# Weight Loss Frustration



## JoetheBull (Apr 29, 2010)

you getting enough sleep?


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

JoetheBull said:


> you getting enough sleep?


Yep.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

Cetanu said:


> These are the recommended minimum caloric intakes for women:
> 
> *Sedentary Women*
> 1600-2000 calories per day
> ...


Everyone is different, though.

I manage a clinical weight loss center, and we test our clients' metabolic rates (two different methods). My BMR is 1250. With moderate exercise 3-5 days per week, I would multiply my BMR x 1.55 to get my maintenance calories = 1937.5. If I wanted to lose a pound per week, I would need to create a deficit of 500 calories a day = 1437.5 calories per day.

If I don't exercise, I only need 1500 a day to MAINTAIN my weight. If I was sedentary and wanted to lose a pound per week, I'd have to reduce my calories to only 1000 per day. 

Here's a website that can help you determine caloric needs based on your BMR and activity level:
Harris Benedict Equation


----------



## Cetanu (Jan 20, 2012)

android654 said:


> You're trying to cut weight, especially excess fat, you need a caloric deficit. That's just math. However if you're dipping too low, lacking nutrients in your diet and your exercise isn't up to snuff, you will have complications. I'd also worry more about body composition than actual weight. Not only is it a better indicator of health, but excess fat lossis better measured from inches and not pounds.


It's not just math.

900 calories of High Fructose Corn Syrup is not the same as 900 calories of Monounsaturated Fat.

If it was that simple I could take a multivitamin every day and eat 2400 calories of potatoes and mince meat to take care of my "daily macronutrient needs".



Snakecharmer said:


> Everyone is different, though.
> 
> I manage a clinical weight loss center, and we test our clients' metabolic rates (two different methods). My BMR is 1250. With moderate exercise 3-5 days per week, I would multiply my BMR x 1.55 to get my maintenance calories = 1937.5. If I wanted to lose a pound per week, I would need to create a deficit of 500 calories a day = 1437.5 calories per day.
> 
> ...


That's all well and good

but it doesn't really explain how I can eat 2000 calories (on a daily recommended of 2200) of nut butter as a snack on a regular occasion and not gain any weight.

I really think that the 'calories in, calories out' idea is complete bullshit.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

Cetanu said:


> but it doesn't really explain how I can eat 2000 calories (on a daily recommended of 2200) of nut butter as a snack on a regular occasion and not gain any weight.
> 
> I really think that the 'calories in, calories out' idea is complete bullshit.


What is your BMR and activity level? 

Trust me, the calories in/calories out is NOT bullshit - I work with it every day.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

These might be helpful:

How We Get Fat | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald

This one is about calories in/calories out: All Diets Work: The Importance of Calories | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald

This one is especially relevant to this thread:
Not Losing Fat at 20% Deficit, What Should I do? - Q&A | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald


----------



## Cetanu (Jan 20, 2012)

Snakecharmer said:


> What is your BMR and activity level?
> 
> Trust me, the calories in/calories out is NOT bullshit - I work with it every day.


BMR is 1868.2
I am an office worker.
I walk a total of (1.5+1.7)*2 Kilometers 5 days a week.
Apart from that I sit in a chair all day.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

Cetanu said:


> BMR is 1868.2
> I am an office worker.
> I walk a total of (1.5+1.7)*2 Kilometers 5 days a week.
> Apart from that I sit in a chair all day.


Could be a lot of things...one could be that you are overestimating your calorie intake. Or, underestimating your activity.

How did you check your BMR? Do you know how much lean mass you have? Just curious.


----------



## Cetanu (Jan 20, 2012)

Snakecharmer said:


> Could be a lot of things...one could be that you are overestimating your calorie intake. Or, underestimating your activity.
> 
> How did you check your BMR? Do you know how much lean mass you have? Just curious.


66 + (13.7 * 78) + (5 * 178) - (6.8 * 23)

No idea how much lean mass I have

A typical day of food for me consists of:

* *




2-3 eggs
portobello mushroom
piece of middle bacon
a few asparagus
an entire small broccoli
1-2 tablespoon of clarified butter or coconut oil
a few garlic cloves roasted
half a brown onion
200-250g of beef, sometimes marrow included
half a cantaloupe
250 of strawberries OR half that of blueberries OR 2-3 kiwi fruits
one coconut (water and meat)
50-100g of macadamias
another 200-250g of some type of animal/bird
cauliflower/asparagus/cabbage/broccoli/carrots+onion


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Personally, I really think we have different BMRs. I think the best way to estimate your BMR is to look at how many calories you ate while maintaining and gaining.

Also, I think that jumping your metabolism with some extreme activity woven with mild activity is a good idea. Also, I do aerobic/weight training, and that works best for me. Weight training might be a good option for joints, because it can actually help joints and I read that it increases metabolism for a short period of time.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> As a note:
> 
> My first walking mile is roughly 12 minutes. The second walking mile is about a 15 minute mile. The "course" I walk is all ups and downs, and the hills are asskickers.


