Of refeeds and diet breaks
Replies
-
VintageFeline wrote: »I've really enjoyed the discussion and furthering my knowledge (a good chunk of which will probably not stick this time other than vague recollections, give me another year of it being repeated).
Yeah, I'm loving it. Especially the fact that we've got such a broad range of experience, right from people who can answer my pesky questions because they've got way more of a grasp of this than I do, those like us who have some knowledge and understanding, and people who this stuff is completely new to. This all takes me back to Education theory (I was almost a teacher once...) and Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development and Scaffolding theory.2 -
Question - anyone eating the level of protein Lyle mentioned in the video? I swear he mentioned 1.4 x body weight but can't listen to the whole thing again right now to find it. I am trying it for the week and I can not imagine fitting that much protein in on more than a 250 calorie/day deficit.0
-
Question - anyone eating the level of protein Lyle mentioned in the video? I swear he mentioned 1.4 x body weight but can't listen to the whole thing again right now to find it. I am trying it for the week and I can not imagine fitting that much protein in on more than a 250 calorie/day deficit.
Do you mean in general how much protein? I think from memory he usually recommends around 0.8-1g per lb for dieters. The 1.4 may have been g per kg. If I can do 0.8g as a 140 lb female vegetarian, you should be able to manage that
ETA: Doh, check other person's profile first, Nony! I see that you are female too, so yeah, we generally don't have the calories to play with that men do, which makes it tougher. Protein shakes have become my best friend (like, who doesn't want a milkshake every night??). But this is also why my carbs are lower on deficit days (usually 80-100g), so I have room for all the protein.
I think if you can hit 0.8g per lb, you're doing well. If you're strength training, esp lifting heavy, you may want to go a little higher.2 -
Question - anyone eating the level of protein Lyle mentioned in the video? I swear he mentioned 1.4 x body weight but can't listen to the whole thing again right now to find it. I am trying it for the week and I can not imagine fitting that much protein in on more than a 250 calorie/day deficit.
He noted that mainly applied for very lean individuals (i.e., males under 10%). I am anout 1g per lb but have days above.0 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Question - anyone eating the level of protein Lyle mentioned in the video? I swear he mentioned 1.4 x body weight but can't listen to the whole thing again right now to find it. I am trying it for the week and I can not imagine fitting that much protein in on more than a 250 calorie/day deficit.
Do you mean in general how much protein? I think from memory he usually recommends around 0.8-1g per lb for dieters. The 1.4 may have been g per kg. If I can do 0.8g as a 140 lb female vegetarian, you should be able to manage that
It was 1.4 gram per pound. I found it - it is around 45 minutes in. You are correct @psuLemon - it is for lean individuals.
I typically eat 1.0-1.1 gram per pound. I have to say I feel much fuller this week at 1.4!2 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Question - anyone eating the level of protein Lyle mentioned in the video? I swear he mentioned 1.4 x body weight but can't listen to the whole thing again right now to find it. I am trying it for the week and I can not imagine fitting that much protein in on more than a 250 calorie/day deficit.
Do you mean in general how much protein? I think from memory he usually recommends around 0.8-1g per lb for dieters. The 1.4 may have been g per kg. If I can do 0.8g as a 140 lb female vegetarian, you should be able to manage that
It was 1.4 gram per pound. I found it - it is around 45 minutes in. You are correct @psuLemon - it is for lean individuals.
I typically eat 1.0-1.1 gram per pound. I have to say I feel much fuller this week at 1.4!
Haha, I'd gotten to 44 mins in flicking through. So close!!
I'll hit 1.1g per lb today, i have had some days where I've had it higher, but I've also done a ton of exercise and therefore have more calories to play with. On a day to day basis, I'd struggle to do that.4 -
Things we’ve learned:
• take a break from dieting
• people can get along and productively continue a thread
• Lyle is not gen pop material, and like his diets, should be mentioned sparingly and in context
I think that last one is appropriate. He’d be proud to be the Voldemort of MFP lol12 -
Things we’ve learned:
• take a break from dieting
• people can get along and productively continue a thread
• Lyle is not gen pop material, and like his diets, should be mentioned sparingly and in context
I think that last one is appropriate. He’d be proud to be the Voldemort of MFP lol
Lyle's women's book hasn't been released yet. The last statement might be subject to change upon its release 3 -
Things we’ve learned:
• take a break from dieting
• people can get along and productively continue a thread
• Lyle is not gen pop material, and like his diets, should be mentioned sparingly and in context
I think that last one is appropriate. He’d be proud to be the Voldemort of MFP lol
I think a lot of what he does can be for gen pop but he also has advanced protocols as he is a trainer of elite lifters and has a vested interest in that particular area. And one of those lifters is female so I guess that's what took him down that rabbit hole. I am happy for that!4 -
Things we’ve learned:
• take a break from dieting
• people can get along and productively continue a thread
• Lyle is not gen pop material, and like his diets, should be mentioned sparingly and in context
I think that last one is appropriate. He’d be proud to be the Voldemort of MFP lol
No, no, I think Lyle's basics are fine for gen pop (and I know we all agree that's stuff everyone can benefit from). I'm still determined to lead horses to water and make them drink, even if I (gently) have to hold their heads under
In book news, he's almost half way on the editing. We may see it this year!!4 -
Lol yes.. Lyle should be mentioned in #context. His basics of dieting are applicable to everyone. He'll poignantly defend diet strategies like WW and gyms like PF for why their structures actually work. I'm taking into consideration his tendency to rabbit hole down his own topics, though that's why I identify with him ... that and his constant 9gag freedom shares
ETA: more podcastery
https://www.bodyrecomposition.com/podcasts/cut-the-sit-get-fit-podcast-interview.html/#more-140522 -
I'd been hesitant to post this, because I really wasn't in the mood to get picked on/under scrutiny/whatever, but OK. Whatever. It's long.
So, I'd always thought this refeed thing was a bunch of nonsense. Because it makes no sense that adding calories back will fix a weight stall, and the Internet and MFP forums are fantastically filled with people who say that diet breaks are a sign of laziness, and that eating more doesn't help you lose weight, because thermodynamics is universal.
