 |
 | 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 / March 20055 Pound Gain Today - Is This Effort Worth It?
Hi, I got on the scale at the gym (after staying away for the entire week as I felt really "fat") and it read 140. I have not been 140 in at least four months, and all of a sudden BAM, I hit 140. I started my new way of eating/living plan last October at 146lbs, and my lowest weight was in December, 133 or so. Now I'm back to 140. How did this happen? I was teetering between 136 and 135 last week. There was no way I ate an excess of 17500 calories in the last week. If any, I probably ate over 2000 more calories than I needed to eat, but that should not have been FIVE POUNDS! Perhaps it's water retention? The thing that annoys me is that I put a LOT of time in at the gym (probably two-three hours a day, five days a week) doing cardio and weight training, but to see this five pounds come back is just disheartening. I feel like I'm putting in this huge amount of effort to get in shape and to eat well and it's not showing anything. In addition, I have been on a "plateau" for at least three months. I was actually O.K. with being on a plateau (135) until this 140 creeped up. This sucks. I think I should just continue eating right and quit working out. If all this effort is not giving me any results, then f* this. Feeling defeated, HS. 146/140/135 Could be because of a period coming. Anyway, the only reason for not losing in the long run, is eating too much in relation to energy spent. That said, you are a slim person, and losing weight is harder when there is much less to lose. The big picture is that you are 140 and not 240, if your dieting accomplishes at least not making you gain weight, then it is a worthwhile effort. I think that you are doing well, maybe not as well as you would like, but better than some realistic alternatives.  Signature223/173.2/180 It could be because of my period. February was strange in that I had a very weak pre-period period (never happened before) in the first week, and then I had my full-blast period two weeks later. It was like I had two periods in one month. I'm not sure what the possible cause would be... Yeah, but I don't want to compare myself to the weight loss goals of others, although I am probably comparing my "ideal" body to something else (actually, not really...I live in "industry"-saturated Los Angeles and find that all the model/actress types are unreal and just gross). I just remember my eating habits from when I was over 140lbs, and I just do not want to eat like I did back in those days. I want to be healthy through eating healthfully, and I found that I did so when I was maintaining at 135lb. Generally, my eating habits are: whole grain cereal ("Nature's Path" stuff) with soy milk and half of a banana, an orange for a mid-morning snack, either a salad with chickpeas and f/f dressing for lunch, or, if my mother prepared something (yes, I am still living at home), then it's usually steamed vegetables or lightly stir-fried vegetables with some starch, usually grains like barley that I prepare...then I usually have 1/2 a cup of plain yoghurt and 6oz of mango for my afternoon snack, and dinner usually duplicates lunch. I sometimes snack after dinner, but it's usually on yoghurt or fruit, nothing fatty or processed. Today I felt like giving up so I ate about two servings of tortilla chips (about 200 calories probably), and I also downed some walnuts (only a few). My breakfast was pretty normal as was my lunch (actually probably smaller than usual)...but at night I didn't eat dinner. Instead I had those chips, a few spoonfuls of plain yoghurt, and some nuts. I just feel incredibly bloated, fat, and just generally blah right now. Maybe this is PMS. Thanks for all the support and kind words. > Could be because of a period coming. Anyway, the only reason for not > losing in the long run, is eating too much in relation to energy [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > well, maybe not as well as you would like, but better than some > realistic alternatives. > It could be because of my period. February was strange in that I had a > very weak pre-period period (never happened before) in the first week, > and then I had my full-blast period two weeks later. It was like I had > two periods in one month. I'm not sure what the possible cause would > be... if your hormaones have been acting like this, they might very well be the explanation. > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > 2000 more calories than I needed to eat, but that should not have been > FIVE POUNDS! Jesus Christ - you are five pounds off target - you definately worry too much!! Ignore short term fluctuations like this. Do yourself a favour and stop using weight as a metric - use % body fat instead, and only measure it once every three months or so. IMHO you are worrying yourself unduly. -- Succorso > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > HS. I'm sorry you're going through a rough time right now. I don't know what kind of eating plan you're following or if you are logging your