 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / June 2004An update and some concerns...
Hi everyone. I haven't posted in quite a while now so I thought I'd check in once again. I started my diet/way of eating on April 1st, when I weighed 196 pounds. I've been constantly refining my plan as I've gone along, with the only constant being the fact that I don't take in as many calories as I used to. I've managed to get down from 196 pounds to 161 pounds in this span of time, and I've begun lifting weights and walking on every-other-day basis. I've passed my initial goal weight of 175 pounds and my second goal weight of 165, and now I'm concentrating on a reduction in body fat percentage rather than overall weight. I am 5'11" and I think I may continue to limit myself to 1500-1800 calories a day for the rest of this month, but I do know that soon I will have to start eating more so I don't get too light. I don't feel weak or anything like that , but I'm told a person with my frame should probably be the 155-165 range so I don't want to lose too much more. But here are my concerns... To this point, I've been very lazy about my weight loss efforts. Rather than exercise my butt off, I've just cut calories and ate better in order to lose my weight. While I have lost an inch or two off of my gut and I am DEFINITELY thinner, I don't feel like I will be able to lose much more body fat without increasing my amount of cardiovascular activity. As it stands right now, I take a brisk walk of a mile and a half every other evening with my dog. I also walk an even faster paced mile three times a week in the minutes before I go to work in the morning. Is there a distance over a certain period of time that I should be shooting for if this is as far as I wish to go when it comes to exercise? I have tried jogging and running but I wasn't able to bend my will enough to go out for that third day. I find the walking much more pleasant and it seems to get my legs burning enough to make a difference in the way I feel. Can I reasonably expect to burn fat this way? My other concerns have to do with eating. I think that I will gradually introduce more calories into my diet starting in July. To this point I have been tracking calories on fit day and sticking to the 1500-1800 a day area, giving my self one pretty controlled treat day where I usually take in about 2500 calories. Since I'm also trying to work on my muscle tone, I've been trying to get a gram of protein per pound of body weight and I've been trying to keep my fats around 20% of my total caloric intake. 640 from protein, 640 from carbs, 320 from fats. However, if I go up to 2000 the percentages will be around 32% protein, 48% carbs, and 20% fat. I think my maintainance level is probably around 2400, at which point my ratio is 28:52:20. Does anyone see a problem with me taking in that many carbs or anything like that? I'm also concerned about how I'm going to be able to afford to eat that many calories. I can already tell that breads will have to become a much bigger part of my daily diet than they have been over the past couple of months, as well as fruits and vegetables. I'm glad I'm not going to continue to try to get 40% of my calories from protein though - 240 grams of protein would send my grocery bill through the roof. This has been hard enough supporting two people and my frivolous dieting on $7.50 an hour without health insurance to pay for my wife's prescriptions and the like. Speaking of my wife, she has lost seventeen pounds in the last month due to nothing more than calorie reduction. I wish she'd slow down and try to eat more than 1200-1500 calories a day, but she seem pretty determined to lose weight as quickly as she can and then gradually work up to a good calorie level. I guess it's the same thing I'm doing, only she has about two years left even if this rate of loss were to continue. If anyone has any comments or suggestions, please post. I need all the help I can get. Thanks Mike 196/161/(150-159 and 15% body fat) Robin 370/353/350(for June) Good job losing weight. I am also 5'11" and I am much fatter than you, at 172 as of this morning. To get bigger muscles, you need to lift heavy things. Simply eating protein won't work. Eating 40% of calories from protein as in 240 grams of protein, is not necessary. Chicken is a very cheap source of protein, although the cheap parts of chickens also come with quite a bit of fat (with which I see nothing wrong). I see no valid reason to eat so low fat diet, and fat can help with the grocery bill. Good job making your wife motivated, also. i First of all, thanks for the congratulations. It wasn't nearly as difficult to lose weight as I thought it would be, but fat is proving to be a different store all together. I checked out the site link that you posted a few weeks back, with all of your before/during/after pictures and it was really cool to see. My all time high was about 215 pounds in the summer of 2000, and then I was right around 185 until last year around this time. The early months of this year brought many many many donuts and double cheeseburgers to me, and I decided to buckle down and do it. I feel healthier than I've ever felt these days, and I don't feel like I'm depriving myself too much right now. I'm sure I won't feel deprived at all as I climb back up the calorie scale to maintainance level. > To get bigger muscles, you need to lift > heavy things. Simply eating protein won't