the patience to stick with it.

No, I'm glad you did bring it up as its definitely something we should be aware of, and its not something I had considered at all. I agree re setting expectations. I know in the past I've set myself unrealistic ones and that’s always ending up in disappointment. Do you think bodytype is an important factor also for face exercises too? I mean it would make sense.

cm5597 wrote:

FE, Facercise's, and even Carolyn's Facial Fitness photos and advice on when you will see results are much more realistic.

Actually I went back to my books and saw there isn't actually a timeframe that I could see in Facercise. I don't own Carolyn's Facial Fitness, so don't know what recommendations she has. Actually looking at Facial Magic, they give you a program, which is interesting (as you add two exercises to it each week and so build up into doing a full routine.

cm5597 wrote:

Yes, FE says to give it a year. I was just responding to the poster who said she tried Ageless for 14 months and didn't like it, and I was just confirming that that is certainly long enough to try a program out to see whether it would give you the results you want.

Gotcha – just wondered where the 14 number had come into it, as hadn't seen it before, so that makes perfect sense, thank you.

cm5597 wrote:

Just my thoughts. Smile

I know many people might not agree, but I do appreciate the space to speak candidly, and I hope I've been fair and respectful, while trying to talk about these sensitive topics Smile

No I think its important to share thoughts like these, as they are useful and may effect/help other people too. Its what we're all here for after all.

Theresa

free skin care · Wed Apr 28, 2010 4:18 am

IMCathy wrote:

Hi Summer2004 - pm for you

Hi Cathy,

Sorry that I couldn't reply to your message earlier because I live in Asia.

Without the wrinkle under my eye, I did not believe that there would be a negative effect of building the muscle of a particular area; while neglecting the adjacent muscle.

Seriously, I will take your advice wholeheartedly!!!

free skin care · Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:26 am

Hi TheresaMary!

TheresaMary wrote:

Hi CM

cm5597 wrote:

Hey TheresaMary Smile

I took into account the changes in hairstyle and the poses, etc., but still actually think her face itself looks like it's not aging in her 40's and that she looks like she's in her twenties, but like she starts to age a bit in her 50's. As I said before, I don't expect to be able to stop the clock, so that's not a critique at all, but rather my personal observation. Deb does look absolutely amazing to me, no matter how you slice it! Smile

I think you raise a good topic, which I'm trying to understand here better. I know that its impossible to stop the clock (and nor would I want to), but just trying to work out where you think Deb has gone wrong in her approach. I mean hormones is a biggie – I've been there for sure and saw my face transform overnight when they were imbalanced, and thank God I was lucky enough to be stubborn to really make my doctor investigate. Otherwise who knows what I'd look like, but I'm wondering if the comments your making about Deb starting at age at 50 you can define more. As I don't see the differences and maybe it’s a good area for us all to be aware of and then we can take appropriate steps to ensure we don't go down that same route.

I don't think Deb or Carol has gone wrong in their approach to aging or dealing with hormones. My understanding is that during menopause, the large hormonal changes cause things like a more rapid bone loss, particularly in the first five years; drier skin; and a reduction in skin elasticity. My understanding is that while these symptoms are mild or undetectable in some women, and in others, they can be mitigated to a degree, they cannot be completely eliminated. Maybe this is in part what motivated Deb to develop techniques to reduce bone loss, as I know she mentioned she started noticing bone loss/changes in her face?? So my thinking is that we should naturally expect to see an increase in aging during and after perimenopause and menopause. Now, I'm really out of my league here in saying much about menopause Smile

, but that is my thinking: that it would make sense we would see faster aging probably in many to most women during those years.

I can't put my finger exactly on the difference in Deb's photos. Sure, her hairstyle makes a big difference, but even then, I feel like I can just tell she's a little older looking. It looks like it's in part a difference in skin and in part a slight difference in build, but I can't really pinpoint it. With Carol, I feel like I can clearly see a larger difference in face fullness, as she goes through a gaunt phase. And to be a bit more nuanced, in their pre-menopause years, I can start to see a gradual reduction in facial fullness through the years in Carol's face (whereas Deb's face does not show this, most likely due to the fact that she is doing resistance training for the face), but that that volume loss seems to speed up rapidly for Carol during the natural menopause years.

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

To me, it looks like the softness and fullness in both her upper and lower cheeks has diminished. For example, in her lower cheeks, it looks to me like that area has started to suck in more, with a dip starting from the edge of her orbicularis oris and extending over the buccinator region. She doesn't have that same dip in photos from her early 50's, and again she does not have it in photos and images that are recent. It doesn't look like a hairstyle change to me, but that's just my opinion.
What are the changes in facial portions that you see?

For me when I look at her beginners dvd, and the advanced, and even the ultimate, the hairstyles are all different, and I watched the advanced dvd again last night for information and thought that her face actually looked very gaunt, and in the ultimate dvd her face to me looks fuller (but I can't help but wonder about the fringe, whether its covering lines.

Yes, I totally agree about her face looking much more gaunt in the advanced DVD that she made several years ago. There is a period of a few years where Carol's face looked much gaunter to me, and those years correspond to the average menopause years. But both before those years, and recently, I don't see that same degree of gauntness. I'm *very* curious to know what changed, if it was indeed a hormonal problem, whether Carol improved her face widener exercise to make it more effective, or whether she is doing anything else that is helping with facial fullness.

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

I guess I'm confused by what your saying. Could you give me some examples of things that they could be doing?
To try to explain where I'm coming from, I'm not saying that our hormones should necessarily automatically be manipulated during menopause, or anything like that. But if they are way out of balance (e.g., stress or a hormone imbalance), then fixing them would likely bring about significant improvements in our apparent facial health. To my knowledge, I had not heard that either Deb or Carol have experienced hormonal issues, so I would expect that they are just going through the normal large changes in hormones associated with menopause. But Loulou did admit to hormonal imbalance, which she corrected.

Oh I thought you meant that their changes were due to imbalance of hormones. I don't know if Deb or Carole has imbalances (and whether they would want to share – I can appreciate they might not) but I think if it is such a factor, then I would expert them being experts to have done something about it. I mean I'm no expert but having gone through the Big M myself, I can fully appreciate its not a fun time and does take a lot of work and effort to balance.

Yeah, I only know that Loulou said she had hormonal imbalances. I was just guessing that I thought Deb and Carol were experiencing the natural increases in aging around menopause. Really, it was just part of my argument that hormones can affect aging and may partly explain Loulou's phenomenal changes.

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

What I was trying to get at is the meta idea of what is a reasonable expectation for what results are possible and what is a reasonable time frame for expecting them.

That’s an interesting point. I never understood how Lou came up with that time frame. Also she's always rather candid in her responses about what she did with her FlexEffect routine, as I know she was pushed for time (and being a fellow mum myself I can fully understand why) but there's little mention of what her routine consisted of. I mean also the photos that are on the cover of the book, someone said earlier were her before and afters on the FlexEffect site, so I do feel at times like there is something we're missing out on.

Yes, it would be helpful to know. Also, I've always personally in my body exercise routine felt like maintenance was a "piece of cake" relative to getting to maintenance. But in Loulou's defense, I know that she said she had people test out her program for her, so she could tweak it, so I'm guessing that's how she developed the estimate of "6 months"...? I mean, it's quite possible that the figure comes from that trial, and if she was really coaching those testers every day, I could see how results might come twice or even up to three times faster. So that makes sense to me. However, even then, I think 6 months, even with daily expert coaching, is probably not reasonable for a majority of people, and certainly, not without in-person coaching.

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

One of my weakness in conversation is that I often bring up too many points, which clouds my main message, so I apologize for that. My main message was that I now have serious doubts that changes of the size that Loulou had in the timeframe she experienced them (only 2 years) are a realistic benchmark to use in setting expectations. One, I have only once see changes that dramatic, and two, the whole hormonal imbalance and internal and topical hormone use makes me wonder if a large part of her results can be explained by correcting her hormones levels. Of course, no one is going to get a beautiful, firm, exquisitely muscled and shaped face like Loulou from just taking hormones--she clearly did a fantastic job with facial exercises. But rather, I suspect the difference in her before and after pictures would be smaller if she never had those hormonal issues, in that her before picture would look better and have a lot less sag.

