| Author | Post |
|---|
Lezune
New Member
| Joined: | 23 Oct 2011 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 10 |
|
Posted: 24 Oct 2011 12:21 am |
|
Heres my story,
In 2005 at 18 i weighed 210lbs ... in 2006 i went full atkins/low carb... between 2 pregnancies and almost 4 years I maintained 135-140...Now at of about March of this year I have bounced to 148-152 and cant shake it... I went back to the basics of atkins and increased my calories to 1700-2000 a day and didnt gain or lose... then in the past 6 weeks I have dropped my calories gradually now im between 1100-1300 a day... im drinking lots of water... I cut back on excercise as I was doing 5-6 days of 30+min... now im doing 45-55minutes of cardio 3-4 days a week... :( I dont know why it wont move... I dont look much different... Should I drop my calories more? my dr. said sometimes some women have to to see results? What do you guys think?
|
Steampunk
Distinguished Member
|
Posted: 24 Oct 2011 03:27 am |
|
You should probably mention how tall you are since that matters with weight too when it comes to getting into your target range.
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 24 Oct 2011 07:27 am |
|
Making some assumptions (female 22 5'5" 150lb) your unadjusted RMR is 1441
So 1700-2000 was obviuosly too high
but 1100-1300 is too low as a long term approach. It won't harm you for a few days, there is no need to panic, but I would look into raising it to 1400-1500.
of course, some people are not very accurate with their calorie counting, they think they're counting X calories but are actually eating more - so you need to take this into account as you sensibly increase calories a little.
Consuming most of your calories from animal-derived products like meat, fish, eggs and dairy is detrimental to your long term health. What use is a slim body when it is ill. Note that I didn't say I am encouraging you to go to a sugar or grain based diet but there are healthier diets which don't derive the majority of their calories from animal products.
|
Lezune
New Member
| Joined: | 23 Oct 2011 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 10 |
|
Posted: 24 Oct 2011 10:58 am |
|
| your assumption is right I am 5'5... I am actually seeing a slow drop at my count of 12-1300 a day perhaps this is my error and is putting me in the right calorie count?
|
JSABD
Distinguished Member
|
Posted: 24 Oct 2011 04:47 pm |
|
Lezune wrote: Heres my story,
In 2005 at 18 i weighed 210lbs ... in 2006 i went full atkins/low carb... between 2 pregnancies and almost 4 years I maintained 135-140...Now at of about March of this year I have bounced to 148-152 and cant shake it... I went back to the basics of atkins and increased my calories to 1700-2000 a day and didnt gain or lose... then in the past 6 weeks I have dropped my calories gradually now im between 1100-1300 a day... im drinking lots of water... I cut back on excercise as I was doing 5-6 days of 30+min... now im doing 45-55minutes of cardio 3-4 days a week... :( I dont know why it wont move... I dont look much different... Should I drop my calories more? my dr. said sometimes some women have to to see results? What do you guys think?
Fatkins did not work 40 years ago and it does not work now.
Here's what needs to happen for healthy weight loss.
Determine your current Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR)
Eat at that level or calories and you will lose at least 1 pound per week per 100 pounds of body weight. Do not lose more that 1 pound per 100 pounds of body weight per week. In a month recalculate your BMR and eat at that level of calories.
Don't be a whiner.
|
Lezune
New Member
| Joined: | 23 Oct 2011 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 10 |
|
Posted: 24 Oct 2011 10:29 pm |
|
| While I appreciate your insight (i do!!) My Basal Metabolic Rate is 1460.... I dont lose weight at this... I have consistantly watched and tracked my calories... I am now 200+ below that and barely seeing a drop.. and while you say atkins doesnt work... perhaps not for the long hall but it did help me lose 75lbs....
|
JSABD
Distinguished Member
|
Posted: 25 Oct 2011 02:31 am |
|
Lezune wrote: While I appreciate your insight (i do!!) My Basal Metabolic Rate is 1460.... I dont lose weight at this... I have consistantly watched and tracked my calories... I am now 200+ below that and barely seeing a drop.. and while you say atkins doesnt work... perhaps not for the long hall but it did help me lose 75lbs....
Your body is not defying the laws of physics. At you weight, weight loss slows. You have not hit a plateau as platteaus are a myth. You may be retaining water.
You may hear stuff like "your body is hanging on to fat" or you are in "starvation mode". That's all BS. Weigh once a week and DO NOT do low carb. You can lose weight on it but you will at the expense of your health.
Initially weight loss is rapid with Atkins. I would suggest to stop aerobics and get into strength training for 3 months. Eat slightly above your BMR. Toned muscle cells have more than one mitochondia making them require a a little bit more energy.
You have have heard that muscle burns fat and you can by building muscle turn your body into a "fat burning machine". There is some truth to that but it is exaggerated.
|
Lezune
New Member
| Joined: | 23 Oct 2011 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 10 |
|
Posted: 25 Oct 2011 09:45 am |
|
| Thanks :) I dont believe in the starvation mode theory either.... i'll keep up the work and switch up my routine as you suggested....
|
RyanPhillips
New Member
|
Posted: 25 Oct 2011 02:56 pm |
|
Hey Lezune
Whatever you chose to do remember Counting Calories is ineffective and over rated! I can say this because I have personally found this out with my fat loss journey.
I have found that if you are going to measure anything measure weight, body fat % and most important.. Total inches.
I haven't tried the atkins diet so I can't comment but the diet I do is a specific version of a Slow Carb diet.
The good news is i started because my friend did it to lose over 3 stone in 3 months and I have lost 17Lb, 3.6% body fat and a total of over 8 inches in 25days!
If you want to know anymore about what I do I would be more than happy to help.
Remember calories are over rated.
Ryan
|
JSABD
Distinguished Member
|
Posted: 26 Oct 2011 01:35 am |
|
RyanPhillips wrote: Hey Lezune
Whatever you chose to do remember Counting Calories is ineffective and over rated! I can say this because I have personally found this out with my fat loss journey.
I have found that if you are going to measure anything measure weight, body fat % and most important.. Total inches.
I haven't tried the atkins diet so I can't comment but the diet I do is a specific version of a Slow Carb diet.
The good news is i started because my friend did it to lose over 3 stone in 3 months and I have lost 17Lb, 3.6% body fat and a total of over 8 inches in 25days!
If you want to know anymore about what I do I would be more than happy to help.
Remember calories are over rated.
Ryan
Based on your experience counting calories is ineffective. So measuring our energy intake and expenditure is not a good idea? Why?
Ryan how is eating the correct food a journey?
|
RyanPhillips
New Member
|
Posted: 26 Oct 2011 04:44 am |
|
Its definitely not the worst Idea to count calories but its also definitely not the best. Weight loss or gain isn't as simple as calories in and calories out. The idea is simple but it doesn't work quite as advertised. However measuring energy intake and expenditure is a GREAT idea, but not specifically through calories. The creator of the "calorie" as we know it today, 19th Century Chemist Wilbur Olin Atwater didn't have the technology we have today. For example..
1000 Cals at 90% fat = 0.9Lb weight LOSS per day
1000 Cals at 90% protein = 0.6Lb weight LOSS per day
1000 Cals at 90% carbs = 0.24Lb weight GAIN per day.
This is why counting calories is over rated. It's not what you put in your mouth, its what makes it to your bloodstream.
The reason scientists and Fitness / diet "gurus" harp on the calorie is because..
(1) it's simple
(2) it's cheap to estimate
(3) it's a popular variable for publication in journals
Think about it for a second.. for the researcher seeking tenure, grant money, or a lucrative corporate contract for example, the words "publish or perish" do apply. If you need to include 100 or 1,000 test subjects and can only afford to measure a few simple things they need to paint the picture that those "important" measurements are of tremendous importance. Really they are not, they are just what appeal to the masses.
To do the impossible (sail around the world, break the 4 minute mile, LOSE that weight you haven't been able to) you need to ignore the popular.
Hope this helps
Ryan
PS eating the right food, dieting, weightloss, what ever you want to call it is a journey. You have a destination (your ideal weight) and you start taking steps towards that destination. I use the word journey as a metaphor for this.Last edited on 26 Oct 2011 04:47 am by RyanPhillips
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 26 Oct 2011 09:50 am |
|
RyanPhillips wrote:
1000 Cals at 90% fat = 0.9Lb weight LOSS per day
1000 Cals at 90% protein = 0.6Lb weight LOSS per day
1000 Cals at 90% carbs = 0.24Lb weight GAIN per day.
Are you saying that someone eating just 1000 calories per day (90% from carbs, the other 10% from protein and/or fat) would gain 0.24LB a day x 7 = 1.68lb)
For the benefit of anyone else who is reading, this is total BS. I am just one counter example.
Show me all your test subjects who gain 1.68lb a week on a 1000 calories per day mostly carb diet.
As to "calorie is not a calorie" variability in general.
1) your figures in no way correlate to the variability of TEF (where digestion of protein requires the most energy to digest, fat the least)
2) nor does it distinguish between carbs with fibre and resistant starch (like beans) compared with sugar and flour.
|
RyanPhillips
New Member
|
Posted: 26 Oct 2011 11:11 am |
|
I don't talk BS. Just what I have found out. I was trying to write it in terms for the guys on here to just understand that Just counting calories Isn't the best way to go about losing weight or losing fat.
In regards to your points..
(1) Of course protein, for one, provokes a greater thermic effect of food (TEF) then either carbohydrate or fat - in simple terms, in digestion a higher % of protein calories are "lost" as heat v. carbohydrates or fat. Its even led some scientists to suggest that the 4 calories per gram assumed for protein should be downgraded 20% to 3.2 calories per gram. Different sources of calories = different results. Other things affect calorie allocation - and that can be modified for fat loss or gain - include digestion, the ration of protein to carbohydrate to fat, and timing. I have addressed all 3 of these which has led me to lose fat and keep it off.
(2) "Calories are all alike, whether they come from Beef or bourbon, from sugar or starch, or from cheese and crackers. Too many calories are just too many calories"
- Fred Stare, founder and former chair of the Harvard University Nutrition Department.
I should have specified "white" carbs are to be avoided. I actually recommend beans when coaching others for fat loss. If you want to get deeper into "white" carbs and other reasons why carbs are a bad choice for fat loss (just for fun) is because chlorine dioxide, one of the chemicals used to bleach flour (even if later made brown again, a common trick) combines with residual protein in most of these foods to form alloxan. Researchers use alloxan in lab rabs to induce diabetes. Thats right - its used to produce diabetes! This is bad news alone if you eat anything white or enriched. Bottom line is don't eat white stuff (unless on your cheat day) unless you want to get fatter.
In conclusion for the guys reading this on here and keeping it simple..
Avoid White Carbs if you want to lose weight and counting calories is better than measuring nothing but just keep in mind that there are better things to measure to achieve your desired result.
Hope this helps
|
Professor Tom
New Member
| Joined: | 10 Aug 2011 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 28 |
|
Posted: 27 Oct 2011 08:51 am |
|
Hi Lezune,
You can look at losing weight two different ways. The first way is that you have to fight to lose one pound a week but can slip up and gain five pounds over the weekend, so why bother. The second way is that you just want to start eating healthier for the rest of your life and you don't obsess on your weight as feeling better as you eat better is much more important.
It is easy to see that the second philosophy is better and hard to achieve instantly. In reality, you have to train your body to appreciate the healthier foods and reject the bad ones.
Keep going forward. It is a marathon, not a sprint!
Tom Laurie
author of The Losing Attitude for Dieters
|
JSABD
Distinguished Member
|
Posted: 28 Oct 2011 08:18 pm |
|
Nir wrote: RyanPhillips wrote:
1000 Cals at 90% fat = 0.9Lb weight LOSS per day
1000 Cals at 90% protein = 0.6Lb weight LOSS per day
1000 Cals at 90% carbs = 0.24Lb weight GAIN per day.
Are you saying that someone eating just 1000 calories per day (90% from carbs, the other 10% from protein and/or fat) would gain 0.24LB a day x 7 = 1.68lb)
For the benefit of anyone else who is reading, this is total BS. I am just one counter example.
Show me all your test subjects who gain 1.68lb a week on a 1000 calories per day mostly carb diet.
As to "calorie is not a calorie" variability in general.
1) your figures in no way correlate to the variability of TEF (where digestion of protein requires the most energy to digest, fat the least)
2) nor does it distinguish between carbs with fibre and resistant starch (like beans) compared with sugar and flour.
There are still people who think the earth is flat and that the immutable laws of physics are not immutable.
The fact is, a calorie is a calorie. A calorie is not a physical thing but rather a measurement of heat. I'm sure you know that Nir so the source of those net calories doesn't matter with one exception. Digestion burns a lot of calories. Some foods require more calories in the digestion process. Foods high in fiber require more calories to digest. Some foods like cherries and celery are said to be calorie negative.
When food is used for energy it is broken own into glycogen (the storage form of glucose) or in the case of fat ketones. Body cells can only live if they are given glucose or ketones and brain cells can only function on glucose. That is one of many reasons why low carb and very low calorie diets should be avoided.
|
JSABD
Distinguished Member
|
Posted: 28 Oct 2011 08:38 pm |
|
RyanPhillips wrote: I don't talk BS. Just what I have found out. I was trying to write it in terms for the guys on here to just understand that Just counting calories Isn't the best way to go about losing weight or losing fat.