work. I know that, silly. I lift every other morning for about 45 minutes, working biceps, pecs, delts, lats, et cetera. I definitely have better muscle tone and more muscle mass than I did when I started the diet portion of my new way of life. I guess I just need reassurance that my body composition will continue to change for the better over the next few months as I eat better, increase my weights, and increase my cardio time. I guess that's a given. > I see no valid reason to eat so low fat diet, and fat can help with the > grocery bill. So what would you say is enough fat and what would you say is too much? I happen to love nuts and seeds and fish of all kinds, and I don't mind eating more of these foods but I'm really trying to avoid saturated fats as much as possible. I think it will be easier to eat more fat when I don't feel like I'm giving up so many calories to each such a small amount. Yeah, I'm moving up to 2000 calories to see what happens. Thanks again for the reply. Mike > First of all, thanks for the congratulations. It wasn't nearly as difficult > to lose weight as I thought it would be, but fat is proving to be a [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > depriving myself too much right now. I'm sure I won't feel deprived at all > as I climb back up the calorie scale to maintainance level. Good job, and I am happy that you do not feel deprived. >> To get bigger muscles, you need to lift >> heavy things. Simply eating protein won't work. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > better over the next few months as I eat better, increase my > weights, and increase my cardio time. I guess that's a given. That's a given, pretty much, yes, if you exercise and eat kind of reasonably -- even if not perfectly -- you will see gains due to exercise. >> I see no valid reason to eat so low fat diet, and fat can help with the >> grocery bill. > > So what would you say is enough fat and what would you say is too > much? I I have no idea what is too much or what is too little, but, in my opinion it would be rather safe to go from 20% to 30-60% without bad health consequences. (note that the big range here simply means that I am not sure of what is the best number). I am eating about 50% of calories from fat, myself. Endless battles rage about how much fat to eat, but, what is pretty apparent is that lowfatting does not confer much tangible benefits. > happen to love nuts and seeds and fish of all kinds, and I don't > mind eating more of these foods but I'm really trying to avoid > saturated fats as much as possible. Surely, eating fish and nuts is a great thing. Plus, you could eat cheap foods like cheap fish and cheap chicken partss, if you allow more fat in your diet. > I think it will be easier to eat more fat when I don't feel like I'm > giving up so many calories to each such a small amount. Yeah, I'm > moving up to 2000 calories to see what happens. Being also a 5'11" male, I am greatly interested in your journey! i > Hi everyone. I haven't posted in quite a while now so I thought I'd check in > once again. I started my diet/way of eating on April 1st, when I weighed 196 > pounds. I've been constantly refining my plan as I've gone along, with the > only constant being the fact that I don't take in as many calories as I used > to. I've managed to get down from 196 pounds to 161 pounds in this span of > time, and I've begun lifting weights and walking on every-other-day basis. Does this mean you lift weights MFW and walk TTHS? Or do you lift and walk on the same day? My concern here is that you're confusing weight loss with fat loss. You want to lose weight, you want to get to a weight, etc. It sounds to me like you want to lose fat, you want to get trim. This means you have to pay attention to keeping your muscle. Walking is fine - I certainly wouldn't cut it out. Your dog needs it, in any case! But pay more attention to short, intense exercises to lose fat. Do interval training, and most definitely do intense weight-lifting. Please tell me your version of weight-lifting doesn't involve doing lots of bicep curls with purple weights! Are you squatting under 100 pound barbell? Deadlifting a couple of hundred pounds? Doing chin-ups? You ought to be. > I've passed my initial goal weight of 175 pounds and my second goal weight > of 165, and now I'm concentrating on a reduction in body fat percentage [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > probably be the 155-165 range so I don't want to lose too much more. But > here are my concerns... Pay no attention to what weight you are. You don't want to get too "light" in terms of losing muscle mass. You ought to have no problem with continuing to lose fat if you're at 15%. No one can look at you and meaningfully say you should be 160 pounds without discussing your lean body mass in the same breath. > To this point, I've been very lazy about my weight loss efforts. Rather than > exercise my butt off, I've just cut calories and ate better in order to lose > my weight. While I have lost an inch or two off of my gut and I am > DEFINITELY thinner, I don't feel like I will be able to lose much more body > fat without increasing my amount of cardiovascular activity. This is why I'm replying: this is where you've got it wrong. You won't be able to lose more body fat without muscle mass going along with it too unless you do MORE weight-lifting and LESS cardio. > As it stands > right now, I take a brisk walk of a