intake, but that can help. I went through an experience where I rapidly gained weight even though I was exercising a lot and eating properly. The food log helped my physician decide that there was definitely a problem and though it took a while the cause was found and stabilized with medication and some diet changes. Most likely though it's water retention like you said. Try drinking a little more water while continuing to do what normally do. A good and salty meal can easily result in a 5 lb temporary water gain. Signaturethe vbchick email goes to vbchick There was no way I ate an > excess of 17500 calories in the last week. If any, I probably ate over > 2000 more calories than I needed to eat, but that should not have been > FIVE POUNDS! No, the numbers just don't add up. You'd need 17,500 cals ON TOP of your daily requirement of 2,000 or so to gain that much! > Perhaps it's water retention? Water weight can be a real annoyance, especially for women. The worst thing is not gaining water weight but LOSING it, let me explain: when you put on weight overnight you know it MUST be water, if you didn't eat 9,000 cals yesterday you can't have gained 2lbs of fat. If you go to saunas & steam baths, go running in hot weather with your body wrapped up in plastic or take laxatives & diuretics you know what to expect, however, if you haven't done anything like that, you don't expect a 'dehydration' weight loss, so when one day you step on the scale & it shows a nice drop, you're very happy. A couple of days later, you've gained back 2 or 3 lbs that won't go away. That happened to me when I had a bit of a stomach bug, I wouldn't even call that diarrhea but I did visit the toilet a bit more often than usual. This was enough to make my weight drop quite a bit. Being after a period, I mistook the loss for release of retained water, but the weight returned a few days later :-( > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > 146/140/135 Were your two weigh-ins (135 and 140 lbs) taken under similar conditions for time of day, hydration level, etc.? Comparing any two consecutive body weight measurements is always problematic. I generally weigh myself each day, under the same conditions (first thing in the morning, sans clothes). But even with these consistent conditions, I've seen one-day weight "gains" or "losses" up to 4.4 lbs. It's possible that your previous measurement of 135 lbs was "light" (perhaps you weighed yourself first thing in the morning, or were dehydrated), and your 140 lbs was "heavy" (you weighed during the day, and may have been drinking water during your workout). The reality is you're probably somewhere in between. As others have noted, it's not the one-day changes that are important. That said, it sound like you may be in a stall...those last few pounds can be hard to lose. Have you had your body fat measured? It's possible that you're losing body fat, but gaining muscle mass at about the same rate. Has your body changed how it looks in a mirror? If your body looks "fitter" than a few months ago, this may be what's happening. If not, perhaps you need to reexamine your diet. If you're stuck, and you're exercising a lot, your diet is the reason. FWIW - you can get a reasonable estimate of your body fat using the "Navy" method, which only requires 3 measurements taken with a fabric tape measure. You can find it online here: http://www.he.net/%7Ezone/prothd2.html (ignore their "ideal weight" number). This method is also built into my WeightWare program (which has a free 30-day trial version on the web site). SignatureGG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary Hi HS, I don't really have any advice to add, but I just wanted to say hang in there! Willow ---------------------------------------------------------- Willow Darcy Shaw from Atlantic Canada Current Loss: -18 lbs Mini Goal: lose 25 lbs by 1st week May Ultimate Goal: lose 70 lbs > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > 146/140/135 > The thing that annoys me is that I put a LOT of time in at > the gym (probably two-three hours a day, five days a week) > doing cardio and weight training,<<snip>> I have been on > a "plateau" for at least three months. I was actually O.K. > with being on a plateau (135) until this 140 creeped up. Two to three hours gymtime is asking for burnout. Overtraining wreaks havoc on ones system and can make your metabolism stallout. Other reasons for a 'plateau' can be that you think you are eating less/more than you really are - time to journalize your daily foods and add up the calories to make sure you are as on track as you think you are. > I think I should just continue eating right and quit working > out. If all this effort is not giving me any results, then f* > this. Noticed that from a following post that your eating plan is vegetarian? Grains, vegetables, fruit and yogurt is that all? You need some protein in there - combine vegetables/grains for increased protein sources, or add soy, meat substitutes etc if you are trying not to eat meats, and or more dairy products like cottage cheese would be a better choice than yogurt (most yogurts are way higher in carbs than protein because of the added sugars in them - compare ingredients btwn brands and choose a low sugar one). Increasing protein will help shutdown those carb grazings of salty snacks. And as far as not seeing results, the only place you are looking is at the scale - which lies ya know. http://skwigg.tripod.com/id12.html Why not take tape measurements and or bodyfat measurements? Two women could both weigh 130lbs, yet one having 18%bodyfat would look way different than another with 28% bodyfat - yet they WEIGH the same and also wear smaller/bigger clothing sizes. So dont fixate on the scale. Just a few thoughts you might want to 'tweak' over .. <<joni>> *We are what we repeatedly do ~ success, therefore is not an accident, but a habit* >> The thing that annoys me is that I put a LOT of time in at >> the gym (probably two-three hours a day, five days a week) [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >than you really are - time to journalize your daily foods and add up >the calories to make sure you are as on track as you think you are. Completely agree with that - 2-3 hours a day is excessive! I think the Harvard studies (professional health care workers) found that the most benefit came at about 30-60 minutes of moderate activity a day. After that, the benefits leveled off, and even began to decrease. >Noticed that from a following post that your eating plan is vegetarian? >Grains, vegetables, fruit and yogurt is that all? You need some protein [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Just a few thoughts you might want to 'tweak' over .. I completely agree with all the above. Great advice, IMHO. > >> The thing that annoys me is that I put a LOT of time in at > >> the gym (probably two-three hours a day, five days a week) [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > a day. After that, the benefits leveled off, and even began to > decrease. While most of us would find it difficult to find the time to train that much, I highly doubt that it's causing any harm (assuming adequate nutrition and rest, and a smart mix of workouts). I know a local fireman who is a dedicated amateur triathlete. He's in his 40's, and has competed in the Hawaii Ironman Triathlon each of the last 10 years, along with other local races. Year-round, he averages close to 4 hours per day of training. Pro athletes average even higher. So, the idea that there may be deleterious effects from training only 2-3 hours per day seems overstated IMO. GG > >Noticed that from a following post that your eating plan is vegetarian? > >Grains, vegetables, fruit and yogurt is that all? You need some protein [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Just a few thoughts you might want to 'tweak' over .. > I completely agree with all the above. Great advice, IMHO. > While most of us would find it difficult to find the time to train that > much, I highly doubt that it's causing any harm (assuming adequate nutrition [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > So, the idea that there may be deleterious effects from training only 2-3 > hours per day seems overstated IMO. Also, what about people who have "physically demanding" jobs. They work hard many hours a day, and it does not (necessarily) hurt them. Signature223/173.2/180 >> >Two to three hours gymtime is asking for burnout. Overtraining wreaks >> >havoc on ones system and can make your metabolism stallout. Other [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >much, I highly doubt that it's causing any harm (assuming adequate nutrition >and rest, and a smart mix of workouts). Very debatable. Too much exercise increases free radical production within the body, and excesses of some hormones, which reduces longevity. Of course, it also increases your risk of exercise-related injury, including over-use, and strain, and could also prematurely wear-out some of your joints and connective tissue... --- "Can over-exercise decrease longevity? Over-exercising can have some negative effects on your longevity. A famous study of 17,000 Harvard alumni showed that those who exercised over 3,500 kilocalories a week had a slight increase in death rate as compared to the control group. Researchers postulate that over-exercise leads to an increase in cellular oxidation. This in turn leads to increased free radical formation, some of which can lead to cellular mutation and cancer." http://www.drlam.com/FAQ/Exercise.cfm >I know a local fireman who is a dedicated amateur triathlete. He's in his >40's, and has competed in the Hawaii Ironman Triathlon each of the last 10 [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >So, the idea that there may be deleterious effects from training only 2-3 >hours per day seems overstated IMO. I'm more concerned with the 'long term' implications... > >> >Two to three hours gymtime is asking for burnout. Overtraining wreaks > >> >havoc on ones system and can make your metabolism stallout. Other [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > including over-use, and strain, and could also prematurely wear-out > some of your joints and connective tissue... I suspect Jack LaLane would disagree. > --- > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > >hours per day seems overstated IMO. > I'm more concerned with the 'long term' implications... >> >> >Two to three hours gymtime is asking for burnout. Overtraining wreaks >> >> >havoc on ones system and can make your metabolism stallout. Other [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >I suspect Jack LaLane would disagree. I don't think so. Last interview I saw with him (about a year ago) he was advocating short, intense, workouts. I think he said something to the affect that if it takes you more than 30 minutes, you're doing it wrong. Of cardio, he said 'go like crazy... as if somone is chasing you' > Noticed that from a following post that your eating plan is vegetarian? > Grains, vegetables, fruit and yogurt is that all? You need some protein [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > choose a low sugar one). Increasing protein will help shutdown those > carb grazings of salty snacks. Hi, I am not vegetarian but I don't eat too much meat save fish and shellfish (which I love). I incorporate protein into my diet by eating lots of yoghurt (we are talking about a pound of nonfat plain yoghurt a day!), and occassionally I'll eat cottage cheese, although I have replaced my cottage cheese intake with yoghurt (every 1/2lb of yoghurt has only 110 calories...one pound only has 220 calories!). I am also trying to eat more nuts (calorie-dense but I love them) and always consume legumes (chickpeas are my favourite). Leafing through alt.support.diet, I read a message from hersubjectivity@yahoo.com of 07 Mar 2005: >> Noticed that from a following post that your eating plan is > vegetarian? [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > replaced my cottage cheese intake with yoghurt (every 1/2lb of yoghurt > has only 110 calories...one pound only has 220 calories!). Fatfree cottage cheese is a great source of protein. 1/2 lb is about 140 calories and 26 grams of protein, compared to 12 grams of protein in the same amount of yogurt. Phil M. Screw the scale and get out the measuring tape! What are your measurements and have they gone down? I find that on weeks I put in alot of gym time I end up not losing as much on the scale but I do lose in the measurements. My body retains water easily and lots of workouts tend to cause water retention. In other posts you've mentioned hormones - this also could play a huge role. So - stopp fretting over this, don't give up on your hard work. Just ride this one out and learn to use the measuring tape as an alternate source of weight loss measuring. > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > 146/140/135 I don't usually measure myself, but I have found that since I started training (like Chris, I like to envision myself as an athlete, as it helps me want to give my body all the good stuff in nutrition and physical activity it needs) I have not lost much in terms of inches (I can tell because my clothes fit the same), but I have found that my stomach is a bit less flabby than it used to be (and trust me, this is my biggest trouble spot!). My thighs can probably crack watermelons and coconuts, but my stomach will always be the bane of my body's existence. I understand why that, even though I do quite a bit of weight training (my "guns" need to be registered, hee hee!), I haven't shown much improvement on either scale or measurements. I feel better about myself in general in that I like going to the gym and I can eat more because I do go to the gym so much, but I haven't shown much physical improvement, considering how much time I put into it... This shows how much I've fallen off the horse: I had two doughnuts at an office meeting today. And I skipped my lunch (salad) and I had only cereal and some multigrain bread with balsamic vinegar for dinner. Oh, and after dinner snacks (immediate after dinner) included some peanut butter and a few bites of a cinnamon roll. Now I'm going to put my hands in the cereal box and have some more...ugh...this is bad. I meant "I *don't* understand" I also don't get how I ate so much over this past Thanksgiving and somehow still managed to lose weight from over the holidays. I mean, I'm not crazy heavy 5'9" and 140lbs, but I don't feel comfortable being at 140 because that brings me back to all these really bad eating habits I used to have. When my diet improved (conscious decision), I was 135lbs and maintaining quite well. Now I just feel blah. Is this just pre-period hormones? I sure hope so. Do the other ladies out there get ravenously hungry just before their period? > I meant "I *don't* understand" > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Do the other ladies out there get ravenously hungry just before their > period? In answer to your last question - YES - many women get that way. And then to the rest - including your other reply about what you ate today... have you tracked the actual calories. You are eating alot of calories in what you posted. I wouldn't doubt that would cause a gain. Also, with all the carbs, I'd be willing to bet there's alot of water retention too. Combine that all together and you can explain your problem. I'm a CARB FIEND! I don't mind not getting protein, but I really, really adore me my carbs. And in terms of calorie tracking for today: 7AM: 3/4cup cereal with soy milk and some bananas (170 calories total) 9AM: plain doughnut (200 calories) 12PM: chocolate doughnut (240 calories) 1PM: chickpeas and cherry tomatoes picked out from salad (300 calories) 2PM: plain yoghurt with fresh mango bits (150 calories) 7PM: 1/4 cup cereal with 1/5 cup soy milk (100 calories), piece of bread with some balsamic (100 calories?), peanut butter (very small amount, probably 100 calories total), three or so bites of cinnamon roll (I am guessing 100 calories, but this is being generous) Total calories for today: (estimated) 1400-1500 This totally can't contribute that much, can it? I am worrying now... Oh, I forgot to add the pound of yoghurt for dinner (about 220 calories). That brings the total to up to around 1700 calories. Not too much. I think that'd put me just ate maintenance, non? (24 years old, 5'9", 140lbs, office job, but walk about 1/4 mile to and from the subway to work, and then I walk about 4-5 flights of stairs 5-7 times a day at my office). > Oh, I forgot to add the pound of yoghurt for dinner (about 220 > calories). That brings the total to up to around 1700 calories. Not too > much. I think that'd put me just ate maintenance, non? (24 years old, > 5'9", 140lbs, office job, but walk about 1/4 mile to and from the > subway to work, and then I walk about 4-5 flights of stairs 5-7 times a > day at my office). Per the Harris-Benedict formula for estimating metabolic rate, a woman of your age, height, and weight, would require: 1738 calories per day, if "Sedentary - little or no exercise" 1991 calories per day, if "Lightly Active - light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week" If you meet the second definition, then you had a deficit of around 300 calories today. Maintained over time, that should result in loss of about 0.6 lbs per week, or 2.6 lbs per month. SignatureGG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is just a guesstimate. The reason is that I often eat around 1500-1600 a day and according to the elliptical machine, I burn about 700-800 calories per hour (I do about an hour of this on an almost daily basis). I also do an hour of weight lifting prior to the elliptical...so all in all I burn about a thousand calories. This leaves only about 500-600 calories that I actually consumed (and did not expend) per day, on average. This doesn't make any mathematical sense as I don't regularly indulge and eat over 2000 calories. (Maybe once a week, but not by much.) I exercise much more than I indulge. I create quite a bit in terms of caloric deficits per day, but it's not showing in my weight or waistline. This is why I want to give up: the math doesn't add up. I went to the gym today (after not having had gone since I last weighed myself) and did weight lifting (easy for me) and cardio (a pain in the a.s, but a must). I usually do at least one hour of cardio/8 miles of running but today I only did 15 minutes of cardio/3 miles. :( >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs >are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is just [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >a.s, but a must). I usually do at least one hour of cardio/8 miles of >running but today I only did 15 minutes of cardio/3 miles. :( I take back what I said about being far more active :-). I was going by the original post with the walking 1/2 a mile and climbing some stairs -- forgetting all the gym activity she does! Chris 262/130s/130s started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004 > I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is just [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > a.s, but a must). I usually do at least one hour of cardio/8 miles of > running but today I only did 15 minutes of cardio/3 miles. :( Well, everybody's different, and it *is* difficult to get accurate estimates for calories in and calories out. But, it also seems unlikely that your metabolism is so far out of line with the averages. It still comes down to calories in vs. calories out. Are you really sure about your calories in? Studies have consistently shown that most of us do a very poor job of estimating the calories we consume, and (surprise) we tend to underestimate the actual number. This alone could explain your stalled weight loss...you've clearly got the exercise program in place, so that leaves only the diet component. I also have some doubts about whether or not you're actually burning "700-800" calories per hour and running "8 miles" on the elliptical trainer. 8 mph (7:30 per mile) running is a very fast pace for most of us. If you are breathing hard and sweating heavily, and unable to hold a conversation, you may be burning around that rate. But, exercise machines are notorious for overestimating calories burned and distance (try running 8 miles outside in one hour for comparison). <shameless plug warning = on> FWIW, the complexities and inherent inaccuracies associated with counting calories is one of the reasons I created my WeightWare program (well, that, and for fame and fortune :-) ).. It uses body weight (recorded daily) plus some statistical analysis, to calculate your daily "energy balance" with a high degree of accuracy. For weight loss, it's the average daily energy balance that's important, and I find it's a whole lot easier to weigh myself once per day than to attempt to keep track of every calorie consumed or burned. <shameless plug warning = off> SignatureGG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary >I went to the gym today (after not having had gone since I last weighed >myself) and did weight lifting (easy for me) and cardio (a pain in the >a.s, but a must). I usually do at least one hour of cardio/8 miles of >running but today I only did 15 minutes of cardio/3 miles. :( If you are running 3 miles in 15 minutes, you are close to world record pace. Are you sure about this? (This would be a 12 mph setting on the treadmill.) Chris 262/130s/130s started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004 Oops, I didn't mean three miles --closer to two. :) I used to do five-six minute miles ten years ago (when I was a wee 14 year old), but now I'm not as fast. >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is just > a guesstimate. The reason is that I often eat around 1500-1600 a day > and according to the elliptical machine, I burn about 700-800 calories > per hour (I do about an hour of this on an almost daily basis). You are probably better off trusting the calculators to the gym machines. The ellipticals of all types at my gym can overestimate my calories consumption (according to my heart rate monitor) by as much as 300% Rachael 176/121/119-124 > >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs > > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is just [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Rachael > 176/121/119-124 Oddly enough, your heart rate is not a particularly good indicator for calories burned. There's no direct correlation or fomula for estimating calories burned from heart rate. The better heart rate models take into account your age, weight, and height to estimate your base metabolic rate. They then use this estimate, along with your average heart rate and max heart rates, to estimate the intensity of your exercise (aka, METS). From that they can estimate calories burned. But some models are better at this than others, and it's very difficult for them to take into account varying levels of fitness (a fit person will have a lower heart rate while doing the same workload), and fatness (people with higher body fat percentages have a lower base metabolic rate). A good HRM probably provides a better estimate than the gym machine, but it's still only a "ballpark" number. I suspect that the gym machines are intentionally high in their estimates, to make users feel better about the number of calories they've supposedly burned. SignatureGG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary >> >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs >> > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is just [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > intentionally high in their estimates, to make users feel better about the > number of calories they've supposedly burned. Yes, mine has you enter height, weight, sex. But of course it's all a guesstimate. I've heard that gym machines are programmed to over read. This always seems odd to me. If you get told by the machine you've burned 800 cals when you've only burned 20 so you think "oh I've got room for the pizza now" and then you put on weight surely you are going to get sick of the darn machine and quit. Not a good marketing tool I should think. Rachael 176/121/119/124 > >> >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs > >> > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is just [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > Rachael > 176/121/119/124 Ah, yes...the "I'll reward myself for exercising with pizza and beer" problem. I hang out on a number of bicycling forums, and I can't tell you how many times I've heard folks say, "I average 150 miles per week on my bike, but I've not lost 1 lb in the last 6 months". These folks are burning 6000+ calories per week bicycling, but their weight loss is stuck in neutral. Some eat too much while on the bike (sport drinks, power bars, etc.), but for most the problem is caused by heightened post-exercise appetite, poor portion control, and the idea that they can eat that extra slice of cake because they rode 20 miles today. It just goes to show that it's all too easy to subvert a really good exercise program with a few poor diet choices. SignatureGG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary >> >> >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs >> >> > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > It just goes to show that it's all too easy to subvert a really good > exercise program with a few poor diet choices. Wow! That must take a lotta food!!!!!! Rachael 176/121/119-124 > >> >> >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs > >> >> > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > Rachael > 176/121/119-124 If you mean to ride 150 miles...it takes about 6000 calories (using the 40 calories per mile rule of thumb). I suspect that some folks use cycling, running, and other endurance exercise as a way of allowing themselves to eat a lot. The downside is that it's just as hard for them to lose weight, and if they ever get injured or have to give up the exercise routine due to job, family, etc. they tend to gain weight rapidly because their eating patterns don't change. GG >>> >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs >>> > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is just [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > pizza now" and then you put on weight surely you are going to get sick of > the darn machine and quit. Not a good marketing tool I should think. People quit using machines (that they buy for home) regardless. As for those going to the gym, higher readings will get gym members off the machines faster, therefore, fewer machines would be able to serve more members. A direct profit to the gym. Signature223/173.2/180 >>>> >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs >>>> > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > machines faster, therefore, fewer machines would be able to serve more > members. A direct profit to the gym. Oh yes! Cunning! Hadn't thought of it like that! Rachael 176/121/119-124 > >>>> >I don't really trust these calculators. I feel like my caloric needs > >>>> > are lower, probably around 1200-1500 a day. I'm not sure, this is [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > Oh yes! Cunning! Hadn't thought of it like that! I doubt that happens much. At least at the many gyms I've been to it's not like that at all. It may just be a case of the machine set wrong or read improperly. I wonder how much experience with gyms he has..... Martha >> Oh, I forgot to add the pound of yoghurt for dinner (about 220 >> calories). That brings the total to up to around 1700 calories. Not too [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >calories today. Maintained over time, that should result in loss of about >0.6 lbs per week, or 2.6 lbs per month. I don't recall what this formula gives me, but it seems to me it was more than I experience in practice. I weigh 135 (at 5'6"), am far more active than the OP, and I maintain at about 1600 calories per day. But I'm 56 (57 next month). I do know age is a big factor, but I'm not sure how well the formula accounts for it. Chris 262/130s/130s started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004 >Perhaps it's water retention? The thing that annoys me is that I put a >LOT of time in at the gym (probably two-three hours a day, five days a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >I think I should just continue eating right and quit working out. If >all this effort is not giving me any results, then f* this. In the recent Consumers Report Health Issue, they did a large study and found that for the majority of long-term 'losers', diet played a much larger role than exercise in weight loss. However, almost all of those who lost weight and kept it off said exercise was key in *maintaining* their weight. Personally, I think it varies from person to person. Some people seem to hate not being able to eat what they want, others hate exercise even more. I think both are necessary but maybe some experimenting is needed to find the correct ratio of dieting and exercise that works for you? 30-40 minutes a day (plus an active life style) is about all I'm willing to invest in exercise... Remember, there are lots of *other* benefits you get from exercising in addition to burning calories. P.S. - lots of things can cause your weight to fluctuate... you might want to get a Tanita scale and track your body fat %. > ... How did this happen? I was teetering between > 136 and 135 last week ... FIVE POUNDS! My water retention swing is six pounds. So yours is smaller than mine. > Perhaps it's water retention? Of course. As long as you've been on-plan you haven't stored new fat. For any well-designed plan that is. > ... I feel like I'm putting in this huge > amount of effort to get in shape ... Did you just start the program? Starting a new exercise program causes the muscles to hoard carbs in the form of glycogen plus the water it takes to dissovle the glycogen. That could account for it all by itself. > This sucks. If you never learned your water retension swing, sure. > I think I should just continue eating right and quit working out. If > all this effort is not giving me any results, then f* this. > Feeling defeated, Right. A known effect of starting an exercise plan and you're getting ready to quit? Not exactly a great idea. |
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.