Relatively light people trying to get leaner

kdiamond

Nutrition can take care of the fat loss and strength training can take care of the muscle.

I try to tell everyone I know this!! As I have said in another post, you can't out train a good diet!! So instead of doing endless hours of cardio, just fix your nutrition, and it will do its job for you!

stroutman81

What sort of wonky things can be caused by high volume of cardio? Do you mean messing with hormones as you referred to in your initial post? My body has been out of wack since I started with my running and weight loss so I am curious what you mean...

Yup, primarily hormones. A friend of mine who's a brilliant trainer (Matt Perryman of ampedtraining.com) puts it like this. Think of our bodies stress capacities like a sink. The actual capacity is the bowl. The spicket and flow of water depict your ability to recover from stress. The drain is the use of recovery.

Suck too much water out, faster than the spicket can replace it, and things are going to backfire. We aren't machines that we can beat on indefinitely.

This isn't an immediate event, I should note. Take a look at this thread. I'd be willing to bet that many of the women who are experiencing plateaus in this thread are eating too low of calories over extended period of times. They're exercising with high volumes of cardio (which circuit training falls into this camp too). They're more than likely perfectionists. Maybe not in general, but when it comes to diet and exercise they need to be "on" all the time. No cheats. No processed foods. Always anxious about diet, etc. Many of them are more than likely mothers, working, etc.

Stress is accumulative. And your body sees all stress the same. Genetics can dictate how quickly that water runs out of the sink... but if you're overdoing it, it'll eventually happen. This is why everyone realizes results at first. "Oh, I'll just jack down my calories super low and run my *kitten* into the ground. Isn't that what works for fat loss?" Sure. For a while. But based on the above... hopefully you're starting to see the problems here.

To quote Matt here, since he put it great:

Here’s where people trip up, though: they assume that the running is just calorie-wasting. Well, it is – but it’s also a powerful stress on the body. Now compound this with a diet. When you’re training for a sport, nutrition is there to help keep the sink full. When you go on a diet, you turn the faucet off. The sink might have been balanced, or at least draining very slowly, before. When you diet, the sink is just emptying out.

Remember one thing: getting in shape is a different matter from staying in shape. The former requires hard training and recovery – to include nutritional support – and is not really compatible with dieting. The latter is just a matter of paying attention to diet; you’re already in shape, and thus don’t have to use up any water (recovery ability) to stay there. Someone that wants to get in shape is going to have to tap into that reserve.

Obviously getting in shape for a sport, even if it’s something that sounds harmless like a half-marathon, is just not compatible with dieting to drop fat. And yes, I’m writing this specifically to target the group of people that want to get in shape while training to run in a marathon. It’s an admirable goal, but realize that it is not compatible with weight loss.

Ideally you’d want to include some conditioning work in your training; what I’m saying here is not to go overboard with it. You can’t just say “aerobic cardio doesn’t work”; obviously it does, as bodybuilders have used it to get lean for decades. It may not be the best approach from the standpoint of muscle retention, but it does work.

Program design isn't just about picking a nutritional and exercise strategy. It's also about balancing stress with recovery. This latter concept is actually the backbone of all programming.

The "wonkiness" that I spoke of is hormonal. It's neurochemical. And many "parts" of the body are affected downstream from these things.

stormieweather

This 'overstressing' of ones body due to too much dieting and lifestyle is what I have been working on for months now. I was tired all the time, and no amount of coffee or sleep could eliminate it. So, in addition to taking several months off from working out, I cut out all stimulants (also stresses the adrenal glands), began taking more vitamin supplements (D, C, amino acids) and upped my calories a few hundred per day to near maintenance. I gained 3 pounds from cutting out the stimulants and then leveled off. Eventually (2 months), the 3 pounds went away and I felt human again. I have gone back to the gym 3x a week, lifting heavy and am limiting my cardio to no more than 20 minutes of as high intensity as I can manage (max on the machine, usually). I feel good again The weight will do whatever the weight is going to do. I'm concerned with my health and body shape more than the scale.

stroutman81

This 'overstressing' of ones body due to too much dieting and lifestyle is what I have been working on for months now. I was tired all the time, and no amount of coffee or sleep could eliminate it. So, in addition to taking several months off from working out, I cut out all stimulants (also stresses the adrenal glands), began taking more vitamin supplements (D, C, amino acids) and upped my calories a few hundred per day to near maintenance. I gained 3 pounds from cutting out the stimulants and then leveled off. Eventually (2 months), the 3 pounds went away and I felt human again. I have gone back to the gym 3x a week, lifting heavy and am limiting my cardio to no more than 20 minutes of as high intensity as I can manage (max on the machine, usually). I feel good again The weight will do whatever the weight is going to do. I'm concerned with my health and body shape more than the scale.

