Of refeeds and diet breaks

Options
1194195197199200221

Replies

  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Options
    kimny72 wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Off topic, does anyone know how to get rid of notifications from specific threads? I replied to one of those chit chat dumb ones and now it's clogging up. I'm also one of those people who have OCD when it comes to notifications and have this incessant urge to check them lol.

    Unfortunately I don't think you can turn off just one thread. I've made that mistake before and luckily chitchatters seem to move on pretty fast.

    You're right.. All I was able to do was turn off notifications in general, but not from specific threads. This thread seems to be one of those that won't die unless the comment limit is reached (if that's even a thing anymore) and it rolls over to a new topic being made. Some (read: too many) chitchat threads are like herpes. Lol.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,013 Member
    edited March 2018
    Options
    anubis609 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Off topic, does anyone know how to get rid of notifications from specific threads? I replied to one of those chit chat dumb ones and now it's clogging up. I'm also one of those people who have OCD when it comes to notifications and have this incessant urge to check them lol.

    Unfortunately I don't think you can turn off just one thread. I've made that mistake before and luckily chitchatters seem to move on pretty fast.

    You're right.. All I was able to do was turn off notifications in general, but not from specific threads. This thread seems to be one of those that won't die unless the comment limit is reached (if that's even a thing anymore) and it rolls over to a new topic being made. Some (read: too many) chitchat threads are like herpes. Lol.

    Bummer :neutral: . Someone posted last year about the Walk to Mordor app he just discovered and I jumped in with a hobbit joke or something thinking nothing of it. He and several others have been using the thread to keep track of their progress daily for months. I don't even read it anymore, just sigh and scroll past the notifications every - single - day. It's crazy how something little like that can be such a pain in the bupkus. First world problems :lol:
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Options
    HDBKLM wrote: »
    I just had the realisation that my projected maintenance calories for my UGW (still around 15–20 pounds from now) is the same as what I'm currently eating, so it looks like at some point I'm simply going to stop losing and that's how I'll know I'm 'done'. It's not even that low of a BMI - I'm talking about 120–125 pounds at 5'3" (middle of normal range, but I have a small frame; wrist measurement under 5.5", East Asian heritage). Being a short, old, sedentary woman blows sometimes.

    I'm wondering if this realisation has any potential ramifications that I should be thinking about now, like 'take a diet break now while you still even have a deficit', as well as what this might mean, if anything, as far as metabolic or hormonal stuff in the long term. Like, that whole discussion on whether to gradually up one's calories to find maintenance level or jump immediately up to them is never going to be a thing for me. Yeesh.

    If you're quite close to your goal weight, remember that extending the deficit is going to be less productive for hormonal regulation. That said, you can take more frequent maintenance days/diet break periods as an approach to give you a break from the chronic deficit.

    During your goal weight maintenance, since that is perceivably the hardest concept for most dieters, you are allowed some flexibility in your diet. Not everyday is going to be the same, so hunger won't always be the same either. Some days may have a deficit, while others might have a surplus. The average intake should be roughly your calculated maintenance and scale weight will fluctuate around a range in either direction. Whether you want/need to actively track during that time is up to you, but it wouldn't hurt to have a rough idea as a baseline.

    I haven't delved into ethnic demographic metabolism very much (other than potential risk factors for certain races), but it does play some part in our personal genetic ability to handle more or less substrates.
  • ZoneFive
    ZoneFive Posts: 570 Member
    Options
    . . . what's a Pocket?
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    edited March 2018
    Options
    ZoneFive wrote: »
    . . . what's a Pocket?

    It's a bookmarking site. I use MFP on PC and it has a little handy Chrome extension that saves any page you want and you get to add a tag to it. I believe it's available on all kinds of devices. This also solves the problem of wanting to bookmark a certain page in a thread (just make sure to click the page number before bookmarking)

    https://getpocket.com/add/?ep=1

    ETA: another plus side of this method is that I no longer need to hunt and weed through notifications because all new posts on favorite threads are consolidated and shown as a number.
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Options
    heybales wrote: »
    nexangelus wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Remember that among the three macros, carbs and fat are the worst combination to pair together for optimal body composition. They're competing substrates for fuel in the body and it can only burn one or the other, and carbs/glucose is always first in line to be used as fuel. Fat goes straight to storage*. On the other hand, it's really hard to overeat animal protein, so people who like to eat a lot tend to not prefer them.

