move less and eat less
Options
Replies
-
If they had been logging incorrectly, then they wouldn't have lost weight when they increased calories.
In my opinion this is not necessarily correct. Often times, increasing calories can increase dietary compliance and adherence in the long term. So for example many times people make an attempt at setting intake too low. They comply for a few days then they make up for it by having a binge day or a "I'm not going to track today" day and effectively un-do the deficit they may have created over the short periods of compliance.0 -
If I want to train for a 100 mile bicyling event, I can't be eating at a deficit. I'll get sick, for sure. I can either lose weight fast and don't train hard, or lose weight very slowly and train....
Everyone is different. I trained for the 100 Miles of Nowhere (3300 feet of climbing on my route) and for D2R2 this summer (only the 100K version, but it did have 8,000 feet of climbing, mostly on dirt) and then the Great River Ride 170K (really 179 km, or 111.5 mi, with 8,800 feet of climbing), while running a deficit between 350 and 500 calories a day. I'm a much stronger cyclist now than I was this time last year, despite losing nearly 50 lb. over the course of the last thirteen months.
Maybe I would have improved even more if I hadn't been eating at a deficit - I'll find that out this summer, I hope!0 -
I find you very condescending.
I know this wasn't directed at me, but as long as we're airing our grievances...
...I find you very adversarial and abrasive...
...and I don't like you.0 -
Also, with a very low calorie goal, people tend to "forget" things in order to not go over. A quick bite of this here, a forgotten carrot or apple there, etc. When they see more calories available, it makes it easier to log that extra bite, because it's not going to "ruin the day." It's mostly psychological, and quite often unconscious.If they had been logging incorrectly, then they wouldn't have lost weight when they increased calories.
In my opinion this is not necessarily correct. Often times, increasing calories can increase dietary compliance and adherence in the long term. So for example many times people make an attempt at setting intake too low. They comply for a few days then they make up for it by having a binge day or a "I'm not going to track today" day and effectively un-do the deficit they may have created over the short periods of compliance.0 -
Also, with a very low calorie goal, people tend to "forget" things in order to not go over. A quick bite of this here, a forgotten carrot or apple there, etc. When they see more calories available, it makes it easier to log that extra bite, because it's not going to "ruin the day." It's mostly psychological, and quite often unconscious.If they had been logging incorrectly, then they wouldn't have lost weight when they increased calories.
In my opinion this is not necessarily correct. Often times, increasing calories can increase dietary compliance and adherence in the long term. So for example many times people make an attempt at setting intake too low. They comply for a few days then they make up for it by having a binge day or a "I'm not going to track today" day and effectively un-do the deficit they may have created over the short periods of compliance.
Agreed.0 -
It has taken me a year to figure out, and I'd be a jerk if I didn't share.
Trying to lose weight? Working out more than 3 times a week? There is your problem.
Take a look around at posts from people "doing everything right and not losing". What do almost all of them have in common? Crazy exercise regimen.
Losing weight is a destructive process. By definition. While you are tearing down the body you have now, don't think of training as anything but a way to reduce the damage from this process. Eat less, move less. Find a distraction that isn't going to prolong your weight loss. Working out is not a good one!
0 -
I also lost a lot of weight doing the opposite of what I recommend. It proves nothing. I would be more fit now had I done something better. I would be closer to my goal.
Okay so what you are saying then is this...
I was 40 when I started, 5ft 7 and started at 205...I have in the past weighed as little at 130lbs...so lets use that weight.
If I had just concentrated on losing the 75lbs then started exercise I would have been better off????really???
Now is losing probably 20lbs of muscle mass a good thing???? That would have taken me at what 4 years to build back...bulking, cutting ,bulking, cutting...how is that better?????
No thank you. I prefer to maintain as much of my 120lbs of muscle, eat at a reasonable deficet and take 2-3 years to acheive my ultimate goals (20-22% BF, bench my bw, DL 2x my BW etc) rather than take 1-2 years to lose 75lbs, and another maybe 4 to build back what I lost.
No, that's pretty much a crappy program I wouldn't recommend. Why would you think I would recommend no exercise?
ah because of this post and your response....I lost around 50lbs without doing any exercise at all. For me it was too overwhelming to learn how to lose weight (for the first time in my life) and also figure out the whole exercise thing (also for the first time in my life). So I decided to focus on diet/calorie deficit. And it worked great for me doing it this way. I lost the weight and improved my health (including getting my glucose number back down into the normal range), and then as I transitioned into maintenance I started walking and my exercise routine has progressed from there. If I had to do it all over I would do the same thing again
Clearly focusing on doing one thing at a time, which is called "specificity", is a really good concept to have when you want I create any adaptation.
Wish I were as smart a you! Took me forever to realize this.
that word... focus... I don't think it means what you think it means. when I focus on one thing it doesn't mean i completely exclude another. if I meant to say "do exclusively", I'd probably say that.
