Q&A session - live right now!
Replies
-
Can you sucessfully lose weight doing only the elliptical machine?
Oh I like this question. Ditto please.
Already answered. Read thread.0 -
Can you lose weight lying in bed ?
Not serious, right?0 -
What does all that mean? Since I weigh 120lbs (at 4'11 ) and I want to weigh 100lbs what does what you wrote mean? And if the MFP food meter is based on flawed logic what should I do to keep tabs on what I need to do?
I'm not sure how the last bit that I posted doesn't help you see where you should take your nutrition. Read this again:
"Shoot for 1 gram of protein per pound of goals weight, 30% of calories from fat, 2-3 servings of fruit per day, 3-6 servings of fibrous veggies per day. If there are still calories to "fill," you can eat whatever you want really to meet your calorie goal."0 -
How do you figure out what your weight should be ??? What about free weights vs. machines which one do you recommend??0
-
How do you figure out what your weight should be ???
I don't really like that question. Not knocking you at all.... it's just there really isn't a good answer. You could base the answer on BMI, for example, but that's not going to take into account things like body fat percentage. I simply don't think it's worth worrying about what your weight should be. Rather, worry about what your health, functionality, performance, and physique should be. Weight will settle where it needs to be once those things are optimized.What about free weights vs. machines which one do you recommend??
Depends on the goals. If they're performance based, I'd say free weights pretty much all the time. I should note up front that I'm a free weights kind of guy. They just make sense to me. I mean, real life doesn't happen affixed to some mechanical plane of motion, so why train in such settings? That said, when it comes to physique training, load is load. Muscle growth can happen with free weights or machines. And frankly, I'm okay with a blend of both. But if I had it my way, pretty much ever program would be centered on free weight training.0 -
Besides eating right, is it ok to do cardio with weights in order to get lean, and how often do you recommend doing cardio?0
-
Bump!0
-
Besides eating right, is it ok to do cardio with weights in order to get lean, and how often do you recommend doing cardio?
What do you mean by "cardio with weights"? Are asking about doing weighted running/walking? Or very light, low rest weight training to give a cardio effect? Clarification please.0 -
Can i have some opinions on my calorie intake please, I am supose to be around 2100 to lose but im eating way below that, I am not hungry at all cos the foods im chosing are keeping me fuller for much longer,
I believe im getting all my nutriants,fibre,calcium,protein,vitamins etc..
My portion sizes are a lot smaller as as some are aware i have a lapband, due to a leakage i put the weight back on,
Anyway i need a new band & im helping the procedure by losing some weight & getting used to smaller portion sizes
Im drinking wine & eating chocolate on my calories0 -
Can i have some opinions on my calorie intake please, I am supose to be around 2100 to lose but im eating way below that, I am not hungry at all cos the foods im chosing are keeping me fuller for much longer,
I believe im getting all my nutriants,fibre,calcium,protein,vitamins etc..
My portion sizes are a lot smaller as as some are aware i have a lapband, due to a leakage i put the weight back on,
Anyway i need a new band & im helping the procedure by losing some weight & getting used to smaller portion sizes
Im drinking wine & eating chocolate on my calories
I can't speak to you calorie level since I don't know what it is nor do I know anything about your weight and activity levels.0 -
Sorry, im new here, It says on this site i should be eating around 2050 cal a day to lose weight,
I can't get to that amount as i am not hungry,
Im i keeping my metabolism is sleep mode by not eating my required amount of calories?
Im eating around 1400-1800 calories a day, i walk for exercise 3 times a week for 1-2 hours a time about 3mph
Im 5ft 7 / 304lbs female 41yrs old (with disc problems in my back), having physio once a week on it, so only form of exercising is walking,housework,running after a 20 month old toddler.
Thank you for your time.0 -
Sorry, im new here, It says on this site i should be eating around 2050 cal a day to lose weight,
I can't get to that amount as i am not hungry,
Im i keeping my metabolism is sleep mode by not eating my required amount of calories?
Im eating around 1400-1800 calories a day, i walk for exercise 3 times a week for 1-2 hours a time about 3mph
Im 5ft 7 / 304lbs female 41yrs old (with disc problems in my back), having physio once a week on it, so only form of exercising is walking,housework,running after a 20 month old toddler.
Thank you for your time.
This is always an interesting commentary for me. Frequently I encounter someone who's carrying a lot of excess fat claiming they can't eat a lot because they're not hungry. What worries me is how on Earth did they get to 300+ lbs without eating a lot? You can't maintain 300+ lbs without a pretty significant and consistent influx of calories/energy.
Are you simply saying that now that you've changed your food choices around, the foods you're eating keep you fuller?
I'm definitely not trying to bash you. I'm just trying to make sure you're on the right path. Given the preponderance of under-reporting in the calorie counting culture, I'm always concerned when I hear an overweight person telling me they can't seem to eat enough.
That said, none of this is really important in your case. Eating roughly 1500 calories per day is fine by me given your stats and situation. Larger folks can get away with deeper deficits than their leaner counterparts. And no, you're not going to cause your metabolism to "sleep" by eating this level of calories. Even at deeper deficits, metabolic rate isn't as reactive as you're assuming.
Long story short - you should be fine. At least in the context of calorie intake.0 -
Sorry, im new here, It says on this site i should be eating around 2050 cal a day to lose weight,
I can't get to that amount as i am not hungry,
Im i keeping my metabolism is sleep mode by not eating my required amount of calories?
Im eating around 1400-1800 calories a day, i walk for exercise 3 times a week for 1-2 hours a time about 3mph
Im 5ft 7 / 304lbs female 41yrs old (with disc problems in my back), having physio once a week on it, so only form of exercising is walking,housework,running after a 20 month old toddler.
Thank you for your time.
This is always an interesting commentary for me. Frequently I encounter someone who's carrying a lot of excess fat claiming they can't eat a lot because they're not hungry. What worries me is how on Earth did they get to 300+ lbs without eating a lot? You can't maintain 300+ lbs without a pretty significant and consistent influx of calories/energy.
Are you simply saying that now that you've changed your food choices around, the foods you're eating keep you fuller?
I'm definitely not trying to bash you. I'm just trying to make sure you're on the right path. Given the preponderance of under-reporting in the calorie counting culture, I'm always concerned when I hear an overweight person telling me they can't seem to eat enough.
That said, none of this is really important in your case. Eating roughly 1500 calories per day is fine by me given your stats and situation. Larger folks can get away with deeper deficits than their leaner counterparts. And no, you're not going to cause your metabolism to "sleep" by eating this level of calories. Even at deeper deficits, metabolic rate isn't as reactive as you're assuming.
Long story short - you should be fine. At least in the context of calorie intake.
I drank too much alcohol for yrs & only ate late at night, I never ate breakfast or Lunch/ So it can be quite easy for a person to gain a lot of weight like this.
Thank you for your reply.0 -
That said, none of this is really important in your case. Eating roughly 1500 calories per day is fine by me given your stats and situation. Larger folks can get away with deeper deficits than their leaner counterparts. And no, you're not going to cause your metabolism to "sleep" by eating this level of calories. Even at deeper deficits, metabolic rate isn't as reactive as you're assuming.
Long story short - you should be fine. At least in the context of calorie intake.
Hii i am a 6'0 ft guy (SW=301lbs,CW=287lbs,Moderate Activity - 4 days cardio(30 mins) + 2 day weight training ) on a deeper deficit myself(1500-1600 cals per day ). I wanted to know how long can i safely eat at a deep deficit without screwing with my metabolism or facing any other serious repurcussions like muscle loss etc...2-3 months or 6 months..wat would u suggest ?0 -
ok after adding you and reading your posts for a while i guess some muscle loss is inevitable but also necessary as 25 % of the weight gain during the over-eating phase is muscle too.Also metabolism will take a setback too and i will have a slower bmr than someone who always maintained at my goal weight.
So i guess i would stick to1500 cals/day(approx 180g Carbs,140 g Protein and 20g Fats) for me for the next 6 months to lose the bulk of my weight including cheat meals and diet breaks.Your thoughts ?0 -
Sorry, im new here, It says on this site i should be eating around 2050 cal a day to lose weight,
I can't get to that amount as i am not hungry,
Im i keeping my metabolism is sleep mode by not eating my required amount of calories?
Im eating around 1400-1800 calories a day, i walk for exercise 3 times a week for 1-2 hours a time about 3mph
Im 5ft 7 / 304lbs female 41yrs old (with disc problems in my back), having physio once a week on it, so only form of exercising is walking,housework,running after a 20 month old toddler.
Thank you for your time.
This is always an interesting commentary for me. Frequently I encounter someone who's carrying a lot of excess fat claiming they can't eat a lot because they're not hungry. What worries me is how on Earth did they get to 300+ lbs without eating a lot? You can't maintain 300+ lbs without a pretty significant and consistent influx of calories/energy.
Are you simply saying that now that you've changed your food choices around, the foods you're eating keep you fuller?
I'm definitely not trying to bash you. I'm just trying to make sure you're on the right path. Given the preponderance of under-reporting in the calorie counting culture, I'm always concerned when I hear an overweight person telling me they can't seem to eat enough.
That said, none of this is really important in your case. Eating roughly 1500 calories per day is fine by me given your stats and situation. Larger folks can get away with deeper deficits than their leaner counterparts. And no, you're not going to cause your metabolism to "sleep" by eating this level of calories. Even at deeper deficits, metabolic rate isn't as reactive as you're assuming.
Long story short - you should be fine. At least in the context of calorie intake.
I drank too much alcohol for yrs & only ate late at night, I never ate breakfast or Lunch/ So it can be quite easy for a person to gain a lot of weight like this.
Thank you for your reply.
Yeah, that makes some sense. That's slightly different than what I was referring to. I've had 400 lb people tell me that 2000 calories is too much for them. That makes absolutely no sense to me seeing as how they had to be living on way more than that to reach and maintain 400 lbs.
But that's not really what you're saying here. You simply altered the quality of your diet such that satiation is easier to come by. And that's a huge part of the game... so congrats.0 -
I've just started a program of lifting weights and have been getting very sore for 2-3 days after. What can I do to minimise DOMS?0
-
Bump0
-
That said, none of this is really important in your case. Eating roughly 1500 calories per day is fine by me given your stats and situation. Larger folks can get away with deeper deficits than their leaner counterparts. And no, you're not going to cause your metabolism to "sleep" by eating this level of calories. Even at deeper deficits, metabolic rate isn't as reactive as you're assuming.
Long story short - you should be fine. At least in the context of calorie intake.
Hii i am a 6'0 ft guy (SW=301lbs,CW=287lbs,Moderate Activity - 4 days cardio(30 mins) + 2 day weight training ) on a deeper deficit myself(1500-1600 cals per day ). I wanted to know how long can i safely eat at a deep deficit without screwing with my metabolism or facing any other serious repurcussions like muscle loss etc...2-3 months or 6 months..wat would u suggest ?
It's difficult to put any rigid numbers to it. Here's what I'll say. Make sure you're getting sufficient protein in... in the tune of 1 gram per pound of goal weight. That, paired with the fact that you are weight training a couple of days per week, will go a long way toward preserving muscle.
Metabolism isn't going to get crushed. In a way, deeper deficit dieting only increases the rate at which the negative adaptations occur. More reasonable deficits simply spread the adaptations out over longer periods of time. They still happen though. You have to realize that a lot of the negative adaptations associated with "starvation mode" are triggered by a loss in fat.
So lose fat quickly, realize the negative adaptations quickly. Lose fat slowly, realize the negative adaptations slowly.
The magnitude of these adaptations seems to be mostly genetic. Some people can lose massive amounts of weight and not skip a beat in terms of energy requirements. I mean, sure, their energy needs will drop due to the loss in body mass. Less tissue to support and mass to move around and such. But they won't see an enormous "adaptive" component where calorie needs fall below what would be expected given the loss in weight.
Others get the short end of the stick where their bodies seem to be hyper-sensitive to large amounts of fat loss.
But again, there's not a lot you can do about it. Preserving as much muscle as possible certainly helps. Not to the degree many 'experts' like to claim... but any little bit helps.
Another question worth asking yourself is how sustainable is this way of eating for you. If you're comfortable to a point where you can see yourself sticking with this for the long haul... so be it. If it doesn't seem manageable for that long though, I'm not necessarily saying things need to be changed now... but I am saying that you need to have an exit strategy planned out ahead of time.
That's something very few people who diet hard do. They diet their booties off, literally and figuratively, wind up resisting all the rigidity and deprivation, and rebound like crazy. On the flip side, I worked with obese folks where we've taken calories much lower than where you're currently at. We'd jump start the process with something like a protein sparing modified fast. But it was planned to be a temporary way of eating with a logical progression into more sustainable nutrition strategies.
Just some food for thought.0 -
ok after adding you and reading your posts for a while i guess some muscle loss is inevitable but also necessary as 25 % of the weight gain during the over-eating phase is muscle too.Also metabolism will take a setback too and i will have a slower bmr than someone who always maintained at my goal weight.
So i guess i would stick to1500 cals/day(approx 180g Carbs,140 g Protein and 20g Fats) for me for the next 6 months to lose the bulk of my weight including cheat meals and diet breaks.Your thoughts ?
I'd likely set protein and fat a bit higher. Protein at around 1 gram per pound of goal weight and fat at about 20-25% of calories. Beyond that... I'm okay with the approach keeping in mind what I said above.0 -
bump0
-
I've just started a program of lifting weights and have been getting very sore for 2-3 days after. What can I do to minimise DOMS?
Honestly... just hang in there. You can use an anti-inflammatory / pain reliever. But at the end of the day, the novelty of lifting weights initializes a cascade of events that leads to soreness. There's just no way around that. The degree to which you get sore will minimize as that novelty wears off.
What makes matters worse is most newcomers to the 'iron game' are overzealous. They lack patience. Why dip your toes in the water when they can dive right in? Problem is, this sets them up for more soreness than is necessary. Backing way off, focusing on learning the correct movement patterns, and using sane volume should be top priority. Worrying about lifting hard/heavy comes later.0 -
Awesome thread. Thanks0
-
Bump! Thanks for the great info.0
-
Another question worth asking yourself is how sustainable is this way of eating for you. If you're comfortable to a point where you can see yourself sticking with this for the long haul... so be it. If it doesn't seem manageable for that long though, I'm not necessarily saying things need to be changed now... but I am saying that you need to have an exit strategy planned out ahead of time.
I cant thank you enough!! Could you suggest me an exit strategy..are you talking eating on maintenance or something else?0 -
Another question worth asking yourself is how sustainable is this way of eating for you. If you're comfortable to a point where you can see yourself sticking with this for the long haul... so be it. If it doesn't seem manageable for that long though, I'm not necessarily saying things need to be changed now... but I am saying that you need to have an exit strategy planned out ahead of time.
I cant thank you enough!! Could you suggest me an exit strategy..are you talking eating on maintenance or something else?
That's a tough question to answer. It's more a matter of formulating a mindset where expectations are managed accordingly. Case in point - many people, feeding off of initial motivation and ambition, diet their hardest in the early stages of their fat loss. The problem is, motivation is a temporary phenomenon. And fat loss is a very slow process... even when you're dieting hard.
When the utility, novelty, and motivation wane, people tend to fall off. The folks who are dieting the hardest tend to fall the hardest and fastest. That's due to a number of reasons. For one, hard dieting typically entails a lot of rigidity and sacrifice. So on a psychological level, there's this rebound effect. We have a finite capacity to exert attention and focus. When it depletes, our 'mental performance' tends to weakness. The net effect is a huge reduction in restraint. I call it the rebellious teenager syndrome. Essentially the restraints reverts into gluttony. It's almost as if while dieting hard, they're accumulating a debt. Once they fall off, their mindsets are such that the only thing they can think about is repaying that 'debt.'
On the physiological side of things, pretty much every aspect of your body is primed for fat storage when you're coming off a hard diet - from cells and hormones on up.
The the psychological and physiological aspects of this have this negative synergistic effect. They compound to set most people up for failure.
For this reason, in almost all cases, I promote eating as much food as possible while still allowing a reasonable rate of monthly weight loss.
In the other cases where I feel that a 'jump start' diet is a fit, I'll do an aggressive diet for a month or two to knock as much weight off as possible. There's research out there that supports this approach in the context of long term adherence and results. It smacks people with a heavy dose of belief and realization that they're in control, that they can lose weight, and that they own their actions/decisions and the effects that they bear.
But before starting such a diet and all throughout, I'm educating that individual to know that these results they're experiencing during the aggressive diet exceed reality. They're not sustainable and before soon they're going to reach a point where more sustainable tactics need to be deployed. At that point, a couple of things need to be cemented:
1) Most importantly, the sustainable tactics need to be individually tailored based.
2) These tactics are going to be of the sort that are meant to be engrained for life. They're not as much tactics as they are behaviors that will come naturally after enough practice.
3) While transitioning into these behaviors, some weight regain is likely. Some of this might be fat. Most of it will be water due to glycogen repletion, etc.
You're in sort of a gray area. You're not dieting ridiculously hard. But you're deeper than I'd typically suggest given your weight. I'm not so sure you need to be overly concerned about what I discussed above. I'd venture to say ride this as long as you can, assuming you're reasonably comfortable. When it stops working (which it likely won't if you can stick with it since a big deficit is always going to lead to weight loss - see anorexia as an extreme example) or when it simply becomes too unbearable, then simply revert to more sane tactics where you're in a slight deficit, you're centering your diet on protein, you're eating plenty of fibrous veggies and fruits, etc.
Basically all the stuff I discuss in my Nutrition 101 article.0 -
You are right..being in the grey area was my plan all along..but i will make sure to include some rubbish food every week from now on so i dont become very rigid.You have made some amazing points there!! i am gonna copy paste this..Again thanks a lot
0 -
bump for later0
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