Recomposition: Maintaining weight while losing fat
Replies
-
hiitsscott wrote: »Hi, been directed here by a very helpful poster on a thread I started yesterday. I was just wondering if someone who is a bit wiser than me can tell me how to go about setting maintenance on my goals please? I mean I know how to do it, but as someone who doesn't exactly lead a busy lifestyle but works out rather intensively in the gym about four times a week, plays an hour of 5-a-side football, does general things like walk the dog a few times a day, go to the shops, etc, what activity levels should I be picking? Because two of them have a difference of several hundred calories and I can't decide which one is best for me.
I am a fan of Alan Aragon's formula...
Goal Weight x (hours of exercise + 9.5)
I always wonder if I should shave off an hour or two from my weekly "exercise" because none of it includes cardio, and I assume calculators/calculations expect I am getting a decent calorie burn.
Anyone have thoughts on this?0 -
I think it's just because this thread is so long, have only made it thru half of it, and there seems to be conflicting info.
I am 106.2 (as of today) 5'1". I don't want to "gain" weight but do want to lean out the little bit of fat I have left lingering/tighten my stomach, butt, and thighs. I think the general consensus is I maintain and I lift... but then I see some people say that additional cutting might be better (not specifically about my situation just in general).
I realize there might be a bit of weight gain w/ the lifting, but that is not my goal... I want thin and lean... I like being tiny!
I am still at a minor deficit because I am afraid of going full maintenance... as I really don't know what my "maintenance" calories are. The calculators all confuse me!
Again, I need "recomp", and now apparently, "maintenance" For Dummies!0 -
DoreenaV1975 wrote: »I think it's just because this thread is so long, have only made it thru half of it, and there seems to be conflicting info.
I am 106.2 (as of today) 5'1". I don't want to "gain" weight but do want to lean out the little bit of fat I have left lingering/tighten my stomach, butt, and thighs. I think the general consensus is I maintain and I lift... but then I see some people say that additional cutting might be better (not specifically about my situation just in general).
I realize there might be a bit of weight gain w/ the lifting, but that is not my goal... I want thin and lean... I like being tiny!
I am still at a minor deficit because I am afraid of going full maintenance... as I really don't know what my "maintenance" calories are. The calculators all confuse me!
Again, I need "recomp", and now apparently, "maintenance" For Dummies!
Doreena, just find your maintenance calories. Are you still losing? If not, you're at maintenance. If you are, up your calories by 100 daily each week. Don't be afraid. It's not like you're adding 1000 calories per day. If you see a half pound gain or pound gain, you know what to do to get it off again if you choose.
I don't think you need to cut anymore, you're tiny-at a healthy weight. Just lift the things.1 -
arditarose wrote: »hiitsscott wrote: »Hi, been directed here by a very helpful poster on a thread I started yesterday. I was just wondering if someone who is a bit wiser than me can tell me how to go about setting maintenance on my goals please? I mean I know how to do it, but as someone who doesn't exactly lead a busy lifestyle but works out rather intensively in the gym about four times a week, plays an hour of 5-a-side football, does general things like walk the dog a few times a day, go to the shops, etc, what activity levels should I be picking? Because two of them have a difference of several hundred calories and I can't decide which one is best for me.
I am a fan of Alan Aragon's formula...
Goal Weight x (hours of exercise + 9.5)
I always wonder if I should shave off an hour or two from my weekly "exercise" because none of it includes cardio, and I assume calculators/calculations expect I am getting a decent calorie burn.
Anyone have thoughts on this?
I'd be interested in this too as that formula is telling me to eat 50% more calories than I do and my weight loss is slower than continental drift (4kg since March).1 -
DoreenaV1975 wrote: »I think it's just because this thread is so long, have only made it thru half of it, and there seems to be conflicting info.
I am 106.2 (as of today) 5'1". I don't want to "gain" weight but do want to lean out the little bit of fat I have left lingering/tighten my stomach, butt, and thighs. I think the general consensus is I maintain and I lift... but then I see some people say that additional cutting might be better (not specifically about my situation just in general).
I realize there might be a bit of weight gain w/ the lifting, but that is not my goal... I want thin and lean... I like being tiny!
I am still at a minor deficit because I am afraid of going full maintenance... as I really don't know what my "maintenance" calories are. The calculators all confuse me!
Again, I need "recomp", and now apparently, "maintenance" For Dummies!
