Extreme Weight Loss Drops Metabolism - Long Term?
Options
Replies
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »SamandaIndia wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »daylitemag wrote: »I haven't read this article but the idea that I've lost muscle as well as fat is something that I find quite upsetting. I've been losing and gaining weight my whole life. No one ever told me that I might also be losing muscle. I've never been an athletic person so I'm sure I don't have any extra muscle to lose.
I might just be paranoid but I now find myself feeling weaker. Particularly in my upper body. Not sure what to do I always eat a lot of protein and have throughout the last six months. Should I be worried?
From what I understand (in a very simplistic way so it makes sense to me
), when you lose weight your body has a choice of whether to burn fat or muscle. Muscle uses more calories than fat on an hourly basis, so if food is in short supply for very long it makes more sense to your body to burn the muscle off to conserve energy. This is why VLCD is a bad idea especially long term (and why WLS patients seem to lose more muscle than average people who lose weight slower or with less of a deficit). It makes more sense to dump the expensive calorie hog than the relatively maintenance free fat reserves for survival purposes.
But if you have a smaller deficit, enough protein *and* your muscles are being used regularly, it makes more sense for your body to burn the fat instead. It still gets rid of something that burns calories, so helping your body balance its energy equation, but it tends to keep what is being used.
So the lesson from my overly simplistic childlike explanation is to keep a smaller deficit (lose weight a little slower), eat enough protein to support your muscle needs, and use the muscles you plan to keep! It doesnt take being a weight lifter - body weight exercises go a long way. The trick is that they need to be progressive - your muscles will become more effecient over time if you dont challenge them, and they will use fewer calories to do the same thing. So if you are only doing body weight exercises, find ways to make it harder when it gets easy for you (i.e. for pushups - once you can do regular ones more than 10 or 20 at a time easily, put your feet up on a small box so you have a downward incline, or use the TRX type straps to add instability, etc).
Use it or lose it
Could you post the science behind your opinion that VLCD is a bad idea especially long term?
Is the C for calorie or carbohydrate? In context, I assume calorie.
Thanks. Now that makes sense.
Sorry for that - yes VLCD commonly (as far as I know!) stands for very low calorie diet (at least in WLS circles). Sorry for any confusion!
And as for the science - "in a very simplistic way so it makes sense to me" and " overly simplistic childlike explanation" -- there is none. I was just explaining it the way I understand it from several years of reading forums and observing my body and the experiences of the people in the WLS communities I am part of. You are free to disagree/ignore with any/all of it - I wont be offended 0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »SamandaIndia wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »daylitemag wrote: »I haven't read this article but the idea that I've lost muscle as well as fat is something that I find quite upsetting. I've been losing and gaining weight my whole life. No one ever told me that I might also be losing muscle. I've never been an athletic person so I'm sure I don't have any extra muscle to lose.
I might just be paranoid but I now find myself feeling weaker. Particularly in my upper body. Not sure what to do I always eat a lot of protein and have throughout the last six months. Should I be worried?
From what I understand (in a very simplistic way so it makes sense to me ), when you lose weight your body has a choice of whether to burn fat or muscle. Muscle uses more calories than fat on an hourly basis, so if food is in short supply for very long it makes more sense to your body to burn the muscle off to conserve energy. This is why VLCD is a bad idea especially long term (and why WLS patients seem to lose more muscle than average people who lose weight slower or with less of a deficit). It makes more sense to dump the expensive calorie hog than the relatively maintenance free fat reserves for survival purposes.
But if you have a smaller deficit, enough protein *and* your muscles are being used regularly, it makes more sense for your body to burn the fat instead. It still gets rid of something that burns calories, so helping your body balance its energy equation, but it tends to keep what is being used.
So the lesson from my overly simplistic childlike explanation is to keep a smaller deficit (lose weight a little slower), eat enough protein to support your muscle needs, and use the muscles you plan to keep! It doesnt take being a weight lifter - body weight exercises go a long way. The trick is that they need to be progressive - your muscles will become more effecient over time if you dont challenge them, and they will use fewer calories to do the same thing. So if you are only doing body weight exercises, find ways to make it harder when it gets easy for you (i.e. for pushups - once you can do regular ones more than 10 or 20 at a time easily, put your feet up on a small box so you have a downward incline, or use the TRX type straps to add instability, etc).
Use it or lose it
Could you post the science behind your opinion that VLCD is a bad idea especially long term?
Is the C for calorie or carbohydrate? In context, I assume calorie.
Thanks. Now that makes sense.
Sorry for that - yes VLCD commonly (as far as I know!) stands for very low calorie diet (at least in WLS circles). Sorry for any confusion!
And as for the science - "in a very simplistic way so it makes sense to me" and " overly simplistic childlike explanation" -- there is none. I was just explaining it the way I understand it from several years of reading forums and observing my body and the experiences of the people in the WLS communities I am part of. You are free to disagree/ignore with any/all of it - I wont be offended
I think he thought you meant very low carb diet, most of us agree on the very low calorie diet not being good for anyone2 -
I did think that but now I understand. Yes while many think the more calories you cut you just lose more weight. Try to starve the body and it is going to fight you tooth and toenail. 1
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »I did think that but now I understand. Yes while many think the more calories you cut you just lose more weight. Try to starve the body and it is going to fight you tooth and toenail.
I love my muscle, and if eating more is necessary to maintain it, I will do it! The low(er) carb helps my appetite and I honestly think somehow "releases" core fat better (my stomach doesnt change if I eat higher carb and lose weight - but it does is I eat the same calories lower carb and lose weight), so I dont go too far For awhile, I thought "eating in excess to build muscle" meant "unlimited food" LOL. So I try to eat very close to maintenance (whether over or under) regardless of whether I am trying to gain muscle or lose fat. Slow is the name of the game in both directions. I got nothing but time 1