But when I posted in another thread (which, frankly, I'm not necessarily planning on going back to because I *really* don't need to deal with the people who can't read, and who insist that I can't log, and don't recognize that outliers apparently exist...), it was suggested that maybe I try doing TDEE, or something close to that, to try to "fix" the issue that I'd had with no amount of restriction working since I'd run my first half. I thought that all that was pretty much ridiculous, because science says that increasing calories doesn't actually help weight come off.
But then I saw my dietitian, who is brilliant *and* evidence-based, and she said the same thing -- that basically, my hormones got really angry (she described it as a bratty toddler throwing a temper tantrum) when not only did I have to then *stop* training after my race because of a broken toe, but then I cut calories back further (because I figured I wasn't running), and didn't actually bring any back on during those six weeks of training before the next race. Wash, rinse, repeat. I'd added more in July and August, and when I looked at my weight was doing from a purely analytical point of view, I saw that it was pretty much bobbling around, and that the only months when there was any decrease was when I kept a more reasonable deficit to my actual TDEE (thanks to the RMR testing helping me get a better idea of what that TDEE is) instead of aiming for a 700 calorie deficit (not knowing at the time, of course, that it was 700 -- I thought it was only 300-500, because I didn't know that my RMR was on the right side of that bell curve). She pointed out that well, since what I was doing wasn't working anyway, let's still do a deficit if that made me happy, but up the calories to a more *reasonable* deficit. And start adding back some sodium, since I don't eat many processed foods, typically don't eat out much (this week being out of the norm, since I've been out a few times this week due to social obligations), and make all of my own canned/frozen vegetables -- and thus, tend to be on the lower side of an adequate sodium intake (she said I was inadequate -- I don't think it was that extreme, but I'll listen to someone else on this one) -- which meant that when I did have higher sodium days, I was packing on water weight pretty sharply.
She said I didn't have to fix the calorie intake right away, and to focus on the sodium first -- so as not to conflate the variables. I've let myself go higher on some days, and frankly, it was nice to have the "permission" to eat higher when I was out with friends or at a work event.
This week alone since letting myself go up a little higher, and even actually *to* my TDEE on some days when I've been out and restricting would have just made me miserable? Mother of all wooshes. Four pounds off since Monday. And that's *with* increasing my sodium intake.
I know it's really popular to assume that if you lose weight when you start eating more, that you've just tightened up your logging. And I know that since I refuse to open my diary, since it's a huge ED trigger for me, that people will say that oh, I'm just ashamed to let other people see, and that I must have had slacked logging.
I weigh everything to the gram, liquid ounce, or mL (with the exception being beef/poultry/pork -- which is done to the ounce because I'm too lazy to figure out the grams in my head). That hasn't changed over the past week. If anything, it's been *looser* over the past week, since there were so many nights when I was out.
So yes. Maybe it works. And maybe I'm just an extreme outlier -- since I'm also apparently one of those people who has a higher burn than what an Apple Watch says. And maybe some people will still think oh, I must have changed something.
The only thing I changed was that I ate more.
I don't know that it'll continue (I'm not thinking it's wise to lose 16 pounds in a month, so I'm hoping that's just water, and would be thrilled simply to get back to a sub-120 by Thanksgiving), but I know that for me, actually adding more calories in, with everything else remaining constant, actually fixed something.
Let the haters and broscience dudes hate.14 -
collectingblues wrote: »I'd been hesitant to post this, because I really wasn't in the mood to get picked on/under scrutiny/whatever, but OK. Whatever. It's long.
So, I'd always thought this refeed thing was a bunch of nonsense. Because it makes no sense that adding calories back will fix a weight stall, and the Internet and MFP forums are fantastically filled with people who say that diet breaks are a sign of laziness, and that eating more doesn't help you lose weight, because thermodynamics is universal.
But when I posted in another thread (which, frankly, I'm not necessarily planning on going back to because I *really* don't need to deal with the people who can't read, and who insist that I can't log, and don't recognize that outliers apparently exist...), it was suggested that maybe I try doing TDEE, or something close to that, to try to "fix" the issue that I'd had with no amount of restriction working since I'd run my first half. I thought that all that was pretty much ridiculous, because science says that increasing calories doesn't actually help weight come off.
But then I saw my dietitian, who is brilliant *and* evidence-based, and she said the same thing -- that basically, my hormones got really angry (she described it as a bratty toddler throwing a temper tantrum) when not only did I have to then *stop* training after my race because of a broken toe, but then I cut calories back further (because I figured I wasn't running), and didn't actually bring any back on during those six weeks of training before the next race. Wash, rinse, repeat. I'd added more in July and August, and when I looked at my weight was doing from a purely analytical point of view, I saw that it was pretty much bobbling around, and that the only months when there was any decrease was when I kept a more reasonable deficit to my actual TDEE (thanks to the RMR testing helping me get a better idea of what that TDEE is) instead of aiming for a 700 calorie deficit (not knowing at the time, of course, that it was 700 -- I thought it was only 300-500, because I didn't know that my RMR was on the right side of that bell curve). She pointed out that well, since what I was doing wasn't working anyway, let's still do a deficit if that made me happy, but up the calories to a more *reasonable* deficit. And start adding back some sodium, since I don't eat many processed foods, typically don't eat out much (this week being out of the norm, since I've been out a few times this week due to social obligations), and make all of my own canned/frozen vegetables -- and thus, tend to be on the lower side of an adequate sodium intake (she said I was inadequate -- I don't think it was that extreme, but I'll listen to someone else on this one) -- which meant that when I did have higher sodium days, I was packing on water weight pretty sharply.
She said I didn't have to fix the calorie intake right away, and to focus on the sodium first -- so as not to conflate the variables. I've let myself go higher on some days, and frankly, it was nice to have the "permission" to eat higher when I was out with friends or at a work event.
This week alone since letting myself go up a little higher, and even actually *to* my TDEE on some days when I've been out and restricting would have just made me miserable? Mother of all wooshes. Four pounds off since Monday. And that's *with* increasing my sodium intake.
I know it's really popular to assume that if you lose weight when you start eating more, that you've just tightened up your logging. And I know that since I refuse to open my diary, since it's a huge ED trigger for me, that people will say that oh, I'm just ashamed to let other people see, and that I must have had slacked logging.
I weigh everything to the gram, liquid ounce, or mL (with the exception being beef/poultry/pork -- which is done to the ounce because I'm too lazy to figure out the grams in my head). That hasn't changed over the past week. If anything, it's been *looser* over the past week, since there were so many nights when I was out.
So yes. Maybe it works. And maybe I'm just an extreme outlier -- since I'm also apparently one of those people who has a higher burn than what an Apple Watch says. And maybe some people will still think oh, I must have changed something.
The only thing I changed was that I ate more.
I don't know that it'll continue (I'm not thinking it's wise to lose 16 pounds in a month, so I'm hoping that's just water, and would be thrilled simply to get back to a sub-120 by Thanksgiving), but I know that for me, actually adding more calories in, with everything else remaining constant, actually fixed something.
Let the haters and broscience dudes hate.
I was on your last thread, it's nice to hear you're actually eating more.6 -
TavistockToad wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »I'd been hesitant to post this, because I really wasn't in the mood to get picked on/under scrutiny/whatever, but OK. Whatever. It's long.
So, I'd always thought this refeed thing was a bunch of nonsense. Because it makes no sense that adding calories back will fix a weight stall, and the Internet and MFP forums are fantastically filled with people who say that diet breaks are a sign of laziness, and that eating more doesn't help you lose weight, because thermodynamics is universal.
But when I posted in another thread (which, frankly, I'm not necessarily planning on going back to because I *really* don't need to deal with the people who can't read, and who insist that I can't log, and don't recognize that outliers apparently exist...), it was suggested that maybe I try doing TDEE, or something close to that, to try to "fix" the issue that I'd had with no amount of restriction working since I'd run my first half. I thought that all that was pretty much ridiculous, because science says that increasing calories doesn't actually help weight come off.
But then I saw my dietitian, who is brilliant *and* evidence-based, and she said the same thing -- that basically, my hormones got really angry (she described it as a bratty toddler throwing a temper tantrum) when not only did I have to then *stop* training after my race because of a broken toe, but then I cut calories back further (because I figured I wasn't running), and didn't actually bring any back on during those six weeks of training before the next race. Wash, rinse, repeat. I'd added more in July and August, and when I looked at my weight was doing from a purely analytical point of view, I saw that it was pretty much bobbling around, and that the only months when there was any decrease was when I kept a more reasonable deficit to my actual TDEE (thanks to the RMR testing helping me get a better idea of what that TDEE is) instead of aiming for a 700 calorie deficit (not knowing at the time, of course, that it was 700 -- I thought it was only 300-500, because I didn't know that my RMR was on the right side of that bell curve). She pointed out that well, since what I was doing wasn't working anyway, let's still do a deficit if that made me happy, but up the calories to a more *reasonable* deficit. And start adding back some sodium, since I don't eat many processed foods, typically don't eat out much (this week being out of the norm, since I've been out a few times this week due to social obligations), and make all of my own canned/frozen vegetables -- and thus, tend to be on the lower side of an adequate sodium intake (she said I was inadequate -- I don't think it was that extreme, but I'll listen to someone else on this one) -- which meant that when I did have higher sodium days, I was packing on water weight pretty sharply.
She said I didn't have to fix the calorie intake right away, and to focus on the sodium first -- so as not to conflate the variables. I've let myself go higher on some days, and frankly, it was nice to have the "permission" to eat higher when I was out with friends or at a work event.
This week alone since letting myself go up a little higher, and even actually *to* my TDEE on some days when I've been out and restricting would have just made me miserable? Mother of all wooshes. Four pounds off since Monday. And that's *with* increasing my sodium intake.
I know it's really popular to assume that if you lose weight when you start eating more, that you've just tightened up your logging. And I know that since I refuse to open my diary, since it's a huge ED trigger for me, that people will say that oh, I'm just ashamed to let other people see, and that I must have had slacked logging.
I weigh everything to the gram, liquid ounce, or mL (with the exception being beef/poultry/pork -- which is done to the ounce because I'm too lazy to figure out the grams in my head). That hasn't changed over the past week. If anything, it's been *looser* over the past week, since there were so many nights when I was out.
So yes. Maybe it works. And maybe I'm just an extreme outlier -- since I'm also apparently one of those people who has a higher burn than what an Apple Watch says. And maybe some people will still think oh, I must have changed something.
The only thing I changed was that I ate more.
I don't know that it'll continue (I'm not thinking it's wise to lose 16 pounds in a month, so I'm hoping that's just water, and would be thrilled simply to get back to a sub-120 by Thanksgiving), but I know that for me, actually adding more calories in, with everything else remaining constant, actually fixed something.
Let the haters and broscience dudes hate.
I was on your last thread, it's nice to hear you're actually eating more.
yeah, I thought about tagging you, since you were legit helpful, but wasn't sure if that would be OK...
It's almost such a relief to have some more calories to play with. I always thought that all of this was my fault, and couldn't figure out what the heck went wrong in May, and I'm just absolutely shocked at what this week has been like.
I was saying to my therapist that having some flexibility back for the first time in at least eight years has been mindblowing (I did WW, and then MFP after gaining weight from improved control after going on my insulin pump nine years ago) -- and even before that, I'd always cycled between sub-1000s and borderline binging. It's also so very nice to not be gnawing my arm off at the end of the day because I'm actually eating *consistently* for the first time in years.3 -
collectingblues wrote: »I'd been hesitant to post this, because I really wasn't in the mood to get picked on/under scrutiny/whatever, but OK. Whatever. It's long.
So, I'd always thought this refeed thing was a bunch of nonsense. Because it makes no sense that adding calories back will fix a weight stall, and the Internet and MFP forums are fantastically filled with people who say that diet breaks are a sign of laziness, and that eating more doesn't help you lose weight, because thermodynamics is universal.
But when I posted in another thread (which, frankly, I'm not necessarily planning on going back to because I *really* don't need to deal with the people who can't read, and who insist that I can't log, and don't recognize that outliers apparently exist...), it was suggested that maybe I try doing TDEE, or something close to that, to try to "fix" the issue that I'd had with no amount of restriction working since I'd run my first half. I thought that all that was pretty much ridiculous, because science says that increasing calories doesn't actually help weight come off.
But then I saw my dietitian, who is brilliant *and* evidence-based, and she said the same thing -- that basically, my hormones got really angry (she described it as a bratty toddler throwing a temper tantrum) when not only did I have to then *stop* training after my race because of a broken toe, but then I cut calories back further (because I figured I wasn't running), and didn't actually bring any back on during those six weeks of training before the next race. Wash, rinse, repeat. I'd added more in July and August, and when I looked at my weight was doing from a purely analytical point of view, I saw that it was pretty much bobbling around, and that the only months when there was any decrease was when I kept a more reasonable deficit to my actual TDEE (thanks to the RMR testing helping me get a better idea of what that TDEE is) instead of aiming for a 700 calorie deficit (not knowing at the time, of course, that it was 700 -- I thought it was only 300-500, because I didn't know that my RMR was on the right side of that bell curve). She pointed out that well, since what I was doing wasn't working anyway, let's still do a deficit if that made me happy, but up the calories to a more *reasonable* deficit. And start adding back some sodium, since I don't eat many processed foods, typically don't eat out much (this week being out of the norm, since I've been out a few times this week due to social obligations), and make all of my own canned/frozen vegetables -- and thus, tend to be on the lower side of an adequate sodium intake (she said I was inadequate -- I don't think it was that extreme, but I'll listen to someone else on this one) -- which meant that when I did have higher sodium days, I was packing on water weight pretty sharply.
She said I didn't have to fix the calorie intake right away, and to focus on the sodium first -- so as not to conflate the variables. I've let myself go higher on some days, and frankly, it was nice to have the "permission" to eat higher when I was out with friends or at a work event.
This week alone since letting myself go up a little higher, and even actually *to* my TDEE on some days when I've been out and restricting would have just made me miserable? Mother of all wooshes. Four pounds off since Monday. And that's *with* increasing my sodium intake.
I know it's really popular to assume that if you lose weight when you start eating more, that you've just tightened up your logging. And I know that since I refuse to open my diary, since it's a huge ED trigger for me, that people will say that oh, I'm just ashamed to let other people see, and that I must have had slacked logging.
I weigh everything to the gram, liquid ounce, or mL (with the exception being beef/poultry/pork -- which is done to the ounce because I'm too lazy to figure out the grams in my head). That hasn't changed over the past week. If anything, it's been *looser* over the past week, since there were so many nights when I was out.
So yes. Maybe it works. And maybe I'm just an extreme outlier -- since I'm also apparently one of those people who has a higher burn than what an Apple Watch says. And maybe some people will still think oh, I must have changed something.
The only thing I changed was that I ate more.
I don't know that it'll continue (I'm not thinking it's wise to lose 16 pounds in a month, so I'm hoping that's just water, and would be thrilled simply to get back to a sub-120 by Thanksgiving), but I know that for me, actually adding more calories in, with everything else remaining constant, actually fixed something.
Let the haters and broscience dudes hate.
It sounds like you've been through it! There are some of us who've been around long enough who have read other threads about adaptive thermogenesis, cortisol, and all of that, and it's likely those people who suggested eating TDEE to you.
The wonders of the diet break/refeed are known to some of us. The reasons diet breaks/refeeds work might only dimly be understood by some (I'm getting there, every time I listen to a podcast or read an article about the science behind them, I understand a bit more), and it's not often enough to really explain it in enough detail to skeptics -- especially because it seems like they're playing right into "oh noes! muh starvahashun mode!!!!!1!!!!!".
The bottom line? If you're over training and underfueling, you jack up a lot of hormones that can mess with things. Eating at TDEE fixes that situation.
I'm glad you saw some positive scale movement!3 -
A lot of Lyle's stuff is very genpop friendly. In fact, a lot of it is aimed squarely at genpop. He has a goldmine of information on his site pertaining to training, diet/nutrition/weight loss, etc. which is evidence-based and highly applicable to everybody. The "Training the Obese Beginner" series is fantastic and he has also made a number of statements which profoundly enrage hardcore meatheads (you don't *have* to squat, machines can be useful and have a legitimate place in fitness routines, etc.). He frequently stresses not "majoring in the minors" or obsessing over inconsequential details. He also scientifically debunks a lot of fitness/nutrition derp.
With that said, he does have some material which is very specialized, aimed at very particular niches and not applicable to genpop. But I don't think diet breaks/refeeds, as being discussed in this thread, fall into that category. They're valid and useful strategies for a broad spectrum of dieters.
From looking at the preview of the TOC for his women's book, it looks to be probably the most thorough, comprehensive book of its kind ever. People have been after him for years to write such a book about general training and nutrition, and I hope that he decides to do it once he's recuperated from writing the women's book.5 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »I'd been hesitant to post this, because I really wasn't in the mood to get picked on/under scrutiny/whatever, but OK. Whatever. It's long.
So, I'd always thought this refeed thing was a bunch of nonsense. Because it makes no sense that adding calories back will fix a weight stall, and the Internet and MFP forums are fantastically filled with people who say that diet breaks are a sign of laziness, and that eating more doesn't help you lose weight, because thermodynamics is universal.
But when I posted in another thread (which, frankly, I'm not necessarily planning on going back to because I *really* don't need to deal with the people who can't read, and who insist that I can't log, and don't recognize that outliers apparently exist...), it was suggested that maybe I try doing TDEE, or something close to that, to try to "fix" the issue that I'd had with no amount of restriction working since I'd run my first half. I thought that all that was pretty much ridiculous, because science says that increasing calories doesn't actually help weight come off.
But then I saw my dietitian, who is brilliant *and* evidence-based, and she said the same thing -- that basically, my hormones got really angry (she described it as a bratty toddler throwing a temper tantrum) when not only did I have to then *stop* training after my race because of a broken toe, but then I cut calories back further (because I figured I wasn't running), and didn't actually bring any back on during those six weeks of training before the next race. Wash, rinse, repeat. I'd added more in July and August, and when I looked at my weight was doing from a purely analytical point of view, I saw that it was pretty much bobbling around, and that the only months when there was any decrease was when I kept a more reasonable deficit to my actual TDEE (thanks to the RMR testing helping me get a better idea of what that TDEE is) instead of aiming for a 700 calorie deficit (not knowing at the time, of course, that it was 700 -- I thought it was only 300-500, because I didn't know that my RMR was on the right side of that bell curve). She pointed out that well, since what I was doing wasn't working anyway, let's still do a deficit if that made me happy, but up the calories to a more *reasonable* deficit. And start adding back some sodium, since I don't eat many processed foods, typically don't eat out much (this week being out of the norm, since I've been out a few times this week due to social obligations), and make all of my own canned/frozen vegetables -- and thus, tend to be on the lower side of an adequate sodium intake (she said I was inadequate -- I don't think it was that extreme, but I'll listen to someone else on this one) -- which meant that when I did have higher sodium days, I was packing on water weight pretty sharply.
She said I didn't have to fix the calorie intake right away, and to focus on the sodium first -- so as not to conflate the variables. I've let myself go higher on some days, and frankly, it was nice to have the "permission" to eat higher when I was out with friends or at a work event.
This week alone since letting myself go up a little higher, and even actually *to* my TDEE on some days when I've been out and restricting would have just made me miserable? Mother of all wooshes. Four pounds off since Monday. And that's *with* increasing my sodium intake.
I know it's really popular to assume that if you lose weight when you start eating more, that you've just tightened up your logging. And I know that since I refuse to open my diary, since it's a huge ED trigger for me, that people will say that oh, I'm just ashamed to let other people see, and that I must have had slacked logging.
I weigh everything to the gram, liquid ounce, or mL (with the exception being beef/poultry/pork -- which is done to the ounce because I'm too lazy to figure out the grams in my head). That hasn't changed over the past week. If anything, it's been *looser* over the past week, since there were so many nights when I was out.
So yes. Maybe it works. And maybe I'm just an extreme outlier -- since I'm also apparently one of those people who has a higher burn than what an Apple Watch says. And maybe some people will still think oh, I must have changed something.
The only thing I changed was that I ate more.
I don't know that it'll continue (I'm not thinking it's wise to lose 16 pounds in a month, so I'm hoping that's just water, and would be thrilled simply to get back to a sub-120 by Thanksgiving), but I know that for me, actually adding more calories in, with everything else remaining constant, actually fixed something.
Let the haters and broscience dudes hate.
It sounds like you've been through it! There are some of us who've been around long enough who have read other threads about adaptive thermogenesis, cortisol, and all of that, and it's likely those people who suggested eating TDEE to you.
The wonders of the diet break/refeed are known to some of us. The reasons diet breaks/refeeds work might only dimly be understood by some (I'm getting there, every time I listen to a podcast or read an article about the science behind them, I understand a bit more), and it's not often enough to really explain it in enough detail to skeptics -- especially because it seems like they're playing right into "oh noes! muh starvahashun mode!!!!!1!!!!!".
The bottom line? If you're over training and underfueling, you jack up a lot of hormones that can mess with things. Eating at TDEE fixes that situation.
I'm glad you saw some positive scale movement!
And I think the funny thing was that I didn't see anything as underfueling and overtraining -- because to me, surely if I were underfueling I'd actually be losing weight! But I've been in this cycle for 20+ years now... (I still look sort of amusingly at my graduate degree days, when I'd walk a mile to the pool, swim a mile, and then walk the mile home... on top of being an active walking-everywhere student.)
I knew that cortisol was likely at play -- my first therapist here had pointed out that I was probably shooting myself in the foot with the cortisol issues -- but I figured that since the RMR came back so much higher than expected, that it was just me looking for excuses. Because surely, my body couldn't be so far weird that I'd see *no* losses for so many months. Because "everyone" always says that if you're truly at a deficit, you'll see losses. I was so angry when I got the testing back because I knew that even if, say, I was off by 10 percent in my logging -- which I knew I wasn't -- that I wasn't off to the degree of 300-500 calories a day.
No, it's not that I messed up. It's that my hormones were messed up.7 -
Glad you are finally seeing some progress @collectingblues!
I think MFP at large has a habit of developing some blinkered views. Things get said enough times, taken out of context and abbreviated, and people parrot a single line without actually really understanding. 'If you were eating at a deficit you'd be losing weight' is a classic example. What it should be is 'if you are eating at a deficit (and you've verified logging etc is on point), you should be losing fat, however that fat loss may be masked by unholy amounts of water weight from jacked up cortisol, and if you've been at a deficit for any amount of time you'll have some adaptive thermogenesis going on that will also impact your rate of fat loss'.
This is the nuance of plateaus/stalls that gets missed: fat loss hasn't stopped, but it can sure as hell be masked by water weight for a long-*kitten* time. In one of Lyle's podcasts he did a calculation that a woman could easily not see a scale loss for 10 weeks between hormonal weight fluctuations and cortisol-induced retention. So, plateau as in scale weight staying the same for weeks on end is real, plateau as in no fat loss for weeks on end (assuming actually at a deficit), not so much.
A little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing...13 -
@collectingblues Thanks for sharing. Given the circumstances with meticulous tracking/training/chronic deficit dieting and being detailed to a tee, and not seeing any fat/weight loss progress, I would have took it as an issue with hormones as well. Ironically, the more detailed the dieter, the more problematic their issues become. You see the opposite in a lot of the people who "effortlessly" make gains/lose fat without being conscious of what they're doing.
It's not always as simple as CICO, but it's not always hormonally complicated either. And this is where dietary camps start their arguments and people who try to listen to one side or the other get caught up in the crossfire and actually feel the negative effects. And yes, recovering from ED is tricky as all hell because we can easily trigger back to faulty logic and old patterns.
As always, the issue is somewhere in between.
If you've done everything mathematically possible to manipulate calories and are stalling, accumulating massive amounts of stress, and seeing an inexplicable shift in mood/recovery/etc., then address the unseen hormonal issue and listen to what your body is asking for... rest, relaxation, food, sex, etc. and for the love of everything unholy stay away from social media, articles, mfp.. it's okay to netflix and chill once in a while.
On the other hand, if you lazed your way to some weight loss, stalled, and either still don't know or deny the existence of calories, then it's time to get acquainted with the laws of thermodynamics and energy balance because while your hormonal response might be working perfectly, there's no stimulus for them to signal energy consumption.
I'm also glad everyone seems to positively take to Lyle, which is where I'm getting the foundation for all of this. Seriously listen to the podcast I linked - he addresses this exact phenomenon in part 1 about an hour in: https://www.bodyrecomposition.com/podcasts/cut-the-sit-get-fit-podcast-interview.html/#more-14052
For the most part calories/energy balance will dictate hormone response. We want to pulse hormones at specific times to get them to play well with what we're asking. Chronically stressing them or flatlining them to no response is what causes logical problems with dieting. In a perfect world, we wouldn't ever need to diet in the first place. But we created what we live in and we arrived here from an evolutionary standpoint, for better or for worse, so now we have to fight instant convenience with simple trial and error and patience.6 -
I actually got to listen to it yesterday - my immediate thought was "*kitten*, I effed up dieting, can I go back and do it again?!?"
I expect I have had hormonal issues for years that I did nothing about, but struggled through diets and comp preps, and had huge amounts of frustration when things weren't as successful as I/coaches expected....
I spent long periods in a deficit, on set diets with a "cheat meal". I spent long periods doing IIFYM, carb cycling with one "high day".
My one reverse diet experience was ok from Lyle's brief mention - I went straight back to my "maintenance" calories (determined by a rmr test) and increased further from there quite quickly.
....I have spent time at heavier weights in between, but the hormonal issues didnt appear to improve. Dr's were terrible and not helpful at all, but I've finally started seeing some one who is reputed to be awesome at dealing with hormonal issues, in "athletes", so fingers crossed. (my hope is that her suggestion isn't just "gain weight". Im happy to eat more, but I don't think my current level of body fat is unhealthy or unsustainable)
Has anyone got any thoughts on leptin deficiency or resistance? I haven't had any time to look in to it as yet, but it's a thought that came to my head as a listened.
I'm two weeks into what I'm assuming is my own "diet break" - I've bumped cals up to what I calculated as maintainance, and increased carbs a bit. I have two lower carb non-training days, with one day a week where I add those calories back, as well as lowering fats to increase carbs more. I'm wondering if I should try and make this two days, or whether it's irrelevant as I'm at maintenance anyway...
1 -
*Listening to podcast as I do an epic amount of cooking for refeed weekend*
Soooo much ratatouille and potato au gratin in my oven right now. Also my baked tater for lunch.4 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I actually got to listen to it yesterday - my immediate thought was "*kitten*, I effed up dieting, can I go back and do it again?!?"
I expect I have had hormonal issues for years that I did nothing about, but struggled through diets and comp preps, and had huge amounts of frustration when things weren't as successful as I/coaches expected....
I spent long periods in a deficit, on set diets with a "cheat meal". I spent long periods doing IIFYM, carb cycling with one "high day".
My one reverse diet experience was ok from Lyle's brief mention - I went straight back to my "maintenance" calories (determined by a rmr test) and increased further from there quite quickly.
....I have spent time at heavier weights in between, but the hormonal issues didnt appear to improve. Dr's were terrible and not helpful at all, but I've finally started seeing some one who is reputed to be awesome at dealing with hormonal issues, in "athletes", so fingers crossed. (my hope is that her suggestion isn't just "gain weight". Im happy to eat more, but I don't think my current level of body fat is unhealthy or unsustainable)
Has anyone got any thoughts on leptin deficiency or resistance? I haven't had any time to look in to it as yet, but it's a thought that came to my head as a listened.
I'm two weeks into what I'm assuming is my own "diet break" - I've bumped cals up to what I calculated as maintainance, and increased carbs a bit. I have two lower carb non-training days, with one day a week where I add those calories back, as well as lowering fats to increase carbs more. I'm wondering if I should try and make this two days, or whether it's irrelevant as I'm at maintenance anyway...
Given that leptin is carb-sensitive, I'd maybe focus on those. Worth a try anyway. But @anubis609 may have more insightful insights than me.1 -
Just wanted to pop in and thank @Nony_Mouse for posting this. Haven't watched the video yet, but still the discussion is enlightening and I should get the chance to watch it this weekend. Definitely some concepts I have never thought about and want to understand better :drinker:3
-
Aw thanks @kimny72 Definitely put the podcast(s) Anubis linked a couple of posts up on your listen list too. It covers sooooooo much.
Haha, Lyle is right now doing his 'if you learn two things from this book, it's eat enough protein and lift weights'.1 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I actually got to listen to it yesterday - my immediate thought was "*kitten*, I effed up dieting, can I go back and do it again?!?"
I expect I have had hormonal issues for years that I did nothing about, but struggled through diets and comp preps, and had huge amounts of frustration when things weren't as successful as I/coaches expected....
I spent long periods in a deficit, on set diets with a "cheat meal". I spent long periods doing IIFYM, carb cycling with one "high day".
My one reverse diet experience was ok from Lyle's brief mention - I went straight back to my "maintenance" calories (determined by a rmr test) and increased further from there quite quickly.
....I have spent time at heavier weights in between, but the hormonal issues didnt appear to improve. Dr's were terrible and not helpful at all, but I've finally started seeing some one who is reputed to be awesome at dealing with hormonal issues, in "athletes", so fingers crossed. (my hope is that her suggestion isn't just "gain weight". Im happy to eat more, but I don't think my current level of body fat is unhealthy or unsustainable)
Has anyone got any thoughts on leptin deficiency or resistance? I haven't had any time to look in to it as yet, but it's a thought that came to my head as a listened.
I'm two weeks into what I'm assuming is my own "diet break" - I've bumped cals up to what I calculated as maintainance, and increased carbs a bit. I have two lower carb non-training days, with one day a week where I add those calories back, as well as lowering fats to increase carbs more. I'm wondering if I should try and make this two days, or whether it's irrelevant as I'm at maintenance anyway...
Given that leptin is carb-sensitive, I'd maybe focus on those. Worth a try anyway. But @anubis609 may have more insightful insights than me.
I have had times spent eating at/above maintenance with higher carbs without issues resolving (I've done low carb for losing, to prioritise protein and fat, but love carbs and they are the first thing to get added back in....).
Thank you for the suggestion though!1 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I actually got to listen to it yesterday - my immediate thought was "*kitten*, I effed up dieting, can I go back and do it again?!?"
I expect I have had hormonal issues for years that I did nothing about, but struggled through diets and comp preps, and had huge amounts of frustration when things weren't as successful as I/coaches expected....
I spent long periods in a deficit, on set diets with a "cheat meal". I spent long periods doing IIFYM, carb cycling with one "high day".
My one reverse diet experience was ok from Lyle's brief mention - I went straight back to my "maintenance" calories (determined by a rmr test) and increased further from there quite quickly.
....I have spent time at heavier weights in between, but the hormonal issues didnt appear to improve. Dr's were terrible and not helpful at all, but I've finally started seeing some one who is reputed to be awesome at dealing with hormonal issues, in "athletes", so fingers crossed. (my hope is that her suggestion isn't just "gain weight". Im happy to eat more, but I don't think my current level of body fat is unhealthy or unsustainable)
Has anyone got any thoughts on leptin deficiency or resistance? I haven't had any time to look in to it as yet, but it's a thought that came to my head as a listened.
I'm two weeks into what I'm assuming is my own "diet break" - I've bumped cals up to what I calculated as maintainance, and increased carbs a bit. I have two lower carb non-training days, with one day a week where I add those calories back, as well as lowering fats to increase carbs more. I'm wondering if I should try and make this two days, or whether it's irrelevant as I'm at maintenance anyway...
Given that leptin is carb-sensitive, I'd maybe focus on those. Worth a try anyway. But @anubis609 may have more insightful insights than me.
I have had times spent eating at/above maintenance with higher carbs without issues resolving (I've done low carb for losing, to prioritise protein and fat, but love carbs and they are the first thing to get added back in....).
Thank you for the suggestion though!
Yeah, I suspect you know way more than I do. It's probably, unfortunately, one of those things that may take a really long time to resolve![:\](https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/resources/emoji/confused.png ":\")
1 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I actually got to listen to it yesterday - my immediate thought was "*kitten*, I effed up dieting, can I go back and do it again?!?"
I expect I have had hormonal issues for years that I did nothing about, but struggled through diets and comp preps, and had huge amounts of frustration when things weren't as successful as I/coaches expected....
I spent long periods in a deficit, on set diets with a "cheat meal". I spent long periods doing IIFYM, carb cycling with one "high day".
My one reverse diet experience was ok from Lyle's brief mention - I went straight back to my "maintenance" calories (determined by a rmr test) and increased further from there quite quickly.
....I have spent time at heavier weights in between, but the hormonal issues didnt appear to improve. Dr's were terrible and not helpful at all, but I've finally started seeing some one who is reputed to be awesome at dealing with hormonal issues, in "athletes", so fingers crossed. (my hope is that her suggestion isn't just "gain weight". Im happy to eat more, but I don't think my current level of body fat is unhealthy or unsustainable)
Has anyone got any thoughts on leptin deficiency or resistance? I haven't had any time to look in to it as yet, but it's a thought that came to my head as a listened.
I'm two weeks into what I'm assuming is my own "diet break" - I've bumped cals up to what I calculated as maintainance, and increased carbs a bit. I have two lower carb non-training days, with one day a week where I add those calories back, as well as lowering fats to increase carbs more. I'm wondering if I should try and make this two days, or whether it's irrelevant as I'm at maintenance anyway...
Given that leptin is carb-sensitive, I'd maybe focus on those. Worth a try anyway. But @anubis609 may have more insightful insights than me.
I have had times spent eating at/above maintenance with higher carbs without issues resolving (I've done low carb for losing, to prioritise protein and fat, but love carbs and they are the first thing to get added back in....).
Thank you for the suggestion though!
Yeah, I suspect you know way more than I do. It's probably, unfortunately, one of those things that may take a really long time to resolve
Nope, I probably don't.... I just think I've switched something off haven't been able to switch it back on by being at maintenance/surplus, and noone has taken the time work with me to pinpoint the actual switch. (like the power to the whole house is out due to one little fault that I can't find! Haha)0 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I actually got to listen to it yesterday - my immediate thought was "*kitten*, I effed up dieting, can I go back and do it again?!?"
I expect I have had hormonal issues for years that I did nothing about, but struggled through diets and comp preps, and had huge amounts of frustration when things weren't as successful as I/coaches expected....
I spent long periods in a deficit, on set diets with a "cheat meal". I spent long periods doing IIFYM, carb cycling with one "high day".
My one reverse diet experience was ok from Lyle's brief mention - I went straight back to my "maintenance" calories (determined by a rmr test) and increased further from there quite quickly.
....I have spent time at heavier weights in between, but the hormonal issues didnt appear to improve. Dr's were terrible and not helpful at all, but I've finally started seeing some one who is reputed to be awesome at dealing with hormonal issues, in "athletes", so fingers crossed. (my hope is that her suggestion isn't just "gain weight". Im happy to eat more, but I don't think my current level of body fat is unhealthy or unsustainable)
Has anyone got any thoughts on leptin deficiency or resistance? I haven't had any time to look in to it as yet, but it's a thought that came to my head as a listened.
