Dogmeat's thoughts on weight loss

savvystephy

I enjoyed your post! Thanks.

Melissa09x

bump

CasperO

Gaining muscle mass while losing bodyfat is extremely rare. You have to be extremely careful, and you have to be a genetic freak. Call me a liar if you wish, but I've done it. Measured and weighed and verified. I was on maintenance, eating exercise calories, doing mega cardio and heavy weight and supplementing protein. I maintained weight and lost inches off the waist and gained inches everywhere else.

Extremely rare, but it can be done (sorta - I admit I wasn't losing weight). Was probably gaining 1 pound a week lean and losing a pound of BF,,, but I did it.

I do completely agree with you that "I did a pushup and gained 5 pounds! I'm ripped! Muscle is heavier than fat you know,,," is crap. We see a lot of it on this site, and you just let it go.

HealthyChanges2010

Disclaimer: I do not have formal education in anything related to health, nutrition, sports, or any even remotely related field. In fact, I'm only properly trained in the field of how to kill people. Rest assured though that it's not my intention here

I do have lots of opinions. You can take them or leave them, just don't take them with a grain of salt because the subsequent water retention might be de-motivational on the scale.


Weight Loss

No one should have that as their ultimate goal. Weight loss in itself CAN be irrelevant, and often is. Treat your scale like that distant relative who readily gives out bad advice; just smile and ignore most of it. Your weight fluctuations are generally comprised of 3 separate things: changes in water levels, changes in lean body mass, and changes in fat mass. The first one is largely irrelevant, the two latter ones are very important; you want to decrease your fat mass and increase your muscle mass.

Muscle mass

Two things: One; you want to grow bigger muscles. One point one; yes, even if you're a female, this IS what you want (and if you are one, no, you will never look like a bodybuilder, no matter how much weight training you do).

Two; you can't grow bigger muscles. For now.

Building muscle mass and getting rid of fat mass are mutually exclusive. Muscle mass is built through calorie surplus, and when you're on calorie deficit, it just won't happen. What you really want then, during your weight loss project, is to preserve as much of your existing lean body mass as possible. In practice, this means keeping within your calorie goals, not being too much under very often, and eating away your exercise calories. If you don't, you WILL experience muscle mass loss, your metabolism will go down from that alone, and it won't rebound back up until you build back the muscles through calorie surplus and hard work. You might see weight loss on the scale, but it's not a sign of a victory, it's a sign of a failure.

Related to this, you might be working hard, hopping on your scale constantly and occasionally seeing it go up. People are quick to point out that perhaps, due to your awesome exercise regime and the fact that muscle weighs more than fat, your small weight gain is probably due to growth in muscle mass. While I'm sure this is a nice and supportive thing to say, it's BS. Your muscles won't be growing. You are probably retaining water, or, in some much rarer cases, gaining a bit of fat through lowered metabolism, possibly caused by not eating enough.


Fat loss

This is what you really want when you talk about weight loss. It is quite simple to achieve, although not necessarily easy, depending on your personal relationship to food and drink items and exercise. If you keep your calorie intake between 200-500 kcal below your maintenance level, you will lose weight. If you're really heavy, you might have a bigger deficit. It's a slow process, and there's NOTHING you can do to speed things up. Don't set unrealistic goals, like "I want to lose 30 lbs before my holiday in Spain in 5 weeks". You won't be losing 30 lbs of fat, and just losing 30 lbs of "something" isn't doing your looks any favours. 30 lbs loss done the wrong way will quite likely make you look more disgusting naked than you looked before the loss.

Fat loss is a covert operation you conduct against your body. We evolved, through natural selection, to be really good at storing energy during periods when there was lots of food, and to survive through times when there wasn't much to eat. Your body is smart, has honestly good intentions at heart, and only tries to help you to survive. So you need to be sneaky around the basterd. That's why it's important you keep your daily deficit small - if you don't, your body will think it's those damn lean times again, lets burn away the energy-costly muscles while holding on to all the fat we see. It's called "starvation mode", and while it's a little bit more sophisticated than a simple on/off switch, you want to avoid slipping into it.

What generally happens after your body discovers your not-so-sneaky operation depends much on the individual, but is usually a combination of lost lean body mass, slowed down metabolism, and strengthened hunger signals and cravings. The purpose of this is to stop wasting energy in maintaining the muscles and get you off your butt to binge on food. When you then go foraging and consume 20 Big Macs the energy is carefully stored as extra fat until your body is convinced that it gets it's fix of burgers and fries on a regular basis. If you give up, and return to eating like you did before your diet, you will end up heavier than you were before.

One neat/frustrating thing about fat loss is that you have zero control on WHERE you lose it. Training your abs won't get rid of your belly fat. Training your thighs won't get rid of your thigh fat. Anyone who claims so is full of horsesh*t (including 99% of women's magazines advertising their retarded articles for acquiring killer abs, and about 90% of men's health related magazines). Exactly WHERE the fat loss occurs when you're running on negative calories is determined by your body, genetics and so forth, not by what you eat or attempt to do. If you're genetically built to lose the belly last, your quest for a sixpack means you need to lose it everywhere else first. Chances are that you'll never get there, and if you do, the required bodyfat percentage is too low to realistically maintain long term. For most men, the belly fat is the last one to leave, for most women it's the butt/thigh fat. So, keep this in mind when you scribble down your goals and exercise plans.

In short; eat more or you won't lose weight. If you face your body in a gloves-off match, you will always lose. It keeps a horseshoe in its glove.


Foodstuffs

Most of this stuff is common knowledge and common sense. I won't go into much detail regarding macronutrient breakdown; basically you will want all 3 of them, and you should probably pay more attention into what KIND of sources you have for them than the exact percentages for your CFP breakdown.

Protein helps you in the muscle mass maintaining business. Getting enough of it is a good thing. Many sources of protein come with saturated fat attached, so go for lean and get your fats from elsewhere.

Fats are your friend. Not all of them, but some of them. Focus on unsaturated fats and avoid saturated fats. Stay completely away from anything that has trans fats. Nuts are awesome sources of fat (but make sure you know the amount you're about to consume fits into your calorie goals).

Carbs shouldn't be a swear word either; there are good ones and there are not so good ones. Veggies, fruits and whole grain is good, over-processed crap filled with sugars is bad.

Drinking water is good. Especially if you have problems with portion control, drink water with meals to fill up. The "8 glasses a day" has no scientific basis, and is probably unnecessary, but isn't going to harm you. Anything your body won't need will be peed away anyway. Go for it if you feel like it, don't feel bad if it seems like too much.

Stay away from excess pop. A can every other day isn't going to harm you much, whether its diet or non-diet. Neither HFCS or aspartame aren't healthy for you, although most of the aspartame scare mongering all over the internet is based on roughly equal amount of facts as 9/11 conspiracy theories.


All this being said, absolutes won't work for most people. If you really, really like something, even if it's unhealthy, don't decide to deprive yourself from it for the rest of your life. You'll likely fail anyway, and enough small failures might lead to giving up altogether. Be it beer, doritos, twinkies, mountain dew, whatever - if you really like them, allow yourself to have them, in moderation, and not too often.

I like Panago's Super Cheezy Pizza, Tim Horton's Boston Cream Doughnuts, Diet Dr. Pepper, A&W Root Beer, for example. I generally squeeze my vices in a regular, within calorie goals day, not to a specific "cheat day", but you might want to do differently.

And on the topic of "cheat days", here's my take on them. I believe having one every 7-10 days or so is beneficial. The most important thing about cheat days is that they're NOT cheat days. You're not "cheating" your diet. You're engaging in a deliberate, controlled plan to both keep your metabolism going and giving you a chance to feel less restricted (if this is an issue for you). MARK everything down. This is very, very important. Skipping food diary days tends to lead to higher chances of giving up counting altogether. You want to know what to expect after your cheat day. I prefer to fill up the extra calories of an over day with nuts, you might want to use it to go for stuff you crave.

On cheat days, or "over days", I hit my maintenance level or go SLIGHTLY above it. "Slightly" doesn't mean over by 5000 Calories. Go above no more than you go under on a regular day. If you go above by 3000kcal (it's not very difficult to do, even by accident) on a cheat day every week, and follow 500kcal deficit the other 6 days, your net outcome is +-0.


Exercise

If you've ever logged your exercise, you know working out to destroy a simple doughnut takes incredible amount of work. So, on the face value, fat loss is mostly about diet, and very little about exercise.

If we do supplement our diet with exercise, we're supposed to eat away the calorie gains anyway. So why the hell would you want to waste time exercising in the first place?

Well, as it turns out, for plenty of reasons. As I mentioned before, you want to do your best to hold on to the muscle mass you have. This can only be done through exercise, and most efficiently through resistance training. It serves two purposes; one is preserving a level of metabolism that makes it easier to lower your weight and manage it once you've reached your goal. Another is that without it, you end up looking like crap once you've reached your goal.

Exercise, be it cardio or anaerobic, will also have a positive impact on your metabolism. This helps in general fat loss and helps to avoid or break plateaus, which can be demoralizing.

There's also the small matter of improved health. For most of us, this just isn't a compelling enough goal by itself, but it's there as a small additional reason to get your butt off the couch.


Motivation

I've been around on a few different weight loss forums and around dieting people in real life. People who aim to lose excess fat for selfish reasons are usually those who end up succeeding, and people who do it for noble reasons (like, "for my kids", or "for my wife/husband") end up failing. I get it, it might sound like a good idea to have such a noble cause. In reality, it rarely works. If you plan to make changes to your body and your lifestyle, you have to be selfish and do it primarily for yourself. All other great and awesome reasons can be in the background, but the primary reason looks at you from your mirror.


Summary

Focus on eating healthier stuff in moderation. Avoid crap on regular basis, but don't place absolute restrictions on yourself. Excercise. LOG EVERYTHING. Be selfish.

Great Summary!!:drinker:

Thanks for taking time to post, some good things in here to think on, appreciate your knowlege and that you've shared it. I recall Banks posted (I hope I have this right..lol) how some hang onto the info they know and don't share it, we could all benefit by sharing things we learn (correct info of course LOL), so again I say thank you:flowerforyou:

savvystephy

My only question would be - how are you not gaining muscle if you are able to life more weight, run longer, etc? Wouldn't you have to gain some muscle for increased fitness while losing weight? Curious of your opinion.

lisawest

My only question would be - how are you not gaining muscle if you are able to life more weight, run longer, etc? Wouldn't you have to gain some muscle for increased fitness while losing weight? Curious of your opinion.

My understanding is that you are not gaining muscle, merely reactivating muscles that you already have. Ever woken up a day or so after a rough workout and thought, "I hurt in muscles I didn't even know I HAD!" Well, you always had those muscles, you just didn't always USE those muscles. When you start using muscles that you haven't paid attention to in awhile, you start gaining strength.

Plus, (and I have scientific basis for this, just my little ol' brain) doesn't it reason that if your leg muscles, for instance, are used to carrying your 200 lb self for a mile. Then you begin losing fat and weight. Those muscles are still able to carry 200 lb, but YOU aren't 200 lb anymore, sothey can carry your 180 lb body farther. You weigh less and stress the muscles less, so it takes longer to get to "failure" or fatigue.

Just my thoughts and ideas. If I'm wrong, cool, please give me the correct information. If I'm close to right, AWESOME! (But also please give me the information. )

dogmeat

My only question would be - how are you not gaining muscle if you are able to life more weight, run longer, etc? Wouldn't you have to gain some muscle for increased fitness while losing weight? Curious of your opinion.

Initial gains in capability to LIFT HEAVY CRAP (and they can be substantial in the beginning) are more related to your body learning to get more bang for the buck out of the muscles you have rather than gaining more

I'm not a huge cardio expert, but I would assume similar principles govern endurance improvements.


Edited To Add: Lisa above pretty much nailed it.

lreed

So, if you lose 8 pounds in a month, but your bodyfat decreases by more than the 8 lbs, say you lost 10 lbs of fat, doesn't that mean that you lost fat and gained muscle? That is what happened to me last month (I do a bootcamp 5 days a week with a minimum of 500 calorie burn for each session) plus two 700 calorie burn sessions on the weekend. Is it because my trainer bumped me up to 150 grams of protein per day? Just curious???? I did have my body fat tested at the beginning and the end of the month. Thanks!!

dogmeat

A whole 2 pound muscle mass increase in a month would be quite extraordinary, especially when losing overall weight at such a rapid pace. Depending on your exercise regime (if it's mostly resistance training instead of cardio), some of that might be muscle gain, but quite possibly not the whole 2 lbs. If it's mostly cardio, then it's quite certain that your lean body mass didn't increase.

Measuring bodyfat isn't exactly the most accurate science in the world until you're at the autopsy table and the coroner can cut you to tiny bits. BIA is largely useless, whereas caliper tests work fairly well to measure progress, but even they're not infallible.

lisawest

Plus, (and I have scientific basis for this, just my little ol' brain)

Sorry, this should have read, "Plus, (and I have NO scientific basis for this, just my little ol' brain)" I apologize for the missed word. My brain got ahead of my fingers!:laugh:

lreed

Thanks Dogmeat, actually I am doing a pretty heavy dumbell/calisthenic routine so maybe? a normal workout is about 80 push ups, 80 squats, 80 overhead presses, 80 dumbbell rows, 80 sit ups with some REALLY fast transitions and ladder work in between. I use 15 lb dumbells too! I wear the heart monitor and average at about 50 minutes at 145 range. Come do bootcamp at 5:30 a.m. in california. You can try it out! When I run through the program with my son, he likens it to Football training. I'll let you know what the bodyfat test is this month. I am down 11 actual pounds now, and hoping for 14-15 in body fat (we shall see!) I am an extraordinary person! :laugh:

lreed

Thanks Dogmeat, actually I am doing a pretty heavy dumbell/calisthenic routine so maybe? a normal workout is about 80 push ups, 80 squats, 80 overhead presses, 80 dumbbell rows, 80 sit ups with some REALLY fast transitions and ladder work in between. I use 15 lb dumbells too! I wear the heart monitor and average at about 50 minutes at 145 range. Come do bootcamp at 5:30 a.m. in california. You can try it out! When I run through the program with my son, he likens it to Football training. I'll let you know what the bodyfat test is this month. I am down 11 actual pounds now, and hoping for 14-15 in body fat (we shall see!) I am an extraordinary person! :laugh:

lreed

Measuring bodyfat isn't exactly the most accurate science in the world until you're at the autopsy table and the coroner can cut you to tiny bits. BIA is largely useless, whereas caliper tests work fairly well to measure progress, but even they're not infallible.

yeah, it the body fat measuring seems sketchy, but it is calipers and the same person has done it consistently for me.

dogmeat

Plural of anecdote isn't evidence, but we're all individuals. For pretty much everyone else, that would probably burn a lot of fat and waste very little muscle.

The amount of reps makes it largely a cardio workout. Not that there's anything wrong with cardio. Personally I'd go with much higher weights and much less reps, but that's just me.

PJilly

Something else to keep in mind is that the percentage of your body that isn't fat isn't all muscle either. It's everything that isn't fat, which includes muscle as well as skin, bone, teeth, organs, blood, pee, poop (you get the idea). So if a body comp indicates that your lean mass has gone up or down, that doesn't necessarily mean you've gained or lost muscle. You could just be full of (or less full of) ... something else. :laugh:

HealthyChanges2010

We Americans have really become a society of instant gratification, and "there's a drug for everything." That's why we're the fattest country in the world. We have to overcome hundreds of millions of dollars spent in advertising telling us to eat fast food, and drink soda. The only thing we really have control over is the choices we make as individuals. We can't control the commercials that are on tv, nor can we control what your friends and family choose to eat. Set a good example for the people around you, and it will rub off.

It can seem hard to overcome a lifetime of over-eating and under-exercising, but after you build up a healthy routine you'll find it's easier than you first thought. Now is the time to become educated, and to renew your vows to good health for yourself and the people around you. Rome wasn't built in a day nor were any of us. It's a process that requires commitment, follow through, and self-discipline.

I commend everyone who's made the choice to be healthy. It's never easy to make a life change, and it must be taken one day at a time.

Some great thoughts here...

savvystephy

Thanks Lisa & Dogmeat. It makes sense. I always figured my plan would be to lose the weight and then work on building muscle, so I am thinking the right way then.

SHBoss1673

Not bad Dogmeat, it's a pretty accurate depiction of what people should be focusing on. And I tend to agree with almost all of it.

Couple of things to point out.

While your body cannot functionally gain muscle mass while in caloric deficit, it can do other things (as noted.) especially when a muscle returns from being mostly dormant (say the quads as an example for someone who did nothing but walk for the last ten years, and then begins to do lower body weight training). Two things happen when you "reactivate" a muscle, the body begins to re-awaken the individual muscle fibers in that muscle, and retrain them, each fiber in a muscle is all or nothing, you either use it or you don't, so inactive fibers need to essentially be retrained as they will atrophy just like a whole muscle will atrophy, when reactivated, the nerve impulses become more efficient, the muscle again begins to store enough glycogen to fuel that extra muscle fiber, and subsequently you become stronger, faster, or more agile with regards to that specific range of motion. This will make you functionally heavier (the extra glycogen), more defined, and less fatigued. All of this happens without actual gains in muscle tissue. This usually happens within the first 4 to 6 weeks, after that, you pretty much maxed out the existing muscle mass and the body will really start trying to build more (if you continue to work the muscle to fatigue). Anyone who says they started weight training and put on 6 lbs of muscle in the first month is technically wrong, but functionally correct because no, they didn't actually add tissue weight, but they did add glycogen, create better muscle usage, and became stronger, which is pretty much what muscle is for right?


OK another thing to just make a note about. Body fat is the most accurate way to measure a person's overall body health. That is if you had to pick one single measurement, for my money body fat would be it (there are better ways to judge overall health, but they are a combination of multiple tests and questions). Now, my wife wouldn't like that because she is extremely in shape, but carries a lot of extra body fat (there are reasons for this though, medical issues, and too much weight training in the past 5 years have really skewed her results in a very odd direction), so this measurement has it's flaws, but overall I can say with almost 100% certainty that someone with 40% body fat is NOT in very good shape, and a woman with 18% body fat is in very good shape. That doesn't mean either of these people are athletic, or that they don't have other medical problems (for instance it's perfectly reasonable to have low body fat but high cholesterol).
The best way to measure body fat, if you don't have a DEXA machine and a few hundred dollars around is to find a Bod Pod. They cost about 50 bucks per session, you don't have to be dunked in a tank, and are more accurate than calipers. Forget the Bio-electrical impedance scales, they are all over the map. And calipers are only accurate if the person performing the test is VERY experienced at it. So for 90% of us, Bod Pod machines (which measure specific density) and Hydrostatic testing (dunk tanks) are usually within 1.5% of accurate and are generally under $100 to do, may also come as part of a package that tests your VO2, and other exercise specific details.

KatWood

Great post Dogmeat!
In general a fantastic thread with great questions and informative replies.

QueenInge

I really enjoyed your post. No fluff or advertising. No BS. Thanks for taking the time to share your information.