mile and a half every other evening with [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > make a difference in the way I feel. Can I reasonably expect to burn fat > this way? No, not particularly. But it's good for your heart, good for your dog, and good for overall calorie expenditure. But to burn fat (versus fat+ muscle) you should do some intervals, i.e., go out for 20 minutes and rotate these four stages: walk, jog, jog faster, run all out Repeat for a minute each. Do this for four or five intervals and you'll be wiped out. (I tend to walk for 4 minutes or so to start with and then walk for a few minutes at the end to cool down.) Mistress Krista calls these "fartleks". http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html > My other concerns have to do with eating. I think that I will gradually > introduce more calories into my diet starting in July. To this point I have [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > 28:52:20. Does anyone see a problem with me taking in that many carbs or > anything like that? Nope. I'd probably try for more fat and less carbs, just because I feel more sated that way on my calorie load, but find what works for you, your recipe preferences, your satiation levels, your energy levels, etc. It's highly individual, IMO. It takes some experimentation to get it right. I figure I've got four or five chances a day for the rest of my life to get it right. :-) > I'm also concerned about how I'm going to be able to afford to eat that many > calories. I can already tell that breads will have to become a much bigger [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > people and my frivolous dieting on $7.50 an hour without health insurance to > pay for my wife's prescriptions and the like. The answer to this is to start in the bulk food bins. Get dried beans and make stews with those and cheaper cuts of meat. Get whole meal flour and make your own bread (buy a bread machine at a tag sale this summer.) I get most of my carb calories from crunchy veggies & fruits like broccoli or apples, but in the winter I eat more brown basmati rice (also bought in bulk) and sweet potatoes. It turns out that eating whole foods is fairly inexpensive (not counting the protein, which you're right about. I find peanut butter, canned tuna, cottage cheese and eggs are cheap protein sources.) > Speaking of my wife, she has lost seventeen pounds in the last month due to > nothing more than calorie reduction. I wish she'd slow down and try to eat > more than 1200-1500 calories a day, but she seem pretty determined to lose > weight as quickly as she can and then gradually work up to a good calorie > level. I guess it's the same thing I'm doing, only she has about two years > left even if this rate of loss were to continue. We call that "yo yo dieting" and it's how many of us got fat to begin with. She diets for a while, grows tired of it and goes back to her former WOE but now she's shot her metabolism and she immediately gains back everything she lost plus more. Ta da, the cycle of doom. Hey, been there, done that. I don't know how to persuade people not to make the same mistakes I've made. > If anyone has any comments or suggestions, please post. I need all the help > I can get. You're not doing badly. It's a four part program and each part needs to be fine-tuned and tweaked. You're doing pretty well on part 1, starting to figure out part 2, and parts 3 and 4 are on deck. 1. Eat less 2. Exercise more 3. Repeat 4. Forever. Good luck. Each stage has it's own issues and elements to conquer. You can get it, though, if you just keep at it. > Mike > 196/161/(150-159 and 15% body fat) > > Robin > 370/353/350(for June) Dally 244/176/169 42%/26.5%/23% Thanks for the reply... > Does this mean you lift weights MFW and walk TTHS? Or do you lift and > walk on the same day? I worked out today, I'll walk tomorrow, workout the next day, walk the day after that. Sorry about the confusion. > It sounds to me like you want to lose fat, you want to get trim. This means you have to > pay attention to keeping your muscle. I'm actually doing much better in terms of muscle than I was before I started the diet. The muscle that is there is much more toned and I'm able to do more repetitions at higher weights than I could in the beginning. My brother just handed me down a beginning weight set so I've graduated from the dual 20 pound dumbbells. Do this point my regimen has consisted of three sets of pushups to failure, three sets of situps to failure, three sets of bicep curls to failure, three sets of overhead tricep raises using both hands on one of the weights, and three sets of bench presses with both weights to failure. As I said I'm very weak but I am improving and now that I have the bench, I can work legs easily and generally work on toning up everywhere. Even butterflies. > Are you squatting under 100 pound barbell? Deadlifting a couple of hundred > pounds? Doing chin-ups? You ought to be. I haven't attempted any of the big muscle group lifts yet. I don't have access to a gym and I'm a little hesistant to try anything that heavy without a spotter. However, I do have a friend who has agreed to coach me and I have the internet at my fingertips to check stuff out. I'm told dead lift and squat are REALLY important, though. We shall see. > You ought to have no problem with continuing to lose fat if you're at 15%. I don't think I'm anywhere near 15% at this point. I'm probably between 