Help
hoodlisa1979
Posts: 38 Member
I started my healthy living 3 weeks ago, my aim is to reduce cholesterol, reduce blood pressure and lose weight, I'm back at the docs in 5 weeks to check progress, I have 48lb to shift, MFP set me to 1200 calories a day which I'm managing with fine, I'm eating all the good heart healthy things, prior to changing my diet I had a unhealthy relationship with wine (it wasn't as in love with me as I it) so I probably only averaged 1000 calories of actual food and another 1000 of the liquid kind through alcohol and soft drinks, my first week 6lb of water weight came off, since then nothing has budged, I take propranolol for an arythmia, my HR doesn't go much above 100, I'm exercising for an hour 3x per week and trying to get plenty of steps in. My unhealthy lifestyle has been over at least 10 years so my questions are do I need to reduce calories further or will my metabolism return at some point, does my heart rate have to go into the fat burning zone to see progress in exercise?
0
Replies
-
Well six pounds of weight loss in the first week is pretty normal. So is no-loss for the next few weeks.
Just do the next right thing. The weight will come off.
As far as HR while on beta blockers, I'd discuss that with a physical therapist or your doctor. I was on propranolol for years, but I don't understand what you mean by, "progress," in exercise?3 -
You don't mention what your stats are, but 1200 is low, so I wouldn't reduce any further.
You've lost 6 lbs in 3 weeks, that's great progress, your body is probably recalibrating its water weight level: there is often a water weight whoosh when first starting and then a temporary stall as your body adjusts.
Furthermore, new exercise often causes water retention for muscle repair, which can mask fat loss on the scale.
So my advice: weight loss isn't linear - you won't lose weight every week, so
- look at the longer term trend: one or two months (menstrual cycles if applicable)
- be patient3 -
cmriverside wrote: »Well six pounds of weight loss in the first week is pretty normal. So is no-loss for the next few weeks.
Just do the next right thing. The weight will come off.
As far as HR while on beta blockers, I'd discuss that with a physical therapist or your doctor. I was on propranolol for years, but I don't understand what you mean by, "progress," in exercise?
Sorry by progress I mean fat loss through exercise as I've read something about not being in the fat burning zone until my HR is over 119bpm0 -
yeah, what the others have said. Also important to keep in mind that menstrual cycle can mess with scale weight. Quite a lot actually in some people, less so in others.
And finally, I bet you've chosen 2lbs of loss per week? It's very likely you will not achieve this. 1200 calories in the lowest MFP will give any woman, even if the required calorie deficit would be larger. if you want to know what to expect lower your weightloss goal temporarily and see how many calories you get. You can also chose maintenance to figure out the same. to lose 1lbs of weight per week you need a calorie deficit of about 500 calories per day, and twice as much for 2lbs per week. Thus if your maintenance calories are currently 2000 calories per day and you wanted to lose 2lbs you'd need to eat 2000-1000=1000 calories per day - which is unhealthy in the long run. As you're already this low you should also eat your exercise calories back1 -
hoodlisa1979 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Well six pounds of weight loss in the first week is pretty normal. So is no-loss for the next few weeks.
Just do the next right thing. The weight will come off.
As far as HR while on beta blockers, I'd discuss that with a physical therapist or your doctor. I was on propranolol for years, but I don't understand what you mean by, "progress," in exercise?
Sorry by progress I mean fat loss through exercise as I've read something about not being in the fat burning zone until my HR is over 119bpm
Okay, well I'm assuming you calculated a maximum heart rate by using your age and some multiplier.
All that gets thrown off by beta blockers. You'll have to get in to see a physical therapist (physio) who can put you on a treadmill and help you establish when you are at your maximum heart rate, or a desired percentage of it (adjusted for meds.)
With that said, I lost 80 pounds doing fairly moderate exercise. Exercise is good for you and any exercise at all will help with weight loss. Weight loss is more about how much food you're eating, and even if you did manage to hit your HR goals every single day for XX number of minutes, you still need to keep food in check. I personally never paid a lot of attention to the "fat burning zone" - some people will even tell you it's a myth. You'll be burning fat all the time with any movement when you are staying in a calorie deficit. Full stop.5 -
cmriverside wrote: »hoodlisa1979 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Well six pounds of weight loss in the first week is pretty normal. So is no-loss for the next few weeks.
Just do the next right thing. The weight will come off.
As far as HR while on beta blockers, I'd discuss that with a physical therapist or your doctor. I was on propranolol for years, but I don't understand what you mean by, "progress," in exercise?
Sorry by progress I mean fat loss through exercise as I've read something about not being in the fat burning zone until my HR is over 119bpm
Okay, well I'm assuming you calculated a maximum heart rate by using your age and some multiplier.
All that gets thrown off by beta blockers. You'll have to get in to see a physical therapist (physio) who can put you on a treadmill and help you establish when you are at your maximum heart rate, or a desired percentage of it (adjusted for meds.)
With that said, I lost 80 pounds doing fairly moderate exercise. Exercise is good for you and any exercise at all will help with weight loss. Weight loss is more about how much food you're eating, and even if you did manage to hit your HR goals every single day for XX number of minutes, you still need to keep food in check. I personally never paid a lot of attention to the "fat burning zone" - some people will even tell you it's a myth. You'll be burning fat all the time with any movement when you are staying in a calorie deficit. Full stop.
Many thanks, very well done on the weight loss, I think I'm thinking about it too much and will just have to focus on health first and hopefully the weight will start to come down and ill become fitter just carrying on doing what I'm doing1 -
hoodlisa1979 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »hoodlisa1979 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Well six pounds of weight loss in the first week is pretty normal. So is no-loss for the next few weeks.
Just do the next right thing. The weight will come off.
As far as HR while on beta blockers, I'd discuss that with a physical therapist or your doctor. I was on propranolol for years, but I don't understand what you mean by, "progress," in exercise?
Sorry by progress I mean fat loss through exercise as I've read something about not being in the fat burning zone until my HR is over 119bpm
Okay, well I'm assuming you calculated a maximum heart rate by using your age and some multiplier.
All that gets thrown off by beta blockers. You'll have to get in to see a physical therapist (physio) who can put you on a treadmill and help you establish when you are at your maximum heart rate, or a desired percentage of it (adjusted for meds.)
With that said, I lost 80 pounds doing fairly moderate exercise. Exercise is good for you and any exercise at all will help with weight loss. Weight loss is more about how much food you're eating, and even if you did manage to hit your HR goals every single day for XX number of minutes, you still need to keep food in check. I personally never paid a lot of attention to the "fat burning zone" - some people will even tell you it's a myth. You'll be burning fat all the time with any movement when you are staying in a calorie deficit. Full stop.
Many thanks, very well done on the weight loss, I think I'm thinking about it too much and will just have to focus on health first and hopefully the weight will start to come down and ill become fitter just carrying on doing what I'm doing
I would just add (as a little more motivation for you) that my 30-90 minute walks keep my blood pressure in a healthy range without the propranolol. I took propranolol for migraines but they slowed me down sooooo much that I actually gained weight on them. The beta blockers and other drugs I had to take were (in my opinion) the biggest factor in my having to lose 80 pounds in the first place.
When I stopped taking all the Rx drugs, I had a sort of rebound high blood pressure mini crisis. I had to work on that! It got all better with nutrition, weight loss and regular exercise.
1 -
You can lose fat by doing "light" exercises like walking. You don't have to be in the "fat burning zone." You are still moving your body, and that takes energy.
When you get your heart rate up, you do give your cardiovascular system a workout, and you can improve cardiovascular fitness. The harder you work, the more energy you will use and the faster you'll oxidize fat. But you still burn fat just by walking. You can even burn fat sitting in a chair if your caloric intake is less than what you're burning, but that's not the ideal approach. Even gentle, light exercise is good for your mental health, at least I think it is, and it's good for fitness.
Go slow to go fast; don't rush it.2 -
Fat burning zone is misleading. You lose weight by taking in fewer weekly calories than you burn. About the best exercise is walking. Easy on joints among other things. Walk faster as you improve your fitness.1
-
hoodlisa1979 wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Well six pounds of weight loss in the first week is pretty normal. So is no-loss for the next few weeks.
