Of refeeds and diet breaks
Replies
-
Using myself as an example, if being on a cut for 1 year has resulted in a scale weight of 172-175 with bf% around 10-12%, maintenance for me would be roughly an additional 600-900kcal per day. Due to the buffer of glycogen loading, water weight, sudden influx of nutrients, I may jump up to 182 or so for a couple weeks and settle around 178 and maybe 13-15% bf by the time I achieve homeostasis, due to increased TDEE from adaptive thermogenesis.
Can i ask how you figure the 182 (so a 7-10 pound increase), and then the 178?
This is where my biggest mind struggle is right now -- the fact that OK, even if I can accept that I'm going to gain, there's no literature about what expected gains might be. Which is what's got me doing a "NOPE", because I am not particularly skilled at navigating the unknown.
0 -
nexangelus wrote: »Maintenance calories can be fine tuned .. if you’re still losing weight at your calculated number, then increase kcals. Or increase the multiplier to allow for activity levels.
I think you have a solid plan, but I do want to just hone in on the 1 month surplus for muscle gain. Completely my own opinion, so take it as just some food for thought.
Any appreciable muscle mass you gain (I can’t recall aforementioned strength training volume) in a month, may be negated by a 6 month deficit following that. I’m not sure what your protein macros might be, but in a deficit protein needs increase to reduce lbm loss.
And if you’re already at a composition and training experience level well into the intermediate stages of lifting, lbm gains are going to be staggeringly slow so the surplus may need to be extended beyond a month.
Otherwise, if you still have body fat to lose and/or are at a novice level of weight training experience, hold maintenance calories while lifting heavy weight in an increasing linear progression, and to retain as much muscle mass as possible, keep progressively lifting heavier as you slowly reintroduce your deficit and keep protein levels appropriate to your lbm / aim for ~0.7g/lb of bodyweight / eat 0.8-1.2g/lb of target goal weight (old school bodybuilding method of protein calculation).
Third time lucky (on phone at work grrr)...
I eat between 136 and 200g of protein per day, have been doing this since May this year.
Surplus total of 2720 cals (might have to increase to 2970 for a bit we will see) is for 8 - 9 weeks. Maintenance is 2 weeks.
I have never lifted heavy in surplus or maintenance, apart from once for about 6 months in 2013. Trying it to see how strong I can get and how it improves the lifting. If anything I will just get some new pbs and prs. Any recomp will be a bonus.
Yeah being female, 43, intermediate lifter, menopausal mean this will be a challenge but I am determined to have food as my friend (not in that comfort eating binge come don't give a toss way). This is really helping even if the focus may be a tad too sharp at times....
Thanks @anubis609 for the shedloads of insight and head nodding moments! As well as this whole darn thread : )
You're welcome! I've only contributed what I can but any credit to starting the thread belongs to @Nony_Mouse
Lifting heavy/heavier during surplus/maintenance periods are actually optimal to use those extra calories for their main purpose > to build muscle. Otherwise, there's no real metabolic reason to be in a surplus aside from reversing the effects of a cut for hormonal, psychological, and satiety purposes; or medically assisting ED patients. Working with peri or post menopausal women, strength training in general serves a greater purpose than just achieving a certain body composition. Around this time, hormonal shifts trend toward a more androgenic state of metabolism and with the decreased estrogen/increased testosterone, body fat storage becomes more centralized around the midsection, and bone health becomes much more important to salvage, strengthen, and/or maintain.
I'll include Lyle's summary response to Alan Aragon's Research Review (https://alanaragon.com/aarr/ for those interested)
@GottaBurnEmAll, thanks.
Yeah, it's not easy, as you know, and I've had this little problem for 30 years or so... That's why I wanted to post too. Hopefully, it will help someone else reading this thread. I also found the thread on willpower really interesting - I think I (and maybe others) focus so much on making everything else perfect (diet, exercise, work, home) that I don't know how much willpower/discipline I have left to try and fix things especially since the cycle generally allows me to lose and maintain anyway. It's just a terrible, terrible way of doing it.
@psuLemon, thanks for the post on the reverse dieting video. I'll have to watch it. I understand, as what @anubis609 mentioned, that it's increasing slowly rather than jumping into maintenance immediately and that there are disadvantages to this (Lyle too mentioned it in one of his podcasts). For me though, I'm maintaining CI but lowering CO as the way to reverse diet. I think this makes sense?!!
For general health reasons and maintaining body composition, you may want to keep the CO and increase CI. Not that it has to be done this way, but being active, in and of itself, has components to optimizing nutrient partitioning and substrate storage.
You can maybe find a balance between the two, where you decrease the volume of activity but maintaining some just to avoid complete sedentary status, and increasing a little of the intake to maintain a relatively enjoyably active lifestyle.
I do a bulk/cut cycle based around intense training for my ultra and a couple of other races. I cannot sustain such intensity all year round (because it takes a lot of time and I want to do other sports as well). When it reduces, I maintain CI (which at peak will be quite high (above 3k)) and lower it as and when hunger reduces but only to a level I'm comfortable with and compensate with doing more resistance training because I'm now in surplus and will start gaining weight.
Based on what I've learnt from this thread though, I've been doing it wrong so I need to think about it more.
Ah yes, then I wouldn't recommend you to endurance train so intensely either. That also isn't sustainable for anyone. Though, if at peak training your intake is >3k then, take the high end of your training deload average and absolutely include resistance training.
I'm sure by now I sound like I have a bias to resistance/strength training, and I do lol, but more along the vein that it provides the most benefit when compared to aerobic activity.
Energy balance is going to be a moving target for the most part. It hardly ever plays out to precise math (or maths for the UK friends). Don't be afraid to play around with the numbers in either direction as your body responds, taking into account age/mood/hormonal pattern/overall wellness, but in general, it's better to overshoot calorie intake estimate and taper down from there instead of the opposite.
Thank you for all your help and responses, @anubis609.
Yes, agree with the overshooting and I know I'll gain but am comfortable with it. (A far cry from my younger years when scale number ruled my world.) What I did learn from this thread was how little muscle we can build in a particular time period so I'm planning to limit the gain so that I don't need to cut so much the next time (no point gaining fat!). My version of reverse diet though I've probably confused people!
PS. I like the "take caffeine" part of the summary
I think I've covered it with all the cups of coffee I drink everyday lol (Yes, I know that's not what he meant!)
And @Nony_Mouse, congrats! Awesome result and yes, I was way less frustrated with the scale swings too during the refeeds.2 -
Yeah, I feel totally justified in drinking my litre of coffee prior to strength training in the mornings now 5
-
Why do I doubt greatly your strength training is anywhere near aerobic!
Now - when doing the long hikes, are the trails secluded enough it won't matter if you load up on coffee. ;-)0 -
Why do I doubt greatly your strength training is anywhere near aerobic!
Now - when doing the long hikes, are the trails secluded enough it won't matter if you load up on coffee. ;-)
Doh, missed the 'aerobic' part
No, my strength training is far from aerobic, and yes, trails are secluded enough 
Even on my walk to work (not secluded), the recent caffeine consumption can be an issue. Fine if I take the direct route (1/2 hour), and conveniently placed public facilities if I take a longer route. 2 -
Why do I doubt greatly your strength training is anywhere near aerobic!
Now - when doing the long hikes, are the trails secluded enough it won't matter if you load up on coffee. ;-)
This is a good point. Coffee makes me pee so frequently very shortly after I have drunk it. I drink a couple of coffees in the morning but don't always immediately workout. If I do you can almost guarantee I need to stop at some point for a pee break. Often just during warmup when the sudden bobbing about makes my bladder decide it needstopeerightnow.0 -
collectingblues wrote: »
Using myself as an example, if being on a cut for 1 year has resulted in a scale weight of 172-175 with bf% around 10-12%, maintenance for me would be roughly an additional 600-900kcal per day. Due to the buffer of glycogen loading, water weight, sudden influx of nutrients, I may jump up to 182 or so for a couple weeks and settle around 178 and maybe 13-15% bf by the time I achieve homeostasis, due to increased TDEE from adaptive thermogenesis.
Can i ask how you figure the 182 (so a 7-10 pound increase), and then the 178?
This is where my biggest mind struggle is right now -- the fact that OK, even if I can accept that I'm going to gain, there's no literature about what expected gains might be. Which is what's got me doing a "NOPE", because I am not particularly skilled at navigating the unknown.
Self tested I imagine.
I'm going to refer you back to a discussion you had with heybales for you to read again. I know this is all causing so much anxiety and you can't yet bring yourself to do what's needed but perhaps re-reading will help with planting and growing the seed.collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »So ... primary care appointment today. He thinks that indeed, it is a cortisol issue caused by some of the blood sugar issues from this summer (I was having lots of problems with hypos), the underfeeding (to use his terms), and thanks to the female triad mess, my body behaving as if it is "chemically underweight" (which I now think is the most ridiculous term ever). He feels that this is likely where my weight will settle out, which ... well, I'm torn between crying and wine.
He also set *his* bottom limit for where my weight should sit. Which is right about where I was in April, so understandably, he's not super keen on me trying to get there again. I have opinions on this.
He urged me to listen to the dietitian (whose advice mirrors this thread), and to try to trust that it's not going to skyrocket forever and ever. And it's that latter that I have an issue with right now.
Logic tells me that I should try this refeed thing for actual, but I have no idea how my body will *actually* respond.
Is it at all possible for you to stop weighing yourself to give the refeed a shot at working?
I would like to think yes, but I also know that I don't trust the process (or my body). I used to not even have a scale, but then I freaked out, and at the next weight, saw that I'd gained 7 pounds in the year without the scale (it was not a long experiment).
If my gym had a scale, I'd feel better about it, but it doesn't -- and I'm not sure I like blindly trusting whatever provider scale (my endo's office always runs high, and I'm not sure how my PCP's scale runs) is in use.
Is there a reason why you need to be at a lower weight? I think from what you've previously said in this thread, you're at 130 pounds which I think for your height is absolutely fine?
Perhaps being at a higher weight than say, 5-10 pounds less may be way easier to maintain for your body in the long run (rather than trying to exhaust yourself with restriction and extensive training).
Because I'm not happy at this weight. Period.
I mean, let's phrase it this way: Let's say you gain 5-10 percent of your starting weight in just six months with no explanation. Are you OK with it?
If you are, I'd be curious to know how/why and see if there are lessons I can learn from it.
If you aren't, you understand why I'm not either.