I'm two weeks into what I'm assuming is my own "diet break" - I've bumped cals up to what I calculated as maintainance, and increased carbs a bit. I have two lower carb non-training days, with one day a week where I add those calories back, as well as lowering fats to increase carbs more. I'm wondering if I should try and make this two days, or whether it's irrelevant as I'm at maintenance anyway...
Given that leptin is carb-sensitive, I'd maybe focus on those. Worth a try anyway. But @anubis609 may have more insightful insights than me.
I have had times spent eating at/above maintenance with higher carbs without issues resolving (I've done low carb for losing, to prioritise protein and fat, but love carbs and they are the first thing to get added back in....).
Thank you for the suggestion though!
Yeah, I suspect you know way more than I do. It's probably, unfortunately, one of those things that may take a really long time to resolve
Nope, I probably don't.... I just think I've switched something off haven't been able to switch it back on by being at maintenance/surplus, and noone has taken the time work with me to pinpoint the actual switch. (like the power to the whole house is out due to one little fault that I can't find! Haha)
I hope you can get some answers soon. 1 -
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »livingleanlivingclean wrote: »I actually got to listen to it yesterday - my immediate thought was "*kitten*, I effed up dieting, can I go back and do it again?!?"
I expect I have had hormonal issues for years that I did nothing about, but struggled through diets and comp preps, and had huge amounts of frustration when things weren't as successful as I/coaches expected....
I spent long periods in a deficit, on set diets with a "cheat meal". I spent long periods doing IIFYM, carb cycling with one "high day".
My one reverse diet experience was ok from Lyle's brief mention - I went straight back to my "maintenance" calories (determined by a rmr test) and increased further from there quite quickly.
....I have spent time at heavier weights in between, but the hormonal issues didnt appear to improve. Dr's were terrible and not helpful at all, but I've finally started seeing some one who is reputed to be awesome at dealing with hormonal issues, in "athletes", so fingers crossed. (my hope is that her suggestion isn't just "gain weight". Im happy to eat more, but I don't think my current level of body fat is unhealthy or unsustainable)
Has anyone got any thoughts on leptin deficiency or resistance? I haven't had any time to look in to it as yet, but it's a thought that came to my head as a listened.
I'm two weeks into what I'm assuming is my own "diet break" - I've bumped cals up to what I calculated as maintainance, and increased carbs a bit. I have two lower carb non-training days, with one day a week where I add those calories back, as well as lowering fats to increase carbs more. I'm wondering if I should try and make this two days, or whether it's irrelevant as I'm at maintenance anyway...
Given that leptin is carb-sensitive, I'd maybe focus on those. Worth a try anyway. But @anubis609 may have more insightful insights than me.
I have had times spent eating at/above maintenance with higher carbs without issues resolving (I've done low carb for losing, to prioritise protein and fat, but love carbs and they are the first thing to get added back in....).
Thank you for the suggestion though!
@livingleanlivingclean - I'm not even gonna pretend to attempt guessing the origin cause of what might be happening, but it's not uncommon for chronic deficits to affect thyroid, on top of leptin, cortisol, estrogen, progesterone, etc. Low carbing also affects thyroid a bit harder, specifically from the consensus of keto/low carb groups, and while it's a normal occurrence, it *might* be a corresponding issue.
Also, considering that you've sought medical advice, I'm going to assume you have panels of labs. Since I can't interpret jack, are you in Lyle's fb group? If you are, it wouldn't hurt to bring it up considering there are a few people who either are or have dealt closely with endocrinologists as it applies to physique athletes. If switching up your diet hasn't worked as well as you'd hoped, it may be more than dietary at this point.
But just to take a wile stab at it from a dietary standpoint, I don't doubt you're already eating enough protein, and probably inversely cycling the carb/fat ratio depending on training/rest days... it borders "woo" in speculation, but if the bulk of your diet is kind of in the limbo between ketogenic and glycolytic, you *may* be experiencing the craptacular dilemma that should be considered metabolic flexibility, and just switching back and forth between fuel sources is generally making you feel like butt.
Maintaining lower levels of leanness all year round isn't impossible, and it's certainly doable, but "optimal" and "doable" are also different. What was the longest run of an actual flexible diet break you've done? I'm just gonna use Sohee Lee as an example, but maybe her suggestion of taking a long 2-3 year break just to maintain sanity and mood might be beneficial, as well as restorative. Assume current activity levels stay the same, but without the rigid structure of following a dedicated strength/hypertrophy program.1 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Glad you are finally seeing some progress @collectingblues!
I think MFP at large has a habit of developing some blinkered views. Things get said enough times, taken out of context and abbreviated, and people parrot a single line without actually really understanding. 'If you were eating at a deficit you'd be losing weight' is a classic example. What it should be is 'if you are eating at a deficit (and you've verified logging etc is on point), you should be losing fat, however that fat loss may be masked by unholy amounts of water weight from jacked up cortisol, and if you've been at a deficit for any amount of time you'll have some adaptive thermogenesis going on that will also impact your rate of fat loss'.
This is the nuance of plateaus/stalls that gets missed: fat loss hasn't stopped, but it can sure as hell be masked by water weight for a long-*kitten* time. In one of Lyle's podcasts he did a calculation that a woman could easily not see a scale loss for 10 weeks between hormonal weight fluctuations and cortisol-induced retention. So, plateau as in scale weight staying the same for weeks on end is real, plateau as in no fat loss for weeks on end (assuming actually at a deficit), not so much.
A little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing...
Its funny you say this, i can't tell you how often i have argued against those one liners and group thinkers. One of those particular arguments is that consistently cutting calories is not always the answer to how to break plateaus (especially with women who love cardio). I can't even begin to tell you how many people saw success from calorie increases, including myself.
Ironically, one thing i generally evaluate when i start working is people is how long they have been dieting or plateaued. If its been awhile ill have them diet break (actually been doing this for years). And even though i did it more for the psychological reasons, its nice to see there is science behind it.7
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions