Diet

[robby denning]

Also, I've been getting some PM's on this thread. One woman wanted to know how to apply this to herself. She's 148 pounds.

Easy, everything I'm writing is adjustable. The only variables are gender, body weight, and activity levels.

For women, take 11 x body weight to get number of calories per day to MAINTAIN weight (men use 12 x body weight).

Now figure out how many calories per day you burn above activities of daily living. If you don't exercise, then it's zero. If you exercise, you can trust the calorimeters on the cardio machines if you enter your wieght. Weight training is low, but count it. If you have an active job or weight train, google it and see what you get.

Once you know what you're burning daily, multiply it by 7 to get a weekly. Now multiply your daily intake above by 7 and add the two numbers together, then divide by 7. (we do this because people typically burn different amounts on weekdays vs weekends and this gives a good average.) See post # 10 in this thread for an example.

Once you have the daily number, track your calories to eat about 250-500 less than maintence for women, 250-1000 less per men. For this to work, you need to spend a few weeks weighing, measuring everything you eat- no whinning! it's hard work because you have no clue how much you really eat or you wouldn't be reading this thread. In time it get's easier as you learn bread has about 100 calories per ounce, cheese 110, veggies about 20 ounces per cup along with a hundred other things. I can track all day only having to look a few things up. Good websites: calorieking.com, the daily plate and many search engines just pull the calories up if you enter the food in search engine.

 

[DEW]

Great info Robby, this is very interesting and I look forward to reading this thread and learning from it. I greatly appreciate the information. DEW

 

[Doj4Whlr]

Wow! Robby, I am absolutely fascinated by the easy to understand, fundamentally-based advice you provide in this thread. I commented in post #12 of this thread and have been interested since. The way you package the information has made it simpler for me to explain the basics to some of my not-so-healthy friends. At some point, I'd like to explore the differences, if any, in the approach to training and diet for senior folks; generally those over 60 or so. Thanks.

 

[Doj4Whlr]

I give kudos to Robby in this thread but there are others of you that have passed along other golden nuggets- thanks to you as well.

 

[robby denning]

Thanks Doj4whler
The numbers don't change much for seniors believe it or not. The media would have everyone believe metabolism drops throughout life and causes the weight gain. That doesn't hold up much in the research (but helps sell lots of books and gimmicks so the myths are going strong). Kevin Hall, a leading researher at the National Institutes of Health is going to release more research soon that debunks many of the metabolism myths out there. Stay posted in early 2013, as I'm sure I'll be writing about it.
Anyway, what we have going on as people age is declining activity levels primarily causing weight gain. The active male in his 20's gets a desk job in his 30's then has kids and can't make the gym as much, becomes a stressed out 40 year old with less activity (life gets busy) plus he's picking up the bad eating habits of most Americans (our culture promotes it- I can get fresh fried chicken in gas stations now which was unheard of 20 years ago) and suddenly he's a fat 50 year old, but it wasn't his metabolism.

For seniors, everything I've written applies. I start with the 11 factor for women or 12 for men and most lose weight as predicted by the first law of Thermodynamics.

 

[robby denning]

The 148 pound woman I mentioned in #41 above PM'd me and said:

"Re: Woman's Recommendation
How is the best way to estimate calories burned above daily living? As I mentioned before I very inconsistently crossfit and do an endurance workout 3 to 5 times a week. Would it be too far out of line to consider 0 for my calories burned above daily living because I am so inconsistent? That would make the deficit probably more than the 250-500 right if I got my workouts in.

Here's my numbers:

11x148=1628 to maintain weight
0= Calories burned above daily living x 7 = 0
1628 x 7 = 11396 kcal per week
Plus 0 (Calories burned) = 11396 Divided by 7 = 1628 less 500 = 1128.

How does this look?"

My answer:

I think your numbers are good with 0 estimated above daily living. We use this technique all the time as professionals because it is difficult to estimate calories burned outside of structured exercise.

You will know it's working if you are losing more on the scale than predicted. Example, if you accumulate a 3500 calorie deficit in a week (that is equal to 1 pound of fat), and you are down 2-4 pounds, you're on track. Some of the extra weight loss will be water, especially weeks 7-9, but if you're burning more than estimated, you will stay ahead of predicted on the scale.

 

[DEW]

Robby the info you are providing is awesome and very appreciated. I'm sure this is a whole other topic but how many days a week can I do some cardio workout? I was told to keep my heart rate between 65-75% for best weight loss, I've been researching
But seems to be allot of differing opinions? I'm currently rehabbing my shoulder so upper body workouts are out for now,I'm off work and just want to make the most of my time off and try and turn all of this into habits. Thanks again for your help DEW

 

[robby denning]

According to the American College of Sports Medicine, cardio can be done 3-5 times per week, and should be for most people.

You are right on for intensity (65%-75%) from those guidelines, too, but not for weight loss as you mention. 65-75% will increase your cardio fitness with some athletes training 90% and above.

I know why you mentioned that intensity level for weight loss, as it's been reported everywhere in the media and many misguided trainers. However`the "fat burning mode" is only partially true (like most myths.)

The take home message for weight loss is train at as high intensity as sustainable as that is where you burn the most calories and as I've said many times, "calories are king" when it comes to weight managment. You do burn more calories from fat at the lower intensities than carbs, but you burn less calories overall at the low intensities.

The best data says people need to burn 2000 calories to 3500 calories per week to lose and keep lost weight off. It doesn't matter as much the intensity as the overall workload as that is what's driving the weight loss. However, working at a higher intensity burns calories faster and in greater amounts- that is what we are after.

Finally, you've been at this for over a week, and if you are following the tracking guidelines, you should be down on the scale. If you're not weighing, you should be, but you should at least be noticing that top button is easier to fasten. Let me know.

 

[DEW]

Robby once again thanks for the info, there is so much crap out there to try to read through. The scale at the gy m has been out of action so I went and got my own so don't know how closet hey will be but I'll post soon. DEW

 

[robby denning]

just use one scale. Don't compare scales, you will go mad.

 

[DEW]

Yeah that's what I figured. So my # may be skewed to start but I can tell a difference all ready ...

 

[marshrat]

I have a question as I have been following this thread. I am in my second or third week of Crossfit, I have been hiking many, many miles with weighted packs, and I have been on what is basically something akin to the Paleo diet. I have pretty much cut out carbs, but I do have the occasional chicken breast sandwich. Anyway, I used the myfitness calorie counter and put in my info. It came up with a little over 1700 cal. per day to reach my goal. Let me preface this by saying that I am interested in losing weight more than anything else. I am 250 lbs, but I've lost over 35 lbs since January. I'm working my butt off, and the CF is kicking my butt, but I am getting stronger. I've plateaued on my weight loss, however, and I'm trying to figure out what I'm doing wrong. I don't know if I'm hitting the muscle building phase which is causing me to add the muscle instead of losing pounds. Just getting pretty bummed out, as I have been working really hard. I don't want to lug around the extra 50 lbs in the mountains. I need some help because I can't do anything on the 1700 cal. I will have no energy in my opinion, but I'm not an expert. I could use the help. Thanks.

 

[robby denning]

marshat,
I've only got a minute, but wanted to answer.

You're finding out why I don't advocate these diets. If you are at 250 pounds, with an average metabolism (80% chance you are) then you are eating more than 3000 calories per day or you would be losing weight. Even if you have a low metabolism, (unlikely), you're eating more than 2400 calories per day.

These are average days, not your clean no cheat days. They include the highs of the weekends and all the food dieters tend to "sneak a bite" of. Whether you stay Paleo doesn't matter, you have to net less than about 2400 calories per day to see signifinct weight loss.

You can try and drop to the 1700 and if you truly hit 1700, you will be loosing weight like you've got the flu. If it's not dropping, you aren't really eating 1700.

 

[marshrat]

What about energy levels, Robby? Don't I need a higher intake to do all the activities that I'm doing? CrossFit, hiking with weighted packs, running, weightlifting? I thought I would need more protein, carbs, etc. to build muscle to continue these activities. 1700 calories a day just won't cut it to have enough energy to CF and cardio.

 

[ohhiitznik]

Oh it will, your body will turn to energy you have stored. AKA Fat. You may feel like crap without eating, but your body needs to start using its reserves if you keep pushing it. And your body will use up the reserves. You may lose a little muscle mass along the way, but as you said you don't care. Keep up with the crossfit and eating clean. I know many people can't hold to a strict paleo diet. I do somewhat of a modified paleo with great success. I eat a little bit of wheat bread, sometimes a pasta dish and I'll get sushi occasion. Also teaching 4 crossfit classes a day keeps me somewhat busy! 1700 calories will give you enough energy to do your activites, you just won't be doing them at max levels the whole time.

 

[robby denning]

ohhit is right. those carbs he mentioned are the good carbs along with the F&V I've been advocating all along on this thread.

I actually wasn't advocating the 1700 calories (hence my flu comment) and is why I've spoke out against the strict diets- not enough ummph for killer workouts. You need carbs for that.

If you could find it in the thread, you'd see I'm for slower weight loss that is sustainable. for life.

I just wanted to point out that if you've quit losing weight, you're just taking in more calories than you require. Guaranteed!

Also, many people tell me "I'm not losing weight" but when I start to push for good data, I find out they are losing, just not quickly like impatient Americans want everything- fast. Get off that bandwagon. You likely didn't go to 285 in a few months and you certainly aren't going to go to 200 or whatever in a few months AND be able to sustain that loss.

It's better to lose it slowly (0.5-2 pounds per week) and keep the weight off because you can sustain those habits that got it off. That is why the really restrictive diets get under my skin because I'v watched hundreds of people do them only to gain all the weight back. (See May 2003 New England Journal of Medicine for studies on the regain phenomenon.)

Track your weight religiously on a graph weighing in on same reliable scale 2x per week (monday and friday) after you get up and pee. Watch it over 3-4 weeks before you decide if what you are doing is working or not.

I've done this exact exercise in tracking for 10+ years and it works and I always know what is going on- never a mystery. I eat too much (of anything) I gain, do the opposite, I lose. You will to.

Keep working the CF, you're going to be pleasantly surprised this fall. Good job

 

[bnsafe]

Robby. I'm sure your right. But I am 6'3" tall an 182 lbs. I eat around 1500 calories a day give or take 200 an rarely eat candy cake etc. Almost all protein fruits an vegetables with very few Carbs an I don't lose any weight. I lift do cardio swim hike 6 miles with 50 lbs an st weirder work out at least an hour a day an usually more 6 days a week an I still have my belly paunch. Barring starvation isn't there a point you just stop losing.

 

[marshrat]

Thanks, Robby. I appreciate it. You have really inspired me to do the calorie counting, and I'm hoping that will do the trick. At the very least, I will be more accountable.

 

[bnsafe]

Oh yea. I have been writing down my calories an wt since Jan 1. Am i missing something

 

[Jax]

I am almost the same at 6'3 215lbs. I am very tall and lean but can not get rid of abdominal fat. I've been at 1200 cals for 4 months eating nothing but lean meat, veggie , fruits and nuts with the addition of weightlifting and cardio with very little results.

8 years ago I lived off the grid for 3 months, I was cut down to 140lbs and starving but I had great looking abs.

Robby. I'm sure your right. But I am 6'3" tall an 182 lbs. I eat around 1500 calories a day give or take 200 an rarely eat candy cake etc. Almost all protein fruits an vegetables with very few Carbs an I don't lose any weight. I lift do cardio swim hike 6 miles with 50 lbs an st weirder work out at least an hour a day an usually more 6 days a week an I still have my belly paunch. Barring starvation isn't there a point you just stop losing.