Did only the number for weight go up - but no measurements?
Who sees you naked on your scale besides you?
How did you decide what was a good number to weigh, and that was based on....?
Is what you've been doing recently for weight loss working well still?
How long has it been working lately?
Any other numbers with your physical self that you are as .... interested .... in being at a certain number?
What are they?
In order ...
1) Well, some slight fluctuations in measurements. But I don't believe for a minute that in the absence of dedicated strength training -- and between running, swimming, barre, and spin, I'm not adding one more thing in -- that one can possibly gain 10 more pounds without measurements increasing.
2) Does that matter? I see me. I have to live with me.
3) Because it's where I felt more marginally comfortable. I like the size I fit into at this weight. I like that I feel more comfortable with fluctuations at that weight. I was finally out of double digit sizes. I could finally take a selfie and not feel horrible and ugly. Like hell am I going back to a higher weight again.
4 and 5) Well, that's the problem.
6) I'd like to see the body fat reduce, but that's not the priority. I have a running time that I'd like to hit -- and ironically, my "ideal" running weight according to several online calculators is where I was pre-May.
I don't expect anyone who has never dealt with body dysmorphia or an eating disorder to get it. But that's my reality.
I guess my only closing remark would be that if you/anyone could give me peer-reviewed work or anything even close to that that says nope, that ugly number from Monday is where things top out, and on average you gain X pounds, then I'd be on board.
But I can't find anyone who is willing or able to do that. So while I believe whole heartedly in this in concept, I'm not willing to adapt it in self until I've got the data showing me that things will not skyrocket.
So the only thing where the raw weight actually makes a difference - and that is running pace.
The other things you mention ("see me", "like the size", "double digit sizes","take a selfie") are about size - and size is not always correlated with weight - hardly.
But you are right - until you get the counseling that creates that ah-ha moment or a way to deal with disconnecting things not connected in reality - you'll have problems.
Considering 20 lbs water weight gain is usually maxed talked about purely from cortisol - one would have to know exactly how much you have gained of it already to know what your potential max is.
But the eating more should help body relax stress - but it sounds like you could more than make up for that, so probably no help.
So one study showed that it took a group on extreme diet, eating at new measured maintenance level, to gain back some of their lost TDEE of 496, back up to only 275 cal below expected - 3 months.
So it appears that body can start doing some slight recovery just eating at new suppressed TDEE.
Which means it increased almost 200 cal in 3 months.
Sadly you aren't in research study to be measured out the whazoo to confirm where suppressed TDEE is, you could possibly eat less and suppress more.
So stick where you are at for 3 months then.2 -
VintageFeline wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »
Using myself as an example, if being on a cut for 1 year has resulted in a scale weight of 172-175 with bf% around 10-12%, maintenance for me would be roughly an additional 600-900kcal per day. Due to the buffer of glycogen loading, water weight, sudden influx of nutrients, I may jump up to 182 or so for a couple weeks and settle around 178 and maybe 13-15% bf by the time I achieve homeostasis, due to increased TDEE from adaptive thermogenesis.
Can i ask how you figure the 182 (so a 7-10 pound increase), and then the 178?
This is where my biggest mind struggle is right now -- the fact that OK, even if I can accept that I'm going to gain, there's no literature about what expected gains might be. Which is what's got me doing a "NOPE", because I am not particularly skilled at navigating the unknown.
Self tested I imagine.
I'm going to refer you back to a discussion you had with heybales for you to read again. I know this is all causing so much anxiety and you can't yet bring yourself to do what's needed but perhaps re-reading will help with planting and growing the seed.collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »So ... primary care appointment today. He thinks that indeed, it is a cortisol issue caused by some of the blood sugar issues from this summer (I was having lots of problems with hypos), the underfeeding (to use his terms), and thanks to the female triad mess, my body behaving as if it is "chemically underweight" (which I now think is the most ridiculous term ever). He feels that this is likely where my weight will settle out, which ... well, I'm torn between crying and wine.
He also set *his* bottom limit for where my weight should sit. Which is right about where I was in April, so understandably, he's not super keen on me trying to get there again. I have opinions on this.
He urged me to listen to the dietitian (whose advice mirrors this thread), and to try to trust that it's not going to skyrocket forever and ever. And it's that latter that I have an issue with right now.
Logic tells me that I should try this refeed thing for actual, but I have no idea how my body will *actually* respond.
Is it at all possible for you to stop weighing yourself to give the refeed a shot at working?
I would like to think yes, but I also know that I don't trust the process (or my body). I used to not even have a scale, but then I freaked out, and at the next weight, saw that I'd gained 7 pounds in the year without the scale (it was not a long experiment).
If my gym had a scale, I'd feel better about it, but it doesn't -- and I'm not sure I like blindly trusting whatever provider scale (my endo's office always runs high, and I'm not sure how my PCP's scale runs) is in use.
Is there a reason why you need to be at a lower weight? I think from what you've previously said in this thread, you're at 130 pounds which I think for your height is absolutely fine?
Perhaps being at a higher weight than say, 5-10 pounds less may be way easier to maintain for your body in the long run (rather than trying to exhaust yourself with restriction and extensive training).
Because I'm not happy at this weight. Period.
I mean, let's phrase it this way: Let's say you gain 5-10 percent of your starting weight in just six months with no explanation. Are you OK with it?
If you are, I'd be curious to know how/why and see if there are lessons I can learn from it.
If you aren't, you understand why I'm not either.
Did only the number for weight go up - but no measurements?
Who sees you naked on your scale besides you?
How did you decide what was a good number to weigh, and that was based on....?
Is what you've been doing recently for weight loss working well still?
How long has it been working lately?
Any other numbers with your physical self that you are as .... interested .... in being at a certain number?
What are they?
In order ...
1) Well, some slight fluctuations in measurements. But I don't believe for a minute that in the absence of dedicated strength training -- and between running, swimming, barre, and spin, I'm not adding one more thing in -- that one can possibly gain 10 more pounds without measurements increasing.
2) Does that matter? I see me. I have to live with me.
3) Because it's where I felt more marginally comfortable. I like the size I fit into at this weight. I like that I feel more comfortable with fluctuations at that weight. I was finally out of double digit sizes. I could finally take a selfie and not feel horrible and ugly. Like hell am I going back to a higher weight again.
4 and 5) Well, that's the problem.
6) I'd like to see the body fat reduce, but that's not the priority. I have a running time that I'd like to hit -- and ironically, my "ideal" running weight according to several online calculators is where I was pre-May.
I don't expect anyone who has never dealt with body dysmorphia or an eating disorder to get it. But that's my reality.
I guess my only closing remark would be that if you/anyone could give me peer-reviewed work or anything even close to that that says nope, that ugly number from Monday is where things top out, and on average you gain X pounds, then I'd be on board.
But I can't find anyone who is willing or able to do that. So while I believe whole heartedly in this in concept, I'm not willing to adapt it in self until I've got the data showing me that things will not skyrocket.
So the only thing where the raw weight actually makes a difference - and that is running pace.
The other things you mention ("see me", "like the size", "double digit sizes","take a selfie") are about size - and size is not always correlated with weight - hardly.
But you are right - until you get the counseling that creates that ah-ha moment or a way to deal with disconnecting things not connected in reality - you'll have problems.
Considering 20 lbs water weight gain is usually maxed talked about purely from cortisol - one would have to know exactly how much you have gained of it already to know what your potential max is.
But the eating more should help body relax stress - but it sounds like you could more than make up for that, so probably no help.
So one study showed that it took a group on extreme diet, eating at new measured maintenance level, to gain back some of their lost TDEE of 496, back up to only 275 cal below expected - 3 months.
So it appears that body can start doing some slight recovery just eating at new suppressed TDEE.
Which means it increased almost 200 cal in 3 months.
Sadly you aren't in research study to be measured out the whazoo to confirm where suppressed TDEE is, you could possibly eat less and suppress more.
So stick where you are at for 3 months then.
No, I know -- and I appreciate the patience. I am just looking for more data as we (the dietitian and I) head down that path, without my trying to rage at the universe at the same time.
We know where my TDEE is -- that's a known factor thanks to the lab testing. The dietitian said worst case scenario, we're looking at 6 months to a year for things to settle out. Which is long, but whatever.
But the "you're going to gain X amount of weight" bit is the unknown variable, and that's the roadblock. Because I am not willing to risk additional weight bumps with an unknown of where that is going to top out.
0 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »ZOMG, Trendweight has me at goal!! It's my old goal, I hadn't changed it yet cos I just kinda sorta wanted to see it say I was there at least once. So yay!! That was nice, because I already have my PMS bloat on, plus a little water weight from training maybe. I will now go change that by 2 kg and it can joyfully tell me how many more weeks it's going to take...
Congrats! If you've hit your old goal during the phase of water retention, I'm going to assume that the extra 2kg isn't too far away lol.
Yeah, it's probably more like a kg away I'd say. Previous low (scale weight) at the end of last week was 1.4 kg off goal. So weight for the first few days of diet break are going to be pretty meaningless - probably have a little more PMS bloat to put on, strength training tomorrow, full day (6-7 hours) hike on Sunday, carb-loading for that tomorrow, lots of carbs while hiking...yeah, the waters will be muddy!!
Funnily, with doing refeeds, I am way less frustrated by scale swings than I was previously, even though they are much more dramatic. I know that my lows tend to show ~a week after ovulation and ~a week after start of TOM once hormonal water and refeed weight has wooshed off, which has so far coincided with day before/day of refeed, though that's shifting due to my not 28 day cycle.
And thus, the psychological benefit of refeeds to promote the idea of what happens when transitioning to maintenance calories from a deficit It's a great way to get people used to the concept of controlled freedom / mindful eating / flexible dieting and learn about their own bodies in the process.
We're not slaves to a number on scale... which reminds me of the thread last night that @VintageFeline also responded to. I didn't have the energy to go ham sandwich troll but I probably expended a good dozen calories from cringing lmao.
Heh.
Nony will tell you, I am about ready to go ham on my scale because I am weeks into not seeing an appreciable loss (though did have a sort of whoosh yesterday at last) but at the same time, all I have to do is look at my diary and see there is no possible way I have at worst maintained. There's a deficit but I am working with a new device with new numbers so things are a bit grey right now. Add in, as I have previously talked about, I retain water like nothing else and it really can just take seemingly forever to work out what's happening. So I have to just wait it out. If I didn't I'd be eating about 500 gross calories by this point.
Totally understand the feeling. In the throes of my consistent losses, seeing "long term" stalls (as measured by my own impatience in the course of 3 weeks lol) led me to the same result. There's a bit of a balance between device calculated calorie burns to dictate deficits and actual calories our bodies are actually expending (measurable only in a metabolic ward), so it's possible that maybe there's some scaling that needs to happen for a slight deficit.. or it could truly be one of those moments where the body will just lose at its own pace whenever it feels like and patience is the only thing that will be needed.0 -
collectingblues wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »
Using myself as an example, if being on a cut for 1 year has resulted in a scale weight of 172-175 with bf% around 10-12%, maintenance for me would be roughly an additional 600-900kcal per day. Due to the buffer of glycogen loading, water weight, sudden influx of nutrients, I may jump up to 182 or so for a couple weeks and settle around 178 and maybe 13-15% bf by the time I achieve homeostasis, due to increased TDEE from adaptive thermogenesis.
Can i ask how you figure the 182 (so a 7-10 pound increase), and then the 178?
This is where my biggest mind struggle is right now -- the fact that OK, even if I can accept that I'm going to gain, there's no literature about what expected gains might be. Which is what's got me doing a "NOPE", because I am not particularly skilled at navigating the unknown.
Self tested I imagine.
I'm going to refer you back to a discussion you had with heybales for you to read again. I know this is all causing so much anxiety and you can't yet bring yourself to do what's needed but perhaps re-reading will help with planting and growing the seed.collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »So ... primary care appointment today. He thinks that indeed, it is a cortisol issue caused by some of the blood sugar issues from this summer (I was having lots of problems with hypos), the underfeeding (to use his terms), and thanks to the female triad mess, my body behaving as if it is "chemically underweight" (which I now think is the most ridiculous term ever). He feels that this is likely where my weight will settle out, which ... well, I'm torn between crying and wine.
He also set *his* bottom limit for where my weight should sit. Which is right about where I was in April, so understandably, he's not super keen on me trying to get there again. I have opinions on this.
He urged me to listen to the dietitian (whose advice mirrors this thread), and to try to trust that it's not going to skyrocket forever and ever. And it's that latter that I have an issue with right now.
Logic tells me that I should try this refeed thing for actual, but I have no idea how my body will *actually* respond.
Is it at all possible for you to stop weighing yourself to give the refeed a shot at working?
I would like to think yes, but I also know that I don't trust the process (or my body). I used to not even have a scale, but then I freaked out, and at the next weight, saw that I'd gained 7 pounds in the year without the scale (it was not a long experiment).
If my gym had a scale, I'd feel better about it, but it doesn't -- and I'm not sure I like blindly trusting whatever provider scale (my endo's office always runs high, and I'm not sure how my PCP's scale runs) is in use.
Is there a reason why you need to be at a lower weight? I think from what you've previously said in this thread, you're at 130 pounds which I think for your height is absolutely fine?
Perhaps being at a higher weight than say, 5-10 pounds less may be way easier to maintain for your body in the long run (rather than trying to exhaust yourself with restriction and extensive training).
Because I'm not happy at this weight. Period.
I mean, let's phrase it this way: Let's say you gain 5-10 percent of your starting weight in just six months with no explanation. Are you OK with it?
If you are, I'd be curious to know how/why and see if there are lessons I can learn from it.
If you aren't, you understand why I'm not either.
Did only the number for weight go up - but no measurements?
Who sees you naked on your scale besides you?
How did you decide what was a good number to weigh, and that was based on....?
Is what you've been doing recently for weight loss working well still?
How long has it been working lately?
Any other numbers with your physical self that you are as .... interested .... in being at a certain number?
What are they?
In order ...
1) Well, some slight fluctuations in measurements. But I don't believe for a minute that in the absence of dedicated strength training -- and between running, swimming, barre, and spin, I'm not adding one more thing in -- that one can possibly gain 10 more pounds without measurements increasing.
2) Does that matter? I see me. I have to live with me.
3) Because it's where I felt more marginally comfortable. I like the size I fit into at this weight. I like that I feel more comfortable with fluctuations at that weight. I was finally out of double digit sizes. I could finally take a selfie and not feel horrible and ugly. Like hell am I going back to a higher weight again.
4 and 5) Well, that's the problem.
6) I'd like to see the body fat reduce, but that's not the priority. I have a running time that I'd like to hit -- and ironically, my "ideal" running weight according to several online calculators is where I was pre-May.
I don't expect anyone who has never dealt with body dysmorphia or an eating disorder to get it. But that's my reality.
I guess my only closing remark would be that if you/anyone could give me peer-reviewed work or anything even close to that that says nope, that ugly number from Monday is where things top out, and on average you gain X pounds, then I'd be on board.
But I can't find anyone who is willing or able to do that. So while I believe whole heartedly in this in concept, I'm not willing to adapt it in self until I've got the data showing me that things will not skyrocket.
So the only thing where the raw weight actually makes a difference - and that is running pace.
The other things you mention ("see me", "like the size", "double digit sizes","take a selfie") are about size - and size is not always correlated with weight - hardly.
But you are right - until you get the counseling that creates that ah-ha moment or a way to deal with disconnecting things not connected in reality - you'll have problems.
Considering 20 lbs water weight gain is usually maxed talked about purely from cortisol - one would have to know exactly how much you have gained of it already to know what your potential max is.
But the eating more should help body relax stress - but it sounds like you could more than make up for that, so probably no help.
So one study showed that it took a group on extreme diet, eating at new measured maintenance level, to gain back some of their lost TDEE of 496, back up to only 275 cal below expected - 3 months.
So it appears that body can start doing some slight recovery just eating at new suppressed TDEE.
Which means it increased almost 200 cal in 3 months.
Sadly you aren't in research study to be measured out the whazoo to confirm where suppressed TDEE is, you could possibly eat less and suppress more.
So stick where you are at for 3 months then.
No, I know -- and I appreciate the patience. I am just looking for more data as we (the dietitian and I) head down that path, without my trying to rage at the universe at the same time.
We know where my TDEE is -- that's a known factor thanks to the lab testing. The dietitian said worst case scenario, we're looking at 6 months to a year for things to settle out. Which is long, but whatever.
But the "you're going to gain X amount of weight" bit is the unknown variable, and that's the roadblock. Because I am not willing to risk additional weight bumps with an unknown of where that is going to top out.
Unless you were given the expensive option of double-labeled water to drink, and collected all urine samples were studied - the lab testing you received did NOT make a known factor of where your TDEE is.
And even if a double-labeled water collection for a couple days - that's the TDEE for those days, not as the seasons change.
I'm betting they did an RMR test, which would be your TDEE if you sat around like that all day long literally.
But that's not reality.
You average TDEE is most useful on weekly basis - and even that is frequently enough it changes decently from normal daily activity changes week to week, to speak nothing of the seasonal changes that effect most.
Flexibility is key because of what the body does already, so in approach, in accepting results, ect.
Why a goal weight number is impossible and unrealistic - range is the thing.5 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Why do I doubt greatly your strength training is anywhere near aerobic!
Now - when doing the long hikes, are the trails secluded enough it won't matter if you load up on coffee. ;-)
This is a good point. Coffee makes me pee so frequently very shortly after I have drunk it. I drink a couple of coffees in the morning but don't always immediately workout. If I do you can almost guarantee I need to stop at some point for a pee break. Often just during warmup when the sudden bobbing about makes my bladder decide it needstopeerightnow.
Yeah, I just did an hour long yoga flow practice...also well known for using my rest breaks in strength training to pop to the loo. Yay for at home exercise!!
The practice I just did has 12 vinyasa flows in it, normally the last two or three I don't have the strength left to chataranga to up dog and just lower all the way for cobra instead. Just did all 12 like a pro arms aren't even mildly grumbling, let alone yelling at me. 2 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »ZOMG, Trendweight has me at goal!! It's my old goal, I hadn't changed it yet cos I just kinda sorta wanted to see it say I was there at least once. So yay!! That was nice, because I already have my PMS bloat on, plus a little water weight from training maybe. I will now go change that by 2 kg and it can joyfully tell me how many more weeks it's going to take...
Congrats! If you've hit your old goal during the phase of water retention, I'm going to assume that the extra 2kg isn't too far away lol.
Yeah, it's probably more like a kg away I'd say. Previous low (scale weight) at the end of last week was 1.4 kg off goal. So weight for the first few days of diet break are going to be pretty meaningless - probably have a little more PMS bloat to put on, strength training tomorrow, full day (6-7 hours) hike on Sunday, carb-loading for that tomorrow, lots of carbs while hiking...yeah, the waters will be muddy!!
Funnily, with doing refeeds, I am way less frustrated by scale swings than I was previously, even though they are much more dramatic. I know that my lows tend to show ~a week after ovulation and ~a week after start of TOM once hormonal water and refeed weight has wooshed off, which has so far coincided with day before/day of refeed, though that's shifting due to my not 28 day cycle.
And thus, the psychological benefit of refeeds to promote the idea of what happens when transitioning to maintenance calories from a deficit It's a great way to get people used to the concept of controlled freedom / mindful eating / flexible dieting and learn about their own bodies in the process.
We're not slaves to a number on scale... which reminds me of the thread last night that @VintageFeline also responded to. I didn't have the energy to go ham sandwich troll but I probably expended a good dozen calories from cringing lmao.
Heh.
Nony will tell you, I am about ready to go ham on my scale because I am weeks into not seeing an appreciable loss (though did have a sort of whoosh yesterday at last) but at the same time, all I have to do is look at my diary and see there is no possible way I have at worst maintained. There's a deficit but I am working with a new device with new numbers so things are a bit grey right now. Add in, as I have previously talked about, I retain water like nothing else and it really can just take seemingly forever to work out what's happening. So I have to just wait it out. If I didn't I'd be eating about 500 gross calories by this point.
Totally understand the feeling. In the throes of my consistent losses, seeing "long term" stalls (as measured by my own impatience in the course of 3 weeks lol) led me to the same result. There's a bit of a balance between device calculated calorie burns to dictate deficits and actual calories our bodies are actually expending (measurable only in a metabolic ward), so it's possible that maybe there's some scaling that needs to happen for a slight deficit.. or it could truly be one of those moments where the body will just lose at its own pace whenever it feels like and patience is the only thing that will be needed.
The stall is not unusual, frustrating yes, unusual, no. I'm one of those people who swings about all over the place all the time whilst in a deficit. Weirdly when I eat at maintenance I hold pretty steady and that steadying is immediate. I wish that translated to my losses so neatly!
I have already made a manual adjustment to my MFP calories to allow for what I think are inflated adjustments but regardless, at no point in 4 out of the last 4 weeks have I eaten above sedentary maintenance. So there's a deficit. When my body deigns to depuff every few days there are tape measure differences. I'm just going to have to give it another couple of weeks to see where I really am and confidently adjust from there. Right now it would just be fiddling round the edges and there's no point in that when you're trying to get as clear a picture as possible in the shortest time possible. And I say shortest time in the context that I always need a good 8 weeks to see what the trend is.0 -
collectingblues wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »
Using myself as an example, if being on a cut for 1 year has resulted in a scale weight of 172-175 with bf% around 10-12%, maintenance for me would be roughly an additional 600-900kcal per day. Due to the buffer of glycogen loading, water weight, sudden influx of nutrients, I may jump up to 182 or so for a couple weeks and settle around 178 and maybe 13-15% bf by the time I achieve homeostasis, due to increased TDEE from adaptive thermogenesis.
Can i ask how you figure the 182 (so a 7-10 pound increase), and then the 178?
This is where my biggest mind struggle is right now -- the fact that OK, even if I can accept that I'm going to gain, there's no literature about what expected gains might be. Which is what's got me doing a "NOPE", because I am not particularly skilled at navigating the unknown.
Self tested I imagine.
I'm going to refer you back to a discussion you had with heybales for you to read again. I know this is all causing so much anxiety and you can't yet bring yourself to do what's needed but perhaps re-reading will help with planting and growing the seed.collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »So ... primary care appointment today. He thinks that indeed, it is a cortisol issue caused by some of the blood sugar issues from this summer (I was having lots of problems with hypos), the underfeeding (to use his terms), and thanks to the female triad mess, my body behaving as if it is "chemically underweight" (which I now think is the most ridiculous term ever). He feels that this is likely where my weight will settle out, which ... well, I'm torn between crying and wine.
He also set *his* bottom limit for where my weight should sit. Which is right about where I was in April, so understandably, he's not super keen on me trying to get there again. I have opinions on this.
He urged me to listen to the dietitian (whose advice mirrors this thread), and to try to trust that it's not going to skyrocket forever and ever. And it's that latter that I have an issue with right now.
Logic tells me that I should try this refeed thing for actual, but I have no idea how my body will *actually* respond.
Is it at all possible for you to stop weighing yourself to give the refeed a shot at working?
I would like to think yes, but I also know that I don't trust the process (or my body). I used to not even have a scale, but then I freaked out, and at the next weight, saw that I'd gained 7 pounds in the year without the scale (it was not a long experiment).
If my gym had a scale, I'd feel better about it, but it doesn't -- and I'm not sure I like blindly trusting whatever provider scale (my endo's office always runs high, and I'm not sure how my PCP's scale runs) is in use.
Is there a reason why you need to be at a lower weight? I think from what you've previously said in this thread, you're at 130 pounds which I think for your height is absolutely fine?
Perhaps being at a higher weight than say, 5-10 pounds less may be way easier to maintain for your body in the long run (rather than trying to exhaust yourself with restriction and extensive training).
Because I'm not happy at this weight. Period.
I mean, let's phrase it this way: Let's say you gain 5-10 percent of your starting weight in just six months with no explanation. Are you OK with it?
If you are, I'd be curious to know how/why and see if there are lessons I can learn from it.
If you aren't, you understand why I'm not either.
Did only the number for weight go up - but no measurements?
Who sees you naked on your scale besides you?
How did you decide what was a good number to weigh, and that was based on....?
Is what you've been doing recently for weight loss working well still?
How long has it been working lately?
Any other numbers with your physical self that you are as .... interested .... in being at a certain number?
What are they?
In order ...
1) Well, some slight fluctuations in measurements. But I don't believe for a minute that in the absence of dedicated strength training -- and between running, swimming, barre, and spin, I'm not adding one more thing in -- that one can possibly gain 10 more pounds without measurements increasing.
2) Does that matter? I see me. I have to live with me.
3) Because it's where I felt more marginally comfortable. I like the size I fit into at this weight. I like that I feel more comfortable with fluctuations at that weight. I was finally out of double digit sizes. I could finally take a selfie and not feel horrible and ugly. Like hell am I going back to a higher weight again.
4 and 5) Well, that's the problem.
6) I'd like to see the body fat reduce, but that's not the priority. I have a running time that I'd like to hit -- and ironically, my "ideal" running weight according to several online calculators is where I was pre-May.
I don't expect anyone who has never dealt with body dysmorphia or an eating disorder to get it. But that's my reality.
I guess my only closing remark would be that if you/anyone could give me peer-reviewed work or anything even close to that that says nope, that ugly number from Monday is where things top out, and on average you gain X pounds, then I'd be on board.
But I can't find anyone who is willing or able to do that. So while I believe whole heartedly in this in concept, I'm not willing to adapt it in self until I've got the data showing me that things will not skyrocket.
So the only thing where the raw weight actually makes a difference - and that is running pace.
The other things you mention ("see me", "like the size", "double digit sizes","take a selfie") are about size - and size is not always correlated with weight - hardly.
But you are right - until you get the counseling that creates that ah-ha moment or a way to deal with disconnecting things not connected in reality - you'll have problems.
Considering 20 lbs water weight gain is usually maxed talked about purely from cortisol - one would have to know exactly how much you have gained of it already to know what your potential max is.
But the eating more should help body relax stress - but it sounds like you could more than make up for that, so probably no help.
So one study showed that it took a group on extreme diet, eating at new measured maintenance level, to gain back some of their lost TDEE of 496, back up to only 275 cal below expected - 3 months.
So it appears that body can start doing some slight recovery just eating at new suppressed TDEE.
Which means it increased almost 200 cal in 3 months.
Sadly you aren't in research study to be measured out the whazoo to confirm where suppressed TDEE is, you could possibly eat less and suppress more.
So stick where you are at for 3 months then.
No, I know -- and I appreciate the patience. I am just looking for more data as we (the dietitian and I) head down that path, without my trying to rage at the universe at the same time.
We know where my TDEE is -- that's a known factor thanks to the lab testing. The dietitian said worst case scenario, we're looking at 6 months to a year for things to settle out. Which is long, but whatever.
But the "you're going to gain X amount of weight" bit is the unknown variable, and that's the roadblock. Because I am not willing to risk additional weight bumps with an unknown of where that is going to top out.
Unless you were given the expensive option of double-labeled water to drink, and collected all urine samples were studied - the lab testing you received did NOT make a known factor of where your TDEE is.
And even if a double-labeled water collection for a couple days - that's the TDEE for those days, not as the seasons change.
I'm betting they did an RMR test, which would be your TDEE if you sat around like that all day long literally.
But that's not reality.
You average TDEE is most useful on weekly basis - and even that is frequently enough it changes decently from normal daily activity changes week to week, to speak nothing of the seasonal changes that effect most.
Flexibility is key because of what the body does already, so in approach, in accepting results, ect.
Why a goal weight number is impossible and unrealistic - range is the thing.
Well, when I say known factor -- it's as accurate as anything *can* be in this setting. I'm fairly consistent in my activity, and thus am pretty confident at least in that ballpark number. But good point that I should repeat testing in the spring/summer, to see where that compares to fall.
I'd even settle for a range or ballpark number of an expected gain. Because I know that ranges are normal, and I'm OK with that. But I can't find even predicted gain range/ballpark/percentage.
With that said: I get why this doesn't bother other people, and I suspect it's best for all involved if I just shut up about it.1 -
collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »
Using myself as an example, if being on a cut for 1 year has resulted in a scale weight of 172-175 with bf% around 10-12%, maintenance for me would be roughly an additional 600-900kcal per day. Due to the buffer of glycogen loading, water weight, sudden influx of nutrients, I may jump up to 182 or so for a couple weeks and settle around 178 and maybe 13-15% bf by the time I achieve homeostasis, due to increased TDEE from adaptive thermogenesis.
Can i ask how you figure the 182 (so a 7-10 pound increase), and then the 178?
This is where my biggest mind struggle is right now -- the fact that OK, even if I can accept that I'm going to gain, there's no literature about what expected gains might be. Which is what's got me doing a "NOPE", because I am not particularly skilled at navigating the unknown.
Self tested I imagine.
I'm going to refer you back to a discussion you had with heybales for you to read again. I know this is all causing so much anxiety and you can't yet bring yourself to do what's needed but perhaps re-reading will help with planting and growing the seed.collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »So ... primary care appointment today. He thinks that indeed, it is a cortisol issue caused by some of the blood sugar issues from this summer (I was having lots of problems with hypos), the underfeeding (to use his terms), and thanks to the female triad mess, my body behaving as if it is "chemically underweight" (which I now think is the most ridiculous term ever). He feels that this is likely where my weight will settle out, which ... well, I'm torn between crying and wine.
He also set *his* bottom limit for where my weight should sit. Which is right about where I was in April, so understandably, he's not super keen on me trying to get there again. I have opinions on this.
He urged me to listen to the dietitian (whose advice mirrors this thread), and to try to trust that it's not going to skyrocket forever and ever. And it's that latter that I have an issue with right now.
Logic tells me that I should try this refeed thing for actual, but I have no idea how my body will *actually* respond.
Is it at all possible for you to stop weighing yourself to give the refeed a shot at working?
I would like to think yes, but I also know that I don't trust the process (or my body). I used to not even have a scale, but then I freaked out, and at the next weight, saw that I'd gained 7 pounds in the year without the scale (it was not a long experiment).
If my gym had a scale, I'd feel better about it, but it doesn't -- and I'm not sure I like blindly trusting whatever provider scale (my endo's office always runs high, and I'm not sure how my PCP's scale runs) is in use.
Is there a reason why you need to be at a lower weight? I think from what you've previously said in this thread, you're at 130 pounds which I think for your height is absolutely fine?
Perhaps being at a higher weight than say, 5-10 pounds less may be way easier to maintain for your body in the long run (rather than trying to exhaust yourself with restriction and extensive training).
Because I'm not happy at this weight. Period.
I mean, let's phrase it this way: Let's say you gain 5-10 percent of your starting weight in just six months with no explanation. Are you OK with it?
If you are, I'd be curious to know how/why and see if there are lessons I can learn from it.
If you aren't, you understand why I'm not either.
Did only the number for weight go up - but no measurements?
Who sees you naked on your scale besides you?
How did you decide what was a good number to weigh, and that was based on....?
Is what you've been doing recently for weight loss working well still?
How long has it been working lately?
Any other numbers with your physical self that you are as .... interested .... in being at a certain number?
What are they?
In order ...
1) Well, some slight fluctuations in measurements. But I don't believe for a minute that in the absence of dedicated strength training -- and between running, swimming, barre, and spin, I'm not adding one more thing in -- that one can possibly gain 10 more pounds without measurements increasing.
2) Does that matter? I see me. I have to live with me.
3) Because it's where I felt more marginally comfortable. I like the size I fit into at this weight. I like that I feel more comfortable with fluctuations at that weight. I was finally out of double digit sizes. I could finally take a selfie and not feel horrible and ugly. Like hell am I going back to a higher weight again.
4 and 5) Well, that's the problem.
6) I'd like to see the body fat reduce, but that's not the priority. I have a running time that I'd like to hit -- and ironically, my "ideal" running weight according to several online calculators is where I was pre-May.
I don't expect anyone who has never dealt with body dysmorphia or an eating disorder to get it. But that's my reality.
I guess my only closing remark would be that if you/anyone could give me peer-reviewed work or anything even close to that that says nope, that ugly number from Monday is where things top out, and on average you gain X pounds, then I'd be on board.
But I can't find anyone who is willing or able to do that. So while I believe whole heartedly in this in concept, I'm not willing to adapt it in self until I've got the data showing me that things will not skyrocket.
So the only thing where the raw weight actually makes a difference - and that is running pace.
The other things you mention ("see me", "like the size", "double digit sizes","take a selfie") are about size - and size is not always correlated with weight - hardly.
But you are right - until you get the counseling that creates that ah-ha moment or a way to deal with disconnecting things not connected in reality - you'll have problems.
Considering 20 lbs water weight gain is usually maxed talked about purely from cortisol - one would have to know exactly how much you have gained of it already to know what your potential max is.
But the eating more should help body relax stress - but it sounds like you could more than make up for that, so probably no help.
So one study showed that it took a group on extreme diet, eating at new measured maintenance level, to gain back some of their lost TDEE of 496, back up to only 275 cal below expected - 3 months.
So it appears that body can start doing some slight recovery just eating at new suppressed TDEE.
Which means it increased almost 200 cal in 3 months.
Sadly you aren't in research study to be measured out the whazoo to confirm where suppressed TDEE is, you could possibly eat less and suppress more.
So stick where you are at for 3 months then.
No, I know -- and I appreciate the patience. I am just looking for more data as we (the dietitian and I) head down that path, without my trying to rage at the universe at the same time.
We know where my TDEE is -- that's a known factor thanks to the lab testing. The dietitian said worst case scenario, we're looking at 6 months to a year for things to settle out. Which is long, but whatever.
But the "you're going to gain X amount of weight" bit is the unknown variable, and that's the roadblock. Because I am not willing to risk additional weight bumps with an unknown of where that is going to top out.
Unless you were given the expensive option of double-labeled water to drink, and collected all urine samples were studied - the lab testing you received did NOT make a known factor of where your TDEE is.
And even if a double-labeled water collection for a couple days - that's the TDEE for those days, not as the seasons change.
I'm betting they did an RMR test, which would be your TDEE if you sat around like that all day long literally.
But that's not reality.
You average TDEE is most useful on weekly basis - and even that is frequently enough it changes decently from normal daily activity changes week to week, to speak nothing of the seasonal changes that effect most.
Flexibility is key because of what the body does already, so in approach, in accepting results, ect.
Why a goal weight number is impossible and unrealistic - range is the thing.
Well, when I say known factor -- it's as accurate as anything *can* be in this setting. I'm fairly consistent in my activity, and thus am pretty confident at least in that ballpark number. But good point that I should repeat testing in the spring/summer, to see where that compares to fall.
I'd even settle for a range or ballpark number of an expected gain. Because I know that ranges are normal, and I'm OK with that. But I can't find even predicted gain range/ballpark/percentage.
With that said: I get why this doesn't bother other people, and I suspect it's best for all involved if I just shut up about it.
If you mean how much will you go up eating at maintenance, mine tends to be about a kg initially, then I have about a 2 kg up and down margin (ie my weight range that takes into account normal fluctuations). Bear in mind though, that I jump straight to maintenance, and I also tend to jump straight to not logging along with that! I suspect with actual controlled logging (ie actually eating at TDEE for sure), that kg jump either won't happen, or will settle out again, and then the range is obviously just day to day fluctuations. If you continue to gain weight at supposed maintenance beyond an initial little glycogen replenishment and extra food weight, then you're not eating at maintenance.
Given that most people give themselves a 5 lb goal range, and generally eat at maintenance with maybe occasional higher days, I'd say that's fairly normal. You're not going to blow up like a balloon 3 -
nexangelus wrote: »Maintenance calories can be fine tuned .. if you’re still losing weight at your calculated number, then increase kcals. Or increase the multiplier to allow for activity levels.
I think you have a solid plan, but I do want to just hone in on the 1 month surplus for muscle gain. Completely my own opinion, so take it as just some food for thought.
Any appreciable muscle mass you gain (I can’t recall aforementioned strength training volume) in a month, may be negated by a 6 month deficit following that. I’m not sure what your protein macros might be, but in a deficit protein needs increase to reduce lbm loss.
And if you’re already at a composition and training experience level well into the intermediate stages of lifting, lbm gains are going to be staggeringly slow so the surplus may need to be extended beyond a month.
Otherwise, if you still have body fat to lose and/or are at a novice level of weight training experience, hold maintenance calories while lifting heavy weight in an increasing linear progression, and to retain as much muscle mass as possible, keep progressively lifting heavier as you slowly reintroduce your deficit and keep protein levels appropriate to your lbm / aim for ~0.7g/lb of bodyweight / eat 0.8-1.2g/lb of target goal weight (old school bodybuilding method of protein calculation).
Third time lucky (on phone at work grrr)...
I eat between 136 and 200g of protein per day, have been doing this since May this year.
Surplus total of 2720 cals (might have to increase to 2970 for a bit we will see) is for 8 - 9 weeks. Maintenance is 2 weeks.
I have never lifted heavy in surplus or maintenance, apart from once for about 6 months in 2013. Trying it to see how strong I can get and how it improves the lifting. If anything I will just get some new pbs and prs. Any recomp will be a bonus.
Yeah being female, 43, intermediate lifter, menopausal mean this will be a challenge but I am determined to have food as my friend (not in that comfort eating binge come don't give a toss way). This is really helping even if the focus may be a tad too sharp at times....
Thanks @anubis609 for the shedloads of insight and head nodding moments! As well as this whole darn thread : )
You're welcome! I've only contributed what I can but any credit to starting the thread belongs to @Nony_Mouse
Lifting heavy/heavier during surplus/maintenance periods are actually optimal to use those extra calories for their main purpose > to build muscle. Otherwise, there's no real metabolic reason to be in a surplus aside from reversing the effects of a cut for hormonal, psychological, and satiety purposes; or medically assisting ED patients. Working with peri or post menopausal women, strength training in general serves a greater purpose than just achieving a certain body composition. Around this time, hormonal shifts trend toward a more androgenic state of metabolism and with the decreased estrogen/increased testosterone, body fat storage becomes more centralized around the midsection, and bone health becomes much more important to salvage, strengthen, and/or maintain.
I'll include Lyle's summary response to Alan Aragon's Research Review (https://alanaragon.com/aarr/ for those interested)@GottaBurnEmAll, thanks.
Yeah, it's not easy, as you know, and I've had this little problem for 30 years or so... That's why I wanted to post too. Hopefully, it will help someone else reading this thread. I also found the thread on willpower really interesting - I think I (and maybe others) focus so much on making everything else perfect (diet, exercise, work, home) that I don't know how much willpower/discipline I have left to try and fix things especially since the cycle generally allows me to lose and maintain anyway. It's just a terrible, terrible way of doing it.
@psuLemon, thanks for the post on the reverse dieting video. I'll have to watch it. I understand, as what @anubis609 mentioned, that it's increasing slowly rather than jumping into maintenance immediately and that there are disadvantages to this (Lyle too mentioned it in one of his podcasts). For me though, I'm maintaining CI but lowering CO as the way to reverse diet. I think this makes sense?!!
For general health reasons and maintaining body composition, you may want to keep the CO and increase CI. Not that it has to be done this way, but being active, in and of itself, has components to optimizing nutrient partitioning and substrate storage.
You can maybe find a balance between the two, where you decrease the volume of activity but maintaining some just to avoid complete sedentary status, and increasing a little of the intake to maintain a relatively enjoyably active lifestyle.
I do a bulk/cut cycle based around intense training for my ultra and a couple of other races. I cannot sustain such intensity all year round (because it takes a lot of time and I want to do other sports as well). When it reduces, I maintain CI (which at peak will be quite high (above 3k)) and lower it as and when hunger reduces but only to a level I'm comfortable with and compensate with doing more resistance training because I'm now in surplus and will start gaining weight.
Based on what I've learnt from this thread though, I've been doing it wrong so I need to think about it more.
Ah yes, then I wouldn't recommend you to endurance train so intensely either. That also isn't sustainable for anyone. Though, if at peak training your intake is >3k then, take the high end of your training deload average and absolutely include resistance training.
I'm sure by now I sound like I have a bias to resistance/strength training, and I do lol, but more along the vein that it provides the most benefit when compared to aerobic activity.
Energy balance is going to be a moving target for the most part. It hardly ever plays out to precise math (or maths for the UK friends). Don't be afraid to play around with the numbers in either direction as your body responds, taking into account age/mood/hormonal pattern/overall wellness, but in general, it's better to overshoot calorie intake estimate and taper down from there instead of the opposite.
That shot from Lyle's recommendations for menopausal women is incredibly helpful to me. Thank you for posting it.
I can't quite follow it to the T due to issues I experience following some of the recommendations (caffeine and I don't get on well, for instance). Will moderate weights with volume be okay, do you think? I have issues with exertional migraines occurring too frequently when I push it with heavy lifting, I just had to back off trying to do it. I get enough migraines as it is.2 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Why do I doubt greatly your strength training is anywhere near aerobic!
Now - when doing the long hikes, are the trails secluded enough it won't matter if you load up on coffee. ;-)
This is a good point. Coffee makes me pee so frequently very shortly after I have drunk it. I drink a couple of coffees in the morning but don't always immediately workout. If I do you can almost guarantee I need to stop at some point for a pee break. Often just during warmup when the sudden bobbing about makes my bladder decide it needstopeerightnow.
I don't even drink coffee and I have this issue. All day long.
Pro tip: don't expect to have a baby at 40 without consequences.4 -
collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »
Using myself as an example, if being on a cut for 1 year has resulted in a scale weight of 172-175 with bf% around 10-12%, maintenance for me would be roughly an additional 600-900kcal per day. Due to the buffer of glycogen loading, water weight, sudden influx of nutrients, I may jump up to 182 or so for a couple weeks and settle around 178 and maybe 13-15% bf by the time I achieve homeostasis, due to increased TDEE from adaptive thermogenesis.
Can i ask how you figure the 182 (so a 7-10 pound increase), and then the 178?
This is where my biggest mind struggle is right now -- the fact that OK, even if I can accept that I'm going to gain, there's no literature about what expected gains might be. Which is what's got me doing a "NOPE", because I am not particularly skilled at navigating the unknown.
Self tested I imagine.
I'm going to refer you back to a discussion you had with heybales for you to read again. I know this is all causing so much anxiety and you can't yet bring yourself to do what's needed but perhaps re-reading will help with planting and growing the seed.collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »So ... primary care appointment today. He thinks that indeed, it is a cortisol issue caused by some of the blood sugar issues from this summer (I was having lots of problems with hypos), the underfeeding (to use his terms), and thanks to the female triad mess, my body behaving as if it is "chemically underweight" (which I now think is the most ridiculous term ever). He feels that this is likely where my weight will settle out, which ... well, I'm torn between crying and wine.
He also set *his* bottom limit for where my weight should sit. Which is right about where I was in April, so understandably, he's not super keen on me trying to get there again. I have opinions on this.
He urged me to listen to the dietitian (whose advice mirrors this thread), and to try to trust that it's not going to skyrocket forever and ever. And it's that latter that I have an issue with right now.
Logic tells me that I should try this refeed thing for actual, but I have no idea how my body will *actually* respond.
Is it at all possible for you to stop weighing yourself to give the refeed a shot at working?
I would like to think yes, but I also know that I don't trust the process (or my body). I used to not even have a scale, but then I freaked out, and at the next weight, saw that I'd gained 7 pounds in the year without the scale (it was not a long experiment).
If my gym had a scale, I'd feel better about it, but it doesn't -- and I'm not sure I like blindly trusting whatever provider scale (my endo's office always runs high, and I'm not sure how my PCP's scale runs) is in use.
Is there a reason why you need to be at a lower weight? I think from what you've previously said in this thread, you're at 130 pounds which I think for your height is absolutely fine?
Perhaps being at a higher weight than say, 5-10 pounds less may be way easier to maintain for your body in the long run (rather than trying to exhaust yourself with restriction and extensive training).
Because I'm not happy at this weight. Period.
I mean, let's phrase it this way: Let's say you gain 5-10 percent of your starting weight in just six months with no explanation. Are you OK with it?
If you are, I'd be curious to know how/why and see if there are lessons I can learn from it.
If you aren't, you understand why I'm not either.
Did only the number for weight go up - but no measurements?
Who sees you naked on your scale besides you?
How did you decide what was a good number to weigh, and that was based on....?
Is what you've been doing recently for weight loss working well still?
How long has it been working lately?
Any other numbers with your physical self that you are as .... interested .... in being at a certain number?
What are they?
In order ...
1) Well, some slight fluctuations in measurements. But I don't believe for a minute that in the absence of dedicated strength training -- and between running, swimming, barre, and spin, I'm not adding one more thing in -- that one can possibly gain 10 more pounds without measurements increasing.
2) Does that matter? I see me. I have to live with me.
3) Because it's where I felt more marginally comfortable. I like the size I fit into at this weight. I like that I feel more comfortable with fluctuations at that weight. I was finally out of double digit sizes. I could finally take a selfie and not feel horrible and ugly. Like hell am I going back to a higher weight again.
4 and 5) Well, that's the problem.
6) I'd like to see the body fat reduce, but that's not the priority. I have a running time that I'd like to hit -- and ironically, my "ideal" running weight according to several online calculators is where I was pre-May.
I don't expect anyone who has never dealt with body dysmorphia or an eating disorder to get it. But that's my reality.
I guess my only closing remark would be that if you/anyone could give me peer-reviewed work or anything even close to that that says nope, that ugly number from Monday is where things top out, and on average you gain X pounds, then I'd be on board.
But I can't find anyone who is willing or able to do that. So while I believe whole heartedly in this in concept, I'm not willing to adapt it in self until I've got the data showing me that things will not skyrocket.
So the only thing where the raw weight actually makes a difference - and that is running pace.
The other things you mention ("see me", "like the size", "double digit sizes","take a selfie") are about size - and size is not always correlated with weight - hardly.
But you are right - until you get the counseling that creates that ah-ha moment or a way to deal with disconnecting things not connected in reality - you'll have problems.
Considering 20 lbs water weight gain is usually maxed talked about purely from cortisol - one would have to know exactly how much you have gained of it already to know what your potential max is.
But the eating more should help body relax stress - but it sounds like you could more than make up for that, so probably no help.
So one study showed that it took a group on extreme diet, eating at new measured maintenance level, to gain back some of their lost TDEE of 496, back up to only 275 cal below expected - 3 months.
So it appears that body can start doing some slight recovery just eating at new suppressed TDEE.
Which means it increased almost 200 cal in 3 months.
Sadly you aren't in research study to be measured out the whazoo to confirm where suppressed TDEE is, you could possibly eat less and suppress more.
So stick where you are at for 3 months then.
No, I know -- and I appreciate the patience. I am just looking for more data as we (the dietitian and I) head down that path, without my trying to rage at the universe at the same time.
We know where my TDEE is -- that's a known factor thanks to the lab testing. The dietitian said worst case scenario, we're looking at 6 months to a year for things to settle out. Which is long, but whatever.
But the "you're going to gain X amount of weight" bit is the unknown variable, and that's the roadblock. Because I am not willing to risk additional weight bumps with an unknown of where that is going to top out.
Unless you were given the expensive option of double-labeled water to drink, and collected all urine samples were studied - the lab testing you received did NOT make a known factor of where your TDEE is.
And even if a double-labeled water collection for a couple days - that's the TDEE for those days, not as the seasons change.
I'm betting they did an RMR test, which would be your TDEE if you sat around like that all day long literally.
But that's not reality.
You average TDEE is most useful on weekly basis - and even that is frequently enough it changes decently from normal daily activity changes week to week, to speak nothing of the seasonal changes that effect most.
Flexibility is key because of what the body does already, so in approach, in accepting results, ect.
Why a goal weight number is impossible and unrealistic - range is the thing.
Well, when I say known factor -- it's as accurate as anything *can* be in this setting. I'm fairly consistent in my activity, and thus am pretty confident at least in that ballpark number. But good point that I should repeat testing in the spring/summer, to see where that compares to fall.
I'd even settle for a range or ballpark number of an expected gain. Because I know that ranges are normal, and I'm OK with that. But I can't find even predicted gain range/ballpark/percentage.
With that said: I get why this doesn't bother other people, and I suspect it's best for all involved if I just shut up about it.
To answer your earlier post, yes as @VintageFeline suspected, my example fluctuation is from self-testing. I personally bounce between a range of a dozen pounds upward when suddenly reversing a deficit into either maintenance or slight surplus. The settling point is somewhere halfway between the highest spike in weight jump for me.
I understand your concern is the actual unknown range that may or may not be as wildly volatile as the numbers I provided. The unfortunate truth is that it's hard to provide even an average range of fluctuation since it's completely individual per person.
I can only guess that reverse dieting *may* reduce perceived psychological stress in your case, however, the burden is the possible refusal to keep scaling up. If according to your doctor the long-term is going to be achieved in 6 months to a year, that's a long time to reverse diet.
I've shared my current dysmorphia and ED history a few pages ago, and I'm still dealing with them as best as I can. From that aspect, those moments where I may say #fuckit and just eat freely (not binge), are the moments I am very hyperaware that I am completely making the choice to have a planned/structured refeed without associating any negative feelings of guilt and numerical consequences are purely by nature of an increased influx of food volume and metabolism. Much like I trained myself to feel a certain way with numbers and self-image, I had to learn to train myself back out of those feelings and thoughts. I don't express much emotion, to everyone else's dismay, but I'm okay with it since I've associated any actions I perform to be toward my benefit. This includes accepting gravitational fluctuations on a scale.
The main point I'm trying to make is that there's going to be a level of unknown discomfort you are going to experience in weight spike. I, myself, would much rather experience it all at once instead of slowly experiencing it in increments. I recover much more quickly that way. And experiencing it multiple times becomes expected and the associated pain is dulled to just looking at it as factual response. So, express how you feel for therapeutic reasons since you're not alone, but I also don't feel that it's beneficial to stress over what hasn't happened yet. Realistically, and much more appropriately, it's okay to feel stress over what has happened, or what is currently happening.
I'm sure it's not much consolation I'm providing, but I don't believe in giving false hope or reassurance when no one really knows until it happens. Just do the best you can and focus on the positives you know to be true.6 -
A nice little NSV for me, my thighs have shrunk! I was looking at them when I was doing yoga, and thought 'hmmm, you guys look smaller...', and sure enough (my upper thighs are my really obvious fatty bit, not so much that they're disproportionately big compared to the rest of me, that's just where the obvious visible layer of fat is). Srsly, not that long ago, the tops of them looked like they had toddler arm floats around them (this was after I'd started really strength training in earnest again, and the muscle underneath had tightened up a bit, made the fat around the tops really obvious). 5
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »nexangelus wrote: »Maintenance calories can be fine tuned .. if you’re still losing weight at your calculated number, then increase kcals. Or increase the multiplier to allow for activity levels.
I think you have a solid plan, but I do want to just hone in on the 1 month surplus for muscle gain. Completely my own opinion, so take it as just some food for thought.
Any appreciable muscle mass you gain (I can’t recall aforementioned strength training volume) in a month, may be negated by a 6 month deficit following that. I’m not sure what your protein macros might be, but in a deficit protein needs increase to reduce lbm loss.
And if you’re already at a composition and training experience level well into the intermediate stages of lifting, lbm gains are going to be staggeringly slow so the surplus may need to be extended beyond a month.
Otherwise, if you still have body fat to lose and/or are at a novice level of weight training experience, hold maintenance calories while lifting heavy weight in an increasing linear progression, and to retain as much muscle mass as possible, keep progressively lifting heavier as you slowly reintroduce your deficit and keep protein levels appropriate to your lbm / aim for ~0.7g/lb of bodyweight / eat 0.8-1.2g/lb of target goal weight (old school bodybuilding method of protein calculation).
Third time lucky (on phone at work grrr)...
I eat between 136 and 200g of protein per day, have been doing this since May this year.
Surplus total of 2720 cals (might have to increase to 2970 for a bit we will see) is for 8 - 9 weeks. Maintenance is 2 weeks.
I have never lifted heavy in surplus or maintenance, apart from once for about 6 months in 2013. Trying it to see how strong I can get and how it improves the lifting. If anything I will just get some new pbs and prs. Any recomp will be a bonus.
Yeah being female, 43, intermediate lifter, menopausal mean this will be a challenge but I am determined to have food as my friend (not in that comfort eating binge come don't give a toss way). This is really helping even if the focus may be a tad too sharp at times....
Thanks @anubis609 for the shedloads of insight and head nodding moments! As well as this whole darn thread : )
You're welcome! I've only contributed what I can but any credit to starting the thread belongs to @Nony_Mouse
Lifting heavy/heavier during surplus/maintenance periods are actually optimal to use those extra calories for their main purpose > to build muscle. Otherwise, there's no real metabolic reason to be in a surplus aside from reversing the effects of a cut for hormonal, psychological, and satiety purposes; or medically assisting ED patients. Working with peri or post menopausal women, strength training in general serves a greater purpose than just achieving a certain body composition. Around this time, hormonal shifts trend toward a more androgenic state of metabolism and with the decreased estrogen/increased testosterone, body fat storage becomes more centralized around the midsection, and bone health becomes much more important to salvage, strengthen, and/or maintain.
I'll include Lyle's summary response to Alan Aragon's Research Review (https://alanaragon.com/aarr/ for those interested)@GottaBurnEmAll, thanks.
Yeah, it's not easy, as you know, and I've had this little problem for 30 years or so... That's why I wanted to post too. Hopefully, it will help someone else reading this thread. I also found the thread on willpower really interesting - I think I (and maybe others) focus so much on making everything else perfect (diet, exercise, work, home) that I don't know how much willpower/discipline I have left to try and fix things especially since the cycle generally allows me to lose and maintain anyway. It's just a terrible, terrible way of doing it.
@psuLemon, thanks for the post on the reverse dieting video. I'll have to watch it. I understand, as what @anubis609 mentioned, that it's increasing slowly rather than jumping into maintenance immediately and that there are disadvantages to this (Lyle too mentioned it in one of his podcasts). For me though, I'm maintaining CI but lowering CO as the way to reverse diet. I think this makes sense?!!
For general health reasons and maintaining body composition, you may want to keep the CO and increase CI. Not that it has to be done this way, but being active, in and of itself, has components to optimizing nutrient partitioning and substrate storage.
You can maybe find a balance between the two, where you decrease the volume of activity but maintaining some just to avoid complete sedentary status, and increasing a little of the intake to maintain a relatively enjoyably active lifestyle.
I do a bulk/cut cycle based around intense training for my ultra and a couple of other races. I cannot sustain such intensity all year round (because it takes a lot of time and I want to do other sports as well). When it reduces, I maintain CI (which at peak will be quite high (above 3k)) and lower it as and when hunger reduces but only to a level I'm comfortable with and compensate with doing more resistance training because I'm now in surplus and will start gaining weight.
Based on what I've learnt from this thread though, I've been doing it wrong so I need to think about it more.
Ah yes, then I wouldn't recommend you to endurance train so intensely either. That also isn't sustainable for anyone. Though, if at peak training your intake is >3k then, take the high end of your training deload average and absolutely include resistance training.
I'm sure by now I sound like I have a bias to resistance/strength training, and I do lol, but more along the vein that it provides the most benefit when compared to aerobic activity.
Energy balance is going to be a moving target for the most part. It hardly ever plays out to precise math (or maths for the UK friends). Don't be afraid to play around with the numbers in either direction as your body responds, taking into account age/mood/hormonal pattern/overall wellness, but in general, it's better to overshoot calorie intake estimate and taper down from there instead of the opposite.
That shot from Lyle's recommendations for menopausal women is incredibly helpful to me. Thank you for posting it.
I can't quite follow it to the T due to issues I experience following some of the recommendations (caffeine and I don't get on well, for instance). Will moderate weights with volume be okay, do you think? I have issues with exertional migraines occurring too frequently when I push it with heavy lifting, I just had to back off trying to do it. I get enough migraines as it is.
You're very welcome! Caffeine or stimulants don't have to necessarily be followed. The topic was for menopausal women dealing with midsection/abdominal fat gain. The thermogenic and ergogenic effect of caffeine is more the benefit, so if you can tolerate tea, that's good enough, otherwise, abstain if it's disagreeable.
As for training loads "heavy and challenging" is subjective to what you feel. Progressive overload can come in the form of increasing weights, reps, or sets. As long as total volume increases over time, there is a benefit.
On that note, sometimes it might seem like a more viable strategy to slightly increase the weight on something like a compound movement such as a squat instead of elongating the workout to fit in another set or another rep. Eg: squatting 125lbs for 5x5, then adding 5lbs every week or every other week may be much more conducive to time spent in the gym and joint health than squatting 125lbs for 5x6, or 6x5, or 5x10, or even 10x10 if you're feeling Russian lol.
So, just pay attention to how you're feeling and even undulating periods or days of moderate/heavy weight with moderate/low reps and light weight with high reps are all okay in terms of increasing volume.
ETA: Also increasing frequency is another method of increasing volume. If you squat 1-2x / week, and add another light day, boom.. increased volume. Just don't jump right into squatting/benching/deadlifting everyday. There would be literally no room to increase volume except in weight.. plus that's just pure overtraining haha0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »nexangelus wrote: »Maintenance calories can be fine tuned .. if you’re still losing weight at your calculated number, then increase kcals. Or increase the multiplier to allow for activity levels.
I think you have a solid plan, but I do want to just hone in on the 1 month surplus for muscle gain. Completely my own opinion, so take it as just some food for thought.
Any appreciable muscle mass you gain (I can’t recall aforementioned strength training volume) in a month, may be negated by a 6 month deficit following that. I’m not sure what your protein macros might be, but in a deficit protein needs increase to reduce lbm loss.
And if you’re already at a composition and training experience level well into the intermediate stages of lifting, lbm gains are going to be staggeringly slow so the surplus may need to be extended beyond a month.
Otherwise, if you still have body fat to lose and/or are at a novice level of weight training experience, hold maintenance calories while lifting heavy weight in an increasing linear progression, and to retain as much muscle mass as possible, keep progressively lifting heavier as you slowly reintroduce your deficit and keep protein levels appropriate to your lbm / aim for ~0.7g/lb of bodyweight / eat 0.8-1.2g/lb of target goal weight (old school bodybuilding method of protein calculation).
Third time lucky (on phone at work grrr)...
I eat between 136 and 200g of protein per day, have been doing this since May this year.
Surplus total of 2720 cals (might have to increase to 2970 for a bit we will see) is for 8 - 9 weeks. Maintenance is 2 weeks.
I have never lifted heavy in surplus or maintenance, apart from once for about 6 months in 2013. Trying it to see how strong I can get and how it improves the lifting. If anything I will just get some new pbs and prs. Any recomp will be a bonus.
Yeah being female, 43, intermediate lifter, menopausal mean this will be a challenge but I am determined to have food as my friend (not in that comfort eating binge come don't give a toss way). This is really helping even if the focus may be a tad too sharp at times....
Thanks @anubis609 for the shedloads of insight and head nodding moments! As well as this whole darn thread : )
You're welcome! I've only contributed what I can but any credit to starting the thread belongs to @Nony_Mouse
Lifting heavy/heavier during surplus/maintenance periods are actually optimal to use those extra calories for their main purpose > to build muscle. Otherwise, there's no real metabolic reason to be in a surplus aside from reversing the effects of a cut for hormonal, psychological, and satiety purposes; or medically assisting ED patients. Working with peri or post menopausal women, strength training in general serves a greater purpose than just achieving a certain body composition. Around this time, hormonal shifts trend toward a more androgenic state of metabolism and with the decreased estrogen/increased testosterone, body fat storage becomes more centralized around the midsection, and bone health becomes much more important to salvage, strengthen, and/or maintain.
I'll include Lyle's summary response to Alan Aragon's Research Review (https://alanaragon.com/aarr/ for those interested)@GottaBurnEmAll, thanks.
Yeah, it's not easy, as you know, and I've had this little problem for 30 years or so... That's why I wanted to post too. Hopefully, it will help someone else reading this thread. I also found the thread on willpower really interesting - I think I (and maybe others) focus so much on making everything else perfect (diet, exercise, work, home) that I don't know how much willpower/discipline I have left to try and fix things especially since the cycle generally allows me to lose and maintain anyway. It's just a terrible, terrible way of doing it.
@psuLemon, thanks for the post on the reverse dieting video. I'll have to watch it. I understand, as what @anubis609 mentioned, that it's increasing slowly rather than jumping into maintenance immediately and that there are disadvantages to this (Lyle too mentioned it in one of his podcasts). For me though, I'm maintaining CI but lowering CO as the way to reverse diet. I think this makes sense?!!
For general health reasons and maintaining body composition, you may want to keep the CO and increase CI. Not that it has to be done this way, but being active, in and of itself, has components to optimizing nutrient partitioning and substrate storage.
You can maybe find a balance between the two, where you decrease the volume of activity but maintaining some just to avoid complete sedentary status, and increasing a little of the intake to maintain a relatively enjoyably active lifestyle.
I do a bulk/cut cycle based around intense training for my ultra and a couple of other races. I cannot sustain such intensity all year round (because it takes a lot of time and I want to do other sports as well). When it reduces, I maintain CI (which at peak will be quite high (above 3k)) and lower it as and when hunger reduces but only to a level I'm comfortable with and compensate with doing more resistance training because I'm now in surplus and will start gaining weight.
Based on what I've learnt from this thread though, I've been doing it wrong so I need to think about it more.
Ah yes, then I wouldn't recommend you to endurance train so intensely either. That also isn't sustainable for anyone. Though, if at peak training your intake is >3k then, take the high end of your training deload average and absolutely include resistance training.
I'm sure by now I sound like I have a bias to resistance/strength training, and I do lol, but more along the vein that it provides the most benefit when compared to aerobic activity.
Energy balance is going to be a moving target for the most part. It hardly ever plays out to precise math (or maths for the UK friends). Don't be afraid to play around with the numbers in either direction as your body responds, taking into account age/mood/hormonal pattern/overall wellness, but in general, it's better to overshoot calorie intake estimate and taper down from there instead of the opposite.
That shot from Lyle's recommendations for menopausal women is incredibly helpful to me. Thank you for posting it.
I can't quite follow it to the T due to issues I experience following some of the recommendations (caffeine and I don't get on well, for instance). Will moderate weights with volume be okay, do you think? I have issues with exertional migraines occurring too frequently when I push it with heavy lifting, I just had to back off trying to do it. I get enough migraines as it is.
You're very welcome! Caffeine or stimulants don't have to necessarily be followed. The topic was for menopausal women dealing with midsection/abdominal fat gain. The thermogenic and ergogenic effect of caffeine is more the benefit, so if you can tolerate tea, that's good enough, otherwise, abstain if it's disagreeable.
As for training loads "heavy and challenging" is subjective to what you feel. Progressive overload can come in the form of increasing weights, reps, or sets. As long as total volume increases over time, there is a benefit.
On that note, sometimes it might seem like a more viable strategy to slightly increase the weight on something like a compound movement such as a squat instead of elongating the workout to fit in another set or another rep. Eg: squatting 125lbs for 5x5, then adding 5lbs every week or every other week may be much more conducive to time spent in the gym and joint health than squatting 125lbs for 5x6, or 6x5, or 5x10, or even 10x10 if you're feeling Russian lol.
So, just pay attention to how you're feeling and even undulating periods or days of moderate/heavy weight with moderate/low reps and light weight with high reps are all okay in terms of increasing volume.
Well, see, the thing is that I don't particularly have an issue with midsection fat. Loose skin? Yeah sure (I did mention that baby at 40 upthread, he was huge.) So I don't need to follow the recommendations specifically for that issue, but bone health is another story. I already have osteopenia and two forms of arthritis.1 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »A nice little NSV for me, my thighs have shrunk! I was looking at them when I was doing yoga, and thought 'hmmm, you guys look smaller...', and sure enough (my upper thighs are my really obvious fatty bit, not so much that they're disproportionately big compared to the rest of me, that's just where the obvious visible layer of fat is). Srsly, not that long ago, the tops of them looked like they had toddler arm floats around them (this was after I'd started really strength training in earnest again, and the muscle underneath had tightened up a bit, made the fat around the tops really obvious).
My "saddlebags" are infuriating. They are so going to cling on to the last gasp. Any sort of side plank type action there they are, flopping about to remind me of their gravitational pull. Honestly if they went and I got another inch off my waist I'd call it good and go to recomp. Alas that ain't happening without a wodge of cash, a white coat and a vacuum so carry on losing I shall.3 -
Ah okay. Well, we share midsection loose skin and I never had a baby.. I just can't for biological reasons Indeed, any form of progressive resistance and strength training (and protein) will at the very least slow down the effects of osteopenia, if not improve bone health. As for any arthritic/joint pain management, supplementing omega-3 + DHA/EPA or eating fatty fish several times per week and turmeric/circumin + black pepper seem to be natural anti-inflammatories. And let's just throw in mushrooms because I like them and because I've been seeing their touted benefits all over Twitter today 4
-
VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »A nice little NSV for me, my thighs have shrunk! I was looking at them when I was doing yoga, and thought 'hmmm, you guys look smaller...', and sure enough (my upper thighs are my really obvious fatty bit, not so much that they're disproportionately big compared to the rest of me, that's just where the obvious visible layer of fat is). Srsly, not that long ago, the tops of them looked like they had toddler arm floats around them (this was after I'd started really strength training in earnest again, and the muscle underneath had tightened up a bit, made the fat around the tops really obvious).
My "saddlebags" are infuriating. They are so going to cling on to the last gasp. Any sort of side plank type action there they are, flopping about to remind me of their gravitational pull. Honestly if they went and I got another inch off my waist I'd call it good and go to recomp. Alas that ain't happening without a wodge of cash, a white coat and a vacuum so carry on losing I shall.
Yep, as you know, mine have clung on for dear life, whist my waist and torso happily kept shrinking.3 -
Ah okay. Well, we share midsection loose skin and I never had a baby.. I just can't for biological reasons Indeed, any form of progressive resistance and strength training (and protein) will at the very least slow down the effects of osteopenia, if not improve bone health. As for any arthritic/joint pain management, supplementing omega-3 + DHA/EPA or eating fatty fish several times per week and turmeric/circumin + black pepper seem to be natural anti-inflammatories. And let's just throw in mushrooms because I like them and because I've been seeing their touted benefits all over Twitter today
Also have a little mid-section loose skin, which I think is completely unfair because never had babies (theoretically capable, but ew), and never been *that* overweight, and never for long.5 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »A nice little NSV for me, my thighs have shrunk! I was looking at them when I was doing yoga, and thought 'hmmm, you guys look smaller...', and sure enough (my upper thighs are my really obvious fatty bit, not so much that they're disproportionately big compared to the rest of me, that's just where the obvious visible layer of fat is). Srsly, not that long ago, the tops of them looked like they had toddler arm floats around them (this was after I'd started really strength training in earnest again, and the muscle underneath had tightened up a bit, made the fat around the tops really obvious).
My "saddlebags" are infuriating. They are so going to cling on to the last gasp. Any sort of side plank type action there they are, flopping about to remind me of their gravitational pull. Honestly if they went and I got another inch off my waist I'd call it good and go to recomp. Alas that ain't happening without a wodge of cash, a white coat and a vacuum so carry on losing I shall.
Yep, as you know, mine have clung on for dear life, whist my waist and torso happily kept shrinking.
And then I have that weird lumpy area from muscle trauma injury on the right leg which just makes that saddlebag look about 5000 times worse. Stupid hourglass body (which isn't stupid because nice shape to have and healthier areas to have stored fat but man the hips).0 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »A nice little NSV for me, my thighs have shrunk! I was looking at them when I was doing yoga, and thought 'hmmm, you guys look smaller...', and sure enough (my upper thighs are my really obvious fatty bit, not so much that they're disproportionately big compared to the rest of me, that's just where the obvious visible layer of fat is). Srsly, not that long ago, the tops of them looked like they had toddler arm floats around them (this was after I'd started really strength training in earnest again, and the muscle underneath had tightened up a bit, made the fat around the tops really obvious).
My "saddlebags" are infuriating. They are so going to cling on to the last gasp. Any sort of side plank type action there they are, flopping about to remind me of their gravitational pull. Honestly if they went and I got another inch off my waist I'd call it good and go to recomp. Alas that ain't happening without a wodge of cash, a white coat and a vacuum so carry on losing I shall.
Yep, as you know, mine have clung on for dear life, whist my waist and torso happily kept shrinking.
And then I have that weird lumpy area from muscle trauma injury on the right leg which just makes that saddlebag look about 5000 times worse. Stupid hourglass body (which isn't stupid because nice shape to have and healthier areas to have stored fat but man the hips).
And I have the lumpy muscle trauma on the left!
I just cropped these progress pics together, hopefully getting around the MFP 'no revealing shots' clause by removing ma butt, because I think you can really see how much my back/torso changed with 4 kgs lost:
12 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Ah okay. Well, we share midsection loose skin and I never had a baby.. I just can't for biological reasons Indeed, any form of progressive resistance and strength training (and protein) will at the very least slow down the effects of osteopenia, if not improve bone health. As for any arthritic/joint pain management, supplementing omega-3 + DHA/EPA or eating fatty fish several times per week and turmeric/circumin + black pepper seem to be natural anti-inflammatories. And let's just throw in mushrooms because I like them and because I've been seeing their touted benefits all over Twitter today
Also have a little mid-section loose skin, which I think is completely unfair because never had babies (theoretically capable, but ew), and never been *that* overweight, and never for long.
Good ol' genes and skin elasticity.. or lack thereof
1 -
Oh and, go the hourglass!!! Even if the hip/upper thigh aspect isn't always awesome.1
-
Nony_Mouse wrote: »Ah okay. Well, we share midsection loose skin and I never had a baby.. I just can't for biological reasons Indeed, any form of progressive resistance and strength training (and protein) will at the very least slow down the effects of osteopenia, if not improve bone health. As for any arthritic/joint pain management, supplementing omega-3 + DHA/EPA or eating fatty fish several times per week and turmeric/circumin + black pepper seem to be natural anti-inflammatories. And let's just throw in mushrooms because I like them and because I've been seeing their touted benefits all over Twitter today
Also have a little mid-section loose skin, which I think is completely unfair because never had babies (theoretically capable, but ew), and never been *that* overweight, and never for long.
Good ol' genes and skin elasticity.. or lack thereof
I think it's my body's payback for rapid weight loss at some point in the well pre-MFP past.1 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »A nice little NSV for me, my thighs have shrunk! I was looking at them when I was doing yoga, and thought 'hmmm, you guys look smaller...', and sure enough (my upper thighs are my really obvious fatty bit, not so much that they're disproportionately big compared to the rest of me, that's just where the obvious visible layer of fat is). Srsly, not that long ago, the tops of them looked like they had toddler arm floats around them (this was after I'd started really strength training in earnest again, and the muscle underneath had tightened up a bit, made the fat around the tops really obvious).
My "saddlebags" are infuriating. They are so going to cling on to the last gasp. Any sort of side plank type action there they are, flopping about to remind me of their gravitational pull. Honestly if they went and I got another inch off my waist I'd call it good and go to recomp. Alas that ain't happening without a wodge of cash, a white coat and a vacuum so carry on losing I shall.
Yep, as you know, mine have clung on for dear life, whist my waist and torso happily kept shrinking.
And then I have that weird lumpy area from muscle trauma injury on the right leg which just makes that saddlebag look about 5000 times worse. Stupid hourglass body (which isn't stupid because nice shape to have and healthier areas to have stored fat but man the hips).
And I have the lumpy muscle trauma on the left!
I just cropped these progress pics together, hopefully getting around the MFP 'no revealing shots' clause by removing ma butt, because I think you can really see how much my back/torso changed with 4 kgs lost:
6
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