LOL. You have no idea what statistical significance even means but are sure to comment on it.

You never fail to disappoint with your nonsense.

Other than Mike Rossi's godfather, Bart Yasso, Amby Burfoot is the biggest hack in the running "journalism" community

His writing style ranges from grandiose self-promotion, to extreme hyperbole, to just plain boring

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

That article was getting at in places what I could not eloquently say earlier.

Of course, if you're shoveling carb bombs for breakfast, pizza and burgers for lunch, and some other junk for dinner, and a bunch of beer and snacks at night.........you've gotta get it under control.

You don't need to freaking count calories if you KNOW you shouldn't be eating a 1500+ calorie burger lunch every other day at lunch. Just eat a salad without croutons and a lean protein and a vinaigrette on those days you chose the burger.

At night, instead of going for 3 beers and a snack start with a full glass of water. I bet you'll only drink 1 instead and probably not snack as heavily.

Point being, there are MAJOR habits that you just plain STOP. No counting crap about it. You just swap the idiotic poor choice for the right choice and move on.

If your salad isn't covered in 1000 Island and croutons and 1/2 lb of cheese, you're doing OK versus the 2/3 lb burger with bacon and fries.

Also, routine physical activity is fine. But, I still feel the bar is pretty darn low for folks wanting to eat their way out of the hole instead of sweating at all.

I see folks all the time go to the gym and head for the leg machines and check their phones while doing 10 lbs. Get on the damn treadmill or a bike!

Pretty much walk over to the "gym health chart" on the wall for cardio and follow the exact instructions for a cardio workout. 5 min warmup, look at your age/weight and pick a heart rate, do the work for 30min, 5 min cool down.

Congrats, not eating a pile of crap just at lunch and doing that simple chart on the wall just netted you minus 1500 calories in a day without counting anything! Repeat 3x a week.

If you're in THAT big of a deficit of calories per day, you probably do need a dietician/doctor/specialist to get you tracking things.

Average Joe looking to lose 15 to 30 lbs does not "need" to track food. IMHO. It's basic discipline.

What does ANY of this have to do with the OP?

He's 63 years old. Losing weight at 63 is fundamentally different than losing weight at 35.

Have you successfully lost 50+ lbs over the age of 45? Have you kept it off for several years in a row? OR....Are you a medical professional who coaches the obese to succeed at these things?

If the answer is "no" than you do NOT understand what it takes to do it successfully. Period, you just don't.

You relate everything back to what its like as an under 35 year old male. Losing weight in that phase of life is EASY. You're right, you don't need to count calories at that age, as an athlete. You burn 3500 calories a day with your eyes closed...and 5000 calories is a big day. You probably burn more calories in your sleep, than I (or the OP) burn in a day.

I'm 49, I eat very well. I don't eat ANY of the things listed in your post. My daily caloric need (BMR+normal activity) without training is about 1500 calories a day. So, to lose weight (without exercise) I need to consume 1000 calories a day. Have you tried to eat ONLY 1000 calories a day? It ain't much. 1500 calories a day isn't much either. The difference between those two is VERY small...and it is EASY to have that much error.

When the margins are that small....some method of MEASURING the food being consumed is necessary. Eyeballing simply isn't accurate enough. I spent 8 months in full OCD mode using a scale, measuring cups, etc to record everything I ate. When I couldn't do that, I would err on the side of caution and assume my estimate was too small and up that estimate to the next increment (1/2 -> 3/4 cup or, 4oz -> 5oz, or whatever). EVERY time I didn't measure I stopped losing weight. I would plateau for a few weeks, then I'd refocus and go back to measuring and logging and resume losing at the rate predicted by 3700 cal / lb.

This is good simple advice...

In 2009 I weighed 265lbs and I currently weigh 170-175lbs... a little less if I get strict with what I eat. I eat what I need calorie wise and try to eat clean... nothing out of box, no fast food, no soda, fruit juices... stay away from added sugar. It was/is a combo of a sustainable diet change and more exercise. I'm not strictly dairy free but I don't drink milk, yogurt, etc.

Losing "weight" at 63 is the exact same as at 35, biochemically. But let's not confuse weight with changing our body composition to become fitter and more healthy. Simply losing "weight" does not mean one with be more healthy. Sometimes it can actually have the opposite effect.

Instead of losing weight, we should be talking about losing excess body fat. At ages over about 40, that is much more difficult if you are applying the simple, and dated, idea of calories in vs calories out. With a decrease in estrogen and testosterone later in life, you have an increase in lipoprotein lipase (LPL), which is one of the main mechanisms that increases the storage of fat. Same with the relationship with those hormones and HSL, which regulates your body's ability to break down fat into usable fatty acid. The two most effective ways of regulating those enzymes to help a person lose fat is to either increase testosterone and estrogen with replacement. I'll not discuss possible health issues with that or ethical issues racing while using Testosterone replacement. The other way is to regulate the insulin in your body. That's done by eliminating high glycemic foods like sugar, processed flour, wheat, etc.

At 63, trying to lose "weight" by straight calorie reduction is a bad strategy. Trying to lose body fat through insulin control, using a diet which eliminates processed carbs and sugars will work. It's not ideal if you want to feel real good which doing high end aerobic and/or threshold training. You also won't perform at a super high level while limiting carbs if you are not careful with timing carb intake.

You are right, if you only count calories later in life to stay thin, you are probably going to fail. Even if you get into your 60s or 70s and stay thin by limiting calories consumption, chances are you lack important muscle tone, bone and have some of the bad health effects that come with it. So yes, "staying lean" at 63 is very different than at 35 or 22 and that is very different than maintaining the same body weight from our 20s to your 60s.

I didn't read any other comments but that last sentence has me worried. There's no "plan" or diet that's a secret to weight loss. As an athlete you'll probably lose 15-20 lbs in a month or two with the decrease in carbs/glycogen, don't confuse that with being healthy.

Look at your diet now. I can guarantee that there are places that are easy cuts that will help you lose weight. When you eat a salad, how big is it? I got by a rule that if a coworker doesn't say, "geeze that's a big salad" then it's not big enough. Aim to meet AT LEAST the daily recommended intake of fiber, at 30g/day. I would recommend exceeding that. Whether you do that as someone that's plant based, paleo, atkins, south beach or military diet just make sure you're getting enough fiber.

Here's what I found. I have IBD and have been on a journey for the last 10 years to get my disease under control with as little pharmacological intervention as possible. I read enough studies that indicated a high fiber and/or vegetarian diet were shown to be beneficial. I made an effort to get more fiber in my diet and what I found was that when I was getting 50g of fiber a day then there was very little room in my diet for junk food or meat. I cut out "unknown" beef years ago (only got local raised cows to avoid any antibiotic and feedlot cattle issues). After about 3 weeks I noticed that I felt better and lost 5lbs and only about 10-15% of my diet was from animal products. I always fell into the "but you need meat for protein" myth so I still added it to some meals but no longer enjoyed. I actually craved salads, bean burritos and lots of fruit. Eventually I just cut out meat altogether and feel a lot better. My inflammation markers (crp levels and fecal calprotectin) are in the normal range and while I still have ongoing medication I'm talking with my GI about reducing that.

Thanks. Fair enough.

Interestingly, part of my weight loss back in 2015/2016 included a high utilization of low-glycemic carbs, and a dramatic reduction of carbs in general in my diet. I made this change in my diet because of my borderline metabolic syndrome diagnosis, not specifically for the reasons you list above. But, that said...my weight lost was 90% fat/10% lean (50 lbs fat, 5 lbs lean).

I completely agree that anything above zone2 was a chore while I was in that mode. I just rode/ran easy, and long...which worked fine. But, any intensity would leave me flat for days. So, I put all that off until after I was where I wanted to be.

I'd like to point out that when Monty talks about how well his time restricted feeding is working. He is doing exactly this. Regulating insulin. That is the real beauty of IF.

If you find you need sugar (a little goes a long way) for high intensity work than just do alternate days and eat on the HITT days of training.

I'd like to point out that when Monty talks about how well his time restricted feeding is working. He is doing exactly this. Regulating insulin. That is the real beauty of IF. //


That is certainly one of the benefits. The other more apparent one, is that you stomach just shrinks. Like getting stapled without the staples. You just fill up faster. And your T levels go up, so workouts have felt better, not worse. I train everyday on the fast, and have yet to come close to bonking. Of course I only do hour workouts or so, but I feel like I could keep going for another hour easily. And then no hunger after the workouts, so usually wait a couple more hours burning fat..


Although just got back a blood test, and my glucose was towards the high end, but triglycerides were down, so not sure what to think about that. The indications of impending diabetes were down, so that is probably related to the insulin levels..

Do you do your 18 hour fast every day, or some lesser frequency?

Abuse this term to show off arrogance... Here, in this article citing multiple studies, the term you point out is used:
https://www.healthline.com/...rb-and-low-fat-diets

Do you do your 18 hour fast every day, or some lesser frequency? //

When I originally began this, I thought maybe go 5 days a week. But it has been nearly 7 weeks now and I have done it every single day. It has been a lot easier than I envisioned, so I just kept it going everyday. And 18 is the minimum, have gone 23 and try to do an extra hour or so here and there. The thing I work on now is getting a few more minutes of workout during the fast, and slowly cleaning up my diet. And that means less carbs. Not really going keto or anything like that, but just by eliminating some carbs I suppose my fat and protein %'s are going up as a result.


But it is still very slow progress, just grinding down a few tenths of a pound here and there, but the arrow keeps pointing downward. Hoping this way I will get an earlier reset on my bodies weight once I get there. Always that pull from your bodies set points to get back to weights it held for very long times. Some say it takes a year at a weight to reset that point, not sure I buy that, but do believe in those set points being somewhat hardwired..

Are you doing any high intensity workouts on the fast or just long, slow stuff?

---

Let food be thy medicine...

No such thing as LSD in my program, 30 to 60 minuets a day. So no time for garbage, I hardly even warm up, just get to it.

hee hee +1!

---

No coasting in running and no crying in baseball

Abuse? You mean point out its correct use?

What you're doing now is called "moving the goalposts". Probably another term you don't actually understand.

and i follow up your argumentative fallacies card with: Argument By Pigheadedness (Doggedness)

Please stop. You're embarrassing yourself.

Thanks. I will give this a try.

A couple of my favorite threads!
https://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ng=clayton1#p2107486
https://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ng=clayton1#p2105756

Clayton1 stopped visiting this site so would be interesting to see how he is doing. I found these pictures and stories very inspiring!
John