That’s a great idea that I haven't considered, that hormone imbalances contribute to sag. That makes sense to me now.

cm5597 wrote:

Now, I bring this up not because I think the typical person simply cannot expect to have changes as large as Loulou did or as fast as Loulou did. I'm just advocating for setting appropriate expectations. I know when I set my expectations too high and don't have amazing results, I want to give up or I want to think that something doesn't work. Take weight-loss, for example. When I was at my heaviest, I would get very down if I only lost a pound in a given a month. But when I finally talked to the right person--an expert in natural bodybuilding--and did the math, that was exactly in the range of the amount I should expect to lose based on my body type and size, a 20% calorie deficit (which is a more realistic calorie cut), and my health history and personal challenges. But it wasn't until I made this mental breakthrough that I was able to have the patience to stick with it.

No, I'm glad you did bring it up as its definitely something we should be aware of, and its not something I had considered at all. I agree re setting expectations. I know in the past I've set myself unrealistic ones and that’s always ending up in disappointment. Do you think bodytype is an important factor also for face exercises too? I mean it would make sense.

Oh, I absolutely think bodytype makes a *big* difference, just as in body exercise. For example, I'm genetically very skinny and tiny, but yet do not have problems putting on muscle, I just have to work much harder and longer than most people to do it. That's fine, but it just means I have to adjust my expectations and training. Also, I have this weird trait that I put on muscle in my quads without even trying--probably from my years of soccer and some leg muscle imbalances--so I always go light on quads, but heavy on most other body parts. Similarly, for my face, I see similar differences. My jaw is narrow, so I need much more build in my masseter to compensate to widen my face, whereas most other people tend to shy away from that exercise for fear of a manly jaw Smile

Also, I have only once overbuilt a muscle in my face (my orbicularis oris)...again because of my genetic predispositions, so it's just not something I worry much about. I'm always worried about "underbuilding" Smile

. And then there are things like recovery time, etc., etc. So I do think training is very individual and body type should be built in to the training routine and one's expectations.

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

FE, Facercise's, and even Carolyn's Facial Fitness photos and advice on when you will see results are much more realistic.

Actually I went back to my books and saw there isn't actually a timeframe that I could see in Facercise. I don't own Carolyn's Facial Fitness, so don't know what recommendations she has. Actually looking at Facial Magic, they give you a program, which is interesting (as you add two exercises to it each week and so build up into doing a full routine.

cm5597 wrote:

Yes, FE says to give it a year. I was just responding to the poster who said she tried Ageless for 14 months and didn't like it, and I was just confirming that that is certainly long enough to try a program out to see whether it would give you the results you want.

Gotcha – just wondered where the 14 number had come into it, as hadn't seen it before, so that makes perfect sense, thank you.

cm5597 wrote:

Just my thoughts. Smile

I know many people might not agree, but I do appreciate the space to speak candidly, and I hope I've been fair and respectful, while trying to talk about these sensitive topics Smile

No I think its important to share thoughts like these, as they are useful and may effect/help other people too. Its what we're all here for after all.

Theresa

Hugs

free skin care · Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:05 am

cm5597 wrote:

I don't think Deb or Carol has gone wrong in their approach to aging or dealing with hormones. My understanding is that during menopause, the large hormonal changes cause things like a more rapid bone loss, particularly in the first five years; drier skin; and a reduction in skin elasticity. My understanding is that while these symptoms are mild or undetectable in some women, and in others, they can be mitigated to a degree, they cannot be completely eliminated. Maybe this is in part what motivated Deb to develop techniques to reduce bone loss, as I know she mentioned she started noticing bone loss/changes in her face?? So my thinking is that we should naturally expect to see an increase in aging during and after perimenopause and menopause. Now, I'm really out of my league here in saying much about menopause , but that is my thinking: that it would make sense we would see faster aging probably in many to most women during those years.

I can't put my finger exactly on the difference in Deb's photos. Sure, her hairstyle makes a big difference, but even then, I feel like I can just tell she's a little older looking. It looks like it's in part a difference in skin and in part a slight difference in build, but I can't really pinpoint it. With Carol, I feel like I can clearly see a larger difference in face fullness, as she goes through a gaunt phase. And to be a bit more nuanced, in their pre-menopause years, I can start to see a gradual reduction in facial fullness through the years in Carol's face (whereas Deb's face does not show this, most likely due to the fact that she is doing resistance training for the face), but that that volume loss seems to speed up rapidly for Carol during the natural menopause years.

You know it kills me to say it, but I do remember Shawn saying something about hormones ages ago, and I thought what would he know – he's a guy, but he was saying something similar to what you are, and I guess I should have paid more attention, but at that time me and Linda were kind of like he's a guy what does he know about hormones and their effects.

cm5597 wrote:

Yes, it would be helpful to know. Also, I've always personally in my body exercise routine felt like maintenance was a "piece of cake" relative to getting to maintenance. But in Loulou's defense, I know that she said she had people test out her program for her, so she could tweak it, so I'm guessing that's how she developed the estimate of "6 months"...? I mean, it's quite possible that the figure comes from that trial, and if she was really coaching those testers every day, I could see how results might come twice or even up to three times faster. So that makes sense to me. However, even then, I think 6 months, even with daily expert coaching, is probably not reasonable for a majority of people, and certainly, not without in-person coaching.

You see I never knew that. I wish she had written some more about who she tested it with, and what their results were. I know one time she answered a question as to why there was a particular count on one exercise with an answer that really surprised me, which was something along the lines of I just picked that number.

cm5597 wrote:

Oh, I absolutely think bodytype makes a *big* difference, just as in body exercise. For example, I'm genetically very skinny and tiny, but yet do not have problems putting on muscle, I just have to work much harder and longer than most people to do it. That's fine, but it just means I have to adjust my expectations and training. Also, I have this weird trait that I put on muscle in my quads without even trying--probably from my years of soccer and some leg muscle imbalances--so I always go light on quads, but heavy on most other body parts. Similarly, for my face, I see similar differences. My jaw is narrow, so I need much more build in my masseter to compensate to widen my face, whereas most other people tend to shy away from that exercise for fear of a manly jaw Smile

Also, I have only once overbuilt a muscle in my face (my orbicularis oris)...again because of my genetic predispositions, so it's just not something I worry much about. I'm always worried about "underbuilding" Smile

. And then there are things like recovery time, etc., etc. So I do think training is very individual and body type should be built in to the training routine and one's expectations.

I'd love to hear more about that.

Theresa

free skin care · Mon May 17, 2010 8:30 am

Going slightly off topic here, but I don't know if I'm the only one who has noticed, but Lou seems to have vanished recently? Has anyone heard from her or know whats going on?

Just curious thats all. There's a lot of unhappy people with problems on the forum, and whilst I've tried to help a couple out, I don't know anywhere near enough - plus the mods there seem to have done a vanishing trick.

Also (don't know if this is pure rumour based on jealousy - as with us girls its always a possibility) I heard that one of the mods has had fillers done. There's no public mention of that, and I'm wondering if she did that because she felt exercises weren't good enough to address that area or what. Thats probably going to make me unpopular but I think its important to be upfront and honest about these things!

free skin care · Mon May 17, 2010 8:58 am

I've been doing Ageless (nearly) 3 months and check in the forum every now and then. You're right, it is like tumbleweed on there. Such a shame.

I've no idea about Lou but I did read somewhere that another FlexEffect trainer is doing her own book too?

free skin care · Mon May 17, 2010 9:05 am

The last time I finally managed to get a response from Lou, she said her father had Alzheimer's, plus she had children to bring up, she sounded very stressed out, that was in the last quarter of 2009. So perhaps it has just got all too much.

free skin care · Mon May 17, 2010 2:24 pm

Sure I knew that about her father (she had spoken to me about it in a PM) but its been quite a while, and even when she was busy, she used to pop on board to let us know she hadn't disappeared. Doesn't look like she's been on there since last year!

Cooking Katy wrote:

The last time I finally managed to get a response from Lou, she said her father had Alzheimer's, plus she had children to bring up, she sounded very stressed out, that was in the last quarter of 2009. So perhaps it has just got all too much.

Mon May 17, 2010 5:20 pm

I posted a question on her forum and she never responded. I hope she's OK.

free skin care · Tue May 18, 2010 3:22 am

On just rereading this thread, I had forgotten, but the forum was set up by someone else for her, not by her, so thats probably also part of the reasons she is not on there. She probably never dreamed that it would take off as much as it has, and I suppose with her poorly father and kids, its too much to deal with day in day out. I suppose we just got to hang in and hope that wherever she is, she's ok.

free skin care · Tue May 18, 2010 8:56 am

I thought I would give an update of sorts on doing Ageless. I did Ageless religiously for about 9 months, along with my AALS and saw great results.
About 6 months ago I changed my routine and basically stopped doing the Ageless exercises. BIG MISTAKE!! Sad

I started up again and I am trying to be as religious about the regime as I was in the beginning and thank God for muscle memory as I am seeing results just 2 weeks after starting again.

I hope all is well with Lou.

ljk - do you have any additional info on the possible book from another Flex Trainer?

free skin care · Tue May 18, 2010 2:00 pm

I read it elsewhere, either on Skincaretalk or LouLou's forum. I'll try and find the post. Don't know anything else about it, sorry.

Think it was TheresaMary who posted it, apologies if I'm wrong.

Also, LouLou last replied to me on the forum about 2 months ago or so, not last year. But she hasn't been on for a while, it's true.

free skin care · Tue May 18, 2010 2:25 pm

Had quite a hunt for this post! Was beginning to think it had been edited out.

http://www.skincaretalk.com/anti-aging/6722-i-just-ordered-flex-effect-its-closeout-2.html#post179154

As this information is easily available, I'm sure it's ok for me to post here. Was hoping to learn more about it myself!

free skin care · Wed May 19, 2010 1:51 am

Sorry it was me. I thought Loli had said to me in a PM that she was working on a book, but I reread my posts last night and couldn't find it. So its possible that I misunderstood. I know she wrote on the forum that she was working on something and said she would post it, but she's been a doll at helping me with some queries, and that translator tool isn't perfect!

free skin care · Wed May 19, 2010 8:11 am

TheresaMary wrote:

Sorry it was me. I thought Loli had said to me in a PM that she was working on a book, but I reread my posts last night and couldn't find it. So its possible that I misunderstood. I know she wrote on the forum that she was working on something and said she would post it, but she's been a doll at helping me with some queries, and that translator tool isn't perfect!

I think I recall Loli saying that she was working on something too, but I'm almost positive it wasn't a book. I think she said she was working on assembling some set of materials to use in training people using the FlexEffect program. My thought was that she was referring just to diagrams of muscles with explanations, or something like that.

free skin care · Wed May 19, 2010 8:17 am

Oh, I just read the Skincaretalk forum post. I obviously didn't see Loli's PM to TheresaMay, so maybe she is working on a book!

free skin care · Wed May 19, 2010 8:47 am

No CM I think I got confused, it might be as you say a collection of materials (which now I think of it is kind of like a book isn't it). Who knows!

cm5597 wrote:

Oh, I just read the Skincaretalk forum post. I obviously didn't see Loli's PM to TheresaMay, so maybe she is working on a book!

Thu May 20, 2010 6:29 pm

Hi everyone. I am interested in starting the ageless program, i have just started tanaka massages..but i am still a little unsure if it will help me. i have been contemplating getting some type of surgery bc I am so sick of my full face that has no contours at all in the mid face area except for nasolabial folds...i cant stand my face and i have good features otherwise, but its really all in the cheek area that makes or breaks a face, in my opinion....its like i have hidden cheek bones bc i have fat from just under my eyes to my chin.
i read that lou lou will send 4 of the exercises to ppl who want to try it out before buying? i just want to know if this program is what i need or maybe i need something else like buccal fat pad removal or a cheek lift or lipo. who knows. i just cant stand it anymore. im 27 and i look like a 12 year old who has weight issues! its ruining my life.

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.