1) your weight will most likely not increase in recomp, but even if it does, you probably won't mind if you have lower bodyfat because you can still look amazing. (See the links) In any case, you won't get big and bulky from lifting, and it really really won't happen while eating at maintenance rather than a surplus.
2) that small defecit while lifting,that is just personal preference. It can however cause you to lose weight. Also, you need a surplus to increase muscle mass. The idea behind recomp is tricking your body in creating a calorie surplus to build muscle by burning fat (rather than a surplus from food). That will be much harder at a defecit than at maintenance...
3) maintenance calories are a range, so you can eat anywhere within that range to maintain weight. Just let MFP calculate it for you, continue logging your exercise and eat that number. Give it a couple of weeks to see what the scale does. You really won't gain a lot of weight if you just keep logging. And even if you do gain a pound, you know how to lose it, plus it allows you to calculate your actual maintenance calories. (1 pound is 3500 calorie surplus, so if you gained one pound in a month, you were eating at a 125 calorie surplus a day.)
4) in my personal opinion, if you are at your goal weight, don't continue to cut. I am on MFP because I was underweight and don't want to go back there. For me being underweight was absolutely horrible, therefore I really dislike advice that makes people head in that direction while already at a healthy weight. Plus, you won't gain any muscle on a cut. If your muscle mass is already quite low, a cut will make you look 'I can count your ribs' skinny rather than fit and lean.
ETA: recommend material on getting bulky
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/977538/halp-heavy-lifting-made-me-supah-bulky/p1
http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2011/07/21/meet-staci-your-new-powerlifting-super-hero/
This second link is what I mean on looking better while having a higher weight.
And on gaining muscle:
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10232698/muscle-gaining-misconceptions1 -
Thanks @arditarose and @AsISmile ... I was told, by a couple of guys (should have been my first clue) on another thread that the only way to reduce body fat was to lose weight...
I told them I thought I had lost enough...but then one of them chimed in you could go down to 98 pounds and still be at a normal BMI. 98 pounds?! WOW! I want to lose the flab but I don't think 98 pounds is healthy especially when my ribs, hip bones, collar bones and spine are protruding already! But then again, what do I know?
I carry my weight on the bottom, so despite the bones sticking out in certain places I really do have a good amount of flab on my problem areas. I am what you call a pear shape.0 -
DoreenaV1975 wrote: »Thanks @arditarose and @AsISmile ... I was told, by a couple of guys (should have been my first clue) on another thread that the only way to reduce body fat was to lose weight...
I told them I thought I had lost enough...but then one of them chimed in you could go down to 98 pounds and still be at a normal BMI. 98 pounds?! WOW! I want to lose the flab but I don't think 98 pounds is healthy especially when my ribs, hip bones, collar bones and spine are protruding already! But then again, what do I know?
I carry my weight on the bottom, so despite the bones sticking out in certain places I really do have a good amount of flab on my problem areas. I am what you call a pear shape.
Don't go there. I'm pear shaped too and I'm treading lightly on going into the 120s even because I know, we get very tiny up top first but there's fat on the thighs and butt. It sounds like you know yourself and that you should not go lower. A recomp will help you reach your goals.0 -
I would let the scale, measurements and progress in the gym dictate that...arditarose wrote: »hiitsscott wrote: »Hi, been directed here by a very helpful poster on a thread I started yesterday. I was just wondering if someone who is a bit wiser than me can tell me how to go about setting maintenance on my goals please? I mean I know how to do it, but as someone who doesn't exactly lead a busy lifestyle but works out rather intensively in the gym about four times a week, plays an hour of 5-a-side football, does general things like walk the dog a few times a day, go to the shops, etc, what activity levels should I be picking? Because two of them have a difference of several hundred calories and I can't decide which one is best for me.
I am a fan of Alan Aragon's formula...
Goal Weight x (hours of exercise + 9.5)
I always wonder if I should shave off an hour or two from my weekly "exercise" because none of it includes cardio, and I assume calculators/calculations expect I am getting a decent calorie burn.
Anyone have thoughts on this?0 -
I would let the scale, measurements and progress in the gym dictate that...arditarose wrote: »hiitsscott wrote: »Hi, been directed here by a very helpful poster on a thread I started yesterday. I was just wondering if someone who is a bit wiser than me can tell me how to go about setting maintenance on my goals please? I mean I know how to do it, but as someone who doesn't exactly lead a busy lifestyle but works out rather intensively in the gym about four times a week, plays an hour of 5-a-side football, does general things like walk the dog a few times a day, go to the shops, etc, what activity levels should I be picking? Because two of them have a difference of several hundred calories and I can't decide which one is best for me.
