Recommended Zone 2 Training

Fat loss is tied to diet way more than exercise. Learn to count and track calories correctly so that you’re taking in fewer calories than you burn on a weekly basis.

Zone 2 is fine for working out 35-45 mins 4 times a week. Do weights and nutrition is where the weight comes off. Gods speed with your plan!!

kalebramsey89 wrote: »

Thank you for your responses. I’m starting to see focusing on my diet is key. I was able to lose 20 lbs from extended fasting. I added 2hours on the bike a day and my fasting ability went out the window. I can’t control my appetite after working out and try to eat everything in the house. I realize this is my bodies attempt reach homeostasis.

The same thing was happening to me. I just started reducing cardio to a quick 5 or 10 min warmup followed by weights and my appetite has been much more under control.

kalebramsey89 wrote: »

Thank you for your responses. I’m starting to see focusing on my diet is key. I was able to lose 20 lbs from extended fasting. I added 2hours on the bike a day and my fasting ability went out the window. I can’t control my appetite after working out and try to eat everything in the house. I realize this is my bodies attempt reach homeostasis.

You're right that for many/most of us, food (not exercise) is the vital variable to manage. It takes me the better part of an hour to burn off a peanut butter sandwich I can eat in under 5 minutes.

As far as your exercise routine: Zone 2 is usually a good choice for someone starting out, or even as the largest fraction of cardiovascular work for a more-fit experienced person. But two hours is a lot.

Can you maintain good overall life balance riding 2 hours every day? (Good life balance = enough time and energy for job, family, home chores, social life, and anything else important to you.) I couldn't. If you can, that can be fine, if your fitness level is up to it.

If you're getting fatigued from that, it may be counterproductive for weight loss to do that much. If we're fatigued, we drag through the rest of our day, resting more (possibly in subtle ways) and burn fewer calories in daily life than if we weren't exhausted. Similarly, if it's so much that your appetite is through the roof, it can be counterproductive for weight loss that way, too.

Here's my bias: Weight loss to a healthy weight is a wonderful thing. Even better: Staying at that healthy weight long term. (I'm heading into year 8 of maintenance, since losing from obese at age 59-60.) Staying at a healthy weight requires finding new, reasonably happy habits that we can stick with forever to not only reach but maintain that healthy weight, on both the eating and exercise front. Ideally, those will be habits that can operate almost on autopilot when other parts of life get challenging, because sooner or later they will.

It's extremely useful IMO to figure out those new habits during loss, while there's still the cushion of a calorie deficit to heal any oopsies. I'm not saying you have to do the same things from day one all the way through maintenance, but sooner or later, during the loss process, it's a good plan to find those long-sustainable habits.

I'd say the habits are useful during loss, too: You don't say how much in total you have left to lose, that I saw, but losing any meaningful total amount tends to be a lengthy process, weeks to months, maybe even a small number of years. IMO, that puts a premium on sustainable methods even during loss.

I'm also not a comprehensive fan of Fung. Some of his practices have been productive for some people, but some of his theories are . . . well, not supported by other experts in the field. Like any iconoclast, he'll make that case that that's because he has revolutionary new insights. In the history of science, there have been a few iconoclasts who overturn hidebound theories and create new progress. But most iconoclasts turn out to be wrong. You might want to check out what some of his critics say, just as a balance.

Certainly, we can't harvest all the nutrients we need from our fat mass. It' simply doesn't contain all the nutrients we need. It has energy, yup, and probably some other nutrients, but not much in the way of protein (needed for keeping muscle mass as we lose fat), fiber (for digestive health), and many micronutrients. Has the rare person lost weight through an extended full fast (weeks) and lived? Some people claim to have done that, yes. "Alive" isn't necessarily "thriving". I do understand that excess weight can be a health threat in itself, though: It was for me.

I hear and appreciate in your posts that you're working on this with a willingness to analyze tactics and adjust them if appropriate. That's an excellent approach.

Best wishes for success: The results are worth it!