Unfortunately this is far too common of an experience. And even worse, people aren't even recognizing it. They write it off as part of dieting or part of aging or whatever.

Glad to hear you figured things out!

jabdye

if you can get lean with diet and weight lifting -- is it wrong to assume that adding some cardio will allow you to be a little more lenient with the diet?

unknownndoll

bump for later =]

stroutman81

if you can get lean with diet and weight lifting -- is it wrong to assume that adding some cardio will allow you to be a little more lenient with the diet?

Nope, not wrong.

Suppose you need 1500 calories per day to cover all energy costs (digestion, respiration, exercise, sleep, etc.)

And suppose that exercise only consists of strength training, which does burn calories.

Now suppose you want to lose some fat. Well, in theory, you could simply add cardio to the mix and not change your intake of 1500 and you're now running a slight deficit since the energy out side of the equation went up while the energy in side remained the same.

This is very generalized... but you get the point.

The fact that cardio acts as a buffer to the nutritional side of things aiding in the control of calories is on of it's best attributes. Not to mention the health benefits, possible partitioning benefits of where calories are going and coming from (depending on the structure of the exercise), possible hunger blunting effects (though for others it stimulates it), etc.

karissastephens

bump to read lata!

jabdye

if you can get lean with diet and weight lifting -- is it wrong to assume that adding some cardio will allow you to be a little more lenient with the diet?

Nope, not wrong.

Suppose you need 1500 calories per day to cover all energy costs (digestion, respiration, exercise, sleep, etc.)

And suppose that exercise only consists of strength training, which does burn calories.

Now suppose you want to lose some fat. Well, in theory, you could simply add cardio to the mix and not change your intake of 1500 and you're now running a slight deficit since the energy out side of the equation went up while the energy in side remained the same.

This is very generalized... but you get the point.

The fact that cardio acts as a buffer to the nutritional side of things aiding in the control of calories is on of it's best attributes. Not to mention the health benefits, possible partitioning benefits of where calories are going and coming from (depending on the structure of the exercise), possible hunger blunting effects (though for others it stimulates it), etc.

That's why I love cardio -- it allows me to eat a little more:bigsmile:

GiGi76

bumping for later!!! :bigsmile:

stroutman81

Looks like this thread finally ran it's course. I should really be stickied. Regardless, if anyone has questions in the future, feel free to post them in this thread or contact me via email.

ellie_1989

Ok thanks I might have a go at a few things. I already do pull ups so I might try push ups. Also I think my dad has some dumbbells so I might have a go with those. Thing is how can I work my legs? My arms really are no problem to me as they're the smallest thing on my body. My legs/thighs/bum is where the weight goes and takes some shifting!

First, keep in mind that muscle doesn't turn into fat and fat doesn't turn into muscle. We're not able to spot reduce fat. So while strength training your legs is important... it's not going to preferentially burn the fat in your problem areas.

Secondly, are you looking for specific exercises you can do for your legs. If so, youtube any of these:

body weight squats
goblet squats
dumbbell squats
reverse lunge
walking lunge
alternating lunge
glute bridge
hip thrusts
suitcase deadlifts
conventional deadlifts
romanian deadlifts
step ups
single leg squats
box squats

I could go on and on.

Also I'm confused by this 1200cal thing. It doesn't seem too difficult for me. I never ate more than 1500cals before anyway so it really isnt a big cut down. Could this means that it suits me? I eat most of my exercise cals back too. But the slow progress....does this indicate I should eat a little more even if it's an extra apple etc a day? Thanks

I'm confused. If you're eating your exercise calories, you're actually eating more than 1200 calories. No?

And yes, fruit does good things for women and fat loss.

Oh right thanks. I didn't realise that some of these exercises built strength...I always just thought 'weights'- clueless! Haha. But if I don't eat back some if not all of my exercise cals then surely I'd be eating too little?! Some days with swimming I burn roughly 400cals...if I don't eat back some of these then I'd only technically be eating 800cals? Surely this wouldn't be right...no?

dskline1

I have a ? that may sound completely absurd....my girlfriend and I hike(intermediate terrain) everyday at least 5 miles and then run hills afterwards (maybe a total of 15 mins of hill running all total - but running up them as fast as we can, walking down, counting to 20 then doing it again). I eat 2 packets of oatmeal with milk before heading out and my gf usually eats half of a bagel or a granola bar. My/our question is.............with doing this type of activity, am I/her eating enough and what is the breakdown as far as glycogen, fat, lean muscle mass? Meaning, I think we burn through our glycogen stores first, but after that, what happens? Could we be doing more harm than good if we are not fueled enough. I usually feel a bit hungry on the 5th mile stretch but still have plenty of energy to do the hills. I also eat within an hour of getting home. I feel a great burn in my high abdomen which my gf does not. Not a cramp type of burn, but, well, I am unsure how to best describe it. It feels good and everyone that I have ever mentioned it to...said that it was good. My core is tight usually through the whole workout. So, anyway...if we continue with this type of exercise (if not running hills we are jumping on picnic tables, or some other type of more explosive activity) are we handling our food intake properly and are we hurting ourselves as far as dipping into burning lean muscle mass? Wow....I hope you can decipher through all that...lol Any insight or suggestions would be appreciated.

Not sure if it matters....I am 5' 108 lbs (more muscular build) she is 5'2" about 115 more of a slender build

coolstacey6

wow....very imformative

stroutman81

Oh right thanks. I didn't realise that some of these exercises built strength...I always just thought 'weights'- clueless! Haha. But if I don't eat back some if not all of my exercise cals then surely I'd be eating too little?! Some days with swimming I burn roughly 400cals...if I don't eat back some of these then I'd only technically be eating 800cals? Surely this wouldn't be right...no?

I can't really say, which is why I don't like the whole, "should I eat back my exercise calories or not. I like to minimize the moving parts as much as possible so when issues arise, which they will, it's easier to troubleshoot.

This is why I focus on cal/lb.

Start at 12. If it's not working over 2-4 weeks, bump intake down to 10. And go from there. Some people have to hit 8 cal/lb but not many.

It seems so many folks around here get tripped up on exercise calories and it probably has to do with the system MFP has set up.

Probably because it truly does depend.

Let's try to make this real simple:

Maintenance is where calories in = calories out, right?

We know that a calorie deficit is required if fat is to be lost, so calories in < calories out.

Large deficits can have negative effects such as increased cravings, muscle loss, irritability, unsustainability (I made that word up), etc.

So we want a moderate deficit, which I'd label as 20-35% off of your maintenance.

So if your maintenance is 2000 calories, anywhere from 1300 to 1600 calories would be realistic for fat loss.

That's a deficit of 400-700 calories per day.

Said deficit, in theory, could come from many, many combination of factors.

On one end of the spectrum you could simply eat 400-700 calories less per day.

On the other end of the spectrum you could keep eating 2000 calories but increase calories expended via exercise to 400-700 calories per day.

If you went with this later scenario, you wouldn't have to eat back your exercise calories because the expended calories from exercise put you in the sweet spot, calorically speaking.

Now if you cut calories by 400-700 AND increased activity by 400-700, then you'd be running too large a deficit unless you ate back your exercise calories.

Follow that logic?

stroutman81

I have a ? that may sound completely absurd....my girlfriend and I hike(intermediate terrain) everyday at least 5 miles and then run hills afterwards (maybe a total of 15 mins of hill running all total - but running up them as fast as we can, walking down, counting to 20 then doing it again). I eat 2 packets of oatmeal with milk before heading out and my gf usually eats half of a bagel or a granola bar. My/our question is.............with doing this type of activity, am I/her eating enough and what is the breakdown as far as glycogen, fat, lean muscle mass? Meaning, I think we burn through our glycogen stores first, but after that, what happens? Could we be doing more harm than good if we are not fueled enough. I usually feel a bit hungry on the 5th mile stretch but still have plenty of energy to do the hills. I also eat within an hour of getting home. I feel a great burn in my high abdomen which my gf does not. Not a cramp type of burn, but, well, I am unsure how to best describe it. It feels good and everyone that I have ever mentioned it to...said that it was good. My core is tight usually through the whole workout. So, anyway...if we continue with this type of exercise (if not running hills we are jumping on picnic tables, or some other type of more explosive activity) are we handling our food intake properly and are we hurting ourselves as far as dipping into burning lean muscle mass? Wow....I hope you can decipher through all that...lol Any insight or suggestions would be appreciated.

Not sure if it matters....I am 5' 108 lbs (more muscular build) she is 5'2" about 115 more of a slender build

A couple of questions and thoughts come to mind:

1. How often are you doing the hike/hill combo?

2. Why are you doing it?

3. Why are you doing jumps and the like (otherwise known as plyometrics).

4. What's the rest of your nutrition look like. It's not the food eaten just before training that matters... it's the total diet.

5. A burning sensation isn't an indicator of workout efficacy.

6. What are your goals?

stroutman81

wow....very imformative

Glad you were able to take something from it!

dskline1

I have a ? that may sound completely absurd....my girlfriend and I hike(intermediate terrain) everyday at least 5 miles and then run hills afterwards (maybe a total of 15 mins of hill running all total - but running up them as fast as we can, walking down, counting to 20 then doing it again). I eat 2 packets of oatmeal with milk before heading out and my gf usually eats half of a bagel or a granola bar. My/our question is.............with doing this type of activity, am I/her eating enough and what is the breakdown as far as glycogen, fat, lean muscle mass? Meaning, I think we burn through our glycogen stores first, but after that, what happens? Could we be doing more harm than good if we are not fueled enough. I usually feel a bit hungry on the 5th mile stretch but still have plenty of energy to do the hills. I also eat within an hour of getting home. I feel a great burn in my high abdomen which my gf does not. Not a cramp type of burn, but, well, I am unsure how to best describe it. It feels good and everyone that I have ever mentioned it to...said that it was good. My core is tight usually through the whole workout. So, anyway...if we continue with this type of exercise (if not running hills we are jumping on picnic tables, or some other type of more explosive activity) are we handling our food intake properly and are we hurting ourselves as far as dipping into burning lean muscle mass? Wow....I hope you can decipher through all that...lol Any insight or suggestions would be appreciated.

Not sure if it matters....I am 5' 108 lbs (more muscular build) she is 5'2" about 115 more of a slender build

A couple of questions and thoughts come to mind:

1. How often are you doing the hike/hill combo?

2. Why are you doing it?

3. Why are you doing jumps and the like (otherwise known as plyometrics).

4. What's the rest of your nutrition look like. It's not the food eaten just before training that matters... it's the total diet.

5. A burning sensation isn't an indicator of workout efficacy.

6. What are your goals?

Let's see...we are doing the hiking/hill combo 3-4 times per week / most probable reason for doing this would be to enjoy the outdoor weather while we can vs hitting the gym which we will have to do over the winter months as well as just trying to get in a decent workout...not so much for weight loss but to tone lower body and maintenance / doing the jumps/jacks to increase our heartrate throughout the workout (limited attempt at a HIIT workout). We both prefer more of the old school exercises vs an aerobics class or zumba, etc / rest of nutrition is decent - lean proteins, fibrous veggies and good fat for dinner; always have a pro/carb/fat combo at every meal with heavier carb ratio in the am - lunches are usually a lean lunchmeat combo of some sort on ww breat and some nuts for the fat; usually have greek yogurt daily - snacks are usually a fruit with pb or seeds/nuts, etc. My calorie consumption is anywhere between 1600-1800 and I am very content with this range. My biggest food weakness is a pbj on ww bread. / goals would be to tone and sculpt and increase cardiovascular effeciency. The number on the scale usually is not a good indicator for me with my size. I don't rely on that as a measurement tool in the least. I do do strength training 3 times per week as well. There is sooo much to tell or try and explain, but I fear overloading the page. If you need anything else to provide an opinion, please let me know. Thanks again!

xLissyx

bump

HIzara

bump!

Good thread.