I am a fan of Alan Aragon's formula...
Goal Weight x (hours of exercise + 9.5)
I always wonder if I should shave off an hour or two from my weekly "exercise" because none of it includes cardio, and I assume calculators/calculations expect I am getting a decent calorie burn.
Anyone have thoughts on this?
I know. As soon as I posted that I was wondering why I even asked because I just use my data anyway. I'm always wishing there was some magical way I could get a larger TDEE without extra cardio. Fantasies.0 -
arditarose wrote: »DoreenaV1975 wrote: »Thanks @arditarose and @AsISmile ... I was told, by a couple of guys (should have been my first clue) on another thread that the only way to reduce body fat was to lose weight...
I told them I thought I had lost enough...but then one of them chimed in you could go down to 98 pounds and still be at a normal BMI. 98 pounds?! WOW! I want to lose the flab but I don't think 98 pounds is healthy especially when my ribs, hip bones, collar bones and spine are protruding already! But then again, what do I know?
I carry my weight on the bottom, so despite the bones sticking out in certain places I really do have a good amount of flab on my problem areas. I am what you call a pear shape.
Don't go there. I'm pear shaped too and I'm treading lightly on going into the 120s even because I know, we get very tiny up top first but there's fat on the thighs and butt. It sounds like you know yourself and that you should not go lower. A recomp will help you reach your goals.
Pear shaped too.
Also, I second this.0 -
Doreena - Don't be afraid of the heavy weights. I tried to "tone up" and "get lean" with reduced calories and yoga/pilates/circuit training/body pump/barre/all the workouts in the world that promise to give you long, lean muscles. That did not give me "long lean muscles", just a skinny fat body that was slowly getting softer as the years went by. I have been recomping for a few months now and lifting as heavy as I can on a structured program. I have never looked better in my life. I am SMALLER that before, not bigger, and went down a jeans size. I am a pear too, and for the first time in my adult life I am seeing some tone and definition in my legs. Please give it a try for a few months. You may get hooked.0
-
icemaiden37 wrote: »arditarose wrote: »hiitsscott wrote: »Hi, been directed here by a very helpful poster on a thread I started yesterday. I was just wondering if someone who is a bit wiser than me can tell me how to go about setting maintenance on my goals please? I mean I know how to do it, but as someone who doesn't exactly lead a busy lifestyle but works out rather intensively in the gym about four times a week, plays an hour of 5-a-side football, does general things like walk the dog a few times a day, go to the shops, etc, what activity levels should I be picking? Because two of them have a difference of several hundred calories and I can't decide which one is best for me.
I am a fan of Alan Aragon's formula...
Goal Weight x (hours of exercise + 9.5)
I always wonder if I should shave off an hour or two from my weekly "exercise" because none of it includes cardio, and I assume calculators/calculations expect I am getting a decent calorie burn.
Anyone have thoughts on this?
I'd be interested in this too as that formula is telling me to eat 50% more calories than I do and my weight loss is slower than continental drift (4kg since March).
Very true.
The extremes are obvious, 1 hr walking isn't the same as 1 hr lifting as 1 hr running.
Walking is about 1/2 calorie burn time-wise as running.
Might try this - to incorporate daily activity (which those formulas and TDEE charts almost never include in estimate) and types/times of exercise.
Like a mailman lifting for 3 x 45 weekly is different than desk jockey person doing it - but if both pick 135 min, or 2 hrs of exercise weekly - one is obviously off.
Just TDEE please, better than 5 level TDEE charts.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G7FgNzPq3v5WMjDtH0n93LXSMRY_hjmzNTMJb3aZSxM/edit?usp=sharing0 -
icemaiden37 wrote: »arditarose wrote: »hiitsscott wrote: »Hi, been directed here by a very helpful poster on a thread I started yesterday. I was just wondering if someone who is a bit wiser than me can tell me how to go about setting maintenance on my goals please? I mean I know how to do it, but as someone who doesn't exactly lead a busy lifestyle but works out rather intensively in the gym about four times a week, plays an hour of 5-a-side football, does general things like walk the dog a few times a day, go to the shops, etc, what activity levels should I be picking? Because two of them have a difference of several hundred calories and I can't decide which one is best for me.