Yes you do talk BS.
In regards to your points..
(1) Of course protein, for one, provokes a greater thermic effect of food (TEF) then either carbohydrate or fat - in simple terms, in digestion a higher % of protein calories are "lost" as heat v. carbohydrates or fat.
This is nothing new but there are some foods that are close 100 carbohydrate like celery or cabbage. That when eaten have negative calories.
What is more important is that people don't think that protein is a panacea. Too much protein will damage kidneys.
Its even led some scientists to suggest that the 4 calories per gram assumed for protein should be downgraded 20% to 3.2 calories per gram. Different sources of calories = different results. Other things affect calorie allocation - and that can be modified for fat loss or gain - include digestion, the ration of protein to carbohydrate to fat, and timing. I have addressed all 3 of these which has led me to lose fat and keep it off.
What caused you to lose weight was a net reduction in caloric intake. Your expenditure was more than your intake. This is not rocket science.
(2) "Calories are all alike, whether they come from Beef or bourbon, from sugar or starch, or from cheese and crackers. Too many calories are just too many calories"
- Fred Stare, founder and former chair of the Harvard University Nutrition Department.
Define calorie.
I should have specified "white" carbs are to be avoided. I actually recommend beans when coaching others for fat loss. If you want to get deeper into "white" carbs and other reasons why carbs are a bad choice for fat loss (just for fun) is because chlorine dioxide, one of the chemicals used to bleach flour (even if later made brown again, a common trick) combines with residual protein in most of these foods to form alloxan. Researchers use alloxan in lab rabs to induce diabetes. Thats right - its used to produce diabetes! This is bad news alone if you eat anything white or enriched. Bottom line is don't eat white stuff (unless on your cheat day) unless you want to get fatter.
I won't argue there. Our food supply is not helping people to not be fat. BUT... what makes people fat and stay fat is their fattitude. If I ate only junk food I still would not get fat.
Our food supply is awful in the US. We have too much foreign and corporate food. Are the US food corporations trying to make people sick? Yes they are. Are they trying to make people fat. Absolutely! Fight the power fatties!
In conclusion for the guys reading this on here and keeping it simple..
Avoid White Carbs if you want to lose weight and counting calories is better than measuring nothing but just keep in mind that there are better things to measure to achieve your desired result.
Hope this helps
Avoid all processed food.
|
RyanPhillips
New Member
|
Posted: 28 Oct 2011 08:51 pm |
|
Jsabd you are taking this very serious aren't you? I can't figure out what your problem is? Have I offended you in some way? If you look at your last comment when your commenting on everything I have put, you actually first say I talk BS and then go on too agree with everything I said in the post lol. And the little bits you added are helpful to the people on the forum and are correct. for example yes avoid processed food and yes a net reduction in caloric intake is what makes me lose weight and yes its not rocket science (dont know why you wrote that sarcastic comment) You seem very negative in your reply.
All the advice I'm giving on here works and is perfectly healthy. Maybe you should try some of it and see for yourself, I do personal coaching if you would like to see in depth about fat loss that works. That is a complete genuine and unsarcastic offer; I think you shouldn't knock something (especially if you haven't tried it or understand it fully)and especially if it works.
Its good to hear other peoples opinions. Although a lot of what your saying is flawed. I know this is going to fly in the face of a lot of nutritional dogma, but I think it is about time we faced up to the fact that calories are not all created equal. Calories are an outdated way of thinking about food and weight loss and you have to learn to look at food in different ways.
It isn?óÔé¼Ôäót about the calories. It is about the type of calories. In our bodies insulin is released as a response to the intake of simple carbohydrates and starches. What can?óÔé¼Ôäót be used immediately for energy is stored as fat. Reduce your intake of simple carbohydrates and you will lose weight. It really is that simple. Once you are eating the right foods you will no longer have to count calories. You will be full, have energy and feel satisfied. I can?óÔé¼Ôäót tell you how many calories I consume in a day now. I really don?óÔé¼Ôäót care. All I know is that my version of the Slow Carb diet (which is perfectly healthy) gets results and works long term.
PS I don't think the world is flat. I'm just interested in what works and how that can help other people achieve there ideal body as I have.
If you feel the need to reply in a negative way again I will not reply to you, just to people on this forum that are looking for a POSITIVE change that I might be able to help them with, not having an egotistical "i know more than you" rant like it seems your doing.
I wish you all the success in your diet and fat loss efforts.
Ryan
|
Nancy_in_GA
Moderator
|
Posted: 28 Oct 2011 10:53 pm |
|
RyanPhillips wrote:
It isn?óÔé¼Ôäót about the calories. It is about the type of calories. In our bodies insulin is released as a response to the intake of simple carbohydrates and starches. What can?óÔé¼Ôäót be used immediately for energy is stored as fat. Reduce your intake of simple carbohydrates and you will lose weight. It really is that simple.
I don't understand the connection between insulin and gaining fat in your body. (Please elaborate if I'm missing something.) Excess insulin makes your body retain water, temporarily, but that's not fat. And once you cut back on the carbs, the insulin levels reduce, and hence the water will go away, but that's not losing fat, that's losing water.
It's true that simple carbs don't make you (me) feel as satisfied as other foods, for various reasons. But the digestible food that "can't be used immediately for energy" is stored as fat eventually, no matter what type of food it is. So it seems like it all works out the same in the end, whether carbs, protein or fats. It all boils down to calories. Any variations I think are miniscule.
I'm not saying simple carbs are a good thing by any means. I'm just saying calories are what counts.
|
Steampunk
Distinguished Member
|
Posted: 29 Oct 2011 12:08 am |
|
RyanPhillips wrote:
Jsabd you are taking this very serious aren't you? I can't figure out what your problem is? Have I offended you in some way?
He replies like that to almost everyone, don't take it personally. ^.^
|
JSABD
Distinguished Member
|
Posted: 29 Oct 2011 11:53 pm |
|
RyanPhillips wrote: Jsabd you are taking this very serious aren't you? I can't figure out what your problem is? Have I offended you in some way? If you look at your last comment when your commenting on everything I have put, you actually first say I talk BS and then go on too agree with everything I said in the post lol. And the little bits you added are helpful to the people on the forum and are correct. for example yes avoid processed food and yes a net reduction in caloric intake is what makes me lose weight and yes its not rocket science (dont know why you wrote that sarcastic comment) You seem very negative in your reply.
I don't like fiction presented as fact.
All the advice I'm giving on here works and is perfectly healthy. Maybe you should try some of it and see for yourself, I do personal coaching if you would like to see in depth about fat loss that works. That is a complete genuine and unsarcastic offer; I think you shouldn't knock something (especially if you haven't tried it or understand it fully)and especially if it works.
x I don't like fiction presented as fact.
Its good to hear other peoples opinions. Although a lot of what your saying is flawed.
Do you know the difference between a fact free declaration ans and statement of fact? I think not. My plan is not flawed. It is based on immutable science.
I know this is going to fly in the face of a lot of nutritional dogma, but I think it is about time we faced up to the fact that calories are not all created equal. Calories are an outdated way of thinking about food and weight loss and you have to learn to look at food in different ways.
You need to learn what a calorie is. You seem to think it is a physical thing. A calorie is a measurement of heat. All calories are exactly equal just as all BTUs are equal and all inches are equal. A calorie is a unit of measure. Get a clue.
It isn?óÔé¼Ôäót about the calories. It is about the type of calories. In our bodies insulin is released as a response to the intake of simple carbohydrates and starches. What can?óÔé¼Ôäót be used immediately for energy is stored as fat. Reduce your intake of simple carbohydrates and you will lose weight. It really is that simple. Once you are eating the right foods you will no longer have to count calories. You will be full, have energy and feel satisfied. I can?óÔé¼Ôäót tell you how many calories I consume in a day now. I really don?óÔé¼Ôäót care. All I know is that my version of the Slow Carb diet (which is perfectly healthy) gets results and works long term.
DUH!!!! There is only one type of calorie. Look it up and then tell us what you find. Your entire premise is flawed.
Stop the presses! Eating wholesome foods leaves people more sated than eating junk food! Who knew? 
PS I don't think the world is flat. I'm just interested in what works and how that can help other people achieve there ideal body as I have.
I don't think so. You are polishing a turd and presenting it as something new and revolutionary and even it is is valid all you have presented in one anecdote... YOU!
If you feel the need to reply in a negative way again I will not reply to you, just to people on this forum that are looking for a POSITIVE change that I might be able to help them with, not having an egotistical "i know more than you" rant like it seems your doing.
Get a helmet if you can't take some criticism and get your ego in check.
I wish you all the success in your diet and fat loss efforts.
Look at my avatar. Do I look fat? I'm probably in far better shape than you.
Ryan
|
Current time is 06:56 pm | |
|