    *Digested fat always goes to storage, but circulates out when insulin levels are low enough to meter them out via lipolysis. Glucose spikes increase insulin levels which halts lipolysis.

    So this is where the demonizing of sugar or carbs on their own is a no-no? In the UK, dunno about anywhere else, they are making sugar the latest demon (sugar tax, making sugary things smaller and even lowering the sugar in some drinks), used to be fat, red meat, blah blah, now carbs (especially sugar). They forget the scientific part that specifies overeating fat plus carbs = danger, and as you said anubis609, this is what most people tend to eat in abundance. I have had so many arguments with folks lately about sugar being the bad, bad thing making people obese. How do you get this across to peeps not into researching or reading around stuff? I mean layman's terms...sorry just venting a little...also the overeating bit..

    So fat only goes "straight to storage" when eating at a caloric surplus? Not just whenever it's consumed at the same time as carbs? That already makes more sense. Phew!

    Well, not really.

    Upwards of 90% of your energy source for the day as a whole is still fat, anyone with detailed metabolic/RMR test results can show that. As activity level increases in intensity then more of it becomes glucose. So depends on how active you are overall. 50/50 ratio is up in the aerobic zone if fit, down lower if you don't exercise much.

    After eating then with insulin elevated, fat to storage since body is dealing with higher blood sugar immediately, potentially.

    Once carb stores are filled in muscle and liver and blood sugar still high despite using it as energy source right then, gluconeogenesis and the carbs go to fat, insulin lowers - fat burning back on.
    In a diet, the muscles stores usually are always below their potential.
    So blood sugar lowers faster in a diet compared to not.
    So you are back to fat-burning mode sooner, in fat-storage mode shorter - compared to no diet.

    But for the specific commented scenario of body comp, carbs with protein will get everything filled up and protein shuttled off to where it's needed while insulin is up. The high % of fat source for energy is on pause until that happens and blood sugar back down. Then back to fat burning. But you are getting protein where it's needed.
    Carbs with fat does fill the glucose stores still, but the fat is going to fat stores during that whole time.
    Protein with fat still raises insulin, despite the claims made by some low carbers. Just not as fast or as high as carbs alone.

    In an average diet, the day as a whole doesn't make as much of a difference as the fact of just being in a deficit.
    Only if you were like major carby and when low would the differences in efficiency cause a tad more to be burned in processing food.

    What happens after a meal and such may look different, but at the end of the day, same result - if all else kept the same like amount of protein at best levels.

    It's like the claims of fasted workouts being a special benefit to weight loss - studies have shown not. Personal preference sure.

    Just wanted to share this as Jeff Nippard basically reiterates this entire response by @heybales

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxmVsT_ZeNs
  • Psychgrrl
    Psychgrrl Posts: 3,177 Member
    Options
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    Wrong thread! Eeek!!! :flushed:

    And since I posted my thanks too to Anubis and Heybales for the great info. And a big hug to appropriately stressed Psychgrrl!

    Thanks! :blush: Getting back into my formal fitness routine helps. Exercise is how I manage my stress. You have to focus in yoga class because they’re packed and one slip and you could take out an entire row of yogis like a stack of dominoes! :lol: I am beyond sore (in a good way) from the 90 minute yoga class last night. Stretching out the sore a bit tonight and then back at it tomorrow.
  • Psychgrrl
    Psychgrrl Posts: 3,177 Member
    Options
    kimny72 wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Off topic, does anyone know how to get rid of notifications from specific threads? I replied to one of those chit chat dumb ones and now it's clogging up. I'm also one of those people who have OCD when it comes to notifications and have this incessant urge to check them lol.

    Unfortunately I don't think you can turn off just one thread. I've made that mistake before and luckily chitchatters seem to move on pretty fast.

    You're right.. All I was able to do was turn off notifications in general, but not from specific threads. This thread seems to be one of those that won't die unless the comment limit is reached (if that's even a thing anymore) and it rolls over to a new topic being made. Some (read: too many) chitchat threads are like herpes. Lol.

    Bummer :neutral: . Someone posted last year about the Walk to Mordor app he just discovered and I jumped in with a hobbit joke or something thinking nothing of it. He and several others have been using the thread to keep track of their progress daily for months. I don't even read it anymore, just sigh and scroll past the notifications every - single - day. It's crazy how something little like that can be such a pain in the bupkus. First world problems :lol:

    Hug for the bummer notifications and a HUGE thumbs up for using the word “bupkus!” :lol:
  • Psychgrrl
    Psychgrrl Posts: 3,177 Member
    edited March 2018
    Options

    anubis609 wrote: »
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    mph323 wrote: »
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    mph323 wrote: »
    Nony_Mouse wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    I've finally read nearly all of this thread. But I need people to dumb things down for me.

    @Nony_Mouse Why are you now doing "moderately low carb"? I must admit I cringe at the thought of one of my heroes going the low carb cult route, but knowing you, you will have a good reason.

    I've always eaten lowish carb (around 100-120) at a deficit, not because I think there's any magic in it, just because it's easier for me to create and sustain a deficit that way. Even at maintenance 150g a day would be the norm for me most of the time. I'm all about the protein, and the things I eat tend to be higher fat (I'm looking at you, avocado and halloumi, oh and dark choc pb in my shakes!), so by the time those two things are in there's not a lot of room left for carbs, and they're the thing I care least about. Nothing cultish about it, just basic maths. I just don't shout it from the rooftops that I'm technically low carb (if you subscribe to that meaning lower than 150g), because it's just the way I eat. Dropped that a little lower than normal the past few days simply to shift some of the unholy amount of water weight I was lugging around. Purely psychological, I know it isn't fat weight.

    So there you go, I've always been moderately low carb, you just didn't know it ;)

    I've been doing the same thing, Nony. The dietitian had me doing a moderate low carb during the pre-race taper, to try to curb that taper weight gain and keep my brain from freaking out. I actually enjoyed it, and found it easier to do when I was focusing on protein more, so it seems to have stuck.

    *slowly raises hand* I'm also low to moderate carb right now, just because that's how the macros land when I focus on protein. I would actually prefer to be higher carb since I'm ramping up my cycling and running, but I seem to be unconsciously reaching for the protein, fat and fiber trifecta.

    Me, too. I've been really good at managing my macros for the last couple of months for roughly a 1/3 for each. My exercise has been crap for the last few weeks (though still getting steps) because of the 15 hour work days. But I keeping on track with what I can. I keep lots of food in my office, so even when there are emergency meetings, I can still manage my nutrition--at least the macros.

    I have to say I feel you on the work hours cutting into activity time :( I retired last May (sing hallelujah!) but for the 14 previous years I had a 4 hour daily commute and my activity was practically nothing outside of weekends. I'm impressed you're keeping up with your steps (I think you have a more or less sedentary job in mental health counselling?) Yeah, I ended up keeping a bunch of portioned out food in my office, because toward the end there I was hitting the snack machine for potato chips and snickers bars almost on the hour.

    I do technically have a sedentary job. I'm closing in on one year of at least 10,000 steps every day, but the big things was the Step Bet I joined. I refuse to lose money over something which should be under my control (or so I think). My goals were quite a bit over 10,000/day (15,000/day four days a week and 18,000/day two days a week). I'd do some yoga on my own after to stretch and relax a bit. And use my pranamat.

    I work on a large college campus and going from meeting to meeting really does help me with my steps.

    The main threat has been gone for a week and is at home with their parents. Mom still thinks the student's diet might be part of the problem (it's not) and I am concerned for the mental health support the student might be getting at home. They should be in an in-patient or intensive outpatient treatment. They're not.

    And of course, this situation happened at another school right in the middle of when we were responding to our student. Our student was hospitalized for mental health issues 4 times in about 5 weeks. :disappointed:

    We've done everything we can possibly do and I still worry it's not enough.

    And today I should get my fitness life back. It's spring break here and things are a little slower (knock on wood). Yoga tonight! :smiley:

    I'm not sure how bad a diet needs to be to warrant a psychiatric threat, barring pure starvation or any extreme diet methods. There are studies that suggest a balanced or improved diet, used in conjunction with therapy, aid in mental health improvement, but an underlying disorder needs to be addressed by a healthcare professional as you stated.

    Oh yeah—agreed! Mom is from a culture that doesn’t really believe in treatment the way we do in the US for mental health issues, even ones as serious as these (note I used the plural).

    Sure, the student could always improve their nutrition (which could help them be in better condition for treatment to work), almost all my students could (and so could I—to be perfectly honest), but eating more veggies and getting some additional fiber isn’t going to fix what’s wrong with them. Mom is thinking it’s the cure because she didn’t have exposure to mental health issues where she was from.

    OK, time for more yoga!
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Options
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    mph323 wrote: »
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    mph323 wrote: »
    Nony_Mouse wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    I've finally read nearly all of this thread. But I need people to dumb things down for me.

    @Nony_Mouse Why are you now doing "moderately low carb"? I must admit I cringe at the thought of one of my heroes going the low carb cult route, but knowing you, you will have a good reason.

    I've always eaten lowish carb (around 100-120) at a deficit, not because I think there's any magic in it, just because it's easier for me to create and sustain a deficit that way. Even at maintenance 150g a day would be the norm for me most of the time. I'm all about the protein, and the things I eat tend to be higher fat (I'm looking at you, avocado and halloumi, oh and dark choc pb in my shakes!), so by the time those two things are in there's not a lot of room left for carbs, and they're the thing I care least about. Nothing cultish about it, just basic maths. I just don't shout it from the rooftops that I'm technically low carb (if you subscribe to that meaning lower than 150g), because it's just the way I eat. Dropped that a little lower than normal the past few days simply to shift some of the unholy amount of water weight I was lugging around. Purely psychological, I know it isn't fat weight.

    So there you go, I've always been moderately low carb, you just didn't know it ;)

    I've been doing the same thing, Nony. The dietitian had me doing a moderate low carb during the pre-race taper, to try to curb that taper weight gain and keep my brain from freaking out. I actually enjoyed it, and found it easier to do when I was focusing on protein more, so it seems to have stuck.

    *slowly raises hand* I'm also low to moderate carb right now, just because that's how the macros land when I focus on protein. I would actually prefer to be higher carb since I'm ramping up my cycling and running, but I seem to be unconsciously reaching for the protein, fat and fiber trifecta.

    Me, too. I've been really good at managing my macros for the last couple of months for roughly a 1/3 for each. My exercise has been crap for the last few weeks (though still getting steps) because of the 15 hour work days. But I keeping on track with what I can. I keep lots of food in my office, so even when there are emergency meetings, I can still manage my nutrition--at least the macros.

    I have to say I feel you on the work hours cutting into activity time :( I retired last May (sing hallelujah!) but for the 14 previous years I had a 4 hour daily commute and my activity was practically nothing outside of weekends. I'm impressed you're keeping up with your steps (I think you have a more or less sedentary job in mental health counselling?) Yeah, I ended up keeping a bunch of portioned out food in my office, because toward the end there I was hitting the snack machine for potato chips and snickers bars almost on the hour.

    I do technically have a sedentary job. I'm closing in on one year of at least 10,000 steps every day, but the big things was the Step Bet I joined. I refuse to lose money over something which should be under my control (or so I think). My goals were quite a bit over 10,000/day (15,000/day four days a week and 18,000/day two days a week). I'd do some yoga on my own after to stretch and relax a bit. And use my pranamat.

    I work on a large college campus and going from meeting to meeting really does help me with my steps.

    The main threat has been gone for a week and is at home with their parents. Mom still thinks the student's diet might be part of the problem (it's not) and I am concerned for the mental health support the student might be getting at home. They should be in an in-patient or intensive outpatient treatment. They're not.

    And of course, this situation happened at another school right in the middle of when we were responding to our student. Our student was hospitalized for mental health issues 4 times in about 5 weeks. :disappointed:

    We've done everything we can possibly do and I still worry it's not enough.

    And today I should get my fitness life back. It's spring break here and things are a little slower (knock on wood). Yoga tonight! :smiley:

    I'm not sure how bad a diet needs to be to warrant a psychiatric threat, barring pure starvation or any extreme diet methods. There are studies that suggest a balanced or improved diet, used in conjunction with therapy, aid in mental health improvement, but an underlying disorder needs to be addressed by a healthcare professional as you stated.

    Oh yeah—agreed! Mom is from a culture that doesn’t really believe in treatment the way we do in the US for mental health issues, even ones as serious as these (note I used the plural).

    Sure, the student could always improve their nutrition (which could help them be in better condition for treatment to work), almost all my students could (and so could I—to be perfectly honest), but eating more veggies and getting some additional fiber isn’t going to fix what’s wrong with them. Mom is thinking it’s the cure because she didn’t have exposure to mental health issues where she was from.

    OK, time for more yoga!

    Ah, that makes sense. Culturally speaking, the stigma surrounding mental health often causes a lot more problems due to the lack of treatment or recognition that treatment is necessary. It’s a mark of shame leading to being a sociocultural pariah if your family is known to have something wrong. Pure lack of understanding is usually the root cause.

    Some of family believes there’s a cure for anxiety and depression by simply toughing it out and “getting over it.” Social awkwardness is rewarded with titles of being a good and quiet child that doesn’t speak out unless spoken to, while any objections are punished with physical and mental abuse.

    In my case, if food was encouraging those types of behaviors because it deviated from traditional meals, then it was a cause of being influenced by growing up in the US and disowning their native culture.

    While it might not be the same line of thought, I can understand why the Mom might believe what she does. It sure as hell doesn’t take it right, but there’s at least some existing context that can be used to try and approach her from a different perspective.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    anubis609 wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    nexangelus wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Remember that among the three macros, carbs and fat are the worst combination to pair together for optimal body composition. They're competing substrates for fuel in the body and it can only burn one or the other, and carbs/glucose is always first in line to be used as fuel. Fat goes straight to storage*. On the other hand, it's really hard to overeat animal protein, so people who like to eat a lot tend to not prefer them.

    *Digested fat always goes to storage, but circulates out when insulin levels are low enough to meter them out via lipolysis. Glucose spikes increase insulin levels which halts lipolysis.

    So this is where the demonizing of sugar or carbs on their own is a no-no? In the UK, dunno about anywhere else, they are making sugar the latest demon (sugar tax, making sugary things smaller and even lowering the sugar in some drinks), used to be fat, red meat, blah blah, now carbs (especially sugar). They forget the scientific part that specifies overeating fat plus carbs = danger, and as you said anubis609, this is what most people tend to eat in abundance. I have had so many arguments with folks lately about sugar being the bad, bad thing making people obese. How do you get this across to peeps not into researching or reading around stuff? I mean layman's terms...sorry just venting a little...also the overeating bit..

    So fat only goes "straight to storage" when eating at a caloric surplus? Not just whenever it's consumed at the same time as carbs? That already makes more sense. Phew!

    Well, not really.

    Upwards of 90% of your energy source for the day as a whole is still fat, anyone with detailed metabolic/RMR test results can show that. As activity level increases in intensity then more of it becomes glucose. So depends on how active you are overall. 50/50 ratio is up in the aerobic zone if fit, down lower if you don't exercise much.

    After eating then with insulin elevated, fat to storage since body is dealing with higher blood sugar immediately, potentially.

    Once carb stores are filled in muscle and liver and blood sugar still high despite using it as energy source right then, gluconeogenesis and the carbs go to fat, insulin lowers - fat burning back on.
    In a diet, the muscles stores usually are always below their potential.
    So blood sugar lowers faster in a diet compared to not.
    So you are back to fat-burning mode sooner, in fat-storage mode shorter - compared to no diet.

    But for the specific commented scenario of body comp, carbs with protein will get everything filled up and protein shuttled off to where it's needed while insulin is up. The high % of fat source for energy is on pause until that happens and blood sugar back down. Then back to fat burning. But you are getting protein where it's needed.
    Carbs with fat does fill the glucose stores still, but the fat is going to fat stores during that whole time.
    Protein with fat still raises insulin, despite the claims made by some low carbers. Just not as fast or as high as carbs alone.

    In an average diet, the day as a whole doesn't make as much of a difference as the fact of just being in a deficit.
    Only if you were like major carby and when low would the differences in efficiency cause a tad more to be burned in processing food.

    What happens after a meal and such may look different, but at the end of the day, same result - if all else kept the same like amount of protein at best levels.

    It's like the claims of fasted workouts being a special benefit to weight loss - studies have shown not. Personal preference sure.

    Just wanted to share this as Jeff Nippard basically reiterates this entire response by @heybales

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxmVsT_ZeNs

    I've just recently been catching a few of his videos on muscles and workouts and science, so very interesting, have to look up those myth discussions.

    I'm especially thrilled to find someone that gestures as much, if not a tad more, than me. Don't see him talk as much in the other video's I've seen.

    That comment near end about the study showing the "fat-adapted" (I guess that means in sense of brain on keto since body already is) showed improvement in endurance.
    I recall reference to an early study testing that against just doing endurance training at lower HR, the Maffetone method basically - and it showed same improvement in increased mitochondria allowing for more % of fat as energy source as intensity went up. Meaning you could go longer slightly harder.

    Thanks for reference, I guess I need to subscribe now.
  • HDBKLM
    HDBKLM Posts: 466 Member
    Options
    anubis609 wrote: »
    HDBKLM wrote: »
    I just had the realisation that my projected maintenance calories for my UGW (still around 15–20 pounds from now) is the same as what I'm currently eating, so it looks like at some point I'm simply going to stop losing and that's how I'll know I'm 'done'. It's not even that low of a BMI - I'm talking about 120–125 pounds at 5'3" (middle of normal range, but I have a small frame; wrist measurement under 5.5", East Asian heritage). Being a short, old, sedentary woman blows sometimes.

    I'm wondering if this realisation has any potential ramifications that I should be thinking about now, like 'take a diet break now while you still even have a deficit', as well as what this might mean, if anything, as far as metabolic or hormonal stuff in the long term. Like, that whole discussion on whether to gradually up one's calories to find maintenance level or jump immediately up to them is never going to be a thing for me. Yeesh.

    If you're quite close to your goal weight, remember that extending the deficit is going to be less productive for hormonal regulation. That said, you can take more frequent maintenance days/diet break periods as an approach to give you a break from the chronic deficit.

    During your goal weight maintenance, since that is perceivably the hardest concept for most dieters, you are allowed some flexibility in your diet. Not everyday is going to be the same, so hunger won't always be the same either. Some days may have a deficit, while others might have a surplus. The average intake should be roughly your calculated maintenance and scale weight will fluctuate around a range in either direction. Whether you want/need to actively track during that time is up to you, but it wouldn't hurt to have a rough idea as a baseline.

    I haven't delved into ethnic demographic metabolism very much (other than potential risk factors for certain races), but it does play some part in our personal genetic ability to handle more or less substrates.

    Thanks. I'm 10 pounds out from my 'stop and reassess' goal of 130 but in all likelihood will keep going until I naturally slide into maintenance at 120–125 due to the aforementioned frame size considerations. Apparently, for example, 130 and 5'3" would put me only around the very top of healthy BMI according to the Chinese government's table (140 in the US, for reference). And though I'm not Chinese as such there's a certain logic in someone with my genetic background taking note of that set of national averages. Also, when I was at uni 20-something years ago I settled at 125 for quite some time after the freshman 15 so I think of it as a sort of 'happy weight'.

    I'll be doing a proper diet break in the second half of April because I've got a holiday planned that will involve a lot of eating and drinking with people I haven't seen in ages, then I guess the slow march to 'no longer losing' will continue. Knowing I'm already eating at my maintenance level for my goal weight means I can already answer the question of whether or not I'll track calories at maintenance with an emphatic yes, I'll be tracking forever, because I could easily overeat my allotment by 700 calories a day if I didn't make a point of reining it in.
  • bmeadows380
    bmeadows380 Posts: 2,981 Member
    Options

    Hah, whenever I see that thread pop up, I think "Good for those nerds!" Please note that I'm currently 2/3rds of the way through my annual Lord of the Rings re-read, so am definitely Team Nerd.

    @MegaMooseEsq *laughs* I don't read the books annually, but I've read them a few times - including the Silmarillion, and I own all the Histories though I haven't read them all (a little academic & dry, but wonderful back ground material), not to mention all the memorabilia in my office area.......And I can keep the "F" straight! Finwe, Feanor, Fingolfin, Finarfin, Finrod, Fingon, Faramir, Frerin.....Tolkien apparently had a thing for "F" names........

    So does that qualify me for a Team Nerd membership card? lol
  • ZoneFive
    ZoneFive Posts: 570 Member
    Options
    ZoneFive wrote: »
    . . . what's a Pocket?

    It's a bookmarking site. I use MFP on PC and it has a little handy Chrome extension that saves any page you want and you get to add a tag to it. I believe it's available on all kinds of devices. This also solves the problem of wanting to bookmark a certain page in a thread (just make sure to click the page number before bookmarking)

    https://getpocket.com/add/?ep=1

    ETA: another plus side of this method is that I no longer need to hunt and weed through notifications because all new posts on favorite threads are consolidated and shown as a number.

    Aha. I NEED this. Thanks!
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Options
    heybales wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    heybales wrote: »
    nexangelus wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Remember that among the three macros, carbs and fat are the worst combination to pair together for optimal body composition. They're competing substrates for fuel in the body and it can only burn one or the other, and carbs/glucose is always first in line to be used as fuel. Fat goes straight to storage*. On the other hand, it's really hard to overeat animal protein, so people who like to eat a lot tend to not prefer them.

    *Digested fat always goes to storage, but circulates out when insulin levels are low enough to meter them out via lipolysis. Glucose spikes increase insulin levels which halts lipolysis.

    So this is where the demonizing of sugar or carbs on their own is a no-no? In the UK, dunno about anywhere else, they are making sugar the latest demon (sugar tax, making sugary things smaller and even lowering the sugar in some drinks), used to be fat, red meat, blah blah, now carbs (especially sugar). They forget the scientific part that specifies overeating fat plus carbs = danger, and as you said anubis609, this is what most people tend to eat in abundance. I have had so many arguments with folks lately about sugar being the bad, bad thing making people obese. How do you get this across to peeps not into researching or reading around stuff? I mean layman's terms...sorry just venting a little...also the overeating bit..

    So fat only goes "straight to storage" when eating at a caloric surplus? Not just whenever it's consumed at the same time as carbs? That already makes more sense. Phew!

    Well, not really.

    Upwards of 90% of your energy source for the day as a whole is still fat, anyone with detailed metabolic/RMR test results can show that. As activity level increases in intensity then more of it becomes glucose. So depends on how active you are overall. 50/50 ratio is up in the aerobic zone if fit, down lower if you don't exercise much.

    After eating then with insulin elevated, fat to storage since body is dealing with higher blood sugar immediately, potentially.

    Once carb stores are filled in muscle and liver and blood sugar still high despite using it as energy source right then, gluconeogenesis and the carbs go to fat, insulin lowers - fat burning back on.
    In a diet, the muscles stores usually are always below their potential.
    So blood sugar lowers faster in a diet compared to not.
    So you are back to fat-burning mode sooner, in fat-storage mode shorter - compared to no diet.

    But for the specific commented scenario of body comp, carbs with protein will get everything filled up and protein shuttled off to where it's needed while insulin is up. The high % of fat source for energy is on pause until that happens and blood sugar back down. Then back to fat burning. But you are getting protein where it's needed.
    Carbs with fat does fill the glucose stores still, but the fat is going to fat stores during that whole time.
    Protein with fat still raises insulin, despite the claims made by some low carbers. Just not as fast or as high as carbs alone.

    In an average diet, the day as a whole doesn't make as much of a difference as the fact of just being in a deficit.
    Only if you were like major carby and when low would the differences in efficiency cause a tad more to be burned in processing food.

    What happens after a meal and such may look different, but at the end of the day, same result - if all else kept the same like amount of protein at best levels.

    It's like the claims of fasted workouts being a special benefit to weight loss - studies have shown not. Personal preference sure.

    Just wanted to share this as Jeff Nippard basically reiterates this entire response by @heybales

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxmVsT_ZeNs

    I've just recently been catching a few of his videos on muscles and workouts and science, so very interesting, have to look up those myth discussions.

    I'm especially thrilled to find someone that gestures as much, if not a tad more, than me. Don't see him talk as much in the other video's I've seen.

    That comment near end about the study showing the "fat-adapted" (I guess that means in sense of brain on keto since body already is) showed improvement in endurance.
    I recall reference to an early study testing that against just doing endurance training at lower HR, the Maffetone method basically - and it showed same improvement in increased mitochondria allowing for more % of fat as energy source as intensity went up. Meaning you could go longer slightly harder.

    Thanks for reference, I guess I need to subscribe now.

    No problem. I just recently subscribed to him too.

    As far as keto/fat adaptation goes, Bill Lagakos breaks it down pretty well in his posts:

    http://caloriesproper.com/ketoadaptation/
    http://caloriesproper.com/long-term-fat-adaptation/
    http://caloriesproper.com/a-timeline-of-ketoadaptation/

    As for the mention of that ~3 week period of performance drop AKA "keto flu," Lyle's ketogenic diet book will mention that it's mostly due to the shift in electrolyte dumping once glycogen becomes reduced:

    Low energy levels

    Carbohydrates are the body’s preferred fuel when they are available (see chapter 4). As
    well, they burn more efficiently than fats. Many individuals voice concerns about drops in general
    energy levels (not including exercise) on a ketogenic diet due to the lack of carbohydrates.
    Many subjects in early studies on ketosis or the PSMF noted transient lethargy and
    weakness. As well many studies noted a high occurrence of orthostatic hypotension which is a
    drop in blood pressure when individuals move from a sitting to standing position. This caused
    lightheadedness in many individuals. It was always taken for granted that ketosis caused this to
    happen.

    However, later studies established that most of these symptoms could be avoided by
    providing enough supplemental minerals, especially sodium. Providing 4-5 grams of sodium per
    day (not much higher than the average American diet) prevents the majority of symptoms of
    weakness and low energy, possibly by maintaining normal blood pressure (26).

    In most individuals fatigue should disappear within a few days to a few weeks at most. If
    fatigue remains after this time period, small amounts of carbohydrates can be added to the diet,
    as long as ketosis is maintained, or the diet should be abandoned for a more balanced diet.

    The effects of ketogenic diets on exercise are discussed in chapter 22. To summarize,
    ketogenic diets can generally sustain low-intensity aerobic exercise without problem after a
    period of adaptation. However because carbohydrates are an absolute requirement to sustain
    high intensity exercise such as weight training or high-intensity aerobic exercise, a standard
    ketogenic diet is not appropriate.
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Options
    HDBKLM wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    HDBKLM wrote: »
    I just had the realisation that my projected maintenance calories for my UGW (still around 15–20 pounds from now) is the same as what I'm currently eating, so it looks like at some point I'm simply going to stop losing and that's how I'll know I'm 'done'. It's not even that low of a BMI - I'm talking about 120–125 pounds at 5'3" (middle of normal range, but I have a small frame; wrist measurement under 5.5", East Asian heritage). Being a short, old, sedentary woman blows sometimes.

    I'm wondering if this realisation has any potential ramifications that I should be thinking about now, like 'take a diet break now while you still even have a deficit', as well as what this might mean, if anything, as far as metabolic or hormonal stuff in the long term. Like, that whole discussion on whether to gradually up one's calories to find maintenance level or jump immediately up to them is never going to be a thing for me. Yeesh.

    If you're quite close to your goal weight, remember that extending the deficit is going to be less productive for hormonal regulation. That said, you can take more frequent maintenance days/diet break periods as an approach to give you a break from the chronic deficit.

    During your goal weight maintenance, since that is perceivably the hardest concept for most dieters, you are allowed some flexibility in your diet. Not everyday is going to be the same, so hunger won't always be the same either. Some days may have a deficit, while others might have a surplus. The average intake should be roughly your calculated maintenance and scale weight will fluctuate around a range in either direction. Whether you want/need to actively track during that time is up to you, but it wouldn't hurt to have a rough idea as a baseline.

    I haven't delved into ethnic demographic metabolism very much (other than potential risk factors for certain races), but it does play some part in our personal genetic ability to handle more or less substrates.

    Thanks. I'm 10 pounds out from my 'stop and reassess' goal of 130 but in all likelihood will keep going until I naturally slide into maintenance at 120–125 due to the aforementioned frame size considerations. Apparently, for example, 130 and 5'3" would put me only around the very top of healthy BMI according to the Chinese government's table (140 in the US, for reference). And though I'm not Chinese as such there's a certain logic in someone with my genetic background taking note of that set of national averages. Also, when I was at uni 20-something years ago I settled at 125 for quite some time after the freshman 15 so I think of it as a sort of 'happy weight'.

    I'll be doing a proper diet break in the second half of April because I've got a holiday planned that will involve a lot of eating and drinking with people I haven't seen in ages, then I guess the slow march to 'no longer losing' will continue. Knowing I'm already eating at my maintenance level for my goal weight means I can already answer the question of whether or not I'll track calories at maintenance with an emphatic yes, I'll be tracking forever, because I could easily overeat my allotment by 700 calories a day if I didn't make a point of reining it in.

    Sounds like a well enough plan. Lifelong tracking may need to be done in many cases. I share that aspect considering my mention of being formerly obese. If I'm not at least aware of what I'm eating, I will overeat. Though, I do have periods of relaxed and rigid tracking when situations or events call for it.
  • alteredsteve175
    alteredsteve175 Posts: 2,718 Member
    Options
    I'm currently following this plan. 1800 calories weekdays (30% carbs/40% fat/30% protein) - 2500 calories on weekends with extra carbs. It's working well and I'm lost ten pounds in 5 weeks. Back to my previous low before diet break at Christmastime. More energy in the gym, too - a nice benefit.

    Is it advisable to take a break and eat at maintenance for a couple of weeks? Or should I continue with the current plan, since I'm replenishing carbs each week?