I am a fan of Alan Aragon's formula...
Goal Weight x (hours of exercise + 9.5)
I always wonder if I should shave off an hour or two from my weekly "exercise" because none of it includes cardio, and I assume calculators/calculations expect I am getting a decent calorie burn.
Anyone have thoughts on this?
I'd be interested in this too as that formula is telling me to eat 50% more calories than I do and my weight loss is slower than continental drift (4kg since March).
Very true.
The extremes are obvious, 1 hr walking isn't the same as 1 hr lifting as 1 hr running.
Walking is about 1/2 calorie burn time-wise as running.
Might try this - to incorporate daily activity (which those formulas and TDEE charts almost never include in estimate) and types/times of exercise.
Like a mailman lifting for 3 x 45 weekly is different than desk jockey person doing it - but if both pick 135 min, or 2 hrs of exercise weekly - one is obviously off.
Just TDEE please, better than 5 level TDEE charts.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1G7FgNzPq3v5WMjDtH0n93LXSMRY_hjmzNTMJb3aZSxM/edit?usp=sharing
Interesting. Pretty accurate for me. I live in the city and sometimes walk a crap ton and sometimes take the bus because I'm lazy, so I tried 10 minutes per day and 20 minutes per day and got a couple hundred calorie difference. Maybe I'll take the bus/subway less
0 -
arditarose wrote: »DoreenaV1975 wrote: »Thanks @arditarose and @AsISmile ... I was told, by a couple of guys (should have been my first clue) on another thread that the only way to reduce body fat was to lose weight...
I told them I thought I had lost enough...but then one of them chimed in you could go down to 98 pounds and still be at a normal BMI. 98 pounds?! WOW! I want to lose the flab but I don't think 98 pounds is healthy especially when my ribs, hip bones, collar bones and spine are protruding already! But then again, what do I know?
I carry my weight on the bottom, so despite the bones sticking out in certain places I really do have a good amount of flab on my problem areas. I am what you call a pear shape.
Don't go there. I'm pear shaped too and I'm treading lightly on going into the 120s even because I know, we get very tiny up top first but there's fat on the thighs and butt. It sounds like you know yourself and that you should not go lower. A recomp will help you reach your goals.
+1 *Nodding*0 -
DoreenaV1975 wrote: »Thanks @arditarose and @AsISmile ... I was told, by a couple of guys (should have been my first clue) on another thread that the only way to reduce body fat was to lose weight...
I told them I thought I had lost enough...but then one of them chimed in you could go down to 98 pounds and still be at a normal BMI. 98 pounds?! WOW! I want to lose the flab but I don't think 98 pounds is healthy especially when my ribs, hip bones, collar bones and spine are protruding already! But then again, what do I know?
I carry my weight on the bottom, so despite the bones sticking out in certain places I really do have a good amount of flab on my problem areas. I am what you call a pear shape.
I think this was on the thread I started asking how long recomp would take to lose the skinny fat. I'm 5'3" 115lbs and they told me to cut too. Even after I said I had gotten down to 107lbs before and looked gross. Ribs sticking out with a belly is not the look I'm going for. After the advice I really thought about cutting, but just can't bring myself to do it. What's the point if when I get there I just look sick? Yuck. I want to look lean and healthy, not concentration camp thin! I hate my belly, but I don't feel like more weight loss is the answer. I don't think you should need to go under 100 lbs either.....that's really really tiny.0 -
DoreenaV1975 wrote: »Thanks @arditarose and @AsISmile ... I was told, by a couple of guys (should have been my first clue) on another thread that the only way to reduce body fat was to lose weight...
I told them I thought I had lost enough...but then one of them chimed in you could go down to 98 pounds and still be at a normal BMI. 98 pounds?! WOW! I want to lose the flab but I don't think 98 pounds is healthy especially when my ribs, hip bones, collar bones and spine are protruding already! But then again, what do I know?
I carry my weight on the bottom, so despite the bones sticking out in certain places I really do have a good amount of flab on my problem areas. I am what you call a pear shape.
I think this was on the thread I started asking how long recomp would take to lose the skinny fat. I'm 5'3" 115lbs and they told me to cut too. Even after I said I had gotten down to 107lbs before and looked gross. Ribs sticking out with a belly is not the look I'm going for. After the advice I really thought about cutting, but just can't bring myself to do it. What's the point if when I get there I just look sick? Yuck. I want to look lean and healthy, not concentration camp thin! I hate my belly, but I don't feel like more weight loss is the answer. I don't think you should need to go under 100 lbs either.....that's really really tiny.