Wow! Unless you are seven feet tall, a twelve minute mile is at least double time, if not jogging. I'm impressed.


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

This is nothing to worry about, just be patient. As your weight drops and you build muscle/fitness, your weight-loss will naturally slow down.

40 pounds by the end of the year is still optimistic in my opinion...

Note that you need to do a lot of walking to lose weight, about 50 miles per pound of weight lost. (of course it varies depending on how you walk, your body mass etc)


----------



## android654 (Jan 19, 2010)

Cetanu said:


> It's not just math.
> 
> 900 calories of High Fructose Corn Syrup is not the same as 900 calories of Monounsaturated Fat.
> 
> If it was that simple I could take a multivitamin every day and eat 2400 calories of potatoes and mince meat to take care of my "


So you just went ahead and ignored the part about nutrients? 

There is a caloric equation to be considered when dropping fat or excess weight. Pick a sports nutritionist from any discipline and they'll tell you the same, if you wanna cut you have to cut calories.


----------



## Cetanu (Jan 20, 2012)

Oh well, I guess I'm the exception. Caloric intake makes no difference for me.


----------



## DiamondDays (Sep 4, 2012)

go read Lyle McDonald - Bodyrecomposition. Lyles rapid fat loss handbook is the shit for kick-starting fatloss.


----------



## bellisaurius (Jan 18, 2012)

Cetanu said:


> I really think that the 'calories in, calories out' idea is complete bullshit.


If everything that went into the body was used, it would be that simple. However, the body has a varying efficiency and a varying amount set aside to fat production, so in practice, as you point out, it's not that simple. Atwater system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Resolution (Feb 8, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> I'll try adding a few more calories to my daily diet, and I'm thinking of switching to swimming compared to walking since it has less joint impact.


I wouldn't recommend this. 

Your body has likely adapted to your lower intakes of calories by decreasing your metabolism, thereby decreasing your overall energy level (despite the walking). 

If you want to lose more weight, you need to boost your metabolism. 

Increase the intensity of your workouts, don't decrease them. Also, I'd suggest you start lifting weights to build muscle and further boost your metabolism.

As for diet, eat 4-5 smaller meals instead of 3 huge meals. This will keep your metabolism working all day, burning and utilizing your food. Might want to try eating way more calories than you're eating now. Be sure to start the day with food to get your metabolism working. I like to start with an omelete, spinach/mushroom/blackbean and a piece of whole wheat toast with some natural peanut butter. 

Try to get 30 grams of protien per meal, and try to keep each meal at about 400 calories. Replace refined carbs with whole grains with high fiber (they digest more slowly, giving you a "longer burn" of energy, and less of an insulin spike). Limit grains. Replace a lot of your grains with vegetables, but don't forsake grains altogether. 

What's your diet like now, if you don't mind me asking? 



android654 said:


> So you just went ahead and ignored the part about nutrients?
> 
> There is a caloric equation to be considered when dropping fat or excess weight. Pick a sports nutritionist from any discipline and they'll tell you the same, if you wanna cut you have to cut calories.


Not entirely true. What you eat has physiological effects. 

Large intakes of processed carbs and sugars can affect our insulin and insulin resistance, the effects of which aren't negligible.


----------



## Resolution (Feb 8, 2010)

The way I look at it is that to boost my metabolism, I need to make my body into a_ more efficient _machine. 

To do that you need to challenge it, way beyond the comfort level. The more you push your limits, the more your body changes/grows stronger to accommodate the demands you place onto it.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

@_Btmangan_ -

These components are moved around for various bits of meals on varying days to make a roughly 1200-1250 calorie day:

- Protein shake (usually as a 200 calorie 'meal' in the morning to help with nausea due to medication)
- Water
- Boiled eggs
- Cucumbers (either plain or with a dash of vinegar and hot sauce)
- Yogurt (trying to switch to Chobani, but the texture is wigging me out)
- A cube of cheddar cheese (with medication I take in the evening in order to remove the taste it leaves in my mouth)
- Spinach salad with a balsamic vinegar dressing
- Tea (green or black and hot or iced with roughly 15 calories of sugar added to it)
- Fish (cod, talapia, tuna or salmon)
- Chicken
- Fruit (usually easy-to-peal fruit such as Clementines and bananas)
- Squash or pumpkin
- hummus with gluten free or reduced gluten crackers
- Pasta is usually whole grain; rice is usually brown rice (if I'm serving people who dislike whole grain pasta or brown rice, I move to white grains)


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

niss said:


> Wow! Unless you are seven feet tall, a twelve minute mile is at least double time, if not jogging. I'm impressed.


I'm not seven feet tall, but I think having a 36" inseam helps me by giving me a rather long stride when I walk for exercise. If it was better on the hips (and if I was in better shape), I might be able to do 2 miles at probably 13 minutes apiece. Alas, it's actually almost as bad on the hips as jogging, and I'm not in excellent shape at the moment. Second mile is slower than the first because I'm usually slightly winded and my hips start hurting on the first uphill. Oh well, all are things to work on. 

:tongue:


----------



## Resolution (Feb 8, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> @_Btmangan_ -
> 
> These components are moved around for various bits of meals on varying days to make a roughly 1250 calorie day:
> 
> ...


This all seems pretty awesome.  

I like to mix my plain Greek Yogurt with cereal/peanuts. It offsets the sourness without nearly as much added sugar as the fruit flavors.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Btmangan said:


> This all seems pretty awesome.


I think I'm better off than a lot of people dieting because I actually like quite a few healthy foods, like vegetables, if I can put a bit of vinegar or hot sauce on them! As for fruits, I used to eat apples, but the skins tend get stuck between my teeth, and I'm not always somewhere I can floss.

:frustrating: 



> I like to mix my plain Greek Yogurt with cereal/peanuts. It offsets the sourness without nearly as much added sugar as the fruit flavors.


Hmm. Not a bad idea. Wonder if cashews would work in it.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

By the way, anyone have any suggestions for socks, inserts or other products that would reduce the chance of blistering on toes? One of my pinky toes keeps trying to blister, and I just need to find something that will reduce the chance of it happening more than regular socks can reduce it.


----------



## FaveteLinguis (Mar 5, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> By the way, anyone have any suggestions for socks, inserts or other products that would reduce the chance of blistering on toes? One of my pinky toes keeps trying to blister, and I just need to find something that will reduce the chance of it happening more than regular socks can reduce it.


Baby powder or foot powder may help. Change socks through out your work out. Put some deodarant on your feet. Wear shoes that are breathable. In general keep your *f**eet dry.* There are socks out there that are designed to wick away moisture as well, I don't have much experience with those since they're expensive as heck.

A common cause of blisters is your feet sweating, the socks getting soaked, and then the constant friction tends to really shuck fit up.

Ah, air out the feet as often as possible as well.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

@FaveteLinguis - The information you posted is pretty much common sense, especially for longer workouts. However, my workouts are roughly 25-30 minutes on a good day. I'm not going to be changing socks after every circuit that I do. I need products that will reduce the chance of blistering within those 30 minutes.


----------



## FaveteLinguis (Mar 5, 2010)

Then foot powder should be all you really need, if not try switching over to socks made of synthetic material instead then. Acrylic has worked best for me.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

FaveteLinguis said:


> Then foot powder should be all you really need, if not try switching over to socks made of synthetic material instead then. Acrylic has worked best for me.


Foot powder doesn't work.


----------



## bromide (Nov 28, 2011)

koalaroo said:


> By the way, anyone have any suggestions for socks, inserts or other products that would reduce the chance of blistering on toes? One of my pinky toes keeps trying to blister, and I just need to find something that will reduce the chance of it happening more than regular socks can reduce it.


Maybe you should change out the shoes rather than the socks? When you're working out, you need shoes that fit perfectly otherwise it's miserytown.

Re: the greek yogurt, something I use that you might try is tzatziki. I put a peeled, cored cucumber, a couple cloves of garlic, a large handful of dill, about a tsp of lemon juice and some salt in a food processor until it's finely chopped, then mix it with a medium sized container of greek yogurt and a bit of olive oil (let it refrigerate overnight before using it). I use it on salads as a dressing and on chicken or veggie wraps and pitas, I personally think it's really tasty, and it's also a way to incorporate greek yogurt into your diet while cutting out the need for more fattening dressings.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

bromide said:


> Maybe you should change out the shoes rather than the socks? When you're working out, you need shoes that fit perfectly otherwise it's miserytown.


I already went out and bought new shoes, which seemed comfortable enough around the store but in practice my pinky toe on the left foot gets rubbed to Hell no matter what shoes I'm wearing for a 2 mile walk. It's only the one foot that gets blisters, and in fact I had to take a smaller walk today than usual because the blister pain was too much.

So basically if there are socks or other products that will provide a cushion on that spot and have worked for other people, that's what I'm looking for.


----------



## bellisaurius (Jan 18, 2012)

Have tried something that would function as athletic tape with the blister area, like a band aid, or one of those raised pads, they look like this


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

bellisaurius said:


> Have tried something that would function as athletic tape with the blister area, like a band aid, or one of those raised pads, they look like this


I've tried taping gauze to the area, but I'm not really sure how effective it was. I'm considering a different lacing strategy, but I'm not sure if it would actually help (for instance, the options here How to Properly Tie Your Running Shoes from Runner's World.com -- there's an option for changing lacing around the toe area.) I could definitely try one of the ring thingies, though.

There's also the option of putting Vaseline on areas most prone to blistering. Has anyone tried this?


----------



## bellisaurius (Jan 18, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> I've tried taping gauze to the area, but I'm not really sure how effective it was. I'm considering a different lacing strategy, but I'm not sure if it would actually help (for instance, the options here How to Properly Tie Your Running Shoes from Runner's World.com -- there's an option for changing lacing around the toe area.) I could definitely try one of the ring thingies, though.
> 
> There's also the option of putting Vaseline on areas most prone to blistering. Has anyone tried this?


Gauze would still have quite a bit of friction underneath. You need something that will remain stationary and allow movement around it,which is why I mentioned the athletic tape. I use it to keep blisters off my index finger when I golf. 

Although, in the long term, you'll eventually form a callous, but I don't think you want that.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

bellisaurius said:


> Gauze would still have quite a bit of friction underneath. You need something that will remain stationary and allow movement around it,which is why I mentioned the athletic tape. I use it to keep blisters off my index finger when I golf.
> 
> Although, in the long term, you'll eventually form a callous, but I don't think you want that.


I think the reason the other foot doesn't blister is because it has a light callous on that location. I'll try the athletic tape once the blister goes away.


----------



## niss (Apr 25, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> By the way, anyone have any suggestions for socks, inserts or other products that would reduce the chance of blistering on toes? One of my pinky toes keeps trying to blister, and I just need to find something that will reduce the chance of it happening more than regular socks can reduce it.


I go backpacking a lot. A couple of things that might help with this are to:

*Wear two pairs of socks. The pair worn next to your skin are very thin, almost like hosiery. Stores that sell backpacking equipment will know what you are talking about if you ask for liner socks.

*Apply a piece of duct tape to the area of your skin where the "hot spot" or friction is developing. The slick back of the tape will reduce the friction between your skin and socks. I know it sounds dumb, but it really works and has saved many backpacking trips for me. WD40 will remove any duct tape residue from your skin.

HTH


----------



## Biracial (Sep 8, 2010)

What's your cardio regiment specifically? Do you use a HIIT pattern? What exactly are you eating?

Personally, intermittent fasting and changing my workout routine always breaks my plateaus.


----------



## Think Too Much (Sep 18, 2012)

Counting calories is not only a ridiculous system but a flawed one, take your multies and fish oil, eat healthy and continue the system you've created that has allowed you to lose 15 pounds. You realize that just because the scale says you haven't lost any "weight" does not mean you are not continuing to lose fat. Increase your exercise/ the intensity of it, if you can't run walk faster and longer. This will take more effort then you are used to but you've hit a plateau for a reason, your body has adapted to what you've been putting it through. Also here, look into rasberry ketones. Raspberry Ketone: Fat-Burner in a Bottle | The Dr. Oz Show


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Biracial said:


> What's your cardio regiment specifically? What exactly are you eating?


I answered in one of my posts that fast walking (4.5 mph mile) up and down hills is my cardio. I also already gave a list of what I'm eating, and the amount of calories I happen to eat in a day.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Think Too Much said:


> Counting calories is not only a ridiculous system but a flawed one, take your multies and fish oil, eat healthy and continue the system you've created that has allowed you to lose 15 pounds. You realize that just because the scale says you haven't lost any "weight" does not mean you are not continuing to lose fat. Increase your exercise/ the intensity of it, if you can't run walk faster and longer. This will take more effort then you are used to but you've hit a plateau for a reason, your body has adapted to what you've been putting it through. Also here, look into rasberry ketones. Raspberry Ketone: Fat-Burner in a Bottle | The Dr. Oz Show


Linking stuff from Dr. Oz doesn't go very far with me.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

I saw some mention of too little calories. Not true. Experiments have been done along the lines of having a group of people take in 1k cals a day while doing some strength training - they retain their muscle, lose fat. They do not go into starvation mode. Those who did not str trn lost fat and a little muscle on 1k cals a day.



> For example, if an individual needs 2,000 calories per day to maintain weight, reducing intake to 1,500 calories, assuming exercise stays the same, should provide a 1 pound per week weight loss (Note: 1 pound of weight is equivalent to about 3,500 calories). Furthermore, reducing to 1,000 calories should result in a weight loss of 2 pounds per week and going down to 500 calories a day should result in a weight loss of 3 pounds per week. However, if an individual actually reduces their intake to 500 calories, the weight loss would not likely be a steady 3 pounds per week because of the reduced metabolic rate. It would likely be around 2¼ to 2½ pounds. This "lower than expected" rate of weight loss is a lot different than "no" weight loss as the "starvation mode" notion proposes.
> It is unclear as to whether the relationship between reduced caloric intake and a lower metabolism follows a straight path or becomes more pronounced the greater the caloric reduction. Some studies have found no significant reduction in metabolism until the caloric restriction is quite large (e.g. 800 calories or less per day).2 Others suggest a linear relationship with small reductions in metabolism accompanying small reductions in caloric restriction, with the gap increasing as the caloric deficit is enlarged.


And this: 
Starvation Mode – Why You Probably Never Need to Worry About It

https://www.google.com/search?q=sta...sugexp=chrome,mod=17&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Anyway, get a different kind of exercise, and perhaps change -what- you are eating.


----------



## Trinidad (Apr 16, 2010)

Try sleeping even more if you can find the time for it. Sleep deprivation is a major component in weight gain and the opposite is true too. I know people who lost more than two pounds in one night by sleeping for 10 hours straight.

Be aware that your body has an internal 'weight-thermostat', a weight that is natural for you. If you get below it, your body will try it's hardest to get you 'level' again.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Promethea said:


> Anyway, get a different kind of exercise, and perhaps change -what- you are eating.


My body actually seems to have adjusted finally; I think my metabolism needed to be kick-started for those few weeks of walking. What I'm eating doesn't seem to be a problem. Only problem is that now I'm losing more than I would like to. It probably isn't terrible since I'm hovering near the obese/overweight BMI line (and by looking at me you could never tell I was "obese"), but it's a bit alarming all the same. I did add a multivitamin and sublingual B12, though.

(Also, it seems that bitching about it helped my cause.)


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

koalaroo said:


> My body actually seems to have adjusted finally; I think my metabolism needed to be kick-started for those few weeks of walking. What I'm eating doesn't seem to be a problem. Only problem is that now I'm losing more than I would like to. It probably isn't terrible since I'm hovering near the obese/overweight BMI line (and by looking at me you could never tell I was "obese"), but it's a bit alarming all the same. I did add a multivitamin and sublingual B12, though.
> 
> (Also, it seems that bitching about it helped my cause.)


I have always believed that bitching burns calories. XD


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Promethea said:


> I have always believed that bitching burns calories. XD


It's also what keeps me kicking!


----------



## Think Too Much (Sep 18, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> Linking stuff from Dr. Oz doesn't go very far with me.


Sorry that's true! Your one of those people that needs the exact perfect information from a professor otherwise the information is completely useless and raspberry ketones are in a Dr. OZ video which must in turn mean they do not work? I made a post which I thought would help you but you apparently know everything, a shame.. no room to learn. Enjoy the struggle and the 1000 cal diet :laughing:


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Think Too Much said:


> Sorry that's true! Your one of those people that needs the exact perfect information from a professor otherwise the information is completely useless and raspberry ketones are in a Dr. OZ video which must in turn mean they do not work? I made a post which I thought would help you but you apparently know everything, a shame.. no room to learn. Enjoy the struggle and the 1000 cal diet :laughing:


Dude, it's Dr. Oz, and like I admitted earlier, things have changed and are fine. If you can provide me with an epidemiological study that shows that "raspberry ketones" work from someone who doesn't have a wife who heals with spirit fingers, I'll accept it. As it is, there doesn't appear to be any evidence that "raspberry ketones" work.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> Only problem is that now I'm losing more than I would like to. It probably isn't terrible since I'm hovering near the obese/overweight BMI line (and by looking at me you could never tell I was "obese"), but it's a bit alarming all the same. I did add a multivitamin and sublingual B12, though.


Have you had your body fat tested? I'd focus on decreasing body fat instead of BMI, especially if you are exercising. BMI is merely a height-to-weight ratio and doesn't consider body composition. Per BMI standards, a lot of lean (but very muscular) athletes would be considered overweight or even obese.


----------



## lhebakshyla (Oct 8, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> I managed to lose 15 lbs by cutting extra calories. I hit some sort of plateau about four weeks ago. For the past two weeks, I've added two miles of walking a day plus moderate yoga plus the cut calories. The past two weeks, I have also lost 0 pounds. I should be burning a significant amount of calories, but I am seeing no weight loss. I'd really like to lose another 40 pounds by the end of 2012.
> 
> At the current plateau rate, I don't see myself ever dropping another pound. Any thoughts from the rest of y'all? As a note, I cannot drop more calories from my diet (I'm down to 1250), and I currently cannot exercise more than I am. The fact that I am not losing weight is baffling to me.


Build some muscles.

Your metabolism is too slow. You need a faster metabolism. Build up muscles. 1 pound of muscle gained effectively burns 5 pounds of fat every year as long as you maintain it, and as long as you avoid a calorific surplus.

I eat over 4000 calories a day. I weigh in at a solid 106 Kg but my fat percentage is quite low... 12-14% when I am eating whatever I want, and down to 9-11% when I watch my diet (and that is when my abs show)

Don't worry about lowering calories. You can not maintain that kind of lifestyle indefinitely. You need a lifestyle change. If your body could burn off 2000 calories everyday, you'd lose weight even while eating 1800. Think of taking steps that can be maintained and followed through all your life. Strength training is a must. Build up muscle.

All the best. PM me if you need more info.


----------



## saturnne (Sep 8, 2009)

Increase muscle, and weight loss becomes easier


----------



## ilphithra (Jun 22, 2010)

I'm going to post this here but I don't know if it will help...

My SO has hypothyroidism, meaning her metabolism is really slow. When I met her, she was... to put it in a nicer way... huge...
I took one look at her diet (typical German food... blech) and swapped her to my diet - Mediterranean Food. 

I let her eat as much as she wants _(I actually eat double of what she does but I have the opposite problem - I can't get weight and need a big intake to keep what I have) _but we have strict hours to eat _(a strict schedule to eat does more than cutting on food intake)_ and we don't eat fast food or anything that we notice has been cooking in 10lbs of fat or something _(saw a cooking program here where the cook dumped 1lb of butter in a pot to make a stew... EW!)_

The change in diet also kick-started her thyroid (according to the doctor) and without any increase in exercise has shed 80lbs and is 20lbs away from her target weight. We are now looking into getting some home gym apparel because it's at the point when she has to convert the rest of the weight into muscle.

Starving yourself will only make your body absorb all it can and create reserves (aka, fat). Have a schedule to eat, change diet, eat as much as you want but don't over stuff yourself. Stop when you fell your hunger is gone or indulge in a couple more bites if it's something you really like. There's nothing worse than deprivation, it only makes it worse in the end and it's the reason why people go yo-yo on their weight.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

@ilphithra -- I'm actually losing a bit more weight again -- it's coming off at rates of between 2-4 lbs per week. The major switch in my diet is eating more fish (the problem is convincing the SO that we should both eat fish, or complaints from my roommates about cooking fish), and changing some of my previous dietary staples that I happen to have sensitivity to such as gluten (my symptoms mimicked having rheumatoid arthritis.) I'm basically on a modified primal (note paleo) diet where I do eat beans and legumes, and I'm not that hungry all of the time.


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

lhebakshyla said:


> Don't worry about lowering calories. You can not maintain that kind of lifestyle indefinitely.


You don't need to. You only need the calorie deficit while losing weight, once you hit your desired weight range, you go back up to the maintenance diet.

Some modest exercise and working out is good, but there is no need to go to the gym and build muscle if you just want to have a healthy weight and lifestyle. Looking at gym participation rates, this seems to be a less sustainable lifestyle choice. Unfortunately, many of those guys who build up substantial muscle let it turn to fat when they become older/elderly. I'm not saying they become obese or anything, but no longer a healthy body fat percentage, unless they adopt a lower calorie diet.

Fact is that koalaroo is doing the right thing in terms of weight loss and with patience, it works.


----------



## lhebakshyla (Oct 8, 2012)

Snow Leopard said:


> You don't need to. You only need the calorie deficit while losing weight, once you hit your desired weight range, you go back up to the maintenance diet.
> 
> Some modest exercise and working out is good, but there is no need to go to the gym and build muscle if you just want to have a healthy weight and lifestyle. Looking at gym participation rates, this seems to be a less sustainable lifestyle choice. Unfortunately, many of those guys who build up substantial muscle let it turn to fat when they become older/elderly. I'm not saying they become obese or anything, but no longer a healthy body fat percentage, unless they adopt a lower calorie diet.
> 
> Fact is that koalaroo is doing the right thing in terms of weight loss and with patience, it works.


You know that it is virtually impossible to put on muscle after you're 40, right?

I do not concern myself with the general gym participation rates. All I know is that everyone in my family has been working out at a gym all their lives. My grandfather is 70+ but he hardly looks a day over 50. My own father is 50+ but he too looks much younger. You wouldn't believe he is my father if you saw him.

I of course look a little older than I am because of the high muscle definition.

Anyways, I agree calorific deficit is not necessary once you no longer want to lose weight. But muscles are essential. At least to some extent. You do not have to go overboard with it. I work out 5 days a week, but everyone else in my family works out 3-4 days. I personally want to look like a Greek God for at least the next 25 years. 

The problem with the notion that you can't go to a gym forever is this... It sub communicates that you will eventually give up n that lifestyle. The presumption is that you will want to. I don't want to. And I don't hang out much with people who might want to.


----------



## nordlund63 (Jul 24, 2012)

I would start doing cardio for an hour a day- actual jogging or biking, no walking. Optimal weight loss comes when you're in the 160+ bpm range. Eat at a 20% calorie deficit and start lifting. You actually burn more calories lifting than doing cardio.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

nordlund63 said:


> I would start doing cardio for an hour a day- actual jogging or biking, no walking. Optimal weight loss comes when you're in the 160+ bpm range. Eat at a 20% calorie deficit and start lifting. You actually burn more calories lifting than doing cardio.


Fast walking is about the only cardio I can do at the moment. Learn to read.


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

lhebakshyla said:


> The presumption is that you will want to. I don't want to. And I don't hang out much with people who might want to.


That's fine. If you enjoy it, then all the more power to you. The problem is that the odds for everyone else are substantially lower.


----------



## NT the DC (May 31, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> I managed to lose 15 lbs by cutting extra calories. I hit some sort of plateau about four weeks ago. For the past two weeks, I've added two miles of walking a day plus moderate yoga plus the cut calories. The past two weeks, I have also lost 0 pounds. I should be burning a significant amount of calories, but I am seeing no weight loss. I'd really like to lose another 40 pounds by the end of 2012.
> 
> At the current plateau rate, I don't see myself ever dropping another pound. Any thoughts from the rest of y'all? As a note, I cannot drop more calories from my diet (I'm down to 1250), and I currently cannot exercise more than I am. The fact that I am not losing weight is baffling to me.


The most weight I ever lost was due to the paleo diet.
It goes in depth in the book.


----------



## ilphithra (Jun 22, 2010)

lhebakshyla said:


> You know that it is virtually impossible to put on muscle after you're 40, right?


Tell that to this 75 year old body builder, will you?


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

My gods, there are a lot of misconceptions in this thread.

1) People absolutely CAN build muscle after age 40. I'm 42 and am doing it.
2) Muscle does not "turn into fat" - they are two different types of tissue altogether.
3) Gaining muscle is beneficial to just about everyone, whether or not they want to be "buff". More LBM = higher metabolic rate, generally speaking.
4) Less calories + more cardio is NOT an effective way to lose fat. 
5) It is very possible to eat too little calories. Find out what your BMR is and multiply that times your activity factor, then reduce by 500 calories a day to lose a pound a week. Eating enough protein and doing strength training will help ensure weight loss is fat, not muscle.


----------



## DiamondDays (Sep 4, 2012)

Snakecharmer said:


> 5) It is very possible to eat too little calories. Find out what your BMR is and multiply that times your activity factor, then reduce by 500 calories a day to lose a pound a week. Eating enough protein and doing strength training will help ensure weight loss is fat, not muscle.


I agree with your points 1-4 but this is simply wrong. Protein sparing modified fasts containing no more than 800kcal per day in combination with resistance training have been proven to be a viable way to loose *fat *in excess of 4 pounds per week with minimal loss of lean body mass. The number 500 kcal deficit per day is just arbitrary. I'm on a 1200kcal deficit atm. and have been for a month and doing great. I even increased my poundage in the squat ( more that i would have expected from weight loss even ). 

Now i dislike using myself as an example of why something's wrong but there it is. Fact is that commonly heard number of 500kcal is a misconception. There's absolutely no harm in eating less as long as you do resistance training and eat lots and lots of protein.

Also the use for resistance training if you're not already doing it is minimal as long as you're eating enough protein.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

DiamondDays said:


> I agree with your points 1-4 but this is simply wrong. Protein sparing modified fasts containing no more than 800kcal per day in combination with resistance training have been proven to be a viable way to loose *fat *in excess of 4 pounds per week with minimal loss of lean body mass. The number 500 kcal deficit per day is just arbitrary. I'm on a 1200kcal deficit atm. and have been for a month and doing great. I even increased my poundage in the squat ( more that i would have expected from weight loss even ).
> 
> Now i dislike using myself as an example of why something's wrong but there it is. Fact is that commonly heard number of 500kcal is a misconception. There's absolutely no harm in eating less as long as you do resistance training and eat lots and lots of protein.
> 
> Also the use for resistance training if you're not already doing it is minimal as long as you're eating enough protein.


PSMFs aren't meant to be done long-term.

However, I see your point - and I do agree that they can be beneficial if done properly and for short-term bouts.

I'm referring to the average person, though; there are a lot of people who believe that the less they eat, the more they'll lose, and that can be damaging.


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

Snakecharmer said:


> 2) Muscle does not "turn into fat" - they are two different types of tissue altogether.


You are right, I was a bit sloppy with how I phrased it. To be clear, if you continue to eat the same diet (which worked well to support a higher body mass), but stop working out (or only do a small fraction of what you did before), then you will have a significant decline in muscle mass, with a proportional increase in mass of fat. (Oh and this process takes years, rather than months).



Snakecharmer said:


> 3) Gaining muscle is beneficial to just about everyone, whether or not they want to be "buff". *More LBM = higher metabolic rate*, generally speaking.


Why is that a good thing? Unless you feel the need to eat more food? Imagine if someone sold you a car that got 50% less mileage per gallon and spun it as a positive. It must be an American thing. :tongue:


----------



## DiamondDays (Sep 4, 2012)

Snakecharmer said:


> I'm referring to the average person, though; there are a lot of people who believe that the less they eat, the more they'll lose, and that can be damaging.


The less you eat, the more you lose is truth. However at some point too much of what you loose is going to be muscle. I believe that that is what people need to understand.


----------



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

DiamondDays said:


> The less you eat, the more you lose is truth. However at some point too much of what you loose is going to be muscle. I believe that that is what people need to understand.


500 kcal is a nice rule of thumb because it is healthy and achievable without major sacrifices. 
I feel there is far too much emphasis out there on 'fast weight loss'. 

The idea is that if someone loses weight more slowly over a longer period of time, they are more likely to stick to those lifestyle changes long term. A common behavioural result of fast weight loss is yo-yo style dieting, rather than losing the weight and keeping it off.


----------



## DiamondDays (Sep 4, 2012)

Snow Leopard said:


> 500 kcal is a nice rule of thumb because it is healthy and achievable without major sacrifices.
> I feel there is far too much emphasis out there on 'fast weight loss'.
> 
> The idea is that if someone loses weight more slowly over a longer period of time, they are more likely to stick to those lifestyle changes long term. A common behavioural result of fast weight loss is yo-yo style dieting, rather than losing the weight and keeping it off.


Sure, these are valid points, but it should be made clear that keeping a deficit larger than 500kcal is not necessarily bad for you in a physical way. I agree that the real "secret" about weight loss is lifestyle changes, though. I guess it's my Ti that goes absolute mad when people spout "truths" like the 500 kcal deficit without explaining why they're recommending that specific number.


----------



## Agile (Sep 27, 2010)

DiamondDays said:


> The less you eat, the more you lose is truth. However at some point too much of what you loose is going to be muscle. I believe that that is what people need to understand.


I thought this was not true to a point, in that if you do eat a lot less where you are hungry all the time, your body can go into starvation mode and holds on to fat cells.


----------



## DiamondDays (Sep 4, 2012)

Agile said:


> I thought this was not true to a point, in that if you do eat a lot less where you are hungry all the time, your body can go into starvation mode and holds on to fat cells.


Well that is a myth. There is no such thing as "starvation mode".


----------



## Agile (Sep 27, 2010)

DiamondDays said:


> Well that is a myth. There is no such thing as "starvation mode".


Ah ok thanks, good to know...


----------



## pinkrasputin (Apr 13, 2009)

koalaroo said:


> By the way, anyone have any suggestions for socks, inserts or other products that would reduce the chance of blistering on toes? One of my pinky toes keeps trying to blister, and I just need to find something that will reduce the chance of it happening more than regular socks can reduce it.


The best socks for this are Balega. They are the only socks I use and I run about 40 miles a week. That of course makes me very prone to blistering. They are about $11 a pair but are worth it. Be careful, blistering can happen under toe nails and you'll lose the toe nail. That's not a big deal to me because I'm a marathoner and we are all used to it. But using Balega's to prevent it is nice. 

Once you buy these socks, be careful to air dry them and don't use fabric softner. It will defeat the purpose.

The other thing you need to do is get your feet fitted with a wider toe box. If your toe box is too small, you get blistering. I know you're walking, but you should still go to your local running store to have them watch your gait and get fitted with the proper shoe.

Another thing- a "large stride" is dangerous for you whether running or walking. The point is to _shorten your stride_ and speed up your cadence. Each foot should strike the down at 180 BPM. This gets your feet right underneath you and is more efficient. You won't pull your whole body out of alignment and out of wack. 

The answer to your original OP would be to shock up your body with different exercise. Don't rely only on cardio. You need to incorporate weights. More muscle you have developed, obviously the more you will burn,even if you are just walking across the floor.

I would also throw your scale away. Stop focusing on numbers. Go by how your clothes fit. You are using diet mentality-instead stay focused on your changed behaviors for a healthy lifestyle.

Be careful of any high protein diet. Extra protein turns into fat. 

Eat when you are hungry, stop when you are satisfied. Don't let arbitrary outside rules (fancy weightloss diets) override your body's natural mechanism to tell you what you need. Teach your body not to eat when you don't feel hungry. And never ignore your hunger. Your body even naturally adjusts according to your current activity level. For instance- when you are less active, you will notice your body will ask for less food-you won't feel as hungry as often. How wonderful our bodies are to have this built in mechanism for hunger and fullness. And how lame it is that diet "experts" try to break you out of listening to your own body. It's the same as emotional eating- don't eat when your body is not hungry. That is how most people gain weight.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

DiamondDays said:


> Well that is a myth. There is no such thing as "starvation mode".


Really? Is there research you can provide to back this up?

Link to an article and relevant studies: 
Starvation Mode

From the article...
In summary and conclusion: 

There is no debate whatsoever about the existence of starvation mode - IT EXISTS and is well documented.

There is also no debate whatsoever that metabolic rate decreases with weight loss. It happens and is well documented, and it is a reason for plateuas.

There’s really only ONE debate about starvation mode that is — HOW MUCH of the starvation mode is comprised of adaptive reduction in metabolic rate and how much is due to loss of total body mass and increased feeding behaviors?

Researchers are still debating these questions, in fact just earlier this year another study was releasd by Major and Doucet in the international journal of obesity called, “clinical significance of adaptive thermogenesis.”

Here’s a quote from this latest (2007) study: 

“Adaptive thermogenesis is described as the decrease in energy expenditure beyond what could be predicted from the changes in fat mass or fat free mass under conditions of standardized physical activity in response to a decreased energy intake, and could represent in some individuals another factor that impedes weight loss and compromises the maintenance of a reduced body weight.”


----------



## DiamondDays (Sep 4, 2012)

Snakecharmer said:


> Really? Is there research you can provide to back this up?
> 
> Link to an article and relevant studies:
> Starvation Mode
> ...


The statement i was refuting was : "your body can go into starvation mode and holds on to fat cells.", not "your bodys basic metabolic rate decreases because of weight loss and adaptive reduction". If it had been the latter i would just have argued that that hardly represents "starvation mode". 

And here's some research saying that starvation mode as described by Agile doesn't exist until you hit essential fat levels : Lower limit of body fat in healthy active men


----------

