Having a cheat day every 2-3 weeks

JaxDemon

JaxDemon, do you have any fullbody topless photos or anything? (Not asking out of being a d1ck, just asking as I can tell you if it "won't be long" until 10-12% bf - It isn't exactly HARD to get there, but its harder than you are assuming it to be.

I have a few I took on my phone to track progress, None recent as I'm not due till Wednesday to take some. My current measurements that I took on 19th are below as you can see my belly needs to lose 6 inches.

Next to no fat on my arms/legs/thighs. Rough guess at 2-5lb on chest if that. All my fat is 90% around my midsection.

It can be done, I've seen it be done have faith.

Height?

5ft 11

JaxDemon

According to this you're 23%
http://www.calculator.net/army-body-fat-calculator.html

You can also check here:
http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bf/

How long by your calculation do you think it would take you to get from 23%-10%?

You do realize that if you lost 30lbs that would put you at 199 at 5'11". Do you think it's realistic to think you can be anywhere near 10-12% at 199lbs ?

I seen that calc but you can't gage bf via an online calc. Hence why I'm gonna get booked into to use a bodpod that way I'll get a proper reading and find out what info I need.

I would be pretty special if I could hit 10-12% bodyfat at 199 and 5ft 11 wouldn't I lol. Realistic who knows, I really don't feel like I have that much fat to shift when you compare a pound of fat. I could be wrong I could be right. Only my results will tell once I'm done.

To get to 13st (182lb) that would mean a 47lb loss needed maybe that's more realistic I just can't see that much on me at all especially after losing 65lb I really need this bodpod done then I can find out.

Kinda derailed this thread some lol

JaxDemon

According to this you're 23%
http://www.calculator.net/army-body-fat-calculator.html

You can also check here:
http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/bf/

How long by your calculation do you think it would take you to get from 23%-10%?

You do realize that if you lost 30lbs that would put you at 199 at 5'11". Do you think it's realistic to think you can be anywhere near 10-12% at 199lbs ?

I seen that calc but you can't gage bf via an online calc. Hence why I'm gonna get booked into to use a bodpod that way I'll get a proper reading and find out what info I need.

I would be pretty special if I could hit 10-12% bodyfat at 199 and 5ft 11 wouldn't I lol. Realistic who knows, I really don't feel like I have that much fat to shift when you compare a pound of fat. I could be wrong I could be right. Only my results will tell once I'm done.

To get to 13st (182lb) that would mean a 47lb loss needed maybe that's more realistic I just can't see that much on me at all especially after losing 65lb I really need this bodpod done then I can find out.

Kinda derailed this thread some lol

A couple of things I've seen a lot of:

People tend to underestimate how much fat they have.
People usually think the have less weight to lose than they really do.
People forget that you also will lose lbm. If you lose 30 lbs, not all 30 lbs will be fat.

Well I'm taking precautions to prevent the lbm loss :happy:

I'm gonna add you to my FL. Once I get booked in and get results then I'll message you. Nice chatting/debating btw.

mndamon

Maybe it's that you don't know how to practice self control.

Real. Talk.

Could have just closed the thread here.

JaxDemon

Maybe it's that you don't know how to practice self control.

Real. Talk.

Could have just closed the thread here.

Shame he was wrong though so why close a thread over something that's wrong. Easy to judge and make assumptions when ya sat behind a pc screen ain't it.

sjsosu

Does anyone consider that different strategies work for different people, and that there isn't one all or nothing absolute method to reach objectives?

I doubt anyone on either side of the fence is going to argue that calories out have to exceed calories in for weight loss. Of course not everyone's objectives are purely to lose weight, or even to lose weight at all.

I doubt the folks that advocate that there's no reason to deprive yourself of any foods you enjoy are advocating that anyone should eat mostly "higher calorie - less nutrient dense foods" (hope those terms don't offend anyone). One of the reasons stated frequently for this position is that it's easier to maintain a healthy diet without the psychological drive to go on eating binges. That might be true for part of the population. That does represent a certain amount of self control and discipline in that they can eat just a planned moderate portion of these foods. It also implies some lack of control, if one is unable to avoid binges if they don't satisfy cravings with a "fix" of these foods.

At the other end of the spectrum, there are some people who are not adept at moderating their intake of these foods, and find it difficult to avoid a binge if they partake in those higher caloric/lower nutrient dense foods. Certainly that represents some lack of control, however the people that can maintain that life style are also demonstrating a remarkable amount of discipline by avoiding these foods entirely.

Then there are people that have medical conditions and avoid certain foods that might cause insulin issues, digestive issues or joint pain.

There are a lot of grey areas. Nothing in life has to be so absolute.

Personally I'm of the mind set that any food is fine in the right proportions, and I've been in the IIFYM camp for over 25 years, although I never know there was a name for it until a few weeks ago. It was always just common sense to me. I've never been to the point that I would considered myself overweight so something must be working. I tend to keep my diet very strict during the week with regards to eating mostly whole foods because I look at calories more on a weekly basis rather than daily, and I like to let loose on the weekends for football season and parties, etc. Also I'm lazy and don't want to have to enter a lot of different things into my log during the week.