Yes, @Moter98, it was and you and both agreed that was just crazy!0 -
DoreenaV1975 wrote: »DoreenaV1975 wrote: »Thanks @arditarose and @AsISmile ... I was told, by a couple of guys (should have been my first clue) on another thread that the only way to reduce body fat was to lose weight...
I told them I thought I had lost enough...but then one of them chimed in you could go down to 98 pounds and still be at a normal BMI. 98 pounds?! WOW! I want to lose the flab but I don't think 98 pounds is healthy especially when my ribs, hip bones, collar bones and spine are protruding already! But then again, what do I know?
I carry my weight on the bottom, so despite the bones sticking out in certain places I really do have a good amount of flab on my problem areas. I am what you call a pear shape.
I think this was on the thread I started asking how long recomp would take to lose the skinny fat. I'm 5'3" 115lbs and they told me to cut too. Even after I said I had gotten down to 107lbs before and looked gross. Ribs sticking out with a belly is not the look I'm going for. After the advice I really thought about cutting, but just can't bring myself to do it. What's the point if when I get there I just look sick? Yuck. I want to look lean and healthy, not concentration camp thin! I hate my belly, but I don't feel like more weight loss is the answer. I don't think you should need to go under 100 lbs either.....that's really really tiny.
Yes, @Moter98, it was and you and both agreed that was just crazy!
I agree I'm 5ft 1 I was at goal weight of 126lbs and thought okay I will try and maintain or should I cut but I upped my calories by 100 after two week I lost 2lbs taking me to 124lbs then I upped my cals again but have lost another 2lbs taking me to 122lbs .. I've upped my cals again this week but by 200 so hopefully it should help. A few people have also told me to keep losing weight in order to see the parts of my body I would like and that losing is the only way to get rid of the fat but I'm not happy with that I thought about it and thought no way I'm already 4lbs below what I wanted and I really don't like it especially being so small in height too I think best thing I can do now is maintain and shed the fat that way. It can be done I've spoken to a few people who have already done it so I'm going to give it a try. Sack looking ill just to see certain parts of your body I would rather eat at maintenanace build some muscle and take the fat off that way0 -
Also does anyone eat their exercise calories back? I don't and wondered if that's okay? So if I maintained at 2000 calories (example) and burned 250 in the gym do I eat those 250 back? I've heard you don't have to because it's not 500/600 cals your burning it's not a lot it's a small amount your burning?0
-
Also does anyone eat their exercise calories back? I don't and wondered if that's okay? So if I maintained at 2000 calories (example) and burned 250 in the gym do I eat those 250 back? I've heard you don't have to because it's not 500/600 cals your burning it's not a lot it's a small amount your burning?
Maintenance is calories in = calories out. So in theory you should eat them back.
The good news however is that you can maintain weight by eating anywhere in your maintenance calorie range. That means that if you are still in that range after exercise it should be okay. But this is all in theory...
I personally have no clue how not eating back workout calories will influence your recomp.0 -
Also does anyone eat their exercise calories back? I don't and wondered if that's okay? So if I maintained at 2000 calories (example) and burned 250 in the gym do I eat those 250 back? I've heard you don't have to because it's not 500/600 cals your burning it's not a lot it's a small amount your burning?
Yes you need to account for your exercise burns when maintaining if you are doing a significant amount of exercise, whether by "eating back" or including it in your TDEE calculation.
If you are only doing 250 a week then it's probably lost in the inaccuracies of estimations and food logging.
Remember it's actual results that matter - not how you work out the numbers. Be consistent and make adjustments based on long terms trends.
0 -
Also does anyone eat their exercise calories back? I don't and wondered if that's okay? So if I maintained at 2000 calories (example) and burned 250 in the gym do I eat those 250 back? I've heard you don't have to because it's not 500/600 cals your burning it's not a lot it's a small amount your burning?
Yes you need to account for your exercise burns when maintaining if you are doing a significant amount of exercise, whether by "eating back" or including it in your TDEE calculation.
If you are only doing 250 a week then it's probably lost in the inaccuracies of estimations and food logging.
Remember it's actual results that matter - not how you work out the numbers. Be consistent and make adjustments based on long terms trends.
Okay so If I burn 250 cals everyday and I'm eating 1900 cals a day I should be really eating 2100 cals a day?0 -
Also does anyone eat their exercise calories back? I don't and wondered if that's okay? So if I maintained at 2000 calories (example) and burned 250 in the gym do I eat those 250 back? I've heard you don't have to because it's not 500/600 cals your burning it's not a lot it's a small amount your burning?
Yes you need to account for your exercise burns when maintaining if you are doing a significant amount of exercise, whether by "eating back" or including it in your TDEE calculation.
If you are only doing 250 a week then it's probably lost in the inaccuracies of estimations and food logging.
Remember it's actual results that matter - not how you work out the numbers. Be consistent and make adjustments based on long terms trends.
Okay so If I burn 250 cals everyday and I'm eating 1900 cals a day I should be really eating 2100 cals a day?
If you are calorie counting you need to calorie count both intake and expenditure.
You would log 250cals of food you ate so why won't you log 250cals of exercise?
If you consistently burn 250 cals a day more than you are eating you would be losing 1lb every two weeks.
That's your focus if you are trying to maintain - your weight trend over a period of weeks.
Think you need to ask yourself why the reluctance to eat more.0 -
Also does anyone eat their exercise calories back? I don't and wondered if that's okay? So if I maintained at 2000 calories (example) and burned 250 in the gym do I eat those 250 back? I've heard you don't have to because it's not 500/600 cals your burning it's not a lot it's a small amount your burning?
Yes you need to account for your exercise burns when maintaining if you are doing a significant amount of exercise, whether by "eating back" or including it in your TDEE calculation.
If you are only doing 250 a week then it's probably lost in the inaccuracies of estimations and food logging.
Remember it's actual results that matter - not how you work out the numbers. Be consistent and make adjustments based on long terms trends.
Okay so If I burn 250 cals everyday and I'm eating 1900 cals a day I should be really eating 2100 cals a day?
If you are calorie counting you need to calorie count both intake and expenditure.
You would log 250cals of food you ate so why won't you log 250cals of exercise?
If you consistently burn 250 cals a day more than you are eating you would be losing 1lb every two weeks.
That's your focus if you are trying to maintain - your weight trend over a period of weeks.
Think you need to ask yourself why the reluctance to eat more.
Okay thanks it's not that I'm reluctant to eat or anything I just wasn't sure wether I ate my calories back from exercise as I've heard some people done bother but now that I know I can eat them back.. I find it hard to eat "clean" if you want to put it and eat that many calories say 2100 simply because things like salad and sweet potatoes etc aren't high in calories I would need to eat like a full bag of salad just to get 150 cals0 -
Agree w/sijomial; sometimes I eat my exercise cals back and sometimes I don't. I've maintained for over a month now and doing recomp so trying to stay on course.
0 -
Not sure if this is the right thread for this question but..... I have been on ICF 5x5 for 2 mo now @ 3x a week & HIIT treadmill @30min 2x/wk I have progressed in weight every week (+5lbs/wk) instead of every workout on pretty much every exercise except for squats - just to maintain proper form and because I've had a lot challenges with perfecting my squat form/depth - right now I'm at a 1/2 squat @ 50-60lbs - in total I've lost 8.4 lbs - slow but consistent @ 1550-75 +( eating 40% or less of my exercise cal back=I only input 100 cal per wo day as I don't have a way of seeing how much I ve actually burned - so I record the bare minimum) cal/day w macros @ 136p 60f 113c I'm 5'8 sw197 cw188.6 gw135-40 - based on my deficit will I still be able to lose fat/weight while maintaining muscle? Thanks for any/all feedback0
-
Not sure if this is the right thread for this question but..... I have been on ICF 5x5 for 2 mo now @ 3x a week & HIIT treadmill @30min 2x/wk I have progressed in weight every week (+5lbs/wk) instead of every workout on pretty much every exercise except for squats - just to maintain proper form and because I've had a lot challenges with perfecting my squat form/depth - right now I'm at a 1/2 squat @ 50-60lbs - in total I've lost 8.4 lbs - slow but consistent @ 1550-75 +( eating 40% or less of my exercise cal back=I only input 100 cal per wo day as I don't have a way of seeing how much I ve actually burned - so I record the bare minimum) cal/day w macros @ 136p 60f 113c I'm 5'8 sw197 cw188.6 gw135-40 - based on my deficit will I still be able to lose fat/weight while maintaining muscle? Thanks for any/all feedback
So 8.4 lbs lost in 2 months, so about 1 lb weekly, or 500 cal deficit average daily, with about 48 lbs more to go, and good protein amount.
That should be no problem at all. If just starting out, probably gained some muscle too.
I would suggest that the database entries for running, if you put in your average speed (so 2.2 miles done in 30 min is 4.4 mph jogging), will be the most accurate calorie burns there.
And the Strength Training entry is based on studies with sets and reps 5-15 range and rests 2-4 min, if that's what you are using too. That would be more accurate than out of the sky figure. 100 cal is barely above BMR probably for 1 hr. You are burning way more than that.0 -
Not sure if this is the right thread for this question but..... I have been on ICF 5x5 for 2 mo now @ 3x a week & HIIT treadmill @30min 2x/wk I have progressed in weight every week (+5lbs/wk) instead of every workout on pretty much every exercise except for squats - just to maintain proper form and because I've had a lot challenges with perfecting my squat form/depth - right now I'm at a 1/2 squat @ 50-60lbs - in total I've lost 8.4 lbs - slow but consistent @ 1550-75 +( eating 40% or less of my exercise cal back=I only input 100 cal per wo day as I don't have a way of seeing how much I ve actually burned - so I record the bare minimum) cal/day w macros @ 136p 60f 113c I'm 5'8 sw197 cw188.6 gw135-40 - based on my deficit will I still be able to lose fat/weight while maintaining muscle? Thanks for any/all feedback
So 8.4 lbs lost in 2 months, so about 1 lb weekly, or 500 cal deficit average daily, with about 48 lbs more to go, and good protein amount.
That should be no problem at all. If just starting out, probably gained some muscle too.
I would suggest that the database entries for running, if you put in your average speed (so 2.2 miles done in 30 min is 4.4 mph jogging), will be the most accurate calorie burns there.
And the Strength Training entry is based on studies with sets and reps 5-15 range and rests 2-4 min, if that's what you are using too. That would be more accurate than out of the sky figure. 100 cal is barely above BMR probably for 1 hr. You are burning way more than that.
Thanks for the reply - I'm really trying to avoid eating back my ex calories - so does it matter if I enter the accurate about of cal burned ? As for my treadmill work I do 2.8 at 1min and 7.0 at 30s ? for 30 min So not sure how that would translate in database - according to my treadmill I burn anywhere from 150-175 cals but I don't always have my hands on the sensors so I doubt that's very accurate ? My lifts are 5x5 w 1-2 min rest btw each set and I do roughly 5 main exercises with 2 accessory exercises (abs/cable crunches)0 -
From what I understand the machines' counters can be horribly inaccurate anyway. As far as how to log, just total each amount, that's what I usually do. So, for example, at 2.8mph, if I did that for 15 times within the 30 minutes, I'd log it as "x mph, 15 minutes", then "7.0mph, 15 minutes" or whatever the total is at 7mph.0
-
Not sure if this is the right thread for this question but..... I have been on ICF 5x5 for 2 mo now @ 3x a week & HIIT treadmill @30min 2x/wk I have progressed in weight every week (+5lbs/wk) instead of every workout on pretty much every exercise except for squats - just to maintain proper form and because I've had a lot challenges with perfecting my squat form/depth - right now I'm at a 1/2 squat @ 50-60lbs - in total I've lost 8.4 lbs - slow but consistent @ 1550-75 +( eating 40% or less of my exercise cal back=I only input 100 cal per wo day as I don't have a way of seeing how much I ve actually burned - so I record the bare minimum) cal/day w macros @ 136p 60f 113c I'm 5'8 sw197 cw188.6 gw135-40 - based on my deficit will I still be able to lose fat/weight while maintaining muscle? Thanks for any/all feedback
So 8.4 lbs lost in 2 months, so about 1 lb weekly, or 500 cal deficit average daily, with about 48 lbs more to go, and good protein amount.
That should be no problem at all. If just starting out, probably gained some muscle too.
I would suggest that the database entries for running, if you put in your average speed (so 2.2 miles done in 30 min is 4.4 mph jogging), will be the most accurate calorie burns there.
And the Strength Training entry is based on studies with sets and reps 5-15 range and rests 2-4 min, if that's what you are using too. That would be more accurate than out of the sky figure. 100 cal is barely above BMR probably for 1 hr. You are burning way more than that.
