Pahla B - 5-0 Method

I remember her being discussed here before, but I've never done her program. It didn't sound unreasonable as a program, based only on how it was described, but I agree with the person above that much of the rhetoric around age or menopause being special problems is more marketing than science. (Lots of trainers/companies are marketing around that concept lately, it seems like.)

If her programs give a person a flat number of calories to eat every day (day with or without exercise), then I'd expect it to be a higher number than MFP would give the same person for the same weight loss rate. That's because MFP expects you to log exercise when you do it, eat the calories then, so calories aren't the same every day, and the final number MFP gives a person who exercises is more calories than their base goal.

Both methods account for exercise, one just averages it it (TDEE method certainly, and possibly Pahla B's method, too?), and the other adds it when it's done (MFP's method). Either one can work, in the right conditions.

Appropriate calories for sensibly moderate weight loss, sound nutrition, and exercise that starts with a small but manageable challenge and progresses from there: Those are the basics, for anyone. The exercise and nutrition are technically not directly required for weight loss (that's calories, directly), but nutrition and activity are essential for well-rounded health, so worth including, and of course can matter for appearance if there are goals beyond simply being thinner.

ETA P.S. If it matters, I'm typing the above as a 66 y/o woman, reasonably active, who became much fitter (starting from near zero) in my 40s (already menopausal from chemotherapy), lost from obese to healthy weight at 59-60, so "weight loss and fitness for older menopausal women" is kind of the territory where I live myself. 😉

Apparently this Pahla chick isn't familiar with, or totally disregards actual science:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34385400/

Or, another perfectly logical explanation is that she is aware of the science and is perfectly happy to lie to you to get your money.

Hmmm.

Not really seeing the appeal, regardless of which way you slice it...

susiemcmac wrote: »

Thanks everyone. Her stuff is free (although there is a paid option). I think I'm more curious about the "moderate" exercise. I feel like I work out hard - 4-5 times a week for about an hour - and notice it's harder for me to recover or I'm much more "sore" than I was in my 30s and 40s. Wondering if "moderate" is enough.

I do agree, from the completely subjective "how I feel" standpoint, that I'm less resilient in my 60s than I was in my 20s.

That means I need to be more conscious of:
* avoiding injuring (because I de-train faster during breaks),
* including adequate body-system-specific recovery in my plans (not doing the exact same workout day after day, oversimplifying),
* keeping up my routine of being active (avoiding long breaks/interruptions), and
* watching out for the effects of other sources of stress (poor sleep, high psychological stress, under-nutrition, stupid-fast weight loss goals, and many other such things).
* Etc.

In some sense, even in someone very fit, some level of physical decline is likely to come eventually, with aging. What isn't a good idea, at least for me, is to let that turn into low expectations. The longtime fit people I know who are 10+ years older than me - so in their 70s/80s - are healthier and more energetic than 40- and 50-somethings I know who have bought into "age = decline" to the point where they have low expectations of themselves, essentially give up. (The fit older folks often are able to have higher quality of life than the overweight/inactive younger ones, too, but that's a whole different rant.)

I think it's increasingly important to exercise in a smart way, as we age. It always would've been an important thing to do - would lead to better results at any age - but the price paid for poorly-managed workouts is lower when young, I think: When young, the price looks more like slower progress than if training had been smarter, while at some point in aging the price may look more like faster decline.

In general, exercising very hard most every day is not the best plan for increasing fitness. As an oversimplified generality, training at a mix of intensities, with adequate recovery in the mix, is a better plan. (By "adequate recovery" I don't mean necessarily full rest days from any/all activity).

In that context, yes, absolutely, moderate exercise is beneficial, even essential as part of a multi-intensity mix. Even at elite athletic levels, athletes in many sports are spending a large fraction of workout time at moderate intensity . . . moderate for them, as people of crazy-high, true outlier fitness level. It's easy to be deceived, as a Joe or Jane Average, looking at an elite workout routine, to think those folks are working all the time at high intensity . . . because that intensity (cycling speed, or volume of training, or lifts, or whatever) that's their moderate level is our unimaginably intense level.

Moderate exercise is good, but not necessarily "enough", depending on one's goals. Some relatively small amount of pretty-intense exercise in the mix is also useful, for someone who has the base fitness to support that intensity. (High intensity exercise is not a great idea for true beginners.)

I'm kind of a slacker on that high-intensity front, I admit, but I know the theoretical background that says to include some. I do, but probably not enough for best results.

The above is pretty oversimplified, but I think reasonably valid at that super-generalized level. I'm not in any position to suggest a program for you ( . . . unless maybe you're a rower, and even then there are better sources). But if you're doing the same workout 4-5 times a week, I'd suggest mixing activities more, considering which body systems are stressed, and alternating with activities that stress different systems. If you're working at peak intensity 4-5 days a week, I'd suggest including more moderate activity in the mix, taking highly intense exercise down to 1-2 days at most.

Just my ignorant opinions as an active li'l ol' lady, though. 😉