Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
another frustrated weight loss question
Quote | Reply
here's the deal, i'm a 5'8", 177, 28 year old male. not trying to get down to 145 or anything so ambitious, but i would like to get down to about 160-165 give or take. problem is, i haven't been able to lose a pound (for more than a few days) in close to two months. on friday i'm probably 176 or so, 178 by monday. i know this means nothing without my exercise and food intake so:

run roughly 22-25 mi week (long run of 9-10, hill sprints, intervals, and an easy 6-7 miler); body weight type lifting (pullups, pushups, dips, core, weighted squats).

food: been following a paleo-ish type diet: breakfast-three eggs, a little 2% cheese, grapefruit; lunch-lean meat and vegetables; dinner-lean meat and veggies. generally a small snack mid afternoon of almonds, leftovers, etc. i do have some sort of guilty snack 4 days or so per week, half a cookie, skinny cow 100 cal ice cream, etc. weekends aren't quite as strict, usually one eat whatever meal, plus maybe 5-8 drinks spread over the weekend.

now i know exactly what i can take out of my diet to put it on point (booze, sweets, etc.), but given the amount of exercise i can't see it completely negating any ounce of weight gain. in the past when i was eating a similar diet and running about the same, i averaged 1-2 lb's per week and stayed around 166.

so there you have it. any ideas, discussion, thoughts, etc. would be greatly appreciated.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The thing that helped me the most was writing down exactly what I ate every day for 2 weeks. Be completely honest with yourself, you don't have to show the log to anyone.

It made me aware of what I was eating.

jaretj
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eat a little bit less than you do now.

if cutting out the cookie, ice cream, or booze isn't hard, that will likely have slightly more benefit than the other things, since they have fructose/sucrose/ethanol in them, which makes it harder to control appetite and other bad things.



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
weight loss is mathematically simple

wt loss=calories consumed<calories burned.

so, do the math. count your calories, calculate your daily metabolic rate, and get into a defecit. period. easy to discuss, sometimes very tough to implement. diet is less calories in, excersise is more calories burned, both lead to weight loss if they total more than your daily requirements.

there are rare issues with decreased metabolic rate that can confuse the equation (ie hypothyroid), but do the math first, then let us know what happens with the weight. without doing real calorie counting, it is really not that helpful to question why you are not losing weight. the vast majority underestimate our caloric intake and overestimate our calorie utilization.

weigh yourself daily, but realize there is a lot of leeway in daily measurments, affected by hydration, etc...you should lose weight over a week, and hopefully see the trend with daily checks, but don't let the mornings freak you out where you don't lose, or god forbid, gain a pound. my wife freaks out if it is not a loss everyday, but she does lose when she compares last monday to this monday.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
What is your BF percentage? Sounds like you need to cut back on the snacks and/or alcohol if you want to drop down again.

5-8 drinks a week is roughly a pound a month just in booze.

Also, how long ago is "in the past"? If it was 5-10 years ago then your metabolism just might be slower due to age. If it was last year then you have another thing going on and probably need to address your diet.


Part of the Slowtwitch Strength Training Association. Picking up something heavier than a bike makes me happy.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [ncor33] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i understand the calories in/calories out equation, and i know that counting calories is the way to go. thing is, it's not the first time i've wanted to lose 10 lbs or so, and every time i've been successful i've not kept numeric track of my calories, rather i simply eat healthy and don't eat until i'm full. the fact that this has never failed makes the current dilemma all the more frustrating.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ncor couldn't have said it better....

calories out need to be > than calories in. Period.

If you eat 2500 calories of apples in a day and only burn 2400 calories a day you will slowly* gain weight. A pound of fat is approximately 3500 calories so you need to burn an access of 500 calories a day to lose 1lb a week.

Drinking is wasted calories as you probably know. If you're serious about losing weight just cut it out of your diet.


< Quitting Isn't An Option >

Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
welcome to being 28 years old bro =)
just have to adjust your expectations of what a decent amount of calories is..and just slightly... (for now!)

or train a lot more!

slowangeleno wrote:
i understand the calories in/calories out equation, and i know that counting calories is the way to go. thing is, it's not the first time i've wanted to lose 10 lbs or so, and every time i've been successful i've not kept numeric track of my calories, rather i simply eat healthy and don't eat until i'm full. the fact that this has never failed makes the current dilemma all the more frustrating.



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [ncor33] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
He's right it comes down to the numbers. When I was kayaking 6 hours a day I could eat anything I wanted and never gain anything because I was always burning more than I could eat. When that slowed down even though I was not gorging I could not sustain the amount I was taking in and unless your calorie intake is around 1000 less than burned any weight loss will be very slow.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [ponyboy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
not sure about bf% since the home scales are bs and a true measurement is expensive and inconvenient. in terms of the booze, i've cut WAY down over the past 3 years. whereas i used to drink a couple of beers a night and pretty voraciously on weekends, i now have maybe one glass a wine two nights during the week and one heavier night on the weekend.

the last time i lost weight steadily was january-august 2008, when i went from 178 to about 165. like i said, i understand not losing weight as rapidly as i could, but the small amount of crap (and it is quite small), one cheat meal to keep me motivated and an average amount of alcohol could completely halt all weight loss.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
hmm. i know barely anything on this topic, but will offer an opinion. you seem like you are in a plateau and need to change out the diet to shock the system. based on what you wrote, your diet seems normal and good but you might need to take a few weeks and be very restrictive with calories. maybe do what a lot of people tested and seems to work - have a high carb day to shock the system then go way low on the carbs for a week and watch the scale. i don't really endorse them, but i was having an issue with losing a few pounds and tried two metabolic enhancers from Max Muscle Nutrition prescribed by my personal trainer / nutritionist. i wiped out the weight I wanted to (the fat) in two weeks (5 lbs) without losing lean body mass by taking them. I tried Max LiquiCarn and D-Fine8. Like I said, I don't really think it's good to add supplements that may cause other issues, i'm kind of a purest that way and don't want to mess with stuff that can be harmful... but these two products surprised me because there are no odd side-effects and i did lose the weight. since you're lifting and strength training, could the weight be lean body mass weight or are you really watching trying to lose fat weight? weigh yourself every day first thing in the morning to watch the trend.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm like in the exact same boat as you (history, age and goal wise), but I started at 200. I was fit and fast in high school at 150 but grad school packed 50# on me and I wanted to get fast again. I knew how to exercise and I had no problem working out 5x a week but was not really seeing much change. What I did that was the most helpful was I used Loseit.com (either the site or the smart phone app). I logged EVERYTHING and it turned out I was eating way more than I needed to and that was the vast majority of my problems. I only changed the amount of food I ate, not what I ate and started dumping weight like I was on meth. It sucked the first couple months but now I have no issues with my reduced intake. I still eat bad food and drink but just a lot less. Get yourself a fancy food diary. I also weighed myself daily with a tanita scale and tracked weight and BF% on an excel spread sheet to track it. It's noisy but daily weight gives a lot info to see trends and changes.
Last edited by: npage148: Mar 31, 11 11:04
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
im about the same as you 5-9, ~176-78, 31 YO. I find that the spring months are the most frustrating to lose the weight. as the season approaches, i am very mindful of what I'm eating yet dont see much weight loss. Once June rolls around, the weight starts to come off. By august im down 10-12 lbs. Im sure if i was at ST standards for time spent training, it would be more like 15-18 lbs. I think weight loss for me, in large part, is due to training in the warmer weather (and also bc my time on the bike increases by about 2x than in the colder months). For some reason, my body just doesn't want to get the weight off in colder weather. This is why i tend to start my season later on (and end later). Not sure if you live in a similar climate or notice a similar pattern, but thought that I would share my situation with someone who is similar in body size.


"Triathlon?!? I play a real sport, I don't want to be the best at exercising." ~Kenny Powers
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowangeleno wrote:
here's the deal, i'm a 5'8", 177, 28 year old male. not trying to get down to 145 or anything so ambitious, but i would like to get down to about 160-165 give or take. problem is, i haven't been able to lose a pound (for more than a few days) in close to two months. on friday i'm probably 176 or so, 178 by monday. i know this means nothing without my exercise and food intake so:

run roughly 22-25 mi week (long run of 9-10, hill sprints, intervals, and an easy 6-7 miler); body weight type lifting (pullups, pushups, dips, core, weighted squats).

food: been following a paleo-ish type diet: breakfast-three eggs, a little 2% cheese, grapefruit; lunch-lean meat and vegetables; dinner-lean meat and veggies. generally a small snack mid afternoon of almonds, leftovers, etc. i do have some sort of guilty snack 4 days or so per week, half a cookie, skinny cow 100 cal ice cream, etc. weekends aren't quite as strict, usually one eat whatever meal, plus maybe 5-8 drinks spread over the weekend.

now i know exactly what i can take out of my diet to put it on point (booze, sweets, etc.), but given the amount of exercise i can't see it completely negating any ounce of weight gain. in the past when i was eating a similar diet and running about the same, i averaged 1-2 lb's per week and stayed around 166.

so there you have it. any ideas, discussion, thoughts, etc. would be greatly appreciated.

Ive started using a net diary for logging food the past 10 days or so. I'm down about 6 lbs already. You start to notice trends in macronutrient breakdown and such. I noticed my protein intake was quite low, and CHO/fats were higher. I then conciously began increasing protein slightly across all meals of the day, and decreasing the others so that I wouldn't crash in the middle of the day and binge on whatever was in sight. I then began factoring in BMR and exercise calories (roughly for swim/run, but I use SRM/Computrainer for bike) so that I would maintain a 400-500 cal deficit per day, but would not trigger a large hunger pain.

The site I use is www.mynetdiary.com. It seems to be sufficient for my needs. Im also training a fair bit more than you so that may factor into my wt. loss as I can generally eat 4000-4500cal on a big day and still have a deficit. Thats a lot of food passing through my mouth so I don't feel like I'm really missing anything.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There are a lot of [zealots] out there who preach calories in / calories out which can be an o.k. benchmark, but also completely misleading. Many people have metabolism issues which develop and creates a hyper sensitivity to carbs and sugars and need to shift their ratios of carbs, proteins and fats

If you are doing the same things you did in the past, and are now not getting the same results, your metabolism may have shifted. You may be a person who does better with a slightly higher shift in proteins and lowering carbs and sugars
Last edited by: Maui5150: Mar 31, 11 11:33
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [Maui5150] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maui5150 wrote:
There are a lot of idiots out there who preach calories in / calories out which can be an o.k. benchmark, but also completely misleading. Many people have metabolism issues which develop and creates a hyper sensitivity to carbs and sugars and need to shift their ratios of carbs, proteins and fats

If you are doing the same things you did in the past, and are now not getting the same results, your metabolism may have shifted. You may be a person who does better with a slightly higher shift in proteins and lowering carbs and sugars

Wrong. It is fact that Calories consumed < Calories burned = weight loss; Calories consumed > Calories burned = weight gain and Calories consumed = Calories burned = wieght maintained.

You can "shift your diet" all you want; but, you have to burn more calories than you consume to lose weight.

Otherwise, show me a study that shows anything different.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [gnorv] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ah wrong. You are not accounting for the bodies reaction to spikes in blood sugar, or in the case I am referring to, people who can have an over reaction to carbs and sugars. The insulin sensitivity can cause the body to go into fat storage mode when it normally should not.

There have also been studies that show that the body adapts and once people start having more fat on their bodies, the messages that the bodies send in "store fat/burn fat" also can change. Some people have called this "Metabolism B" as well as others have things with their thyroid, liver and pancreas that also affect the bodies metabolism and how it processes sugars and carbs.

So in your eyes 2000 calories of sugars is the same as 2000 calories or protein?

Really????

Sorry. Many people get "lucky" and don't have to think about ratios of carbs to proteins. Others do.

For the original poster, I am almost willing to guarantee that instead of snacking on "Skinny Cow" they ate a can of Tuna, or snacked on the same amount of say celery and almond butter, the weight would come off... The difference not being the calories, but the composition of the calories
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [Maui5150] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pretty much sounds like another excuse (with a different name) for why people "can't" lose weight. Explain how if one eat 2500 cal and burns 3000 a day they will not lose weight. It is like some thermodynamic loophole only special people get?
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"i know exactly what i can take out of my diet to put it on point (booze, sweets, etc.), but given the amount of exercise i can't see it completely negating any ounce of weight gain"

I am your n=1 case study. 6' 0.5" Post Miamiman weight on December 1st was 206. End of December I was at 204.5. Trying to cut at least 15 more pounds by September to get to under 190 for Rev3.

I've got a bad candy addiction. Woman next to me has a giant bowl of all kinds of really good candy. For two months my weight held exactly steady at 204.5. On February 23rd I stopped all candy. Today I weighed in at 198.5. So 6 pounds in 5 weeks. Almost nothing has changed other than the candy and a gradual uptick in training, but it wasn't like I wasn't hitting it hard in January and February. Fuck me that is a lot of candy.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Last edited by: j p o: Mar 31, 11 12:02
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [slowangeleno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If you're looking to lose weight, REAL weight, email me at cleanse4lifenow@aol.com. I'll tell you how I lost 32 lbs in just over 60 days, and how you can too.

Quote:
slowangeleno wrote:
here's the deal, i'm a 5'8", 177, 28 year old male. not trying to get down to 145 or anything so ambitious, but i would like to get down to about 160-165 give or take. problem is, i haven't been able to lose a pound (for more than a few days) in close to two months. on friday i'm probably 176 or so, 178 by monday. i know this means nothing without my exercise and food intake so:

run roughly 22-25 mi week (long run of 9-10, hill sprints, intervals, and an easy 6-7 miler); body weight type lifting (pullups, pushups, dips, core, weighted squats).

food: been following a paleo-ish type diet: breakfast-three eggs, a little 2% cheese, grapefruit; lunch-lean meat and vegetables; dinner-lean meat and veggies. generally a small snack mid afternoon of almonds, leftovers, etc. i do have some sort of guilty snack 4 days or so per week, half a cookie, skinny cow 100 cal ice cream, etc. weekends aren't quite as strict, usually one eat whatever meal, plus maybe 5-8 drinks spread over the weekend.

now i know exactly what i can take out of my diet to put it on point (booze, sweets, etc.), but given the amount of exercise i can't see it completely negating any ounce of weight gain. in the past when i was eating a similar diet and running about the same, i averaged 1-2 lb's per week and stayed around 166.

so there you have it. any ideas, discussion, thoughts, etc. would be greatly appreciated.

Chris
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [npage148] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not at all. You can also look at things such as Metabolic Syndrome, Impaired Glucose Tolerance, and other similar things. People can either be in early stages of such conditions, or be showing similar body functions and reactions of the same

What it more is saying is not an "Excuse" as you put it, but for some people they need to change their approach because their bodies react differently.

It is not as life threatening or drastic as say Diabetes, but the long term consequences are that people with these metabolic states are often at higher risk as diabetes.

More simply put, for these people, it is not just calories in / calories out, but also monitoring and adjusting the SOURCE and ration of the macronutrients to maximize the effectiveness.

And to answer your question... Simple. you take in 2500 calories, your diet is high in sugar / carbs and you are one of the people who has this imbalance and your body over produces insulin causing fat storage as well as prompting the body out of the fat burn state and to use muscle instead.

So what you are trying to say is that Diabetics don't have to have a special diet? Right? This is a similar condition, not as severe, but the body, especially the pancreas and liver over react to blood sugar spikes.

And to the contrary. I am not making an "Excuse" as you would put it... I am saying for many people calories in / calories out alone does not work, because their over active insulin production works against them, they have to monitor and control their diets more closely as well.

It comes down to really understanding more the sources of calories, the composition of foods and understanding that "Gee I just ate 3 apples" I am healthy for one person, just created a blood sugar spike for another and their bodies reaction is more like them eating 3 snickers bars.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [Maui5150] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maui5150 wrote:
Ah wrong. You are not accounting for the bodies reaction to spikes in blood sugar, or in the case I am referring to, people who can have an over reaction to carbs and sugars. The insulin sensitivity can cause the body to go into fat storage mode when it normally should not.

There have also been studies that show that the body adapts and once people start having more fat on their bodies, the messages that the bodies send in "store fat/burn fat" also can change. Some people have called this "Metabolism B" as well as others have things with their thyroid, liver and pancreas that also affect the bodies metabolism and how it processes sugars and carbs.

So in your eyes 2000 calories of sugars is the same as 2000 calories or protein?

Really????

Sorry. Many people get "lucky" and don't have to think about ratios of carbs to proteins. Others do.

For the original poster, I am almost willing to guarantee that instead of snacking on "Skinny Cow" they ate a can of Tuna, or snacked on the same amount of say celery and almond butter, the weight would come off... The difference not being the calories, but the composition of the calories

I can't believe how much BS there is out there in regards to weight loss. So, you are telling me if you burn 2000 calories a day and you eat 1,800 calories a day; you won't lose wieght if someones body has an "over reaction" to carbs.

Please, show me a study that proves your jargon:
Calories consumed < Calories burned = weight gain

That is some funnys $hit.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [Maui5150] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maui5150 wrote:
Not at all. You can also look at things such as Metabolic Syndrome, Impaired Glucose Tolerance, and other similar things. People can either be in early stages of such conditions, or be showing similar body functions and reactions of the same

What it more is saying is not an "Excuse" as you put it, but for some people they need to change their approach because their bodies react differently.

It is not as life threatening or drastic as say Diabetes, but the long term consequences are that people with these metabolic states are often at higher risk as diabetes.

More simply put, for these people, it is not just calories in / calories out, but also monitoring and adjusting the SOURCE and ration of the macronutrients to maximize the effectiveness.

And to answer your question... Simple. you take in 2500 calories, your diet is high in sugar / carbs and you are one of the people who has this imbalance and your body over produces insulin causing fat storage as well as prompting the body out of the fat burn state and to use muscle instead.

So what you are trying to say is that Diabetics don't have to have a special diet? Right? This is a similar condition, not as severe, but the body, especially the pancreas and liver over react to blood sugar spikes.

And to the contrary. I am not making an "Excuse" as you would put it... I am saying for many people calories in / calories out alone does not work, because their over active insulin production works against them, they have to monitor and control their diets more closely as well.

It comes down to really understanding more the sources of calories, the composition of foods and understanding that "Gee I just ate 3 apples" I am healthy for one person, just created a blood sugar spike for another and their bodies reaction is more like them eating 3 snickers bars.

If your diet affects your metabolic rate, it is factored into the equation of Calories consumed > Calories burned = wieght loss on the Calories burned side fo the equation.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
interesting. any idea how much you were having. my candy/sweets intake is basically along the lines of buy a cookie at starbucks, eat maybe 1/3, buy a regular size bag of skittles, eat a handful and toss the rest, or have a 170 cal no sugar added klondike bar after dinner. once in a while the wife persuades me to split a desert after dinner on the weekend.

in terms of alcohol, i only drink wine, light beer (mostly) or whiskey. no 400 cal margaritas or other sugary swill.
Quote Reply
Re: another frustrated weight loss question [gnorv] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Fairly straight forward... And the Mayo Clinic.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/...c%20syndrome/DS00522

And if you don't understand the relationship between spikes in blood sugar and the bodies signals to store fat, then you are a lost cause. This is all about the INSULIN stupid.
Quote Reply

Prev Next