22 and 25%, though I still haven't had my body fat professionally measured. I've used the tape measure methods a few times but I don't really trust them. I have a doctor's appointment at the end of this month and I'll probably get it checked there, along with my cholesterol as I turn 25 tomorrow. > You won't be able to lose more body fat without muscle mass going along with it > too unless you do MORE weight-lifting and LESS cardio. This blew my mind, though I have long suspected it was the case. So basically, lift more and burn less calories through extended slow cardio? > walk, > jog, > jog faster, > run all out I definitely need to make time to give this a try. Thanks for all of your help. I probably won't give too many more updates in the near future as my story isn't that interesting to follow, but I will definitely be back here from time to time. I need to get my hands on a body fat scale or a pair of digital calipers and just ignore my weight for a while. I'm very proud of my weight loss and muscle gain, but more than that I'm proud of the fact that I'm finally able to exhibit some degree of self-control when it comes to food. It still wins out once a week, but for the most part I feel like I have junk food conquered. I can't believe I thrived as long as I did on doughnuts and double cheeseburgers and doritos and oreos and Ben and Jerrys and all of my favorite foods. You know what? They all sound so good right now but I know better. Mike >> Are you squatting under 100 pound barbell? Deadlifting a couple of > hundred [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > and I have the internet at my fingertips to check stuff out. I'm told dead > lift and squat are REALLY important, though. We shall see. I think that it is crazy to start deadlifts at 200. I am just getting into deadlifts and Idecided to start with 2 weeks of deadlifts with a puny weight of 110 or so pounds, just to improve my form. I do two sets of 10 every day. > the near future as my story isn't that interesting to follow, but I will it is interesting to me. > definitely be back here from time to time. I need to get my hands on a body > fat scale or a pair of digital calipers and just ignore my weight for a cheap plastic calipers are sold on ebay for next to nothing. > while. I'm very proud of my weight loss and muscle gain, but more than that > I'm proud of the fact that I'm finally able to exhibit some degree of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and oreos and Ben and Jerrys and all of my favorite foods. You know what? > They all sound so good right now but I know better. junk food does not even sound good to me anymore... i >>>Are you squatting under 100 pound barbell? Deadlifting a couple of >>>hundred pounds? Doing chin-ups? You ought to be. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > puny weight of 110 or so pounds, just to improve my form. I do two > sets of 10 every day. I didn't mean he ought to start with 200 pound deadlifts, it's just that he needs to consider THAT lifting weights, not doing bicep curls with twenty pound dumbbells. A frequent problem men have is that they only work the muscles they can see in the mirror. Lots of bicep and pec work, nothing for the legs. And there's no reason why a 25 year old man who weight-trains can't deadlift 200 pounds. I bet I could deadlift 200 pounds (though I haven't tried, I tend to do sets of 5 with 135.) If you want to burn fat, work the large muscles. Not the biceps, not the abs, but the quads, hamstrings, glutes and pecs. Dally >>>>Are you squatting under 100 pound barbell? Deadlifting a couple of >>>>hundred pounds? Doing chin-ups? You ought to be. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > he needs to consider THAT lifting weights, not doing bicep curls with > twenty pound dumbbells. No disagreement here. I was concerned that your suggestion may be misunderstood. > A frequent problem men have is that they only > work the muscles they can see in the mirror. Lots of bicep and pec [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If you want to burn fat, work the large muscles. Not the biceps, not > the abs, but the quads, hamstrings, glutes and pecs. Also, the back and the a.s. By the way, supposedly well developed back and buttocks makes a man look more attractive, no less than biceps and pecs... What I am wondering about is whether there is some exercise for legs that could make them bigger, without overloading the knee joints. i > Hi everyone. I haven't posted in quite a while now so I thought I'd check in <snip> > wasn't able to bend my will enough to go out for that third day. I find the > walking much more pleasant and it seems to get my legs burning enough to > make a difference in the way I feel. Can I reasonably expect to burn fat > this way? I have burned plenty of fat walking three miles a day as a bare minimum -- I usually take another 2-3 mile walk or work out with weights so that I exercise at least two hours a day (this seems mandatory for me to maintain or continue any kind of weight loss). > Speaking of my wife, she has lost seventeen pounds in the last month due to > nothing more than calorie reduction. I wish she'd slow down and try to eat > more than 1200-1500 calories a day, but she seem pretty determined to lose > weight as quickly as she can and then gradually work up to a good calorie > level. I guess it's the same thing I'm doing, only she has about two years > left even if this rate of loss were to continue. This is a backwards approach. She needs to start with the calorie level appropriate for her current weight -- or else she will have nowhere to turn when 1200-1500 calories isn't working anymore. 