Just do the next right thing. The weight will come off.
As far as HR while on beta blockers, I'd discuss that with a physical therapist or your doctor. I was on propranolol for years, but I don't understand what you mean by, "progress," in exercise?
Sorry by progress I mean fat loss through exercise as I've read something about not being in the fat burning zone until my HR is over 119bpm
I'm going to go a little technical on this point: Any movement burns calories. Even being flat on your back in bed just being alive burns calories. If you have a normal life (job, chores, etc.), that burns more calories. If you add intentional movement-for-its-own-sake (which some people call "exercise"
), that burns more calories.
Like Tom said, get your calorie intake from food/drink below your calorie burn - no matter what combination of the above is doing the burning - and you'll lose weight. It's simple physics. Even if you're motionless in a coma, there's some calorie level at which you'd lose weight (but it would be a pretty low one, probably 1000 to 1900 or so calories, depending on body size and composition - less than 1000 would be rare among adults, really tiny people mostly).
So, what is the "fat burning zone"? It's a real thing, but the blogosphere and tabloids and even some trainers completely misunderstand what it actually is, and give us dumb advice as a result. I'm going to oversimplify, but here's the basic situation IMU:
When someone is completely still - sleeping or in that coma - they're burning mostly fat. They're not burning very many calories (i.e., few calories per minute), but it's mostly calories from fat.
As that person starts moving more, they burn increasingly more calories per minute, and eventually the body's ability to turn fat into fuel limits use of fat for immediate energy, so it uses increasing amounts of what amount to carbohydrates/sugars (in various forms in the body) as a percentage of that calorie burn. The more intense the exercise, the more calories burned per minute, and the higher percent of those calories that will be carb-sourced, loosely speaking.
It's a gradual ramp-up of the percentage of calories that come from carb-equivalents, as exercise gets more intense, not an on/off switch. Super loosely speaking, the "fat burning zone" is approximately where the crossover happens, for most people, from more than half the calories coming from fat in the moment, to more than half coming from carb-y stuff in the moment.
Conclusion: The "fat burning zone" isn't really about weight loss at all: It's about what fuel the body is using in the moment, at the time of the exercise.
Do intense enough exercise long enough, the body will run low on available carbohydrate-type fuel, and defend itself from overdoing, through fatigue or (at an extreme) something called "hitting the wall", or "bonking" among other terms. Most of us will never feel that, so let's ignore that for now.
Looping back: It's eating fewer calories than we burn overall that leads to fat loss. For that overall result, it doesn't much matter how or when we burn those calories. If we eat less than we burn, the body is going to turn to stored fat at some point as an energy source. Why should we care when it happens - during sleep, during exercise, while watching The Bachelor, whatever - as long as it does happen?
The implication: There's no need for us regular duffers to worry about the fat burning zone. Long-endurance athletes need to worry about it, in order to have reasonable fuel during their marathon run or whatever, so they don't hit the wall. (That's why most of them eat sugary things on long runs - quick energy to avoid bonking.)
So, if the "fat burning zone" is pretty irrelevant for weight loss, how do we plan exercise during weight loss?
Well, for one, exercise is more for health than weight loss. We can lose weight even without any exercise at all.
But if we do exercise during weight loss, one of two nice things can possibly happen: We can either not eat back the exercise calories and lose weight a little faster (as long as we're not trying to lose weight too fast, which would be dumb), or we can eat a little more while losing at the same rate (which is nice, because food is tasty).
Further, if we do strength exercise while losing weight - even though strength exercise burns relatively few calories as we do it - we can keep more of our muscle mass while losing fat. That's loosely because the strength exercise reminds our bodies that we like and want those muscles, so it should keep them.
Since muscle is relatively slow and effortful to build, we want to keep what we have, right? And - though many people don't realize it - fat/obese people typically have more muscle mass than similarly-active always-thin people, just from moving our heavy bodies through the world every minute of every day. Keep it!
So, here's what I think, just my opinion: The sweet spot for calorie burn during weight loss is a thing that's very individual, and we need to figure it out.
How?
First, set a time budget for the amount of exercise you can fit into your life (ideally permanently) while maintaining good life balance (enough time and energy for job, family, chores, hobbies, anything else important to you).
Next, fit some strength exercise into your time budget - it needn't be lots, probably less than half an hour 2-3 times a week unless you want it to be more (and you can start slower with less if kind of out of shape at the start).
If there's still exercise time in your budget, fill it with the intensity, duration and frequency of cardiovascular exercise that will leave you energized for the rest of your day/week, not dragging through the rest of life. (A very few minutes of "whew" feeling right after the exercise is OK.)
Pick a reasonably fun (or at least tolerable) exercise, because things we like doing are more likely to happen, realistically. Pick something that's convenient, too, not some thing at a gym way over on the other side of town where you never go. Same deal, that makes it more likely to happen.
What intensity, duration and frequency you should do will depend on your current fitness level. Here again, it's fine to start by using less of your time budget, if necessary because of low starting fitness.
If you're a little more fit at the start, and can fill your budget with more-intense cardiovascular exercise, allow a little time at the start of the workout to warm up (slow pace of whatever you're doing), and a little time at the end for cool down (slow pace of the exercise, and/or a little stretching-type stuff).
This is an investment in long-term health, not a forced march to an end date. You're shooting for a small, manageable challenge from your total exercise plan. That's the right balance for maximizing exercise calorie contribution to weight loss, IMO. Too much, and fatigue will make you rest more and bleed calories out of the rest of your day. Too little, and you won't make fitness progress (and you'll have fewer calories in play from exercise).
As you gradually get more fit, whatever you're doing will get easier to do. When that happens, increase the frequency, intensity, duration or type of exercise to keep that manageable challenge in the picture. You'll be surprised what you accomplish in a few weeks to months. That's how fitness happens.
TL;DR: Pretty much only endurance athletes need to worry about "fat burning zone", not us regular people. For weight loss, just think about total calories burn vs. total calorie intake. Get some strength exercise to keep what muscle you have. For fitness and health, plan fun exercise that gradually increases in intensity, duration, frequency or type to continuously keep a manageable bit of challenge in the picture. Don't work to exhaustion, because that's counterproductive.
Just my understanding and opinions (and rant ).
Best wishes!7 -
I'm fairly sure looking at the posters above that someone has covered it; but, you do NOT need a specific heart rate, or zone, in order to engage in activity, movement and exercise that burns calories. Or even, frankly, to slowly improve health coming from a sedentary starting point, if that's the individual case.
For a certain specific subset of results that one may be seeking to achieve from exercise, the intensity of the training may be relevant. With a hearth condition this forum would not be where I would get advice as to whether such would be relevant to YOU.2 -
Many thanks for all your insights everyone, I very much appreciate the help, @annpt77 I've had my resistance bands out for 15 mins after reading your advice, I was suprised at how out of breath it made me as the smart weighted hula hoop I'm using for an hour a time doesn't, I can even sing whilst using that, again much appreciate the advice, ill come back in a few weeks to update on progess2
-
One thing about this fat burning zone: I read a few comments from sports physicians a few years back that the fat burning zone has one good effect: it keeps people going for longer because the intensity is rather low. On that now, low pace when doing cardio is actually good for building endurance, and through that exercising faster at same intensity. Cool. If you're upping the intensity then your body loses less fat as energy as AnnP mentioned above. Plus, as it's more intense you can't keep it up very long. But those physicians measured that while the amount of fat used as energy relative to glucose is lower, the amount of energy from fat might still be similar to exercising longer in the fat burning zone because overall energy consumption is higher. One just has to find the sweet spot, which is pretty much moot without a sports lab.0
-
I am going through the same thing right now. Eating between 1,000-1,400 calories a day. Increased my activity and I’m only taking in about 50-100g carbs a day sometimes less. I drink plenty of water. I’m taking telmisartan for hypertension. I have 100-120lbs to lose. I have a Dr appointment in two weeks. I am 39.5 years old. Something isn’t right with me as I should be at least losing something but to stay the same weight for a week and a half just isn’t possible with the strict eating and exercising schedule I’ve been on. It’s so frustrating to be doing so good but not seeing results and I want to get off the medication I’m on. No I’m not eating more than I think I am. No regular soda junk food or processed foods and I weigh out my food to be accurate. I do mostly OMAD but on a couple occasions I’ve eaten a small chicken salad for lunch and then did dinner. It makes no sense to me when people say that eating too few calories can keep you from losing. That’s just not possible. Maybe for a day or or three but at some point you should start shedding weight.0
-
crystalgailpeterson wrote: »I am going through the same thing right now. Eating between 1,000-1,400 calories a day. Increased my activity and I’m only taking in about 50-100g carbs a day sometimes less. I drink plenty of water. I’m taking telmisartan for hypertension. I have 100-120lbs to lose. I have a Dr appointment in two weeks. I am 39.5 years old. Something isn’t right with me as I should be at least losing something but to stay the same weight for a week and a half just isn’t possible with the strict eating and exercising schedule I’ve been on. It’s so frustrating to be doing so good but not seeing results and I want to get off the medication I’m on. No I’m not eating more than I think I am. No regular soda junk food or processed foods and I weigh out my food to be accurate. I do mostly OMAD but on a couple occasions I’ve eaten a small chicken salad for lunch and then did dinner. It makes no sense to me when people say that eating too few calories can keep you from losing. That’s just not possible. Maybe for a day or or three but at some point you should start shedding weight.
1 and a half weeks really isn't enough time to see loss on the scale. That you say 1000-1400 calories per day makes me wonder if you are estimating calories, as that's a pretty big range. But, at any rate, water retention can hide weight loss for up to a month. And if you're only at a small deficit, it can easily take a couple weeks to lose a pound.1 -
No I’m not estimating! I’m logging everything every day. What I mean by 1,000-1,400 is some days I only eat 1,000 some days I eat 1,100 or some days I eat 1,400. It varies day to day. I weigh everything like I said in my original post as well so I’m being as accurate as I can be. I’m not one of those that “estimates”.1
-
crystalgailpeterson wrote: »No I’m not estimating! I’m logging everything every day. What I mean by 1,000-1,400 is some days I only eat 1,000 some days I eat 1,100 or some days I eat 1,400. It varies day to day. I weigh everything like I said in my original post as well so I’m being as accurate as I can be. I’m not one of those that “estimates”.
When did you start exercising and what are your workouts? Water retention while muscles adapt can hide fat loss.
0 -
crystalgailpeterson wrote: »No I’m not estimating! I’m logging everything every day. What I mean by 1,000-1,400 is some days I only eat 1,000 some days I eat 1,100 or some days I eat 1,400. It varies day to day. I weigh everything like I said in my original post as well so I’m being as accurate as I can be. I’m not one of those that “estimates”.
Fair enough. Like I said, could easily just be water weight1 -
hoodlisa1979 wrote: »Many thanks for all your insights everyone, I very much appreciate the help, @annpt77 I've had my resistance bands out for 15 mins after reading your advice, I was suprised at how out of breath it made me as the smart weighted hula hoop I'm using for an hour a time doesn't, I can even sing whilst using that, again much appreciate the advice, ill come back in a few weeks to update on progess
It's absolutely true that conditioning can be surprisingly activity specific: There can be a little fitness carryover from one cardiovascular-centric activity to another, or from one strength activity to another, but there are always new stresses on our body from a new activity, even a similar one, and it does take time to adapt.
Good for you, in multiple sense of that phrase, starting in with some strength work! Let yourself work at a very moderate pace to start, don't push yourself to exhaustion. True persistent exhaustion is almost always counterproductive IMO, and with strength exercise, form also can suffer as we get fatigued. Sub-ideal form in strength exercise can create more injury risk. Bands are not as risky in that way, maybe, as weights, but it's still a consideration. Get good form and good body mechanics working for you, all the way through the workout, for best results!
I'll look forward to hearing about your progress as you continue along. You'll surprise yourself, I predict, with what patient, persistent work can accomplish!1 -
I just walk on my treadmill 2 miles 3-4 times a week0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 426 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