Thanks for the reply - I'm really trying to avoid eating back my ex calories - so does it matter if I enter the accurate about of cal burned ? As for my treadmill work I do 2.8 at 1min and 7.0 at 30s ? for 30 min So not sure how that would translate in database - according to my treadmill I burn anywhere from 150-175 cals but I don't always have my hands on the sensors so I doubt that's very accurate ? My lifts are 5x5 w 1-2 min rest btw each set and I do roughly 5 main exercises with 2 accessory exercises (abs/cable crunches)
The machine sensors are for displaying HR only - since they are totally optional calorie burn is not based on that.
If you entered weight, it's based on that. And if they have been using the formula's that have been around for ages based on the most used piece of exercise equipment in research studies, and it's a free formula - that's the most accurate calorie burn.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/774337/how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is/p1
And would likely match the database very closely.
You don't have to make it difficult though by figuring out how much running / walking split - what does treadmill report you did for distance for 30 min?
Double it - there's your average MPH - log that.
The amount of calorie burn per min doesn't change that greatly over the range you are talking about.
http://www.exrx.net/Aerobic/WalkCalExp.html
Almost all lifting programs would fall under Strength Training, it's not until you get down to 1 min or less rests and 15 and over reps that you've moved in to Circuit Training entry.
I could see why now you let exercise create a tad more deficit, but I'd log it and with only 48 to go, don't make the deficit more than 750 in total. 30 lbs left just hold to 500 cal deficit and start eating back that exercise.0 -
Thanks for the reply;)Not sure if this is the right thread for this question but..... I have been on ICF 5x5 for 2 mo now @ 3x a week & HIIT treadmill @30min 2x/wk I have progressed in weight every week (+5lbs/wk) instead of every workout on pretty much every exercise except for squats - just to maintain proper form and because I've had a lot challenges with perfecting my squat form/depth - right now I'm at a 1/2 squat @ 50-60lbs - in total I've lost 8.4 lbs - slow but consistent @ 1550-75 +( eating 40% or less of my exercise cal back=I only input 100 cal per wo day as I don't have a way of seeing how much I ve actually burned - so I record the bare minimum) cal/day w macros @ 136p 60f 113c I'm 5'8 sw197 cw188.6 gw135-40 - based on my deficit will I still be able to lose fat/weight while maintaining muscle? Thanks for any/all feedback
So 8.4 lbs lost in 2 months, so about 1 lb weekly, or 500 cal deficit average daily, with about 48 lbs more to go, and good protein amount.
That should be no problem at all. If just starting out, probably gained some muscle too.
I would suggest that the database entries for running, if you put in your average speed (so 2.2 miles done in 30 min is 4.4 mph jogging), will be the most accurate calorie burns there.
And the Strength Training entry is based on studies with sets and reps 5-15 range and rests 2-4 min, if that's what you are using too. That would be more accurate than out of the sky figure. 100 cal is barely above BMR probably for 1 hr. You are burning way more than that.
Thanks for the reply - I'm really trying to avoid eating back my ex calories - so does it matter if I enter the accurate about of cal burned ? As for my treadmill work I do 2.8 at 1min and 7.0 at 30s ? for 30 min So not sure how that would translate in database - according to my treadmill I burn anywhere from 150-175 cals but I don't always have my hands on the sensors so I doubt that's very accurate ? My lifts are 5x5 w 1-2 min rest btw each set and I do roughly 5 main exercises with 2 accessory exercises (abs/cable crunches)
The machine sensors are for displaying HR only - since they are totally optional calorie burn is not based on that.
If you entered weight, it's based on that. And if they have been using the formula's that have been around for ages based on the most used piece of exercise equipment in research studies, and it's a free formula - that's the most accurate calorie burn.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/774337/how-to-test-hrm-for-how-accurate-calorie-burn-is/p1
And would likely match the database very closely.
You don't have to make it difficult though by figuring out how much running / walking split - what does treadmill report you did for distance for 30 min?
Double it - there's your average MPH - log that.
The amount of calorie burn per min doesn't change that greatly over the range you are talking about.
http://www.exrx.net/Aerobic/WalkCalExp.html
Almost all lifting programs would fall under Strength Training, it's not until you get down to 1 min or less rests and 15 and over reps that you've moved in to Circuit Training entry.
I could see why now you let exercise create a tad more deficit, but I'd log it and with only 48 to go, don't make the deficit more than 750 in total. 30 lbs left just hold to 500 cal deficit and start eating back that exercise.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions