Aging and Weight Gain
Dr. Nelson, I turned 40 last year. I exercise as much as I ever did (walking or bicycling about a half-hour four or five days a week), and my eating habits haven't changed, but I've gained one whole dress size. What can I do to stave off this creeping weight gain?
As I am sure you know, gaining weight as we age--particularly after the age of 40--is very common. The unfortunate part of this process is that as the scale is creeping up, the amount of body fat is increasing while the amount of muscle is decreasing. This makes weight loss even more challenging, because the less muscle we have, the fewer calories we burn.
While aerobic exercise has been shown to improve cardiovascular fitness and burn calories, it does not seem to influence muscle mass or strength. Strength training, on the other hand, has been shown to increase both muscle mass and muscle strength. Strength training also has been shown to increase bone mass, which is extremely important for women because of the increased risk of developing osteoporosis.
Given the details of your exercise program, there are three areas of your fitness and nutrition where adjustments may help:
* Strength training
* Daily physical activities
* Getting the most from the food you eat
Strength training
As people age, especially after age 40, they lose one-third to one-half of a pound of muscle each year and gain that much in body fat. Although this may seem minuscule, in fact it is quite significant as it translates to about a 1 to 2 percent loss of strength each year. With this loss of muscle strength, we tend to spontaneously become less active because daily activities become more difficult and exhausting to perform. But strength training has the power to maintain your muscle mass, your strength, and keep daily activities doable and fun!
How strength training will help you lose and maintain weight
When discussing strength training and lean body mass, we are primarily talking about the amount of muscle in your body. As strength training helps you build new muscle, you will enjoy a boost in your metabolism. The more muscle you have, the more calories you burn throughout the day—whether you are walking, vacuuming, or sleeping. This is because muscle is metabolically active. Stored fat, on the other hand, is not metabolically active, uses very little energy, and therefore burns minimal calories.
Daily physical activities
As you gain muscle mass, you get two real boosts for weight control. First, your metabolism will increase so that you can eat more and burn calories more effectively. Secondly, because you are stronger, physical activity becomes easier and more fun.
To burn more calories throughout the day, tack on an extra five to 10 minutes to your regular aerobic exercise. Also, try to get at least 30 minutes or more of physical activity on most if not all days of the week. With time constraints, it can be difficult to incorporate more structured exercise; instead, get more daily physical activity by:
* Walk or take public transit rather than driving whenever possible
* Throw away the remote controls
* Use the stairs rather than the elevator or escalator
Remember, every little bit helps!
Get the most from the food you eat
It is so important to get the most vitamins, minerals, and satisfaction as possible from the food you eat.
* Try to eliminate white breads and rice from your diet and replace with whole grains—like whole wheat bread, bran, oats, and brown rice. These products contain many more nutrients, will fill you up more, and keep your hunger away longer.
* Load up on fruits and vegetables—things like cucumbers, carrots, jicama, apples, and grapefruits make great snacks.
* Try keeping food logs—you may be eating more than you think.
* Drink a tall glass of water before assuming you are hungry. Thirst is often mistaken for hunger. And remember to drink at least eight glasses of water each day
by Miriam Nelson, PhD
Created October, 2000
Copyright 1998 - 2005 Miriam E. Nelson. All rights reserved.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Friday, June 3, 2011
Living With Obesity At 700 Calories Per Day!
Living With Obesity At 700 Calories Per Day!
By: David Greenwalt
I want you to consider a common female client. She's a woman about 5'5" and 185 pounds. A combination of a mostly sedentary lifestyle, quick-fix, processed foods and consistent excessively low calories has resulted in an incredibly stubborn fat loss scenario. Not only has it created a stubborn fat loss scenario but her ability to add body fat is remarkably strong.
Most would believe there is simply no possible way she could be 185 pounds eating mostly low calories. While it's true the average obese American created their own obesity by being a huge over consumer, a sedentary glutton if you will, many are able to maintain their level of obesity with the following formula in very precise ratios: starvation + binges + sedentary lifestyle.
An initial review of this woman's calories indicates she is just above starvation level in the 400-700 per day range. The food choices are mostly protein in this case (low-carb is all the rage you know) and there are virtually no vegetables or fruits to speak of.
Five or six days per week the calories remain low in this range, however, there are nighttime binges from time to time and weekend binges where carbs loaded with fat (doughnuts, rolls, cookies, pizza etc.) are consumed.
So while the calories are very low the majority of the time, there are one to two days per week where this isn't always the case. Even so, the nighttime binges and weekend slack offs don't amount to what you might presume would be thousands of extra calories, thus explaining the 185-pound body weight.
Very few foods are prepared from home. There are lots of fast foods being consumed. Convenience and taste rule.
I must say. Early on in my coaching and teaching career this woman was a real head scratcher for me. Isn't it calories in and calories out? Even if she's not active she's starving!
How in the heck does she stay at 185 eating an average, including all binges, of maybe 750 calories per day? She's frustrated beyond belief. She sees her friends and coworkers eating more and weighing less. Is she simply unlucky? Is everyone else blessed? And what in the world is she supposed to do to fix this, if it can be fixed?
Why Is She Not Losing Weight?
First, let me tell you why she's not losing weight. Then I'll tell you what she has to do to fix the situation. With a chronic (months and months) intake of less than 1000 calories per day and a 185-pound body weight her metabolism is suffering greatly. It's running cool, not hot. It's basically running at a snail's pace.
Think of it this way. Her metabolism has matched itself to her intake. She could, indeed, lose body fat but she's in that gray area where she is eating too few calories but not quite at the concentration-camp level yet.
If she were to consume 100-300 calories per day her body would have virtually no choice but to begin liberating stored body fat. This is NOT the solution. It's unhealthy and, in fact, quite stupid.
The Practical Way To Lose Fat!
Today's society is about speed. We no longer have to wait for the oven to warm our food because we have microwaves ready to do the work in less time. The same is not true when it comes to fat loss.
[ Click here to learn more. ]
Not only has her metabolism matched her intake, her body has maximized production of enzymes that are designed to help store any additional calories as fat. Anytime additional, immediately-unnecessary calories are consumed the enzymes are there and waiting to store the additional calories as fat. Her body is starved nutritionally and it has one thing on its mind - survival.
Being mostly sedentary, her metabolism (hormones play a large role here) can do a pretty good job of keeping things slow enough so that the pathetically low calories she's consuming are just enough to maintain.
But since certain enzymes are elevated, waiting for more calories so more bodyfat can be stored, every nighttime binge or weekend mini-feast will contribute to fat stores.
So on the days she's not bingeing her body does not lose fat, or if it does, it's very little. And on the few days or times she does binge a bit her body is quite efficient at storing fat. So, while she may lose a smidge of fat from starving it is quickly replaced with every binge.
Remember, these binges aren't a gluttonous 4000-calorie feast. Oh no, a binge might be 4-5 cookies worth about 500-700 calories. Nevertheless, since the binge foods are mostly carbs and fat it's very easy for the enzymes to shuttle the dietary fat into stored body fat. It's what they were designed to do.
So, What's The Solution?
Well then, now that we presumably know some valid reasons why she's not seeing a scale change and definitely no body fat change how do we fix her? We have to do something she's going to freak out over.
We have to get her eating more. Not only do we have to get her eating more but more of the right, whole foods need to be eaten. Foods lower in fat that aren't as easily STORED as body fat have to be consumed. And we have to warn her.
A Discouraging Start
We have to warn her that since she's been sedentarily living on protein with binges of carbs and fats she is likely to see a weight gain right away. It's true.
Once we begin really feeding her body with nutritious carbohydrates so she can become more active, her glycogen-depleted body will hang on to some of those carbohydrates (in skeletal muscle and liver) so she has stored energy for activity.
When her body hangs on to those carbohydrates it has no choice but to hang on to more water too. For every gram of glycogen (stored carbs) she stores she'll hang on to three grams of water.
This is not a negative response by the body but it will be interpreted by her as quite negative when she steps on the scale.
It's quite likely she'll see a five to seven pound weight gain when she really starts eating properly again. This weight gain will remain for one to three weeks before it starts moving in the other direction.
For argument's sake let's assume my Calorie Calculator and Goal Setter at Club Lifestyle suggests a 1500-calorie per day average in week one for a one-pound loss per week. First, she is going to freak out about this many calories.
For months she's been eating less than 1000 and usually around 400-700 in one to three feedings total per day. To her 1500 calories is a ton of food. And if she even begins to eat less fast and packaged-foods it will be a ton of food.
There is no doubt whatsoever that she will resist the increase. This resistance may take one to three weeks to overcome. During this period no weight loss will occur. She is too fat already in her mind and believes it will only hurt her to increase her food intake.
I mean, after all, isn't that how she got fat to begin with? In her early stages of fat gain this was probably true. She overconsumed. But as I've said already, that's not why she's staying heavy.
In addition to a freaked-out mindset about adding more food to her already overfat body she will simply find that it's all but impossible to eat four or more times per day.
She's just not hungry at first. Makes sense when you think about it. Why would she be hungry three hours after eating a 300-calorie, balanced breakfast? Her body is used to 400-700 calories per day!
So, even though she gets a plan and begins using my nutrition analyzer to log foods and meals she finds after having a balanced breakfast of 250 calories she couldn't force herself to eat meal number two on time.
It'll take several more days of realizing what is going on and being one-hundred percent honest and diligent with her logging and planning before she begins to eat her meals as planned no matter what - even if she's not hungry.
By now two to four weeks have passed and the only thing she's seen on the scale is it going up--not very encouraging if I say so myself.
Raising The Grade
After the first two to four weeks have passed she's probably beginning to consume her meals as planned although not quite like an "A" student yet. That is coming. She feels better because she's working out and is more active.
And she feels like she has more energy throughout the day because she's feeding her body more calories and the right kinds of calories.
She has finally begun eating the right kinds of fast foods (low in fat, moderate in protein) and less packaged food overall. She is making more meals from home and taking them to work for lunch rather than always grabbing something quick from a vending machine or the break room that always has some treat another employee brought in.
After another two weeks or so she's moved from a "B" grade to more consistent "A"s. She's planning her days one day ahead in the Nutrition Analyzer; she's consuming fresh veggies and fruits on a daily basis.
Her calories are almost ALWAYS in line with what is recommended by my Lean Account and she has seen her first signs of the scale moving in the right direction.
She is now dropping from 190 pounds (her high after reintroducing food and carbohydrates again) to 189.3! "Progress at last!" she says. In actuality, the entire process was progress. But that's not how she saw it in the beginning.
With a total of two to four weeks of increased caloric intake behind her and eating more consistently the right kinds of foods her metabolism has truly begun to rebound.
She didn't kill it as she thought. She only wounded it. And since our metabolisms are like kids (they are quite resilient) and she doesn't have thyroid issues or diabetes or any known wrench that could be thrown into the spokes of fat loss, she will begin, for the first time in months or years, to see results that make sense and that one would expect of someone who is active (30-60 minutes five or more days per week) and consuming a caloric intake of 1300-1500 calories per day.
Butterfly Effect: The Basics Of The Thyroid - Part 1.
Avoiding Sabotage
This process is in no way easy. I think you can see a plethora of ways it could be screwed up, sabotaged, given up on too early and so forth.
A key to success for this very common woman (men too) is not giving up too soon, having faith in the fix, and moving sooner rather than later to the increased, quality food intake.
It's going to take effort to overcome the mental hurdles of eating more food as well as the increase in scale weight that is going to occur in weeks one to three or so. It's disheartening, however, to charge hard down the weight-loss field only to get to the one-yard line and decide it's time to quit.
Don't Let Your Metabolism Fall.
These are the top ten ways you can boost your metabolism and keep it high - even through Fall.
[ Click here to learn more. ]
Many don't realize they only had one more yard to go and they'd have had a touchdown. You gotta hang in there with this plan. It's going to take some time for the glycogen levels to be replenished and level out. It's going to take some time for mental adjustments to occur.
It's going to take some time before hunger signals are restored to anything close to normal. It's going to take time for the metabolism to rebound and not be in its protective mode.
Giving A Stubborn Body The Message
In certain, very stubborn cases, it may be necessary to eat at a eucaloric (maintenance) or hypercaloric (over maintenance) level for a few weeks to ensure the metabolism does get the signal that everything is alright and you aren't going to kill the body.
Remember, your body could care less about your desire for fat loss. It just wants to survive.
Some Take-Home Points
The most common cause of obesity is Americans are sedentary overeaters/drinkers. Nothing in this article should be construed as to say that under eating is the root cause of obesity. It's not.
It IS common for many men and women to be under eating with sporadic binges as I described here. This creates a perfect environment for continued obesity even if total caloric intake is quite low on average.
Low-carb followers or "starvers" WILL see the scale go up when calories are consumed at reasonable levels again and carbohydrates are reintroduced. Live with it. Deal with it. It's going to happen. 98% of the gain will be water.
The time it takes for mental acceptance and other adjustments to occur will vary but one should expect a two to four week window for these things to take place. Being forewarned with an article like this may speed this process up some.
Once the right types of foods are consumed and the right caloric intake is consumed and the right ratios of carbohydrates, proteins and fats are consumed on a consistent basis, then, and only then, will metabolism begin to be restored and the key to fat loss be inserted into the lock with a noticeable drop in the scale resulting.
This may take an additional two to four weeks to occur. Your metabolism is never dead or broken for good. But it may take several weeks of proper eating and activity for it to be restored.
From day one, until the first, noticeable drop in the scale occurs may be four to six weeks--maybe one to two weeks longer. Those who give up on the one-yard line will never see the scale drop as will occur when intelligent persistence and consistency over time are adhered to.
David Greenwalt
By: David Greenwalt
I want you to consider a common female client. She's a woman about 5'5" and 185 pounds. A combination of a mostly sedentary lifestyle, quick-fix, processed foods and consistent excessively low calories has resulted in an incredibly stubborn fat loss scenario. Not only has it created a stubborn fat loss scenario but her ability to add body fat is remarkably strong.
Most would believe there is simply no possible way she could be 185 pounds eating mostly low calories. While it's true the average obese American created their own obesity by being a huge over consumer, a sedentary glutton if you will, many are able to maintain their level of obesity with the following formula in very precise ratios: starvation + binges + sedentary lifestyle.
An initial review of this woman's calories indicates she is just above starvation level in the 400-700 per day range. The food choices are mostly protein in this case (low-carb is all the rage you know) and there are virtually no vegetables or fruits to speak of.
Five or six days per week the calories remain low in this range, however, there are nighttime binges from time to time and weekend binges where carbs loaded with fat (doughnuts, rolls, cookies, pizza etc.) are consumed.
So while the calories are very low the majority of the time, there are one to two days per week where this isn't always the case. Even so, the nighttime binges and weekend slack offs don't amount to what you might presume would be thousands of extra calories, thus explaining the 185-pound body weight.
Very few foods are prepared from home. There are lots of fast foods being consumed. Convenience and taste rule.
I must say. Early on in my coaching and teaching career this woman was a real head scratcher for me. Isn't it calories in and calories out? Even if she's not active she's starving!
How in the heck does she stay at 185 eating an average, including all binges, of maybe 750 calories per day? She's frustrated beyond belief. She sees her friends and coworkers eating more and weighing less. Is she simply unlucky? Is everyone else blessed? And what in the world is she supposed to do to fix this, if it can be fixed?
Why Is She Not Losing Weight?
First, let me tell you why she's not losing weight. Then I'll tell you what she has to do to fix the situation. With a chronic (months and months) intake of less than 1000 calories per day and a 185-pound body weight her metabolism is suffering greatly. It's running cool, not hot. It's basically running at a snail's pace.
Think of it this way. Her metabolism has matched itself to her intake. She could, indeed, lose body fat but she's in that gray area where she is eating too few calories but not quite at the concentration-camp level yet.
If she were to consume 100-300 calories per day her body would have virtually no choice but to begin liberating stored body fat. This is NOT the solution. It's unhealthy and, in fact, quite stupid.
The Practical Way To Lose Fat!
Today's society is about speed. We no longer have to wait for the oven to warm our food because we have microwaves ready to do the work in less time. The same is not true when it comes to fat loss.
[ Click here to learn more. ]
Not only has her metabolism matched her intake, her body has maximized production of enzymes that are designed to help store any additional calories as fat. Anytime additional, immediately-unnecessary calories are consumed the enzymes are there and waiting to store the additional calories as fat. Her body is starved nutritionally and it has one thing on its mind - survival.
Being mostly sedentary, her metabolism (hormones play a large role here) can do a pretty good job of keeping things slow enough so that the pathetically low calories she's consuming are just enough to maintain.
But since certain enzymes are elevated, waiting for more calories so more bodyfat can be stored, every nighttime binge or weekend mini-feast will contribute to fat stores.
So on the days she's not bingeing her body does not lose fat, or if it does, it's very little. And on the few days or times she does binge a bit her body is quite efficient at storing fat. So, while she may lose a smidge of fat from starving it is quickly replaced with every binge.
Remember, these binges aren't a gluttonous 4000-calorie feast. Oh no, a binge might be 4-5 cookies worth about 500-700 calories. Nevertheless, since the binge foods are mostly carbs and fat it's very easy for the enzymes to shuttle the dietary fat into stored body fat. It's what they were designed to do.
So, What's The Solution?
Well then, now that we presumably know some valid reasons why she's not seeing a scale change and definitely no body fat change how do we fix her? We have to do something she's going to freak out over.
We have to get her eating more. Not only do we have to get her eating more but more of the right, whole foods need to be eaten. Foods lower in fat that aren't as easily STORED as body fat have to be consumed. And we have to warn her.
A Discouraging Start
We have to warn her that since she's been sedentarily living on protein with binges of carbs and fats she is likely to see a weight gain right away. It's true.
Once we begin really feeding her body with nutritious carbohydrates so she can become more active, her glycogen-depleted body will hang on to some of those carbohydrates (in skeletal muscle and liver) so she has stored energy for activity.
When her body hangs on to those carbohydrates it has no choice but to hang on to more water too. For every gram of glycogen (stored carbs) she stores she'll hang on to three grams of water.
This is not a negative response by the body but it will be interpreted by her as quite negative when she steps on the scale.
It's quite likely she'll see a five to seven pound weight gain when she really starts eating properly again. This weight gain will remain for one to three weeks before it starts moving in the other direction.
For argument's sake let's assume my Calorie Calculator and Goal Setter at Club Lifestyle suggests a 1500-calorie per day average in week one for a one-pound loss per week. First, she is going to freak out about this many calories.
For months she's been eating less than 1000 and usually around 400-700 in one to three feedings total per day. To her 1500 calories is a ton of food. And if she even begins to eat less fast and packaged-foods it will be a ton of food.
There is no doubt whatsoever that she will resist the increase. This resistance may take one to three weeks to overcome. During this period no weight loss will occur. She is too fat already in her mind and believes it will only hurt her to increase her food intake.
I mean, after all, isn't that how she got fat to begin with? In her early stages of fat gain this was probably true. She overconsumed. But as I've said already, that's not why she's staying heavy.
In addition to a freaked-out mindset about adding more food to her already overfat body she will simply find that it's all but impossible to eat four or more times per day.
She's just not hungry at first. Makes sense when you think about it. Why would she be hungry three hours after eating a 300-calorie, balanced breakfast? Her body is used to 400-700 calories per day!
So, even though she gets a plan and begins using my nutrition analyzer to log foods and meals she finds after having a balanced breakfast of 250 calories she couldn't force herself to eat meal number two on time.
It'll take several more days of realizing what is going on and being one-hundred percent honest and diligent with her logging and planning before she begins to eat her meals as planned no matter what - even if she's not hungry.
By now two to four weeks have passed and the only thing she's seen on the scale is it going up--not very encouraging if I say so myself.
Raising The Grade
After the first two to four weeks have passed she's probably beginning to consume her meals as planned although not quite like an "A" student yet. That is coming. She feels better because she's working out and is more active.
And she feels like she has more energy throughout the day because she's feeding her body more calories and the right kinds of calories.
She has finally begun eating the right kinds of fast foods (low in fat, moderate in protein) and less packaged food overall. She is making more meals from home and taking them to work for lunch rather than always grabbing something quick from a vending machine or the break room that always has some treat another employee brought in.
After another two weeks or so she's moved from a "B" grade to more consistent "A"s. She's planning her days one day ahead in the Nutrition Analyzer; she's consuming fresh veggies and fruits on a daily basis.
Her calories are almost ALWAYS in line with what is recommended by my Lean Account and she has seen her first signs of the scale moving in the right direction.
She is now dropping from 190 pounds (her high after reintroducing food and carbohydrates again) to 189.3! "Progress at last!" she says. In actuality, the entire process was progress. But that's not how she saw it in the beginning.
With a total of two to four weeks of increased caloric intake behind her and eating more consistently the right kinds of foods her metabolism has truly begun to rebound.
She didn't kill it as she thought. She only wounded it. And since our metabolisms are like kids (they are quite resilient) and she doesn't have thyroid issues or diabetes or any known wrench that could be thrown into the spokes of fat loss, she will begin, for the first time in months or years, to see results that make sense and that one would expect of someone who is active (30-60 minutes five or more days per week) and consuming a caloric intake of 1300-1500 calories per day.
Butterfly Effect: The Basics Of The Thyroid - Part 1.
Avoiding Sabotage
This process is in no way easy. I think you can see a plethora of ways it could be screwed up, sabotaged, given up on too early and so forth.
A key to success for this very common woman (men too) is not giving up too soon, having faith in the fix, and moving sooner rather than later to the increased, quality food intake.
It's going to take effort to overcome the mental hurdles of eating more food as well as the increase in scale weight that is going to occur in weeks one to three or so. It's disheartening, however, to charge hard down the weight-loss field only to get to the one-yard line and decide it's time to quit.
Don't Let Your Metabolism Fall.
These are the top ten ways you can boost your metabolism and keep it high - even through Fall.
[ Click here to learn more. ]
Many don't realize they only had one more yard to go and they'd have had a touchdown. You gotta hang in there with this plan. It's going to take some time for the glycogen levels to be replenished and level out. It's going to take some time for mental adjustments to occur.
It's going to take some time before hunger signals are restored to anything close to normal. It's going to take time for the metabolism to rebound and not be in its protective mode.
Giving A Stubborn Body The Message
In certain, very stubborn cases, it may be necessary to eat at a eucaloric (maintenance) or hypercaloric (over maintenance) level for a few weeks to ensure the metabolism does get the signal that everything is alright and you aren't going to kill the body.
Remember, your body could care less about your desire for fat loss. It just wants to survive.
Some Take-Home Points
The most common cause of obesity is Americans are sedentary overeaters/drinkers. Nothing in this article should be construed as to say that under eating is the root cause of obesity. It's not.
It IS common for many men and women to be under eating with sporadic binges as I described here. This creates a perfect environment for continued obesity even if total caloric intake is quite low on average.
Low-carb followers or "starvers" WILL see the scale go up when calories are consumed at reasonable levels again and carbohydrates are reintroduced. Live with it. Deal with it. It's going to happen. 98% of the gain will be water.
The time it takes for mental acceptance and other adjustments to occur will vary but one should expect a two to four week window for these things to take place. Being forewarned with an article like this may speed this process up some.
Once the right types of foods are consumed and the right caloric intake is consumed and the right ratios of carbohydrates, proteins and fats are consumed on a consistent basis, then, and only then, will metabolism begin to be restored and the key to fat loss be inserted into the lock with a noticeable drop in the scale resulting.
This may take an additional two to four weeks to occur. Your metabolism is never dead or broken for good. But it may take several weeks of proper eating and activity for it to be restored.
From day one, until the first, noticeable drop in the scale occurs may be four to six weeks--maybe one to two weeks longer. Those who give up on the one-yard line will never see the scale drop as will occur when intelligent persistence and consistency over time are adhered to.
David Greenwalt
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
My Ticker
[url=http://www.myfitnesspal.com/weight-loss-ticker][img]http://tickers.myfitnesspal.com/ticker/show/639/7299/6397299.png[/img][/url]
Created by MyFitnessPal.com - [url=http://www.myfitnesspal.com]Nutrition Facts[/url] For Foods
Created by MyFitnessPal.com - [url=http://www.myfitnesspal.com]Nutrition Facts[/url] For Foods
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Advise from MFP Peeps. on eating back exercise calories burned
Losing weight relies on a calorie deficit... in order to lose one pound of fat you need to eat (or work off) 3500 LESS calories than your maintenance calories. MFP already has you at that deficit... so you would eat 500 less calories a day than maintenance to lose 1 pound a week. If you exercise, you increase that deficit. Which you would THINK is a good thing... BUT... if that deficit gets TOO big, it's actually detrimental to your health and can and WILL mess up your metabolism in the long run. There have also been studies that show that an average female should not eat LESS than 1200 calories in a day (a male, 1500) or your body will believe it is starving and will refuse to release the fat... and will begin burning muscle instead... bad. THAT is why MFP wants you to eat back those calories. Even eating them, you will be at enough of a deficit to lose weight. At a HEALTHY rate. To those on a 1200 calorie diet, I usually suggest that you reset your goals to 1250 or 1300 so that you can eat TO or just above the 1200 NET so that MFP doesn't tell you you're over. I've been doing it since Feb and I'm very close to 25 pounds down... You really can't argue with success. :)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MFP calculates your calorie allowance using your BMR (the calories your body burns each day at rest), daily activity level and your weight loss goals (the calorie deficit needed each day) .
So, the calorie allowance you see has the calorie deficit already accounted for. Once you add exercise, it creates an even larger calorie deficit. If you have a LOT of weight to lose, it's not that big of a deal if you are spreading your food out and eating your daily allowance. You're still going to lose weight.
BUT, if you're getting close to your goal weight and you're finding that the pounds aren't coming off, even though you've created a great calorie deficit... try eating those "extra" calories. Your body is looking for fuel and balance. You have to find your calorie "sweet spot" so to speak. Sometimes that means eating more.
Hope that made sense. :)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eat back or not eat back the calories???
One issue that seems to be related to MFP more than any other forum I post on is the question of "to eat or not to eat" the calories one expends exercising. I'm assuming it has something to do with the logging and calculations used on MFP, which I am admittedly unfamiliar with. However, suffice it to say that I get this question in my inbox a few times each week, so it's obviously worth mentioning on the forum.
First, let it be known that there are no universally accepted rules regarding eating them back or not. The reason being is because there's no magic to it - it comes down to energy balance. Nothing more. Let me explain...
Let's try to make this real simple:
Maintenance calorie intake is where calories in = calories out, right?
We know that a calorie deficit is required if fat is to be lost, so calories in < calories out.
Large deficits can have negative effects such as increased cravings, muscle loss, irritability, unsustainability (I made that word up), etc.
So we want a moderate deficit, which I'd label as 20-35% off of your maintenance. There's latitude here, mind you.
So if your maintenance is 2000 calories, anywhere from 1300 to 1600 calories would be realistic for fat loss.
That's a deficit of 400-700 calories per day.
Said deficit, in theory, could come from a number of combinations.
On one end of the spectrum you could simply eat 400-700 calories less per day. This assumes the energy out side of the equation stays reasonably static.
On the other end of the spectrum you could keep eating 2000 calories but increase calories expended via exercise to 400-700 calories per day.
If you went with this latter scenario, you wouldn't have to eat back your exercise calories because the expended calories from exercise put you in the sweet spot, calorically speaking.
Now if you cut calories by 400-700 AND increased activity by 400-700, then you'd be running too large a deficit unless you ate back your exercise calories. I can't express how general this is, but it's something many should listen to. Obese folks, on the contrary, can run much larger deficits than thinner folks for reasons we won't get into here today. But all of these relatively thin folks who are trying to "beat their bodies into submission" by blitzing it full force with calorie deprivation and massive amounts of exercise should probably heed this advice.
In real terms, most people establish their deficits partly by cutting calories and partly by increasing activity. But for those of you wondering whether you should be eating back your calories expended exercising, you need to look at your calories in net terms. Where does your deficit stand without eating back your exercise calories?
I'll note that personally I don't worry about any of this with my own training or my clients. I set what I consider sane and productive volumes of various exercise (strength training, energy system development, conditioning for fat loss, etc.). From there, there's really not a lot of variability in energy expenditure since I know, by and large, what volume of exercise is required to drive the adaptations I'm shooting for.
Therefore, the only thing to really manipulate is calorie intake. It's a much cleaner approach but to each his own. Do what you're happy with and what makes the most sense for you
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
MFP calculates your calorie allowance using your BMR (the calories your body burns each day at rest), daily activity level and your weight loss goals (the calorie deficit needed each day) .
So, the calorie allowance you see has the calorie deficit already accounted for. Once you add exercise, it creates an even larger calorie deficit. If you have a LOT of weight to lose, it's not that big of a deal if you are spreading your food out and eating your daily allowance. You're still going to lose weight.
BUT, if you're getting close to your goal weight and you're finding that the pounds aren't coming off, even though you've created a great calorie deficit... try eating those "extra" calories. Your body is looking for fuel and balance. You have to find your calorie "sweet spot" so to speak. Sometimes that means eating more.
Hope that made sense. :)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
eat back or not eat back the calories???
One issue that seems to be related to MFP more than any other forum I post on is the question of "to eat or not to eat" the calories one expends exercising. I'm assuming it has something to do with the logging and calculations used on MFP, which I am admittedly unfamiliar with. However, suffice it to say that I get this question in my inbox a few times each week, so it's obviously worth mentioning on the forum.
First, let it be known that there are no universally accepted rules regarding eating them back or not. The reason being is because there's no magic to it - it comes down to energy balance. Nothing more. Let me explain...
Let's try to make this real simple:
Maintenance calorie intake is where calories in = calories out, right?
We know that a calorie deficit is required if fat is to be lost, so calories in < calories out.
Large deficits can have negative effects such as increased cravings, muscle loss, irritability, unsustainability (I made that word up), etc.
So we want a moderate deficit, which I'd label as 20-35% off of your maintenance. There's latitude here, mind you.
So if your maintenance is 2000 calories, anywhere from 1300 to 1600 calories would be realistic for fat loss.
That's a deficit of 400-700 calories per day.
Said deficit, in theory, could come from a number of combinations.
On one end of the spectrum you could simply eat 400-700 calories less per day. This assumes the energy out side of the equation stays reasonably static.
On the other end of the spectrum you could keep eating 2000 calories but increase calories expended via exercise to 400-700 calories per day.
If you went with this latter scenario, you wouldn't have to eat back your exercise calories because the expended calories from exercise put you in the sweet spot, calorically speaking.
Now if you cut calories by 400-700 AND increased activity by 400-700, then you'd be running too large a deficit unless you ate back your exercise calories. I can't express how general this is, but it's something many should listen to. Obese folks, on the contrary, can run much larger deficits than thinner folks for reasons we won't get into here today. But all of these relatively thin folks who are trying to "beat their bodies into submission" by blitzing it full force with calorie deprivation and massive amounts of exercise should probably heed this advice.
In real terms, most people establish their deficits partly by cutting calories and partly by increasing activity. But for those of you wondering whether you should be eating back your calories expended exercising, you need to look at your calories in net terms. Where does your deficit stand without eating back your exercise calories?
I'll note that personally I don't worry about any of this with my own training or my clients. I set what I consider sane and productive volumes of various exercise (strength training, energy system development, conditioning for fat loss, etc.). From there, there's really not a lot of variability in energy expenditure since I know, by and large, what volume of exercise is required to drive the adaptations I'm shooting for.
Therefore, the only thing to really manipulate is calorie intake. It's a much cleaner approach but to each his own. Do what you're happy with and what makes the most sense for you
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