1200 calories for a 350 lb. woman is preposterous -- that "all or nothing" attitude that will work against her. I started with my nutritionist at 228 lbs. and I was eating at *least* 2000-2500 per day. Now that I'm down to the 150s, I'm at about 1600-1800 calories per day of a balanced diet that focuses primarily on whole healthy foods. Mary M 325-157-148 >> Speaking of my wife, she has lost seventeen pounds in the last month due to >> nothing more than calorie reduction. I wish she'd slow down and try to eat [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > This is a backwards approach. She needs to start with the calorie > level appropriate ditto > for her current weight -- or else she will have nowhere to turn when 1200-1500 > calories isn't working anymore. 1200 calories for a 350 lb. woman is preposterous -- > that "all or nothing" attitude that will work against her. I started with my > nutritionist at 228 lbs. and I was eating at *least* 2000-2500 per day. Now that I'm > down to the 150s, I'm at about 1600-1800 calories per day of a balanced diet that > focuses primarily on whole healthy foods. Just curious, what do you consider a "whole healthy food"? Is a rotisserie chicken a whole healthy food? i > >> Speaking of my wife, she has lost seventeen pounds in the last month due to > >> nothing more than calorie reduction. I wish she'd slow down and try to eat [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Just curious, what do you consider a "whole healthy food"? For me, vegetables, fruits, poultry, whole grain breads, olive oil -- things that are generally not packaged or overly processed, cooked in a healthy manner (not in fatty sauces, fried, etc.). > Is a rotisserie chicken a whole healthy food? If made at home, yes. :-) I confess I do eat them from the grocery store when in a pinch, but always suffer for it sodium-wise. Sometimes it's the best choice available for protein, so I just live with that and make up for it by drinking more water. Lately I've been eating a lot more at home and my weight is showing it. Mary >> >> Speaking of my wife, she has lost seventeen pounds in the last month due to >> >> nothing more than calorie reduction. I wish she'd slow down and try to eat [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > generally not packaged or overly processed, cooked in a healthy manner (not in fatty > sauces, fried, etc.). makes sense. >> Is a rotisserie chicken a whole healthy food? > > If made at home, yes. :-) I confess I do eat them from the grocery store when in a > pinch, but always suffer for it sodium-wise. Sometimes it's the best choice available > for protein, so I just live with that and make up for it by drinking more water. > Lately I've been eating a lot more at home and my weight is showing it. I hear you about sodium... i Mike, Great job! Re: aerobics - a minimun of a half hour daily is recommended - an hour may be ideal. Fitness is actually more important than weight (for men) - "unfit (low cardiorespiratory fitness as determined by maximal exercise testing), lean men had double the risk of all-cause mortality of fit, lean men (relative risk: 2.07; 95% CI: 1.16, 3.69; P = 0.01). Unfit, lean men also had a higher risk of all-cause and CVD mortality than did men who were fit and obese. We observed similar results for fat and fat-free mass in relation to mortality. Unfit men had a higher risk of all-cause and CVD mortality than did fit men in all fat and fat-free mass categories. Similarly, unfit men with low waist girths (<87 cm) had greater risk of all-cause mortality than did fit men with high waist girths (99 cm)." http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/69/3/373 > Hi everyone. I haven't posted in quite a while now so I thought I'd check in > once again. I started my diet/way of eating on April 1st, when I weighed 196 [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > Robin > 370/353/350(for June) Hi Michael, Just a couple of quick comments on some of your questions: Exercise -- Walking 1 to 1.5 miles most days is certainly better than not exercising, but it isn't really a whole lot of exercise. It's good for you, but it won't really burn a lot of calories. If you can add a bit more walking, or some weight training, that would be good. Weight training will also improve your muscularity and appearance, and will increase your metabolism somewhat, which will help with weight loss. Carbs -- I don't see any problem with a 50% carb diet, though the low-carb folks will object. Your ratios sound fine to me. I've lost lots of weight eating 40-50% carbs. Cost of protein -- Protein doesn't have to be beef, or even meat. Some inexpensive high protein foods are canned tuna fish, cottage cheese, and beans. I don't think whey protein powder supplements are terribly expensive either, for the amount of protein they provide. If you look for specials at the supermarket or go to Costco or Sam's Club or the like, you can generally find bulk packages of chicken and hamburger at very reasonable prices. Many cuts of beef are very reasonably priced. There are ways to fix less expensive cuts that make them tender and tasty. Anyway, good luck! Chris 262/146/ (145-150) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.