jakichan Member

The machines themselves tend to give really bogus measurements of calories burned. The best way is to wear a heart rate monitor.

On the medically supervised diet I did 1200 cals was the line between supervision or no supervision. If you were eating 1200/day they didn't need to monitor you. If you were on a program that had you eating less than that then you saw a nurse each week and a doctor each month, as well as a lab panel.

We have all this amazing food at work. Sometimes I look at people eating a big noodle bowl and go "They can eat that stuff...and they're not fat....here I am with the same old salad..."

Do you mean their "Builders Bar"? Regular Clif bars are mostly carb.

Even the HRM will tend to overestimate, but it's more accurate than the guesses that MFP makes for exercise.

A can of progresso light soup. 200 cal. Done.

Well, my doctor has recently prescribed it. (Haven't decided to take it yet.) She thinks I'm stuck on a set point at the moment, and wants me to try this for a couple of months to see if I can get off of it and try to get moving down again.

I've got the Withings scale that does body fat, but it's highly inaccurate and very much impacted by your level of hydration. I tried it out the morning of my most recent dunk test and it wasn't even close.

That's the most frustrating thing about any of this - for any idea you may find you can always find an "expert" telling you that it's completely wrong...

I was on a VLCD that was medically supervised. Even with strength training I lost a fair bit of lean mass. It's just the nature of the beast.

I've added eggs back in. My diet shake and two hard-boiled eggs for breakfast is 310 calories and makes me very satisfied. If eggs are bad, that's fine. But if I have to eat twice as many calories to be satisfied then aren't I just as screwed?

They're *fairly* accurate, but it still safer to assume it overestimates. Especially if it's on an exercise you've been doing for a long time.

As an experiment I had my BMR measured and ate that. I gained weight. YMMV. The body adapts.

You're making assumptions about her BMR. I really wish MFP let us put in tested values for that.

This x1000. If I'm doing the cardio "right" (high-intensity intervals) then lifting weights is the last thing I want to do after. :)

Adaptive thermogenesis does exist. I have repeated metabolic tests that show that it does. But I don't think it happens overnight.

In my mind it's no different than a religion person trying to "save" you. Both are offensive.

For me 1200 calories works with low-energy-density foods. A lot of broth-based soups, salads with zero-cal dressing, etc. Stuff that fills you up without a lot of calories.

A couple of things... 1) You can always get a body fat test. A dunk test or similar (but not the electronic kind) - you can focus on what a good "target weight" combined with a body fat percentage. That will take into account your bone structure. 2) If you've been big for a LONG time, like I have been, your body adapts. My…

Ah, ok. Although the target may be below BMR, the eating may not be. But I don't exercise every day, so some days it would be. My test indicates my metabolism has slowed, unfortunately. :(

I don't even count my strength training because I just have no idea how. No way to guess the calorie output. I just count the steady-state cardio. And even then it's probably wrong.

This is true, but overstated. http://www.builtlean.com/2013/04/16/muscle-burn-calories/ However building muscle is still a good idea. (Or keeping what you have.)

You can try a concept called "volumetrics". If you switch to low-energy density foods you'd be amazed how much food you end up eating. And here's my favorite trick: Make soup. I take one of the entrees from my diet, a chicken and rice thing. Make 2 cups of chicken bullion. Dump the entry in it. Awesome chicken soup, and…

That's EXACTLY what I said! :)

It's REALLY easy to become a "certified trainer". Finding one that knows what they're doing and you like is hard, but once you have that person it's a good relationship. Sadly, mine is doing this thing they call "having a baby", so she can't train me right now. :(

Eggs? For me I've found that greasy breakfast buffets can do it (mmm...reconstituted eggs....), but hard-boiled ones don't.

I've been fluctuating between 265 and 270 for a while. I'm still obese. And it's not sour grapes - it's trying to help people who seem to think the laws of thermodynamics don't apply to them. They're either underestimating input, or overestimating output, or both. Actually, your body adapts to such changes. Search for…

Also, metabolic pathways. I.e from what I've read the metabolic pathway for protein is about 70% efficient. So eating 100 calories of pure protein would net you 70 calories of usable energy. I think the effect of CI on CO is not well understood. The body can and will adapt to changes. I know that dieting can cause your BMR…

Sometimes? I have dunk tank data that shows that over the course of losing 40lb I lost 50% lean tissue and 50% fat. :(

I would agree - I'm just saying that the tools to measure as such DO NOT EXIST. Or at least are not practical. Some reasons: 1. Our bodies adapt. You're NEVER measuring "calories out", you're guessing. If you've been dieting for a while your BMR is probably lower than you think it is. Are you SURE what your BMR is today? I…