FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > losing weight
losing weight
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia" It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc" Wow | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"thanks for the advice i do have sugar in my tea and have at least five cups a day so i ll change this for starters !!! thanks" I cut sugar out of my hot drinks, thought I'd miss it but it wasn't long before I didn't notice it at all and now I can't stand sugar in them. Good luck OP  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Wow" Did I say something wrong?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Wow Did I say something wrong? "The first half was so wrong it hurt me to read it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"These threads never fail to amaze me It’s almost like the less someone knows about diet, the more confident they are to post their dribble OP, if you want some actual advice from someone that’s trained on giving it, drop me a private message. " Erm. So if something works for one. And they share that experience. It means they don't know anything. The person who ga E me the advice was a Pt and bloody good one. And the advice he gave me worked. So was and is that just luck?. All you had to say was if you want professional advice message me. Instead of attacking people's personal journey  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Wow Did I say something wrong?
The first half was so wrong it hurt me to read it "Okay. It was so wrong it's worked for me. Go figure  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"These threads never fail to amaze me It’s almost like the less someone knows about diet, the more confident they are to post their dribble OP, if you want some actual advice from someone that’s trained on giving it, drop me a private message. Erm. So if something works for one. And they share that experience. It means they don't know anything. The person who ga E me the advice was a Pt and bloody good one. And the advice he gave me worked. So was and is that just luck?. All you had to say was if you want professional advice message me. Instead of attacking people's personal journey "It’s important to point out the bad advice that’s wrong too. Otherwise who knows what to follow? Don’t let your ego be bruised, there’s loads of rubbish and myths and fake advice in this fitness and diet industry | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is it with people’s obsession with cardio for weight loss?! That’s so so outdated. You burn way more calories doing weights etc. " Oh I forgot that. Yes, build muscle, it burns fat. Walking is also excellent for fat loss too though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia" Eat less food, miss a meal. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc" Big yikes
It is definitely okay to skip a meal or two, and is actually better than toying with your ghrelin (hunger hormone) and blood sugar levels all day. The "starvation mode" theory you mentioned is absolute bullshit, and your method just sounds like torture. I literally find it easier to do 48hr extended fasts (the healthy way, with lots of electrolytes and vitamin supplements) than let my body think it's gonna get food 6 times a day | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Big yikes
It is definitely okay to skip a meal or two, and is actually better than toying with your ghrelin (hunger hormone) and blood sugar levels all day. The "starvation mode" theory you mentioned is absolute bullshit, and your method just sounds like torture. I literally find it easier to do 48hr extended fasts (the healthy way, with lots of electrolytes and vitamin supplements) than let my body think it's gonna get food 6 times a day "Intermittent fasting is extremely effective for weight loss, and as I said above, has excellent and proven health benefits. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Big yikes
It is definitely okay to skip a meal or two, and is actually better than toying with your ghrelin (hunger hormone) and blood sugar levels all day. The "starvation mode" theory you mentioned is absolute bullshit, and your method just sounds like torture. I literally find it easier to do 48hr extended fasts (the healthy way, with lots of electrolytes and vitamin supplements) than let my body think it's gonna get food 6 times a day
Intermittent fasting is extremely effective for weight loss, and as I said above, has excellent and proven health benefits."Totally agree. I do it in solidarity with the millions who do not know where the next meal is coming from. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Big yikes
It is definitely okay to skip a meal or two, and is actually better than toying with your ghrelin (hunger hormone) and blood sugar levels all day. The "starvation mode" theory you mentioned is absolute bullshit, and your method just sounds like torture. I literally find it easier to do 48hr extended fasts (the healthy way, with lots of electrolytes and vitamin supplements) than let my body think it's gonna get food 6 times a day
Intermittent fasting is extremely effective for weight loss, and as I said above, has excellent and proven health benefits."Yup my severe case of eczema I had been struggling with for years finally healed up when I started doing OMAD/EFs. Turns out your body can focus on repairing a whole load of shit when it's not busy digesting all the time  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Big yikes
It is definitely okay to skip a meal or two, and is actually better than toying with your ghrelin (hunger hormone) and blood sugar levels all day. The "starvation mode" theory you mentioned is absolute bullshit, and your method just sounds like torture. I literally find it easier to do 48hr extended fasts (the healthy way, with lots of electrolytes and vitamin supplements) than let my body think it's gonna get food 6 times a day
Intermittent fasting is extremely effective for weight loss, and as I said above, has excellent and proven health benefits.
Yup my severe case of eczema I had been struggling with for years finally healed up when I started doing OMAD/EFs. Turns out your body can focus on repairing a whole load of shit when it's not busy digesting all the time "It really does. That’s brilliant, I’m pleased for you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Big yikes
It is definitely okay to skip a meal or two, and is actually better than toying with your ghrelin (hunger hormone) and blood sugar levels all day. The "starvation mode" theory you mentioned is absolute bullshit, and your method just sounds like torture. I literally find it easier to do 48hr extended fasts (the healthy way, with lots of electrolytes and vitamin supplements) than let my body think it's gonna get food 6 times a day
Intermittent fasting is extremely effective for weight loss, and as I said above, has excellent and proven health benefits."Absofuckinglutely! Autopagy is another excellent result of fasting. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia" Cut down on bread and potatoes. No crisps, chocolate or booze. Will drop off you within a few weeks. Good luck. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Big yikes
It is definitely okay to skip a meal or two, and is actually better than toying with your ghrelin (hunger hormone) and blood sugar levels all day. The "starvation mode" theory you mentioned is absolute bullshit, and your method just sounds like torture. I literally find it easier to do 48hr extended fasts (the healthy way, with lots of electrolytes and vitamin supplements) than let my body think it's gonna get food 6 times a day
Intermittent fasting is extremely effective for weight loss, and as I said above, has excellent and proven health benefits.
Yup my severe case of eczema I had been struggling with for years finally healed up when I started doing OMAD/EFs. Turns out your body can focus on repairing a whole load of shit when it's not busy digesting all the time
It really does. That’s brilliant, I’m pleased for you "Thank you xx | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I’d love to try IF but with 4000 calories a day just to maintain my weight I end up just feeling sick trying to eat all that in the eating window Looks like such a simple way to manage food." Yeah it very easily gives you a big calorie deficit. I'm actually finding it hard to meet the calorie target my PT set me. 4000 cals, wow! Adding enough avocado and nuts to your diet should do the trick  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though." I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I’d love to try IF but with 4000 calories a day just to maintain my weight I end up just feeling sick trying to eat all that in the eating window Looks like such a simple way to manage food. Yeah it very easily gives you a big calorie deficit. I'm actually finding it hard to meet the calorie target my PT set me. 4000 cals, wow! Adding enough avocado and nuts to your diet should do the trick "I don’t struggle outside of IF situations I’ve gone as high as 6k a day when I’m really training and working hard | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works " I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... " I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. " Oh I think this is still quite a radical idea for many  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product" The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. " Maybe you burnt the extra calories from all the extra shopping and cooking | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though." I found it easy to do it like this: No breakfast, no lunch and then all your calories in the evening. I tended to have a rotation of 3/4 meals, that i knew. Only needed to weigh the rice really, and then veg by eye. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. " You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I found it easy to do it like this: No breakfast, no lunch and then all your calories in the evening. I tended to have a rotation of 3/4 meals, that i knew. Only needed to weigh the rice really, and then veg by eye. " That is nice and simple. I'd have to drink a lot of extra coffee during the day though! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories " Yeah now you mention it, when I was eating more cals was when I was in ketosis so using body fat as fuel instead of carbs. I know you're not a fan of keto but it definitely makes you lose mad weight. Just an absolute bitch to stick to! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories Yeah now you mention it, when I was eating more cals was when I was in ketosis so using body fat as fuel instead of carbs. I know you're not a fan of keto but it definitely makes you lose mad weight. Just an absolute bitch to stick to!" The reason I’m not a fan is that when calories are matched, keto makes you lose no more weight that any other diet. It’s not magic | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories Yeah now you mention it, when I was eating more cals was when I was in ketosis so using body fat as fuel instead of carbs. I know you're not a fan of keto but it definitely makes you lose mad weight. Just an absolute bitch to stick to!" And the “using body fat as fuel” is an over simplification. It’s not entirely true Keto is the holy grail of fake facts and myths in dieting | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories Yeah now you mention it, when I was eating more cals was when I was in ketosis so using body fat as fuel instead of carbs. I know you're not a fan of keto but it definitely makes you lose mad weight. Just an absolute bitch to stick to! The reason I’m not a fan is that when calories are matched, keto makes you lose no more weight that any other diet. It’s not magic " Tell that to the 5 stone I lost eating 1800 cals per day
Anyway cutting out carbs instantly cuts out a whole bunch of calories. Plus eating high-fat foods keeps you way fuller for longer, again reducing the amount of calories you need.
A medium avocado has about the same amount of cals as 2 slices of bread, but only one of those option will keep me full for longer than 30 minutes. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. " The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories Yeah now you mention it, when I was eating more cals was when I was in ketosis so using body fat as fuel instead of carbs. I know you're not a fan of keto but it definitely makes you lose mad weight. Just an absolute bitch to stick to! The reason I’m not a fan is that when calories are matched, keto makes you lose no more weight that any other diet. It’s not magic Tell that to the 5 stone I lost eating 1800 cals per day
Anyway cutting out carbs instantly cuts out a whole bunch of calories. Plus eating high-fat foods keeps you way fuller for longer, again reducing the amount of calories you need.
A medium avocado has about the same amount of cals as 2 slices of bread, but only one of those option will keep me full for longer than 30 minutes. "Exactky, it’s the fullness you get from keto, plus the fact your eliminating an entire macro, that causes weight loss. Not keto It just seems silly to me. It’s a bitch to follow, but you lose weight, then you go off keto, and you haven’t learned how to eat in a sustainable way while not in keto, so you just put the weight back on. It’s no more effective than any other diet when it comes to calories, so it’s always better to learn how to eat a sensible diet that’s not a bitch to stick to, so you can live a functional life | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. " Bruh I literally followed Greg Doucette's low cal, high volume diet to the letter. Stuck to around 1400 cals or less. Weighed everything religiously. Tracked absolutely everything, down the last Diet Coke. Lost nothing and just tortured myself for weeks due to hunger. I have pages and pages of messages between me and my friend who was keeping me accountable poring over my MFP diary trying to figure out what the heck was going on because I was at my wits' end. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories Yeah now you mention it, when I was eating more cals was when I was in ketosis so using body fat as fuel instead of carbs. I know you're not a fan of keto but it definitely makes you lose mad weight. Just an absolute bitch to stick to! The reason I’m not a fan is that when calories are matched, keto makes you lose no more weight that any other diet. It’s not magic Tell that to the 5 stone I lost eating 1800 cals per day
Anyway cutting out carbs instantly cuts out a whole bunch of calories. Plus eating high-fat foods keeps you way fuller for longer, again reducing the amount of calories you need.
A medium avocado has about the same amount of cals as 2 slices of bread, but only one of those option will keep me full for longer than 30 minutes.
Exactky, it’s the fullness you get from keto, plus the fact your eliminating an entire macro, that causes weight loss. Not keto
It just seems silly to me. It’s a bitch to follow, but you lose weight, then you go off keto, and you haven’t learned how to eat in a sustainable way while not in keto, so you just put the weight back on.
It’s no more effective than any other diet when it comes to calories, so it’s always better to learn how to eat a sensible diet that’s not a bitch to stick to, so you can live a functional life "14 years of keto here and two years carnivore. It's incredibly easy and fuck all to do with the CICO crap that was touted by profit making, shareholding commercial 'diets'. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories Yeah now you mention it, when I was eating more cals was when I was in ketosis so using body fat as fuel instead of carbs. I know you're not a fan of keto but it definitely makes you lose mad weight. Just an absolute bitch to stick to! The reason I’m not a fan is that when calories are matched, keto makes you lose no more weight that any other diet. It’s not magic Tell that to the 5 stone I lost eating 1800 cals per day
Anyway cutting out carbs instantly cuts out a whole bunch of calories. Plus eating high-fat foods keeps you way fuller for longer, again reducing the amount of calories you need.
A medium avocado has about the same amount of cals as 2 slices of bread, but only one of those option will keep me full for longer than 30 minutes.
Exactky, it’s the fullness you get from keto, plus the fact your eliminating an entire macro, that causes weight loss. Not keto
It just seems silly to me. It’s a bitch to follow, but you lose weight, then you go off keto, and you haven’t learned how to eat in a sustainable way while not in keto, so you just put the weight back on.
It’s no more effective than any other diet when it comes to calories, so it’s always better to learn how to eat a sensible diet that’s not a bitch to stick to, so you can live a functional life "Have you ever tried keto? I've incorporated carbs back in due to a change in lifestyle post-pandemic that makes keto even harder for me to stick to. I would say it's definitely taught me to eat more sensibly, and be more in tune with my body. I eat way better quality sources of carbs and foods that I know will keep me full, and from doing OMAD I've learned how to handle hunger. I wouldn't have learned what my body likes without doing keto tbh. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. Bruh I literally followed Greg Doucette's low cal, high volume diet to the letter. Stuck to around 1400 cals or less. Weighed everything religiously. Tracked absolutely everything, down the last Diet Coke. Lost nothing and just tortured myself for weeks due to hunger. I have pages and pages of messages between me and my friend who was keeping me accountable poring over my MFP diary trying to figure out what the heck was going on because I was at my wits' end." And then you started eating 1800 but keto and lost weight? Someone call NASA, she’s broken the rules of thermodynamics! I’ll probably account this more likely to something other than you breaking the laws of thermodynamics. I couldn’t say what without knowing exactly what went on, but my guess would be mistracked calories somewhere, and/or a change in activity But hey, whatever works for you, all I know is studies have proven, when calories are equal, Keto fairs no better than any other diet, and I just don’t see the point of putting people through the restrictive hell that is keto, just for them to rebound as soon as they stop because they haven’t learned how to eat a normal diet and manage their weight. It’s counter productive and encouraged an unhealthy relationship with food and dieting | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories Yeah now you mention it, when I was eating more cals was when I was in ketosis so using body fat as fuel instead of carbs. I know you're not a fan of keto but it definitely makes you lose mad weight. Just an absolute bitch to stick to! The reason I’m not a fan is that when calories are matched, keto makes you lose no more weight that any other diet. It’s not magic Tell that to the 5 stone I lost eating 1800 cals per day
Anyway cutting out carbs instantly cuts out a whole bunch of calories. Plus eating high-fat foods keeps you way fuller for longer, again reducing the amount of calories you need.
A medium avocado has about the same amount of cals as 2 slices of bread, but only one of those option will keep me full for longer than 30 minutes.
Exactky, it’s the fullness you get from keto, plus the fact your eliminating an entire macro, that causes weight loss. Not keto
It just seems silly to me. It’s a bitch to follow, but you lose weight, then you go off keto, and you haven’t learned how to eat in a sustainable way while not in keto, so you just put the weight back on.
It’s no more effective than any other diet when it comes to calories, so it’s always better to learn how to eat a sensible diet that’s not a bitch to stick to, so you can live a functional life
14 years of keto here and two years carnivore.
It's incredibly easy and fuck all to do with the CICO crap that was touted by profit making, shareholding commercial 'diets'.
" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. Bruh I literally followed Greg Doucette's low cal, high volume diet to the letter. Stuck to around 1400 cals or less. Weighed everything religiously. Tracked absolutely everything, down the last Diet Coke. Lost nothing and just tortured myself for weeks due to hunger. I have pages and pages of messages between me and my friend who was keeping me accountable poring over my MFP diary trying to figure out what the heck was going on because I was at my wits' end. And then you started eating 1800 but keto and lost weight? Someone call NASA, she’s broken the rules of thermodynamics! I’ll probably account this more likely to something other than you breaking the laws of thermodynamics. I couldn’t say what without knowing exactly what went on, but my guess would be mistracked calories somewhere, and/or a change in activity But hey, whatever works for you, all I know is studies have proven, when calories are equal, Keto fairs no better than any other diet, and I just don’t see the point of putting people through the restrictive hell that is keto, just for them to rebound as soon as they stop because they haven’t learned how to eat a normal diet and manage their weight. It’s counter productive and encouraged an unhealthy relationship with food and dieting " Lmao not being funny but you've literally told me that by the end of your PT course there were people that still didn't know what a push up was. So not really gonna count on your "professional knowledge" too much. I am gonna count on what's helped me lose 70lbs and counting though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. Bruh I literally followed Greg Doucette's low cal, high volume diet to the letter. Stuck to around 1400 cals or less. Weighed everything religiously. Tracked absolutely everything, down the last Diet Coke. Lost nothing and just tortured myself for weeks due to hunger. I have pages and pages of messages between me and my friend who was keeping me accountable poring over my MFP diary trying to figure out what the heck was going on because I was at my wits' end." If that is the case that is remarkable. It goes against everything modern science understands about weight loss. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. You don’t, you’ve made a mistake somewhere Calories are just calories Yeah now you mention it, when I was eating more cals was when I was in ketosis so using body fat as fuel instead of carbs. I know you're not a fan of keto but it definitely makes you lose mad weight. Just an absolute bitch to stick to! The reason I’m not a fan is that when calories are matched, keto makes you lose no more weight that any other diet. It’s not magic Tell that to the 5 stone I lost eating 1800 cals per day
Anyway cutting out carbs instantly cuts out a whole bunch of calories. Plus eating high-fat foods keeps you way fuller for longer, again reducing the amount of calories you need.
A medium avocado has about the same amount of cals as 2 slices of bread, but only one of those option will keep me full for longer than 30 minutes.
Exactky, it’s the fullness you get from keto, plus the fact your eliminating an entire macro, that causes weight loss. Not keto
It just seems silly to me. It’s a bitch to follow, but you lose weight, then you go off keto, and you haven’t learned how to eat in a sustainable way while not in keto, so you just put the weight back on.
It’s no more effective than any other diet when it comes to calories, so it’s always better to learn how to eat a sensible diet that’s not a bitch to stick to, so you can live a functional life
14 years of keto here and two years carnivore.
It's incredibly easy and fuck all to do with the CICO crap that was touted by profit making, shareholding commercial 'diets'.
"I refuse to discuss it further with people who throw out the endless peer reviewed studies anc meta analysis, all of which are free to learn from. The science is out there, it’s free, no profit to be made. If your choose to ignore it, I’m not gonna bother going further. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. Bruh I literally followed Greg Doucette's low cal, high volume diet to the letter. Stuck to around 1400 cals or less. Weighed everything religiously. Tracked absolutely everything, down the last Diet Coke. Lost nothing and just tortured myself for weeks due to hunger. I have pages and pages of messages between me and my friend who was keeping me accountable poring over my MFP diary trying to figure out what the heck was going on because I was at my wits' end. And then you started eating 1800 but keto and lost weight? Someone call NASA, she’s broken the rules of thermodynamics! I’ll probably account this more likely to something other than you breaking the laws of thermodynamics. I couldn’t say what without knowing exactly what went on, but my guess would be mistracked calories somewhere, and/or a change in activity But hey, whatever works for you, all I know is studies have proven, when calories are equal, Keto fairs no better than any other diet, and I just don’t see the point of putting people through the restrictive hell that is keto, just for them to rebound as soon as they stop because they haven’t learned how to eat a normal diet and manage their weight. It’s counter productive and encouraged an unhealthy relationship with food and dieting Lmao not being funny but you've literally told me that by the end of your PT course there were people that still didn't know what a push up was. So not really gonna count on your "professional knowledge" too much. I am gonna count on what's helped me lose 70lbs and counting though. " The science is out there. I’m sure you’ve been yo-yoing back and forth for a long time, with stretches of success and stretches of regression This could be in part due to your lack of knowledge and ignorance to the science out there backing it up. That’s on you. I’m not here to help people who choose to remain ignorant in the face of endless studies. It’s only you that’s gonna yo-yo | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. Bruh I literally followed Greg Doucette's low cal, high volume diet to the letter. Stuck to around 1400 cals or less. Weighed everything religiously. Tracked absolutely everything, down the last Diet Coke. Lost nothing and just tortured myself for weeks due to hunger. I have pages and pages of messages between me and my friend who was keeping me accountable poring over my MFP diary trying to figure out what the heck was going on because I was at my wits' end. If that is the case that is remarkable. It goes against everything modern science understands about weight loss. " Then I would recommend you look at the work of Dr Jason Fung, who has helped countless diabetic patients lose weight and reverse their diabetes by focusing on the quality of the calorie and not the calorie itself science is forever evolving... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I found it easy to do it like this: No breakfast, no lunch and then all your calories in the evening. I tended to have a rotation of 3/4 meals, that i knew. Only needed to weigh the rice really, and then veg by eye. That is nice and simple. I'd have to drink a lot of extra coffee during the day though!" As long as it’s either black, or you count the milk in your calorie allowance, it’s fine. The first few times are hard, and you can get a nasty headache, but once you’ve done it a couple of times, it’s surprisingly easy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Stop buying chocolates and crisps, they are empty calories and a bad habit (not a treat). Don’t eat after 7pm. If you’re desperately hungry at night drink water and go to bed early." Ageee with all this except, I have a chocolate treat every day, but I am super good with everything else. I don’t feel deprived them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. Bruh I literally followed Greg Doucette's low cal, high volume diet to the letter. Stuck to around 1400 cals or less. Weighed everything religiously. Tracked absolutely everything, down the last Diet Coke. Lost nothing and just tortured myself for weeks due to hunger. I have pages and pages of messages between me and my friend who was keeping me accountable poring over my MFP diary trying to figure out what the heck was going on because I was at my wits' end. And then you started eating 1800 but keto and lost weight? Someone call NASA, she’s broken the rules of thermodynamics! I’ll probably account this more likely to something other than you breaking the laws of thermodynamics. I couldn’t say what without knowing exactly what went on, but my guess would be mistracked calories somewhere, and/or a change in activity But hey, whatever works for you, all I know is studies have proven, when calories are equal, Keto fairs no better than any other diet, and I just don’t see the point of putting people through the restrictive hell that is keto, just for them to rebound as soon as they stop because they haven’t learned how to eat a normal diet and manage their weight. It’s counter productive and encouraged an unhealthy relationship with food and dieting Lmao not being funny but you've literally told me that by the end of your PT course there were people that still didn't know what a push up was. So not really gonna count on your "professional knowledge" too much. I am gonna count on what's helped me lose 70lbs and counting though. The science is out there. I’m sure you’ve been yo-yoing back and forth for a long time, with stretches of success and stretches of regression This could be in part due to your lack of knowledge and ignorance to the science out there backing it up. That’s on you. I’m not here to help people who choose to remain ignorant in the face of endless studies. It’s only you that’s gonna yo-yo" I am far from ignorant. I've done the research. I've read up on the science. Your CICO theory is very valid, I'm not denying that. For me though, being insulin resistant, being in a caloric deficit means jack shit if I'm getting my calories from carbs and spiking my blood sugar to where the excess insulin is promoting fat storage. Doing something like keto really suits me, as a diabetic (well, reversed diabetic now), because the lack of carbs keeps my blood sugars stable. Maybe if you researched science surrounding insulin resistant people, not just from sources that support your theories, you yourself might come off as less abrasive and ignorant? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Big yikes
It is definitely okay to skip a meal or two, and is actually better than toying with your ghrelin (hunger hormone) and blood sugar levels all day. The "starvation mode" theory you mentioned is absolute bullshit, and your method just sounds like torture. I literally find it easier to do 48hr extended fasts (the healthy way, with lots of electrolytes and vitamin supplements) than let my body think it's gonna get food 6 times a day "And see that's your opinion. Am I telling you yikes you shouldn't do that?, no. Because what works for you is fine and what works for me is fine. And also what works for other's is also fine. I'm not an expert. We just just have different methods to get the same results. Just as people who go to the gym have different methods to obtain the same gains. Who's wrong and who's right. Results speaks volumes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. Bruh I literally followed Greg Doucette's low cal, high volume diet to the letter. Stuck to around 1400 cals or less. Weighed everything religiously. Tracked absolutely everything, down the last Diet Coke. Lost nothing and just tortured myself for weeks due to hunger. I have pages and pages of messages between me and my friend who was keeping me accountable poring over my MFP diary trying to figure out what the heck was going on because I was at my wits' end. And then you started eating 1800 but keto and lost weight? Someone call NASA, she’s broken the rules of thermodynamics! I’ll probably account this more likely to something other than you breaking the laws of thermodynamics. I couldn’t say what without knowing exactly what went on, but my guess would be mistracked calories somewhere, and/or a change in activity But hey, whatever works for you, all I know is studies have proven, when calories are equal, Keto fairs no better than any other diet, and I just don’t see the point of putting people through the restrictive hell that is keto, just for them to rebound as soon as they stop because they haven’t learned how to eat a normal diet and manage their weight. It’s counter productive and encouraged an unhealthy relationship with food and dieting Lmao not being funny but you've literally told me that by the end of your PT course there were people that still didn't know what a push up was. So not really gonna count on your "professional knowledge" too much. I am gonna count on what's helped me lose 70lbs and counting though. The science is out there. I’m sure you’ve been yo-yoing back and forth for a long time, with stretches of success and stretches of regression This could be in part due to your lack of knowledge and ignorance to the science out there backing it up. That’s on you. I’m not here to help people who choose to remain ignorant in the face of endless studies. It’s only you that’s gonna yo-yo I am far from ignorant. I've done the research. I've read up on the science. Your CICO theory is very valid, I'm not denying that. For me though, being insulin resistant, being in a caloric deficit means jack shit if I'm getting my calories from carbs and spiking my blood sugar to where the excess insulin is promoting fat storage. Doing something like keto really suits me, as a diabetic (well, reversed diabetic now), because the lack of carbs keeps my blood sugars stable. Maybe if you researched science surrounding insulin resistant people, not just from sources that support your theories, you yourself might come off as less abrasive and ignorant? " Without being rude, it just sounds like you don’t understand what a calorie deficit it. And I really don’t want to s rude here, but that’s just what it sounds like. Spikes in insulin won’t cause fat storage if you are in a calorie deficit, because there’s no calories to store as fat. Like I said, I hate to sound rude, but I’d do more research. You seem to have some fundamental flaws in your understanding. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia It seems easy when saying it. But one way my guy helped me is cut your meals in half. So effectively your stomach gets some food but isn't full. After an hour or two eat the second half. It helps your body to burn off what it doesn't need and not take all the crap. Never skip meals as your body thinks crap, not sure when I'm going to get food again and stores it all as fat. But also you need to get some cardio in your week. Weather that be weights based cardio amor just regular cardio. Running, skipping etc Big yikes
It is definitely okay to skip a meal or two, and is actually better than toying with your ghrelin (hunger hormone) and blood sugar levels all day. The "starvation mode" theory you mentioned is absolute bullshit, and your method just sounds like torture. I literally find it easier to do 48hr extended fasts (the healthy way, with lots of electrolytes and vitamin supplements) than let my body think it's gonna get food 6 times a day
And see that's your opinion. Am I telling you yikes you shouldn't do that?, no. Because what works for you is fine and what works for me is fine. And also what works for other's is also fine. I'm not an expert. We just just have different methods to get the same results. Just as people who go to the gym have different methods to obtain the same gains. Who's wrong and who's right. Results speaks volumes "You know what, you're right. If it worked for you that's great
I apologise whole heartedly for getting triggered over someone losing weight in a different manner to me, that was a mistake on my part =) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works " Granted if you eat like the last days of Rome, a person will struggle to lose weight when intermittent fasting, but as you say (respectfully) you need to understand why something works and it's not as simple as CICO. Long term, CICO does not work and I can quote studies that prove it. The moment someone comes off a calorie restricted diet, they put the weight back on and more. There is more at play here: hormones and genetics are two of them. Often people are criticised for being weak willed and/or lazy for not being able to be keep weight off, when in fact it has nothing to do with that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia" Keto is a fast way to lose fat but you have to be strict with your carb intake | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Without being rude, it just sounds like you don’t understand what a calorie deficit it. And I really don’t want to s rude here, but that’s just what it sounds like. Spikes in insulin won’t cause fat storage if you are in a calorie deficit, because there’s no calories to store as fat. Like I said, I hate to sound rude, but I’d do more research. You seem to have some fundamental flaws in your understanding. "
Thanks for the chuckle | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Without being rude, it just sounds like you don’t understand what a calorie deficit it. And I really don’t want to s rude here, but that’s just what it sounds like. Spikes in insulin won’t cause fat storage if you are in a calorie deficit, because there’s no calories to store as fat. Like I said, I hate to sound rude, but I’d do more research. You seem to have some fundamental flaws in your understanding.
Thanks for the chuckle "Like I said, chuckle all you want, but we both know you’ve been struggling for a long time, with weight up and down. No consistent results. That might be due to your ignorance and lack of knowledge on the facts. https://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/ That’s a very good long article on it, and they have links to studies and other discussions on why low carb isn’t the answer etc Consistent results will come when you drop the ego and accept the science. Without that you’ll continue to yo-yo back and forth. Genuinely hope you take the time to read it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works I like to understand them too. Trouble is a year later all that understanding changes!... I don’t think the idea of calories in vs calories out had change in a very long time. The laws of thermodynamics are pretty well set. There’s just always idiots and snake oil salesmen trying to pitch you their product The quality of the calorie definitely matters too though. I lost far more weight when eating 1800-2000 cals of whole foods and healthy fats than 1200-1400 calories that still included junk and convenience foods. The chances of you only sticking to 1200-1400 calories and eating junk wouldn't be almost impossible. Calories are just calories. The problem is the junk ones aren't that filling so people just keep eating and don't realise just how many calories they are actually consuming. Bruh I literally followed Greg Doucette's low cal, high volume diet to the letter. Stuck to around 1400 cals or less. Weighed everything religiously. Tracked absolutely everything, down the last Diet Coke. Lost nothing and just tortured myself for weeks due to hunger. I have pages and pages of messages between me and my friend who was keeping me accountable poring over my MFP diary trying to figure out what the heck was going on because I was at my wits' end. And then you started eating 1800 but keto and lost weight? Someone call NASA, she’s broken the rules of thermodynamics! I’ll probably account this more likely to something other than you breaking the laws of thermodynamics. I couldn’t say what without knowing exactly what went on, but my guess would be mistracked calories somewhere, and/or a change in activity But hey, whatever works for you, all I know is studies have proven, when calories are equal, Keto fairs no better than any other diet, and I just don’t see the point of putting people through the restrictive hell that is keto, just for them to rebound as soon as they stop because they haven’t learned how to eat a normal diet and manage their weight. It’s counter productive and encouraged an unhealthy relationship with food and dieting Lmao not being funny but you've literally told me that by the end of your PT course there were people that still didn't know what a push up was. So not really gonna count on your "professional knowledge" too much. I am gonna count on what's helped me lose 70lbs and counting though. The science is out there. I’m sure you’ve been yo-yoing back and forth for a long time, with stretches of success and stretches of regression This could be in part due to your lack of knowledge and ignorance to the science out there backing it up. That’s on you. I’m not here to help people who choose to remain ignorant in the face of endless studies. It’s only you that’s gonna yo-yo I am far from ignorant. I've done the research. I've read up on the science. Your CICO theory is very valid, I'm not denying that. For me though, being insulin resistant, being in a caloric deficit means jack shit if I'm getting my calories from carbs and spiking my blood sugar to where the excess insulin is promoting fat storage. Doing something like keto really suits me, as a diabetic (well, reversed diabetic now), because the lack of carbs keeps my blood sugars stable. Maybe if you researched science surrounding insulin resistant people, not just from sources that support your theories, you yourself might come off as less abrasive and ignorant? Without being rude, it just sounds like you don’t understand what a calorie deficit it. And I really don’t want to s rude here, but that’s just what it sounds like. Spikes in insulin won’t cause fat storage if you are in a calorie deficit, because there’s no calories to store as fat. Like I said, I hate to sound rude, but I’d do more research. You seem to have some fundamental flaws in your understanding. " Sorry, but again, that's too simplistic. It's not the complete picture of how the body works and as soon as you stop restricting the calories you start eating at a previous level, you will start to gain weight. Put simply, if you deprive someone of food, the body slows things down: heart rates drops, for example, and other bodily functions slow too to reduce calorie consumption. They they "get used" to operating at that level and when you start eating again back at your usual level (and it doesn't have to be excessive) the weight piles on as there plenty of calories to go round because the body is still operating in a mode where fewer calories are being used. The CICO based on the first law of thermodynamics is not the complete picture and in order to maintain weight loss a lifestyle has to be adopted. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works Granted if you eat like the last days of Rome, a person will struggle to lose weight when intermittent fasting, but as you say (respectfully) you need to understand why something works and it's not as simple as CICO. Long term, CICO does not work and I can quote studies that prove it. The moment someone comes off a calorie restricted diet, they put the weight back on and more. There is more at play here: hormones and genetics are two of them. Often people are criticised for being weak willed and/or lazy for not being able to be keep weight off, when in fact it has nothing to do with that. "https://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Without being rude, it just sounds like you don’t understand what a calorie deficit it. And I really don’t want to s rude here, but that’s just what it sounds like. Spikes in insulin won’t cause fat storage if you are in a calorie deficit, because there’s no calories to store as fat. Like I said, I hate to sound rude, but I’d do more research. You seem to have some fundamental flaws in your understanding.
Thanks for the chuckle
Like I said, chuckle all you want, but we both know you’ve been struggling for a long time, with weight up and down. No consistent results.
That might be due to your ignorance and lack of knowledge on the facts.
https://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/
That’s a very good long article on it, and they have links to studies and other discussions on why low carb isn’t the answer etc
Consistent results will come when you drop the ego and accept the science. Without that you’ll continue to yo-yo back and forth.
Genuinely hope you take the time to read it. "The true yo yoing only happened when I did low calorie/VLCD for short periods and then ate "normally" again. The consistent weight loss happened when I finally understood what was going on within my body and how to tackle it. I've never lost so much weight over such a long period of time as when I started researching insulin resistance. And kept it off. Any recent struggles have been due to a lack of willpower and not doing what I need to be doing. That's mental, not physical. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We've done a bit of fasting in the past but found it a bit tedious to plan and manage. Heard something recently on the benefits of skipping breakfast some days as a mini fast (think the idea is you don't eat for 12+ hours). The benefits were more to do with energy etc. than weight loss though. I think it’s important to know why things work, so we can attribute the success to the right thing For example, fasting doesn’t cause fat loss. A calorie deficit brought on by fasting does. If you do intermittent fasting then eat 10000 calories in your window. You’ll still gain weight I’m a firm believer in people understanding why a certain thing works Granted if you eat like the last days of Rome, a person will struggle to lose weight when intermittent fasting, but as you say (respectfully) you need to understand why something works and it's not as simple as CICO. Long term, CICO does not work and I can quote studies that prove it. The moment someone comes off a calorie restricted diet, they put the weight back on and more. There is more at play here: hormones and genetics are two of them. Often people are criticised for being weak willed and/or lazy for not being able to be keep weight off, when in fact it has nothing to do with that.
https://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/"That's not an answer that supports CICO. Have you drilled down into the 33 articles that the "health journalist" has reviewed? How many are done on mice? The article is written by Armistead Legge (according to the article ... Armistead Legge is the Director of Content for Legion. He has completed over 100 triathlons and cross-country, cycling, and adventure races, has squatted and deadlifted over 400...) - hardly scientifically qualified and the "Dr" who reviewed it is a Dr of physiotherapy. Not exactly qualified in the right area, when it comes to molecular biology and such like? Pithy answer that link, but sorry it's not persuasive. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Food poisoning?" Might as well add cholera to the list. Not recommended long term though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/ That's not an answer that supports CICO. Have you drilled down into the 33 articles that the "health journalist" has reviewed? How many are done on mice? " None. They’re all studies done on people. Which says to me you didn’t even take the time to read it? Your not wrong that COCI is the only aspect. Obviously if you start eating like a fat pig again you’ll put the weight on. But that’s proof in itself that COCI works. Eat less, lose weight, start eating more, gain Wright. My point is that COCI is the driving factor of every diet. Nothing else matters without COCI being in place. So that needs to be the focus before anything else. A calorie deficit needs to be found and maintained If you have any studies showing weight loss where COCI wasn’t in place and they lost weight while in a calorie surplus without the use of drugs, id love to see it. COCI is number 1. Number 2 is learning how to return to a less strict form of dieting that allows you to maintain your weight management after you’ve lost the weight. But nothing happens without COCI. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually don’t do that. I found Huel and getting plenty of exercise helped me lose weight " Have you had the hot huel savoury? If your have, what did you think of it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually don’t do that. I found Huel and getting plenty of exercise helped me lose weight Have you had the hot huel savoury? If your have, what did you think of it? " Not tried it. I just had a shake for breakfast and dinner then a sensible tea like chicken and salad | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/ That's not an answer that supports CICO. Have you drilled down into the 33 articles that the "health journalist" has reviewed? How many are done on mice? None. They’re all studies done on people. Which says to me you didn’t even take the time to read it? Your not wrong that COCI is the only aspect. Obviously if you start eating like a fat pig again you’ll put the weight on. But that’s proof in itself that COCI works. Eat less, lose weight, start eating more, gain Wright. My point is that COCI is the driving factor of every diet. Nothing else matters without COCI being in place. So that needs to be the focus before anything else. A calorie deficit needs to be found and maintained If you have any studies showing weight loss where COCI wasn’t in place and they lost weight while in a calorie surplus without the use of drugs, id love to see it. COCI is number 1. Number 2 is learning how to return to a less strict form of dieting that allows you to maintain your weight management after you’ve lost the weight. But nothing happens without COCI. " FYI I was never debating CICO - I don't think anyone is. 1800 cals is still below what I burn as an obese person. My point was that the quality of the calorie and keeping blood sugar levels stable through the consumption of low GI foods is far more effective for combating insulin resistance, thus leading to weight loss. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anybody interested in the long term the effects of calorie restriction might find the Minnesota Starvation Experiment and Women's Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial interesting. These were trials carried out on large scales and involved real people. " Just read the Minnesota one, no idea how it comes into play here? They systematically starved people to see how shitty it would make them feel then refeed them Sorry I’m just not seeing how this study applies to someone careful using a small calorie surplus to reach a healthy weight? And only 34 participants in the 1940s? I’m lost | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually don’t do that. I found Huel and getting plenty of exercise helped me lose weight Have you had the hot huel savoury? If your have, what did you think of it? Not tried it. I just had a shake for breakfast and dinner then a sensible tea like chicken and salad " The savoury stuf looks good though! I actually think the shakes taste kinda gross | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/ That's not an answer that supports CICO. Have you drilled down into the 33 articles that the "health journalist" has reviewed? How many are done on mice? None. They’re all studies done on people. Which says to me you didn’t even take the time to read it? Your not wrong that COCI is the only aspect. Obviously if you start eating like a fat pig again you’ll put the weight on. But that’s proof in itself that COCI works. Eat less, lose weight, start eating more, gain Wright. My point is that COCI is the driving factor of every diet. Nothing else matters without COCI being in place. So that needs to be the focus before anything else. A calorie deficit needs to be found and maintained If you have any studies showing weight loss where COCI wasn’t in place and they lost weight while in a calorie surplus without the use of drugs, id love to see it. COCI is number 1. Number 2 is learning how to return to a less strict form of dieting that allows you to maintain your weight management after you’ve lost the weight. But nothing happens without COCI. " No, I didn't read all 33 studies, but then their relevance from a further scan is tenuous at best and do not all directly relate to CICO and so the headline is misleading. I take it you've been through all 33 with a fine tooth comb? If they are all on humans, then that's great, but then are they all long term studies? Unlikely. At least one only lasted 10 weeks. That's nowhere near enough time to say anything conclusive about long term results. We're going to have to disagree about CICO and the first law of thermodynamics being the basis for everything. Have you considered calorific absorption and caloric availability? How would this work with your CICO model. There's other factors that influence metabolism. This isn't a simple matter of maths and physics (not that they are ever simple in some fields of endeavour). Over a few weeks the whole system may be approximated to CICO as a simplification, but longer term that's simply not the case and I'm talking years not weeks. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you love walking do more of it. Liking the exercise is half the battle. " This. Works for me. Cut down food and walk loads. Can’t be doing with all this scientific stuff. It’s not rocket science! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually don’t do that. I found Huel and getting plenty of exercise helped me lose weight Have you had the hot huel savoury? If your have, what did you think of it? Not tried it. I just had a shake for breakfast and dinner then a sensible tea like chicken and salad The savoury stuf looks good though! I actually think the shakes taste kinda gross " Yeh they’re an acquired taste | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Actually don’t do that. I found Huel and getting plenty of exercise helped me lose weight Have you had the hot huel savoury? If your have, what did you think of it? Not tried it. I just had a shake for breakfast and dinner then a sensible tea like chicken and salad The savoury stuf looks good though! I actually think the shakes taste kinda gross Yeh they’re an acquired taste "I added a little sweetener to mine. Seemed to helps | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/ That's not an answer that supports CICO. Have you drilled down into the 33 articles that the "health journalist" has reviewed? How many are done on mice? None. They’re all studies done on people. Which says to me you didn’t even take the time to read it? Your not wrong that COCI is the only aspect. Obviously if you start eating like a fat pig again you’ll put the weight on. But that’s proof in itself that COCI works. Eat less, lose weight, start eating more, gain Wright. My point is that COCI is the driving factor of every diet. Nothing else matters without COCI being in place. So that needs to be the focus before anything else. A calorie deficit needs to be found and maintained If you have any studies showing weight loss where COCI wasn’t in place and they lost weight while in a calorie surplus without the use of drugs, id love to see it. COCI is number 1. Number 2 is learning how to return to a less strict form of dieting that allows you to maintain your weight management after you’ve lost the weight. But nothing happens without COCI. No, I didn't read all 33 studies, but then their relevance from a further scan is tenuous at best and do not all directly relate to CICO and so the headline is misleading. I take it you've been through all 33 with a fine tooth comb? If they are all on humans, then that's great, but then are they all long term studies? Unlikely. At least one only lasted 10 weeks. That's nowhere near enough time to say anything conclusive about long term results. We're going to have to disagree about CICO and the first law of thermodynamics being the basis for everything. Have you considered calorific absorption and caloric availability? How would this work with your CICO model. There's other factors that influence metabolism. This isn't a simple matter of maths and physics (not that they are ever simple in some fields of endeavour). Over a few weeks the whole system may be approximated to CICO as a simplification, but longer term that's simply not the case and I'm talking years not weeks. " Well with no counter studies from your half I guess we will just have to agree to disagree, as I can’t really say anything about nothing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anybody interested in the long term the effects of calorie restriction might find the Minnesota Starvation Experiment and Women's Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial interesting. These were trials carried out on large scales and involved real people. Just read the Minnesota one, no idea how it comes into play here? They systematically starved people to see how shitty it would make them feel then refeed them Sorry I’m just not seeing how this study applies to someone careful using a small calorie surplus to reach a healthy weight? And only 34 participants in the 1940s? I’m lost " Do you need a map?
If you've read Wikipedia then it's understandable. What happened to the subjects after they started eating again? It was not purely a function of calories. What happened can't be explained by CICO alone. There's a fair bit of commentary on these studies out there.
The study was relatively small scale, but then funding for large scale studies is difficult to come by. Indeed some of the 33 papers in the Legion article were small scale. In fact most were. Not even 100 participants is exactly large scale. The Women's Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial was a little larger (48,835), no? Scientifically speaking long term trials are more reliable. Following a small cohort of bodybuilders for 10 weeks is hardly science I'd want to rely on for my future health and wellbeing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If you love walking do more of it. Liking the exercise is half the battle. This. Works for me. Cut down food and walk loads. Can’t be doing with all this scientific stuff. It’s not rocket science! " If it resembles exercise or needs lycra or any mention of dieting its just not for me. Stealth health | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/ That's not an answer that supports CICO. Have you drilled down into the 33 articles that the "health journalist" has reviewed? How many are done on mice? None. They’re all studies done on people. Which says to me you didn’t even take the time to read it? Your not wrong that COCI is the only aspect. Obviously if you start eating like a fat pig again you’ll put the weight on. But that’s proof in itself that COCI works. Eat less, lose weight, start eating more, gain Wright. My point is that COCI is the driving factor of every diet. Nothing else matters without COCI being in place. So that needs to be the focus before anything else. A calorie deficit needs to be found and maintained If you have any studies showing weight loss where COCI wasn’t in place and they lost weight while in a calorie surplus without the use of drugs, id love to see it. COCI is number 1. Number 2 is learning how to return to a less strict form of dieting that allows you to maintain your weight management after you’ve lost the weight. But nothing happens without COCI. No, I didn't read all 33 studies, but then their relevance from a further scan is tenuous at best and do not all directly relate to CICO and so the headline is misleading. I take it you've been through all 33 with a fine tooth comb? If they are all on humans, then that's great, but then are they all long term studies? Unlikely. At least one only lasted 10 weeks. That's nowhere near enough time to say anything conclusive about long term results. We're going to have to disagree about CICO and the first law of thermodynamics being the basis for everything. Have you considered calorific absorption and caloric availability? How would this work with your CICO model. There's other factors that influence metabolism. This isn't a simple matter of maths and physics (not that they are ever simple in some fields of endeavour). Over a few weeks the whole system may be approximated to CICO as a simplification, but longer term that's simply not the case and I'm talking years not weeks. Well with no counter studies from your half I guess we will just have to agree to disagree, as I can’t really say anything about nothing." Yeah, last time I cited a load of stuff you just brushed it off with some nebulous comment centered around you not having the time or inclination to read it or such like. Do I really want to go to the trouble again? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/ That's not an answer that supports CICO. Have you drilled down into the 33 articles that the "health journalist" has reviewed? How many are done on mice? None. They’re all studies done on people. Which says to me you didn’t even take the time to read it? Your not wrong that COCI is the only aspect. Obviously if you start eating like a fat pig again you’ll put the weight on. But that’s proof in itself that COCI works. Eat less, lose weight, start eating more, gain Wright. My point is that COCI is the driving factor of every diet. Nothing else matters without COCI being in place. So that needs to be the focus before anything else. A calorie deficit needs to be found and maintained If you have any studies showing weight loss where COCI wasn’t in place and they lost weight while in a calorie surplus without the use of drugs, id love to see it. COCI is number 1. Number 2 is learning how to return to a less strict form of dieting that allows you to maintain your weight management after you’ve lost the weight. But nothing happens without COCI. No, I didn't read all 33 studies, but then their relevance from a further scan is tenuous at best and do not all directly relate to CICO and so the headline is misleading. I take it you've been through all 33 with a fine tooth comb? If they are all on humans, then that's great, but then are they all long term studies? Unlikely. At least one only lasted 10 weeks. That's nowhere near enough time to say anything conclusive about long term results. We're going to have to disagree about CICO and the first law of thermodynamics being the basis for everything. Have you considered calorific absorption and caloric availability? How would this work with your CICO model. There's other factors that influence metabolism. This isn't a simple matter of maths and physics (not that they are ever simple in some fields of endeavour). Over a few weeks the whole system may be approximated to CICO as a simplification, but longer term that's simply not the case and I'm talking years not weeks. Well with no counter studies from your half I guess we will just have to agree to disagree, as I can’t really say anything about nothing." I literally just posted an article that backs this up | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"://legionathletics.com/cico-diet/ That's not an answer that supports CICO. Have you drilled down into the 33 articles that the "health journalist" has reviewed? How many are done on mice? None. They’re all studies done on people. Which says to me you didn’t even take the time to read it? Your not wrong that COCI is the only aspect. Obviously if you start eating like a fat pig again you’ll put the weight on. But that’s proof in itself that COCI works. Eat less, lose weight, start eating more, gain Wright. My point is that COCI is the driving factor of every diet. Nothing else matters without COCI being in place. So that needs to be the focus before anything else. A calorie deficit needs to be found and maintained If you have any studies showing weight loss where COCI wasn’t in place and they lost weight while in a calorie surplus without the use of drugs, id love to see it. COCI is number 1. Number 2 is learning how to return to a less strict form of dieting that allows you to maintain your weight management after you’ve lost the weight. But nothing happens without COCI. No, I didn't read all 33 studies, but then their relevance from a further scan is tenuous at best and do not all directly relate to CICO and so the headline is misleading. I take it you've been through all 33 with a fine tooth comb? If they are all on humans, then that's great, but then are they all long term studies? Unlikely. At least one only lasted 10 weeks. That's nowhere near enough time to say anything conclusive about long term results. We're going to have to disagree about CICO and the first law of thermodynamics being the basis for everything. Have you considered calorific absorption and caloric availability? How would this work with your CICO model. There's other factors that influence metabolism. This isn't a simple matter of maths and physics (not that they are ever simple in some fields of endeavour). Over a few weeks the whole system may be approximated to CICO as a simplification, but longer term that's simply not the case and I'm talking years not weeks. Well with no counter studies from your half I guess we will just have to agree to disagree, as I can’t really say anything about nothing. Yeah, last time I cited a load of stuff you just brushed it off with some nebulous comment centered around you not having the time or inclination to read it or such like. Do I really want to go to the trouble again? " I don’t think I did, and I don’t think you posted anything that applied to this, but again, let’s just agree to disagree. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Go into outer space and one becomes weightless. The simplest solutions are often the most overlooked #occamsrazor "And freezedried strawberries sucked from a packet. Yummy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia" HIIT workout or other vigorous exercise for minimum 20/30 mins daily. Don’t snack on shit: sweets, crisps, chocolate, energy/fitness bars. They’re all bollocks. Cut out processed sugars and fats. Skip the latte and have a white coffee instead. Eat a reasonable and balanced mixture of food. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs" Have you tried IF? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wasn't happy with my weight so I cut out all carbs for a few months, went on a drinking ban and i lost a stone" I think cutting the booze helps a lot. I've considered cutting it completely but each time I do somebody seems to turn up with a nice bottle of wine or whiskey! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia" I cant remember the last time i was 80kg's i'm in at around 126kg's at the moment but Im pretty tall, however no special diet required as you still need all food groups, just focus on a calorie deficit, work out roughly how much you eat per day currently and drop 20% where you can as a start. drink water instead of when you feel a snack coming | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs" If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"These threads never fail to amaze me It’s almost like the less someone knows about diet, the more confident they are to post their dribble OP, if you want some actual advice from someone that’s trained on giving it, drop me a private message. " Gotta agree with you. So much content that could end up on r/FatLogic. I've manipulated my weight for years now for racing and worked with professional nutritionist. Sample size of 1 and my word only, but the whole cohort I was racing and working with all saw the same dramatic changes. Some of the advice I had from forums, YouTube, magazines and god knows where else they ripped apart in a couple of hours, gave me a tool kit of dietary advice, fed me as part of a study for a month and the differences not just in weight management but also performance was just unbelievable. Night and day differences. This was related to my sport so more about maximizing performance and w/kg but the bad logic which I had picked up (even at a BMI of 25, thinking fit and healthy etc) they tore to pieces. I learned so much bad advice which they corrected and now I can weight manage up and down with ease around events while still pushing out the performance. One of the biggest revelations was just how bad general weightloss and diet advice is on forums like this, magazines and just in general discussions and marketing. If your getting advice from a swingers forum on how to change your weight, you'll get hundreds of different answers, bucket tons of fatlogic that won't work, snake oils, diet short cuts that wont last and just crap advice. You'll still be above your target weight no matter how many times your cut and switch which bit of cherry picked advice your going to try the next week. OP - use a few proven, professional services websites for sound advice; if other (fit and proven effective!) swinger offer to help support you with more tailored or personal advice and have a background in nutrition, sport science or sport performance offer help, take them up on it. And stick to it. Generally 4 week windows for body adaptions, but if you get it right, it's life style changes and long term, not another fab, excuse, rebound, more advice and go around again. It takes perseverance and commitment. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"These threads never fail to amaze me It’s almost like the less someone knows about diet, the more confident they are to post their dribble OP, if you want some actual advice from someone that’s trained on giving it, drop me a private message. Gotta agree with you. So much content that could end up on r/FatLogic. I've manipulated my weight for years now for racing and worked with professional nutritionist. Sample size of 1 and my word only, but the whole cohort I was racing and working with all saw the same dramatic changes. Some of the advice I had from forums, YouTube, magazines and god knows where else they ripped apart in a couple of hours, gave me a tool kit of dietary advice, fed me as part of a study for a month and the differences not just in weight management but also performance was just unbelievable. Night and day differences. This was related to my sport so more about maximizing performance and w/kg but the bad logic which I had picked up (even at a BMI of 25, thinking fit and healthy etc) they tore to pieces. I learned so much bad advice which they corrected and now I can weight manage up and down with ease around events while still pushing out the performance. One of the biggest revelations was just how bad general weightloss and diet advice is on forums like this, magazines and just in general discussions and marketing. If your getting advice from a swingers forum on how to change your weight, you'll get hundreds of different answers, bucket tons of fatlogic that won't work, snake oils, diet short cuts that wont last and just crap advice. You'll still be above your target weight no matter how many times your cut and switch which bit of cherry picked advice your going to try the next week. OP - use a few proven, professional services websites for sound advice; if other (fit and proven effective!) swinger offer to help support you with more tailored or personal advice and have a background in nutrition, sport science or sport performance offer help, take them up on it. And stick to it. Generally 4 week windows for body adaptions, but if you get it right, it's life style changes and long term, not another fab, excuse, rebound, more advice and go around again. It takes perseverance and commitment. " R/fat logic I need this in my life. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"3 years ago i was 76 kgs now i am 80kgs i want to lose 4 kgs can anyone recomend a plan for me to lose this weight by xmas i like walking. i eat healthy but do have a few choc bars and crisps tia" Get the my fitness pal app and figure out your recommended daily calorie intake. Then start tracking the calories you eat and the exercise you do. Try to maintain a 300-500 calorie deficit per day and don't let the weekends set you back. This might mean cutting down on snacks or doing more exercise. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Funny that no one has mentioned the slimming club featured In The league of gentlemen. Dust anybody, Just Dust, it's very low in fat, you can eat as much Dust as you like." wasn't that Little Britain? LoG would be selling yourself to Briss the butchers. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Can anyone advise me how to breathe? I seemed to be doing fine for millions of years but it’s all gone to shit now , is there a forum , book or DVD? " Millions of years! You look good for your age  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Funny that no one has mentioned the slimming club featured In The league of gentlemen. Dust anybody, Just Dust, it's very low in fat, you can eat as much Dust as you like. wasn't that Little Britain? LoG would be selling yourself to Briss the butchers." Yes you are right it was Little Britain. Along with Tom Baker saying 80% of Americans are obese the other 20% are just plain fat. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts " Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs Have you tried IF? " Intermittent fasting?......I don't think I could cope without food. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated." If you're training hard it's tricky to find the balance between getting enough fuel to keep you going but still lose weight. I read an interesting article the other day claiming that people that got 8 hours sleep while training were found to have burned fat while those that had less sleep were burning muscle more than fat. Although if muscle is heavier than fat maybe that's a good thing!   | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated. If you're training hard it's tricky to find the balance between getting enough fuel to keep you going but still lose weight. I read an interesting article the other day claiming that people that got 8 hours sleep while training were found to have burned fat while those that had less sleep were burning muscle more than fat. Although if muscle is heavier than fat maybe that's a good thing! ". there seems to be so much science behind it all, it's certainly not just a case of calories in versus calories out, or I'd be slim. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated. If you're training hard it's tricky to find the balance between getting enough fuel to keep you going but still lose weight. I read an interesting article the other day claiming that people that got 8 hours sleep while training were found to have burned fat while those that had less sleep were burning muscle more than fat. Although if muscle is heavier than fat maybe that's a good thing! . there seems to be so much science behind it all, it's certainly not just a case of calories in versus calories out, or I'd be slim."There’s just a very good chance your not actually in a deficit if your weight isn’t moving. Coz let’s be honest, you aren’t the first human ever to beat starvation. Dieting is just a very controlled version of starving. You don’t take in enough food, so your body must compensate by using its reserve fuels There’s also a good chance that your TDEE has dropped as you’ve been dieting. And might only be in a very small calorie deficit now, if any at all And then how strict are you really being with counting everything? Don’t answer, because telling me “very strict” means nothing, you need to be honest with yourself. How often are you letting little treats slide? Or not counting the sugar/milk in a tea coffee? To say that a calorie deficit isn’t working is like saying “I’m immune to starvation”. No ones immune, there’s an energy balance going on within the body. You can’t cheat that. It might be good to take a diet break for a week or 2 to refresh, then hit it head on again with a stricter mindset, and the knowledge that your TDEE 6 months ago might not be your TDEE today. 1000 calorie deficit should work out to about 1kg a week lost. I personally think that’s too high a deficit, especially since look at your pictures, your no where near big enough to require that kind of deficit. I’d recommend 200-300 maximum. The next is to figure out your TDEE as accurately as possible. There’s apps and spreadsheets that do that for you. But the easiest way is to set a calorie target, hit it daily, weigh yourself daily and see what happens a week. Weight stayed the same? Or went up? Calories too high, drop by 100-200. Weight goes down slowly? Keep it there. Weight goes down by a lot? The deficit might be too big, to make it more sustainable maybe add 100-200 calories and reassess Whenever these things come up I always try to remind people that we have 100s of studies out there showing calorie deficits work, don’t think for a second your any different | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated. If you're training hard it's tricky to find the balance between getting enough fuel to keep you going but still lose weight. I read an interesting article the other day claiming that people that got 8 hours sleep while training were found to have burned fat while those that had less sleep were burning muscle more than fat. Although if muscle is heavier than fat maybe that's a good thing! "Muscle isn't heavier than fat. A lb of muscle weighs the same as a lb of fat. It's denser meaning there will be less of the muscle in a lb than there will be of the fat. But like the old 'which is heavier? A tonne of feathers or a tonne of rocks' (might not be rocks, just went with something denser ) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Thanks. Always useful to be educated on the semantics. Wouldn't want anyone to misunderstand my meaning.. "It's not semantics though.... Irs science
Always happy to help though, so you're welcome | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Thanks. Always useful to be educated on the semantics. Wouldn't want anyone to misunderstand my meaning..
It's not semantics though.... Irs science
Always happy to help though, so you're welcome "Well if we wanna get fancy, when comparing weights we usually talk about a defined volume. So in that sense, muscle is heavier than fat. Because a 1m cubed block of muscle would weigh more than a 1m cubed block of fat | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Thanks. Always useful to be educated on the semantics. Wouldn't want anyone to misunderstand my meaning..
It's not semantics though.... Irs science
Always happy to help though, so you're welcome
Well if we wanna get fancy, when comparing weights we usually talk about a defined volume. So in that sense, muscle is heavier than fat. Because a 1m cubed block of muscle would weigh more than a 1m cubed block of fat "That's density. 1lb of fat and 1lb of muscle both weigh 1lb. It's just you can squish more muscle than fat into a given volume of space. The amount of stuff you can squish into a given volume = density. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Thanks. Always useful to be educated on the semantics. Wouldn't want anyone to misunderstand my meaning..
It's not semantics though.... Irs science
Always happy to help though, so you're welcome
Well if we wanna get fancy, when comparing weights we usually talk about a defined volume. So in that sense, muscle is heavier than fat. Because a 1m cubed block of muscle would weigh more than a 1m cubed block of fat
That's density. 1lb of fat and 1lb of muscle both weigh 1lb. It's just you can squish more muscle than fat into a given volume of space. The amount of stuff you can squish into a given volume = density."No ones debating what weighs more, 1lb of fat or muscle, the statement was “Muscle weighs more than fat” Which is accurate. Because muscle is denser and weighs more given an equal volume compared to fat | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated. If you're training hard it's tricky to find the balance between getting enough fuel to keep you going but still lose weight. I read an interesting article the other day claiming that people that got 8 hours sleep while training were found to have burned fat while those that had less sleep were burning muscle more than fat. Although if muscle is heavier than fat maybe that's a good thing! . there seems to be so much science behind it all, it's certainly not just a case of calories in versus calories out, or I'd be slim.
There’s just a very good chance your not actually in a deficit if your weight isn’t moving.
Coz let’s be honest, you aren’t the first human ever to beat starvation. Dieting is just a very controlled version of starving. You don’t take in enough food, so your body must compensate by using its reserve fuels
There’s also a good chance that your TDEE has dropped as you’ve been dieting. And might only be in a very small calorie deficit now, if any at all
And then how strict are you really being with counting everything? Don’t answer, because telling me “very strict” means nothing, you need to be honest with yourself. How often are you letting little treats slide? Or not counting the sugar/milk in a tea coffee?
To say that a calorie deficit isn’t working is like saying “I’m immune to starvation”. No ones immune, there’s an energy balance going on within the body. You can’t cheat that.
It might be good to take a diet break for a week or 2 to refresh, then hit it head on again with a stricter mindset, and the knowledge that your TDEE 6 months ago might not be your TDEE today.
1000 calorie deficit should work out to about 1kg a week lost. I personally think that’s too high a deficit, especially since look at your pictures, your no where near big enough to require that kind of deficit. I’d recommend 200-300 maximum.
The next is to figure out your TDEE as accurately as possible. There’s apps and spreadsheets that do that for you. But the easiest way is to set a calorie target, hit it daily, weigh yourself daily and see what happens a week. Weight stayed the same? Or went up? Calories too high, drop by 100-200. Weight goes down slowly? Keep it there. Weight goes down by a lot? The deficit might be too big, to make it more sustainable maybe add 100-200 calories and reassess
Whenever these things come up I always try to remind people that we have 100s of studies out there showing calorie deficits work, don’t think for a second your any different "I use myfitnesspal to track all food, incl milk in coffee and the little bit of squash in my water, and I even weigh my dollop of ketchup, everything is tracked honestly. I use a Fitbit to track calories burned which I know isn't 100% accurate but gives a good guide. I've been given my calories and macros by a PT. I'm trying very very hard but feel I'm not getting anywhere. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Cut out the crap. Don't eat after your evening meal. Stop snacking in between meals. Actually listen to your belly and not the clock...by that I mean if you're not hungry don't eat because it's dinner time. One skipped meal won't kill you Walk more if you enjoy it. It's more about what you put in your mouth than anything else." THIS! Try using an app like my fitness pal to simply monitor what you're eating. I'm sure by logging the foods you will quickly realise what you don't need. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated. If you're training hard it's tricky to find the balance between getting enough fuel to keep you going but still lose weight. I read an interesting article the other day claiming that people that got 8 hours sleep while training were found to have burned fat while those that had less sleep were burning muscle more than fat. Although if muscle is heavier than fat maybe that's a good thing! . there seems to be so much science behind it all, it's certainly not just a case of calories in versus calories out, or I'd be slim.
There’s just a very good chance your not actually in a deficit if your weight isn’t moving.
Coz let’s be honest, you aren’t the first human ever to beat starvation. Dieting is just a very controlled version of starving. You don’t take in enough food, so your body must compensate by using its reserve fuels
There’s also a good chance that your TDEE has dropped as you’ve been dieting. And might only be in a very small calorie deficit now, if any at all
And then how strict are you really being with counting everything? Don’t answer, because telling me “very strict” means nothing, you need to be honest with yourself. How often are you letting little treats slide? Or not counting the sugar/milk in a tea coffee?
To say that a calorie deficit isn’t working is like saying “I’m immune to starvation”. No ones immune, there’s an energy balance going on within the body. You can’t cheat that.
It might be good to take a diet break for a week or 2 to refresh, then hit it head on again with a stricter mindset, and the knowledge that your TDEE 6 months ago might not be your TDEE today.
1000 calorie deficit should work out to about 1kg a week lost. I personally think that’s too high a deficit, especially since look at your pictures, your no where near big enough to require that kind of deficit. I’d recommend 200-300 maximum.
The next is to figure out your TDEE as accurately as possible. There’s apps and spreadsheets that do that for you. But the easiest way is to set a calorie target, hit it daily, weigh yourself daily and see what happens a week. Weight stayed the same? Or went up? Calories too high, drop by 100-200. Weight goes down slowly? Keep it there. Weight goes down by a lot? The deficit might be too big, to make it more sustainable maybe add 100-200 calories and reassess
Whenever these things come up I always try to remind people that we have 100s of studies out there showing calorie deficits work, don’t think for a second your any different
I use myfitnesspal to track all food, incl milk in coffee and the little bit of squash in my water, and I even weigh my dollop of ketchup, everything is tracked honestly.
I use a Fitbit to track calories burned which I know isn't 100% accurate but gives a good guide.
I've been given my calories and macros by a PT. I'm trying very very hard but feel I'm not getting anywhere."Fit bits are known for being very unreliable with calorie estimation. Your probably burning way less than you think | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated. If you're training hard it's tricky to find the balance between getting enough fuel to keep you going but still lose weight. I read an interesting article the other day claiming that people that got 8 hours sleep while training were found to have burned fat while those that had less sleep were burning muscle more than fat. Although if muscle is heavier than fat maybe that's a good thing! . there seems to be so much science behind it all, it's certainly not just a case of calories in versus calories out, or I'd be slim.
There’s just a very good chance your not actually in a deficit if your weight isn’t moving.
Coz let’s be honest, you aren’t the first human ever to beat starvation. Dieting is just a very controlled version of starving. You don’t take in enough food, so your body must compensate by using its reserve fuels
There’s also a good chance that your TDEE has dropped as you’ve been dieting. And might only be in a very small calorie deficit now, if any at all
And then how strict are you really being with counting everything? Don’t answer, because telling me “very strict” means nothing, you need to be honest with yourself. How often are you letting little treats slide? Or not counting the sugar/milk in a tea coffee?
To say that a calorie deficit isn’t working is like saying “I’m immune to starvation”. No ones immune, there’s an energy balance going on within the body. You can’t cheat that.
It might be good to take a diet break for a week or 2 to refresh, then hit it head on again with a stricter mindset, and the knowledge that your TDEE 6 months ago might not be your TDEE today.
1000 calorie deficit should work out to about 1kg a week lost. I personally think that’s too high a deficit, especially since look at your pictures, your no where near big enough to require that kind of deficit. I’d recommend 200-300 maximum.
The next is to figure out your TDEE as accurately as possible. There’s apps and spreadsheets that do that for you. But the easiest way is to set a calorie target, hit it daily, weigh yourself daily and see what happens a week. Weight stayed the same? Or went up? Calories too high, drop by 100-200. Weight goes down slowly? Keep it there. Weight goes down by a lot? The deficit might be too big, to make it more sustainable maybe add 100-200 calories and reassess
Whenever these things come up I always try to remind people that we have 100s of studies out there showing calorie deficits work, don’t think for a second your any different
I use myfitnesspal to track all food, incl milk in coffee and the little bit of squash in my water, and I even weigh my dollop of ketchup, everything is tracked honestly.
I use a Fitbit to track calories burned which I know isn't 100% accurate but gives a good guide.
I've been given my calories and macros by a PT. I'm trying very very hard but feel I'm not getting anywhere.
Fit bits are known for being very unreliable with calorie estimation. Your probably burning way less than you think "I've heard they can be about 40% wrong but at that I'm still in a calorie deficit. If it says I'm in a 1000 calorie deficit if 40% wrong then I'm still in a 600 deficit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I use myfitnesspal to track all food, incl milk in coffee and the little bit of squash in my water, and I even weigh my dollop of ketchup, everything is tracked honestly. I use a Fitbit to track calories burned which I know isn't 100% accurate but gives a good guide. I've been given my calories and macros by a PT. I'm trying very very hard but feel I'm not getting anywhere." Your PT would have included your activity level in the calories calculation. If you are adding your workouts to MFP, not sure if you are, it would be counted twice and push you over your allowance. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I use myfitnesspal to track all food, incl milk in coffee and the little bit of squash in my water, and I even weigh my dollop of ketchup, everything is tracked honestly. I use a Fitbit to track calories burned which I know isn't 100% accurate but gives a good guide. I've been given my calories and macros by a PT. I'm trying very very hard but feel I'm not getting anywhere. Your PT would have included your activity level in the calories calculation. If you are adding your workouts to MFP, not sure if you are, it would be counted twice and push you over your allowance." You can still see how many cals you've consumed on MFP though, not counting workouts even when you log them. So for example for a 1500 cal allowance it would say: 1000 (eaten) + 500 (burned through exercise) = 1000 remaining If you go by the remaining amount then yeah you'd be over, but MFP doesn't modify the calories you've already tracked even if you log workouts | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I use myfitnesspal to track all food, incl milk in coffee and the little bit of squash in my water, and I even weigh my dollop of ketchup, everything is tracked honestly. I use a Fitbit to track calories burned which I know isn't 100% accurate but gives a good guide. I've been given my calories and macros by a PT. I'm trying very very hard but feel I'm not getting anywhere. Your PT would have included your activity level in the calories calculation. If you are adding your workouts to MFP, not sure if you are, it would be counted twice and push you over your allowance." .No I don't add my exercise in to mfp. I'll just keep plodding on,I'm getting physically fitter which is the main priority. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated. If you're training hard it's tricky to find the balance between getting enough fuel to keep you going but still lose weight. I read an interesting article the other day claiming that people that got 8 hours sleep while training were found to have burned fat while those that had less sleep were burning muscle more than fat. Although if muscle is heavier than fat maybe that's a good thing! . there seems to be so much science behind it all, it's certainly not just a case of calories in versus calories out, or I'd be slim.
There’s just a very good chance your not actually in a deficit if your weight isn’t moving.
Coz let’s be honest, you aren’t the first human ever to beat starvation. Dieting is just a very controlled version of starving. You don’t take in enough food, so your body must compensate by using its reserve fuels
There’s also a good chance that your TDEE has dropped as you’ve been dieting. And might only be in a very small calorie deficit now, if any at all
And then how strict are you really being with counting everything? Don’t answer, because telling me “very strict” means nothing, you need to be honest with yourself. How often are you letting little treats slide? Or not counting the sugar/milk in a tea coffee?
To say that a calorie deficit isn’t working is like saying “I’m immune to starvation”. No ones immune, there’s an energy balance going on within the body. You can’t cheat that.
It might be good to take a diet break for a week or 2 to refresh, then hit it head on again with a stricter mindset, and the knowledge that your TDEE 6 months ago might not be your TDEE today.
1000 calorie deficit should work out to about 1kg a week lost. I personally think that’s too high a deficit, especially since look at your pictures, your no where near big enough to require that kind of deficit. I’d recommend 200-300 maximum.
The next is to figure out your TDEE as accurately as possible. There’s apps and spreadsheets that do that for you. But the easiest way is to set a calorie target, hit it daily, weigh yourself daily and see what happens a week. Weight stayed the same? Or went up? Calories too high, drop by 100-200. Weight goes down slowly? Keep it there. Weight goes down by a lot? The deficit might be too big, to make it more sustainable maybe add 100-200 calories and reassess
Whenever these things come up I always try to remind people that we have 100s of studies out there showing calorie deficits work, don’t think for a second your any different
I use myfitnesspal to track all food, incl milk in coffee and the little bit of squash in my water, and I even weigh my dollop of ketchup, everything is tracked honestly.
I use a Fitbit to track calories burned which I know isn't 100% accurate but gives a good guide.
I've been given my calories and macros by a PT. I'm trying very very hard but feel I'm not getting anywhere.
Fit bits are known for being very unreliable with calorie estimation. Your probably burning way less than you think
I've heard they can be about 40% wrong but at that I'm still in a calorie deficit. If it says I'm in a 1000 calorie deficit if 40% wrong then I'm still in a 600 deficit."That’s not how maths works 
If it’s 40% out, it’s 40% out of your TDEE not your deficit
So 40% of a 2000 calorie estimated TDEE is 800 calories
Plus, if you know it’s potentially 40% out, why are you following it? What is “pretty accurate” to you? 40% out isn’t pretty accurate | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Good luck OP, hope you find something that works. I'm in a 500-1000 calorie deficit a day, work out 4 times a week but the weight just won't come off. It's a real struggle continuously. Mrs If you training that much and working out then you aren’t eating enough… need high protein foods to support muscles while training and a 1000 deficit for me is not sustainable .. just my thoughts Someone else said this but if I eat more then weight goes on. I'm totally frustrated. If you're training hard it's tricky to find the balance between getting enough fuel to keep you going but still lose weight. I read an interesting article the other day claiming that people that got 8 hours sleep while training were found to have burned fat while those that had less sleep were burning muscle more than fat. Although if muscle is heavier than fat maybe that's a good thing! . there seems to be so much science behind it all, it's certainly not just a case of calories in versus calories out, or I'd be slim.
There’s just a very good chance your not actually in a deficit if your weight isn’t moving.
Coz let’s be honest, you aren’t the first human ever to beat starvation. Dieting is just a very controlled version of starving. You don’t take in enough food, so your body must compensate by using its reserve fuels
There’s also a good chance that your TDEE has dropped as you’ve been dieting. And might only be in a very small calorie deficit now, if any at all
And then how strict are you really being with counting everything? Don’t answer, because telling me “very strict” means nothing, you need to be honest with yourself. How often are you letting little treats slide? Or not counting the sugar/milk in a tea coffee?
To say that a calorie deficit isn’t working is like saying “I’m immune to starvation”. No ones immune, there’s an energy balance going on within the body. You can’t cheat that.
It might be good to take a diet break for a week or 2 to refresh, then hit it head on again with a stricter mindset, and the knowledge that your TDEE 6 months ago might not be your TDEE today.
1000 calorie deficit should work out to about 1kg a week lost. I personally think that’s too high a deficit, especially since look at your pictures, your no where near big enough to require that kind of deficit. I’d recommend 200-300 maximum.
The next is to figure out your TDEE as accurately as possible. There’s apps and spreadsheets that do that for you. But the easiest way is to set a calorie target, hit it daily, weigh yourself daily and see what happens a week. Weight stayed the same? Or went up? Calories too high, drop by 100-200. Weight goes down slowly? Keep it there. Weight goes down by a lot? The deficit might be too big, to make it more sustainable maybe add 100-200 calories and reassess
Whenever these things come up I always try to remind people that we have 100s of studies out there showing calorie deficits work, don’t think for a second your any different
I use myfitnesspal to track all food, incl milk in coffee and the little bit of squash in my water, and I even weigh my dollop of ketchup, everything is tracked honestly.
I use a Fitbit to track calories burned which I know isn't 100% accurate but gives a good guide.
I've been given my calories and macros by a PT. I'm trying very very hard but feel I'm not getting anywhere.
Fit bits are known for being very unreliable with calorie estimation. Your probably burning way less than you think
I've heard they can be about 40% wrong but at that I'm still in a calorie deficit. If it says I'm in a 1000 calorie deficit if 40% wrong then I'm still in a 600 deficit.
That’s not how maths works
If it’s 40% out, it’s 40% out of your TDEE not your deficit
So 40% of a 2000 calorie estimated TDEE is 800 calories
Plus, if you know it’s potentially 40% out, why are you following it? What is “pretty accurate” to you? 40% out isn’t pretty accurate "If according to the figures from my Fitbit and mfp if my calorie deficit is 1000, then I disegregard 40% of the deficit to allow for Fitbit not being accurate which is 400, then that takes my deficit down to 600. It's maths. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As the above poster said, varying factors can be involved. But wether u lose weight or not from attending a gym or working out at home or walks running bikes etc . Keep up the exercise as it will stand to you anyway, and leave you in a better position to tweak diets or whatever as you go on . " Thank you. And I'm so much fitter and healthier than when I started my journey, which is the main thing, the bonus is being a stone lighter but that's taken 8 months to do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wow. Lots of advice from people on here; I'm guessing based on things that work for them. One thing I didn't read much of is the 'age' variable. I used to be able to lose weight easily with modifications to diet and/or exercise pattern up to mid 30s. After 40 my metabolism changed so much that the things I used to do stopped working and I had to radically change. Now I've found that - for me - the diet is most important. Sugar and processed cards (Bread, pasta, cereals) have had to be mostly binned if I want to stand a chance. Its spartan and it not enjoyable most of the time (as I like my tasty food), but my only pointer is to get help from someone who is knowledgeable about your age range in terms of nutrition and weight control and factor in what you know about your own body." Have you tried sourdough? I can’t eat other bread, but can tolerate this (Co-op do a lovely fresh baked one) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