I need a little "straw man award" sticker to post on some of these "takedowns" this one is quite a reach though.0 -
If I want to train for a 100 mile bicyling event, I can't be eating at a deficit. I'll get sick, for sure. I can either lose weight fast and don't train hard, or lose weight very slowly and train....
Everyone is different. I trained for the 100 Miles of Nowhere (3300 feet of climbing on my route) and for D2R2 this summer (only the 100K version, but it did have 8,000 feet of climbing, mostly on dirt) and then the Great River Ride 170K (really 179 km, or 111.5 mi, with 8,800 feet of climbing), while running a deficit between 350 and 500 calories a day. I'm a much stronger cyclist now than I was this time last year, despite losing nearly 50 lb. over the course of the last thirteen months.
Maybe I would have improved even more if I hadn't been eating at a deficit - I'll find that out this summer, I hope!
well that's kinda complicated. How much better are you at biking with 50 lbs strapped on might be a way to explore your increased capacity for work.0 -
If they had been logging incorrectly, then they wouldn't have lost weight when they increased calories.
In my opinion this is not necessarily correct. Often times, increasing calories can increase dietary compliance and adherence in the long term. So for example many times people make an attempt at setting intake too low. They comply for a few days then they make up for it by having a binge day or a "I'm not going to track today" day and effectively un-do the deficit they may have created over the short periods of compliance.
how about a more goldylocks type approach for compliance?
some people seem to hold up better through a slow grind, some like to rip a bandaid off as quick as possible.
you just weigh your type against your goals. no reason to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
but if you are like me, a 300 cal deficit feels more or less like a 1000 cal deficit, only with more energy to get bored with. much easier for me, personally, it turns out, to cut 3 times as hard for 1/3 as long. and oddly more effective now that I got this rest thing down.0 -
Yeah sometimes also true.
But I kinda think a 12mm reduction (50%) in the belly skin fold in 1 month when you expected half that from past experience is hard to explain as water weight from reduced inflammation.
That's where I am at. I FIGURATIVELY am blown away by how effective rest is (not just not overtraining). So I shall henceforth be known as captain rest.
Ok maybe not, but I'm definitely gonna be all up in that rest more bandwagon for a while.
Or, it's because it's well documented that belly fat is the hardest to get rid of, and last to go, so you are now at the point where that is what you are primarily losing.
ancedotal =/= science.
I take measurements from a few spots, and this ain't my first time at this bodyfat % thanks, but i know the drill and my expectations based on past performance are quite specific. and based on actual past experience and having kept records, not impressions formed before I've done my first round of cutting.
why do people keep throwing straw men at this? look at my freaking profile, you think I really don't know how this works? a year ago, if a guy with my record said "hey, check out this mistake I made for a year", I would have found that pretty damn interesting. unfortunately, I mostly interacted with fellow instant experts.
of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...0 -
of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...
So no science will occur in this thread?
What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.
I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?0 -
el oh el0
-
I also lost a lot of weight doing the opposite of what I recommend. It proves nothing. I would be more fit now had I done something better. I would be closer to my goal.
Okay so what you are saying then is this...
I was 40 when I started, 5ft 7 and started at 205...I have in the past weighed as little at 130lbs...so lets use that weight.
If I had just concentrated on losing the 75lbs then started exercise I would have been better off????really???
Now is losing probably 20lbs of muscle mass a good thing???? That would have taken me at what 4 years to build back...bulking, cutting ,bulking, cutting...how is that better?????
No thank you. I prefer to maintain as much of my 120lbs of muscle, eat at a reasonable deficet and take 2-3 years to acheive my ultimate goals (20-22% BF, bench my bw, DL 2x my BW etc) rather than take 1-2 years to lose 75lbs, and another maybe 4 to build back what I lost.
No, that's pretty much a crappy program I wouldn't recommend. Why would you think I would recommend no exercise?
ah because of this post and your response....I lost around 50lbs without doing any exercise at all. For me it was too overwhelming to learn how to lose weight (for the first time in my life) and also figure out the whole exercise thing (also for the first time in my life). So I decided to focus on diet/calorie deficit. And it worked great for me doing it this way. I lost the weight and improved my health (including getting my glucose number back down into the normal range), and then as I transitioned into maintenance I started walking and my exercise routine has progressed from there. If I had to do it all over I would do the same thing again
Clearly focusing on doing one thing at a time, which is called "specificity", is a really good concept to have when you want I create any adaptation.
Wish I were as smart a you! Took me forever to realize this.
that word... focus... I don't think it means what you think it means. when I focus on one thing it doesn't mean i completely exclude another. if I meant to say "do exclusively", I'd probably say that.
I need a little "straw man award" sticker to post on some of these "takedowns" this one is quite a reach though.
No not trying to create a straw man actually asking a question...just like I did at first to clarify exactly what you meant, not that you clarified much and glossed over my questions like "what do you consider extreme for workouts"
. You are not very precise or concise with your thoughts and the OP was a bit how do I say...confusing then as you continue and not answer questions it gets more confusing then when you say "focus" on one thing...yah that means the main area of interest...trust me I read the words and take their meaning just fine.
Mean what you say, say what you mean and be able to back it up and when asked a question for clarification answer it...but Im not the only one here who still believes this OP is not as great as you think.
I will continue on my way working out 5x a week, lifting 3x out of those 5 and eating at a deficet and not worry about eating less and moving less...as I am getting great results and in less time than a lot of people that are doing this with me outside of MFP.0 -
of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...
So no science will occur in this thread?
What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.
I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?
because, MAJIK
0 -
The amount of exercise one can get without getting a negative stress/inflammatory response probably depends on the individual as well as many contextual elements such as length/intensity of the exercise they are doing and how active they are during the times they are not "exercising."It has taken me a year to figure out, and I'd be a jerk if I didn't share.
Trying to lose weight? Working out more than 3 times a week? There is your problem.
Take a look around at posts from people "doing everything right and not losing". What do almost all of them have in common? Crazy exercise regimen.
Losing weight is a destructive process. By definition. While you are tearing down the body you have now, don't think of training as anything but a way to reduce the damage from this process. Eat less, move less. Find a distraction that isn't going to prolong your weight loss. Working out is not a good one!0 -
of course anecdotal evidence isn't science. science is a method, so...
So no science will occur in this thread?
What does it matter though if you create a calorie deficit of 3500 calories while eating 2700 calories a day (exercising 5-6 hours a week) or 2200 calories a day (with 2-3 days a week)? In the end, it will still create a 1 lb loss.
I am struggling to understand how lowering your intake and your TDEE will create more weight loss?
because, MAJIK
In for magic...0 -
"how about a more goldylocks type approach for compliance?
some people seem to hold up better through a slow grind, some like to rip a bandaid off as quick as possible.
you just weigh your type against your goals. no reason to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
but if you are like me, a 300 cal deficit feels more or less like a 1000 cal deficit, only with more energy to get bored with. much easier for me, personally, it turns out, to cut 3 times as hard for 1/3 as long. and oddly more effective now that I got this rest thing down."
@OP - so what I understand you to be saying above is that you are comfortable eating at 1000 calories/day deficit, with less workouts so that you can cut quicker. That is a very steep cut to maintain for an extended period - perhaps if you are someone with alot to lose, and only for a period of time...but, general recommendations on these forums seem to suggest 1 lb/week (500 cals deficit) as a rule of thumb decreasing to 250 deficit as you get within striking range of your goal. I can only speak for myself when I say there is no way I would entertain a 1000 cal deficit for an extended period of time. To me, there is a significant difference between a 300 cal deficit and a 1000 cal deficit.0 -
"how about a more goldylocks type approach for compliance?
some people seem to hold up better through a slow grind, some like to rip a bandaid off as quick as possible.
you just weigh your type against your goals. no reason to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
but if you are like me, a 300 cal deficit feels more or less like a 1000 cal deficit, only with more energy to get bored with. much easier for me, personally, it turns out, to cut 3 times as hard for 1/3 as long. and oddly more effective now that I got this rest thing down."
@OP - so what I understand you to be saying above is that you are comfortable eating at 1000 calories/day deficit, with less workouts so that you can cut quicker. That is a very steep cut to maintain for an extended period - perhaps if you are someone with alot to lose, and only for a period of time...but, general recommendations on these forums seem to suggest 1 lb/week (500 cals deficit) as a rule of thumb decreasing to 250 deficit as you get within striking range of your goal. I can only speak for myself when I say there is no way I would entertain a 1000 cal deficit for an extended period of time. To me, there is a significant difference between a 300 cal deficit and a 1000 cal deficit.
I agree. However, it appears that OP has decided that his experience is the only one that matters and that anyone else's amounts to a straw man argument if it at all differs from his own.0 -
I find you very condescending.
I know this wasn't directed at me, but as long as we're airing our grievances...
...I find you very adversarial and abrasive...
...and I don't like you.
I'm abrasive?. For the most part I've just given my opinion, except in this instance.
Oh, and I'm heartbroken. I think I'll go cry myself to sleep.0 -
I find you very condescending.
I know this wasn't directed at me, but as long as we're airing our grievances...
...I find you very adversarial and abrasive...
...and I don't like you.
I'm abrasive?. For the most part I've just given my opinion, except in this instance.
Oh, and I'm heartbroken. I think I'll go cry myself to sleep.
Hello. I don't know you and don't have a dog in this race. Then I went and read your post history.
You are abrasive.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/post/by_user/537642920
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions