Loose Body Fat Urgently
Replies
-
JodehFoster wrote: »Muscleflex79 wrote: »The OP says you are training for 2 months now, are at the higher level of healthy body fat range, yet I understand you want fast results for a bodybuilding contest? Can you define fast? I hope it is fast, as in "in a few years"? If it took a few months of training to get where you want to, all of us would be competing.
this! I didn't initially catch the part about only training for 2 months...there's no way in a couple months of weight training you would be anywhere near the level needed to compete on stage.
in all fairness, the OP said "training hard and heavy for around two months"...this does not indicate that she's only been training for this long, but perhaps lifting for years and recently been busting-*kitten* on it.
...I could be wrong, but there's that.
I'm still going to stick with my advice to not rush competing. I also had lots of experience with lifting going into my prep.
It would be best starting prep off at a lower BF instead of having to crash diet with a deadline looming.0 -
The link - realistic goals and competing.
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=1307389830 -
I don't think it's realistic to expect to go from 29% to 15% in one month!0
-
Okay.... you're not doing any cardio? This is why. Minimum of 50 minutes 5x per week.... the weight will fall off.0
-
-
-
If you are eating 1200-1300 calories and burning off 800 your body is pretty much running off of nothing. Honestly I would suggest bumping up calories slowly until you start gaining weight then start a deficit from there. Your metabolism is probably so slow it's holding onto absolutely everything you are eating.0
-
You can read magazine or online Fitness RX for Women, Muscle & Fitness Hers, and Oxygen. They feature both body building and figure athletes and provide lots of training tips and examples. I also follow them on Twitter.
You might get some really helpful ideas and tips. Including more realistic expectations regarding the time to get into competition shape.0 -
skittlebitz wrote: »If you are eating 1200-1300 calories and burning off 800 your body is pretty much running off of nothing. Honestly I would suggest bumping up calories slowly until you start gaining weight then start a deficit from there. Your metabolism is probably so slow it's holding onto absolutely everything you are eating.
If your metabolism can become "so slow it holds on to everything you are eating" then how do you explain anorexia?0 -
0 -
tara_means_star wrote: »skittlebitz wrote: »If you are eating 1200-1300 calories and burning off 800 your body is pretty much running off of nothing. Honestly I would suggest bumping up calories slowly until you start gaining weight then start a deficit from there. Your metabolism is probably so slow it's holding onto absolutely everything you are eating.
If your metabolism can become "so slow it holds on to everything you are eating" then how do you explain anorexia?
...or why starving people in third world countries are skinny rather than fat?0 -
tara_means_star wrote: »skittlebitz wrote: »If you are eating 1200-1300 calories and burning off 800 your body is pretty much running off of nothing. Honestly I would suggest bumping up calories slowly until you start gaining weight then start a deficit from there. Your metabolism is probably so slow it's holding onto absolutely everything you are eating.
If your metabolism can become "so slow it holds on to everything you are eating" then how do you explain anorexia?
...or why starving people in third world countries are skinny rather than fat?
And die of starvation (looking painfully thin)...0 -
Not required perhaps, but definitely helpful yo many people due to the calorie burn, which helps create a bigger DEFICIT.0 -
Not required perhaps, but definitely helpful yo many people due to the calorie burn, which helps create a bigger DEFICIT.
I completely agree.0 -
Yes I weight everything on the scales and record on here... I'm very careful with my intake as I am pretty serious about this. I eat very clean too, and spike my metabolism with a cheatmeal per 2-3 weeks.
In terms of BF% I guess it could be lower than 29% however, I have used the same method each time, so either way the % lost is still 2%...
There is no such thing as spiking your metabolism.0 -
skittlebitz wrote: »If you are eating 1200-1300 calories and burning off 800 your body is pretty much running off of nothing. Honestly I would suggest bumping up calories slowly until you start gaining weight then start a deficit from there. Your metabolism is probably so slow it's holding onto absolutely everything you are eating.
Everyone else has already addressed the issue of slowing metabolism so I won't bother. I also want to add - she is likely not burning 800 calories regardless of what her HRM or whatever says.
I do not doubt OP is working hard, but I think she is overestimating what kind of calorie burns she is getting.0 -
tara_means_star wrote: »skittlebitz wrote: »If you are eating 1200-1300 calories and burning off 800 your body is pretty much running off of nothing. Honestly I would suggest bumping up calories slowly until you start gaining weight then start a deficit from there. Your metabolism is probably so slow it's holding onto absolutely everything you are eating.
If your metabolism can become "so slow it holds on to everything you are eating" then how do you explain anorexia?
I've suffered from anorexia before and I can assure you I ate half an apple a day and worked out for hours. Believe me my body isn't going to be holding onto that apple, there isn't enough to hold onto. Take a basic human physiology class, you'll learn quickly how metabolism works.0 -
Jumping in here to say I agree: your deficit may be narrower than you think. The calorie burns we are are all given by devices & calculatiors are just approximations to use as tools. It's not like we're in a lab hooked up to extremely accurate monitors. So yours may be a little lower than you are being led to believe & need readjust accordingly. You could tweak things like trying a tad more cardio. Also, the places you've described holding on to fat are the places we are genetically predisposed to hold it... I can be extremely lean and fit but I would have to engage in unhealthy practices to get skinny Angelina Jolie arms. Look at JLo with what I believe is her 100% natural booty. I am genetically predisposed to stash a little stubborn fat in my arms even when I can reduce my hips to just about any number I choose. If I try for a certain waist measurement, I'm pretty much guaranteed the hips will always be just 8-10 inches bigger, not the 10-12 inches of an hourglass shape. Genetics!0
-
Something Real: The Starvation Response
Taken from http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/starvation-mode/
"Alright, so by now I’ve hopefully helped you see that the typical definition of starvation mode is nothing but a silly myth and a convenient excuse people pull out of their *kitten* to try to explain their lack of weight loss.
In reality, the real explanation is that they’re just failing to do what needs to be done (e.g. create a caloric deficit). Simple as that. Additional details here: How To Lose Fat
But, there is something else that needs to be mentioned here which happens to be very real. It’s something better described as the “starvation response.”
Basically, if you do things to your body that it doesn’t like, it’s going to respond in whatever way makes the most sense to it from a survival standpoint.
In this case, the thing your body doesn’t like is an extreme and prolonged deficit caused by either severe caloric restriction (you know, VERY low calorie diets), excessive amounts of exercise (often tons and tons and TONS of cardio on a daily/almost daily basis), or some combination of the two (very few calories coming in with very high calories going out).
In this sort of extreme scenario, your body’s adaptive response is to make it harder for you to allow this to continue and, you know, prevent you from dying. How so? Well, for starters…
It slows down your metabolic rate, aka the adaptive thermogenesis I mentioned earlier. Since your body can’t tell the difference between you eating less in an attempt to lose fat and look good, and you eating less because you’re about to starve to death, it reacts to both scenarios the same way… by slowing down your metabolic rate in an attempt to conserve energy stores and keep you alive. This IS completely real, and the exact amount of it will vary from person to person. However, as mentioned earlier, this amount of “slowdown” is MUCH less than most people think. It’s enough to slow weight loss progress a little over time, but no where near enough to completely stop it or prevent it from happening in the first place (and certainly not enough to somehow cause a person to gain weight).
It reduces the amount of non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT) taking place, which in turn causes you to naturally burn less calories. This is really part of the previous bullet point.
It causes intense hunger and food cravings, which causes you to eat more than you’re attempting to. Pay extra attention to this one. Think of the people who starve themselves most of the week with some stupid 800 calorie per day diet, then binge like crazy during a 1-2 day span afterwards. They’ll say “I’m eating 800 calories per day and not losing weight… it has to be starvation mode!!” Nope. First of all, most of those people are unknowingly eating more than the 800 calories they claim. Second, the few that legitimately are eating 800 calories most of those days are following them up with those 1-2 day binges where they essentially binge-eat themselves right out of the excessive deficit they stupidly attempted to create during those previous days. So… stupid 800 calorie starvation diet most days + crazy 3000-6000 (or more) calorie binges on other days = no deficit present (but maybe a surplus now is). And that’s magically how someone “eating 800 calories per day” ends up not losing weight or possibly even gaining some. They’re either unknowingly eating much more than they claim, or eating what they claim on some days and then binge eating themselves right back to their maintenance level and then some on the others.
It makes you feel like crap mentally and physically. Pretty self explanatory.
This, among many other obvious health reasons (plus the increased risk of muscle loss, the fact that the weight is often regained right after, the likelihood of an eating disorder developing if it hasn’t already, etc.), is why you’re NOT supposed to severely restrict your calorie intake and/or do extreme and excessive amounts of exercise.
Doing so would be stupid.
But, here’s the thing. Even if you did do something this stupid… you’d still lose weight. Every single time in fact. Every study and real world example proves it, and there is not a single bit of evidence anywhere that suggests otherwise.
BUT PLEASE NOTE: I say this only to help show you that the concept of “eating too little preventing weight loss/causing weight gain” is *kitten*, not to suggest you actually start starving yourself to lose weight. I’m NOT suggesting that at all. It’s a terrible idea. I don’t recommend it at all. You shouldn’t do it. Don’t do it. Don’t be stupid. Have I said this enough times to sink in for the handful of people looking for someone to justify their eating disorder?
Just in case I haven’t, here’s one last thing about the Minnesota Starvation Experiment I mentioned before. Yes, they all lost weight on very low calorie diets. But, some pretty *kitten* up *kitten* (technical term) happened as well…
Among the conclusions from the study was the confirmation that prolonged semi-starvation produces significant increases in depression, hysteria and hypochondriasis as measured using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. Indeed, most of the subjects experienced periods of severe emotional distress and depression. There were extreme reactions to the psychological effects during the experiment including self-mutilation (one subject amputated three fingers of his hand with an axe, though the subject was unsure if he had done so intentionally or accidentally).
Participants exhibited a preoccupation with food, both during the starvation period and the rehabilitation phase. Sexual interest was drastically reduced, and the volunteers showed signs of social withdrawal and isolation. The participants reported a decline in concentration, comprehension and judgment capabilities, although the standardized tests administered showed no actual signs of diminished capacity. There were marked declines in physiological processes indicative of decreases in each subject’s basal metabolic rate (the energy required by the body in a state of rest), reflected in reduced body temperature, respiration and heart rate. Some of the subjects exhibited edema in their extremities, presumably due to decreased levels of plasma proteins given that the body’s ability to construct key proteins like albumin is based on available energy sources.
Think of this as the starvation response at its absolute worst (which is consistent with what accompanies anorexia). The lesson? Very low calorie diets will cause weight loss, BUT DON’T ACTUALLY DO IT.
Another thing worth mentioning is that some degree of starvation response comes about during ANY form of consistent deficit, even the small/moderate/safe kind that is recommended. It’s just to a less significant and noticeable degree than when the deficit is excessively/stupidly large.
This is one of the many reasons why A) a small/moderate deficit is recommended in the first place (it’s safer, healthier, easier, more sustainable, less problematic, etc.) and
things like refeeds, diet breaks and cyclical forms of dieting are recommended for people trying to reach lower levels of body fat and/or those who will just be in a deficit for a significant period of time… to help prevent, reduce and fix the various issues associated with this starvation response.
Although again, just keeping your deficit to a sane size and your activity to a sane level will alone go pretty far in reducing these issues for the average fat person trying to become less fat.
So yes, the starvation response is a real thing that does affect people losing weight. And yes, the more extreme your deficit is, the more extreme the response will be. This is all true and legit.
BUT… it’s STILL not what “starvation mode” is thought to be. It STILL doesn’t prevent weight loss. It STILL doesn’t cause weight gain. That STILL remains total horseshit just the same.
The starvation response will basically make weight loss harder and possibly slower at some point, and some adjustments may need to be made to compensate. But actually stop weight loss from happening or reverse it? Nope. That just doesn’t happen.
If It’s Not Starvation Mode, Then Why Aren’t I Losing Weight?
If weeks/months are passing and you’re not losing any weight (or you’re possibly even gaining some), and you came to the incorrect myth-based conclusion that you must be in starvation mode, then I hope you realize by now that you were wrong.
And that brings us to our next obvious question. If “starvation mode” isn’t the cause of your lack of weight loss… just what the hell is? Well, if you made it this far, that answer should be pretty obvious by now.
It’s not because you’re eating too little. It’s not because your calories are too low. It’s not because you’re burning too many calories. It’s the opposite.
Basically, you’re eating more calories than you think you are, burning less calories than you think you are, or both… and no deficit is present.
Surprise!
I know, I know… “But I’m only eating X amount of calories, I swear!” You know who else swore they were “only eating X amount of calories” (with X being some low amount that should clearly cause weight loss)? The woman in my story from before.
You remember her, she was the woman who claimed to be eating 1300 calories per day until she realized she wasn’t. Instead, she was accidentally underestimating, under-reporting, and/or just miscalculating her calorie intake by hundreds of calories per day the whole time.
Just like pretty much everyone else who swears they’re “eating the right amount of calories” and “working out to burn the right amount of calories” but yet somehow STILL aren’t losing any weight for some crazy reason.
That “crazy reason” is just the simple absence of your required caloric deficit caused in these cases by an underestimated calorie intake, an overestimated activity level, or just some kind of miscalculation or mistake somewhere that has lead you to believe you’re “doing everything right” when in reality you are not. (Additional details here: Why Am I Not Losing Weight?)
How do I know this? How can I be so sure?
Because if you WERE doing everything right and you WERE in a deficit, you’d currently be losing weight and we wouldn’t be having this conversation."
Now: I used the wrong term instead of starvation mode I will use starvation response. Seriously why is everybody looking for a fight nowadays.0 -
Thank you for adding the reference, I was going to question that.
Overall, I don't disagree with what is said in the article - very large calorie deficits aren't good. And if you aren't losing weight you are probably eating more than you think.
Most people here are suggesting OP is probably eating more than she thinks. I do not believe she is eating so little that it is causing her weight loss to stop. And she isn't doing hours and hours of cardio.
People aren't looking for a fight, people are looking to make sure information given is correct.0 -
Opening your diary would, of course, help alot...
If you're truly eating 1200-1300 calories a day and burning even half of what you think you're burning, you'd be losing weight. And since you're not, then the numbers are off. And if your numbers are truly not off, then it's time to visit a reputable doctor.0
This discussion has been closed.
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