Per prior comments, make sure it's worth it as typical testing borders on useless unless you do some homework and make sure it's a full panel and always ask for a copy of your blood work. Good luck
Printable View
Not.
I call it the pecan pie rule.
A generous piece of pecan pie has about 500 calories.
If you get on a road bike, and ride it HARD for an hour, you burn about 500 calories. And I'm not talking about puttering around the neighborhood, I'm talking about head down, lungs pumping, hard riding.
It's a lot easier to lose weight by foregoing dessert, than it is to exercise it off.
Maybe try reverse dieting out of that insanely huge deficit?
Gents,
I’ve been “heavy” for years, 5’10” usually @230#. Working out only makes me hungry, if I downhill one ski day I’ll eat EVERYTHING I can lay hands on for three days. I retired as an LEO desk jockey five years ago, got a desk job at the old department for three more, then totally retired two years ago. I thought getting away from pushing papers and working around my house and property would help with the weight. Wrong! My weight eventually crept up to 249#. Pills for blood pressure, blood sugar and cholesterol are an evening routine.
Last October I went to a new younger doctor and his advice was to cut way back on carbs, so I’ve been trying to keep it between 50gm and 75gm per day. Started in November and as of the first of February I’ve tapered off at 25# lost. It’s still dropping but not at the same rate. I feel much better and my BP has gone down. I quit eating bread, rice, pastry’s, bagels, I limit potatoes and corn to a fraction of what I was eating. I do eat raw sweet potatoes, rutabagas, carrots, and radishes but they are peeled and sliced so that I’m controlling portions over a couple days instead of eating all that in one meal. I reward myself with a beer a few times a week but I’ve pretty much given up sodas and juices. The majority of meat I eat is venison and chicken. I’ve learned how to eat out with less carb intake.
Really I’m hoping that at 60 years old this becomes a life changer. My next doctors appointment is in April, Ikm hoping we can get me off some of the medication.
My wife (the gym rat) is asking that we get pizza tonight to celebrate getting our tax refund, I guess I’ll have to make a “sacrifice”. ;)
Correct nutrition is more important for weight loss that exercising, I know that from my own experience
Low carb diets have been around since about WWII, commercially popularized by Robert Atkins in the late 60's. The most current iteration of the fad is the ketogenic diet. Those fad diets are effective as a means of short-term weight loss. They are not effective as a means of sustainable, or long-term weight loss, at least...no more effective than dietary counseling aimed toward so-called "healthy eating". In other words, low carbohydrate diets don't do anything to address the actual problem driving obesity....unhealthy lifestyle...eating too much and exercising too little. Without permanent lifestyle change, permanent weight loss won't happen.
Many people want to believe that it's about the food. "McDonalds is bad". It's not. the obesity epidemic in America is about the volume. The problem with fast food isn't the nutritional value of the food, it's that the high-fat/high carbohydrate food that they sell tastes good, so you eat more of it.
I'm not saying that short-term weight loss is bad...it's not. I'm saying that in terms of overall health, the lack of sustainability of fad diets means that their overall effect on a person's health is limited.
Will, as a believer in the "set-point theory", I think this article provides a nice review for those who can grasp the physiology.
http://spectrum.diabetesjournals.org/content/20/3/166
IMHO, the "efficiency" that the authors talk about is the reason why fad diets are ineffective in the long term...there are just too many feedback mechanisms.
I’ve not been quite as strict with myself as the Adkins or Keto diet. I have just mentally assigned some carbs as worthless and some as allowable. I have cut back on portions and I’m now down by 31 pounds. I find it much easier to work around my property or go hiking in the National Forest with my wife. This will be a long term effort to make me better.
I haven’t read the thread, but will pass along what works for me.
Swimming 2-3x a week for 30-40 minutes per session put ON about 10 pounds of muscle in year one. Over the next three years - with no dietary or other changes - the increased metabolism of the increased skeletal muscle mass burned off 35 pounds (5 belt notches). That has stayed off as I maintain the swim regime and associated muscle. I still eat my biscuit & gravy and late night snack (I know:) - but maintaining a normal weight seems to be no problem if I keep some muscle on to burn calories. FWIW - 10lbs of extra skeletal muscle burns the equivalent of a pound of fat per week! YMMV
geezer john
In general, one can't exercise their way out of obesity.
That's pretty much the conclusion of article via the data, but even less so than many, myself included thought. Related to the set point hypothesiis, the Constrained Total Energy Expenditure hypothesis is quite interesting:
Constrained Total Energy Expenditure and Metabolic Adaptation to Physical Activity in Adult Humans
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...60982215015778
Those articles nicely illustrate the current major thrust of the medical bariatric community as well as bariatric/metabolic surgery for about the last 8 or 9 years. Prior to that, we just thought that weight loss surgery worked solely by restricting intake and, in the case of gastric bypass, creating some component of malabsorption. As diabetes become such a huge component of the obese population, we began to notice that that population's blood sugars normalized immediately after surgery and it was independent of the weight loss. It turns out that the mechanism was a lot more complicated than we thought, with vastly more metabolic implications.
It also helps to illuminate why weight loss is not just a simple matter of calorie intake vs calorie expenditure.
Basically the same thing I am doing. I'm in the middle of a huge re-model roofing project on a house we bought. Three months ago I couldn't have dreamed of being up there, but 35lbs lighter today made it possible. I'm on day 7 without a break and I'm still going up and down the ladder with no issues. Still have 65lbs to go.
I came across a eating plan for natural body builders which allocated calories based upon the individuals weight, which was to be taken once a week upon waking up. The idea being that you'd constantly be lowering the total calorie intake to match your weight loss or gain goals. The starting allocation was 11 calories per pound. This Macros would be 1.25-1.5g of protein per lb of body weight, carbs being 40-60% of the total allocation of calories less the amount for protein and the remaining balance went to fat. If after a week if weight loss goals weren't being met, you would decrease to 9 or 10 calories per pound for example.
I don't recall coming across a plan that had this constant adjustment based on weight and found it interesting. Its interesting considering the information in the article, about how people become more metabolically efficient as their weight decreased.
So your two choices are some sort of weight loss surgery or a lifetime of extreme discipline, diligence and dedication of controlling how much you eat?
I'm still trying to wrap my head around this. Is the article saying that some people have a set point that's way into the obese category?
Yes. But there are multiple factors that make up what the set point actually is. They include genetics, environment, and behavior. You can’t do anything about the genetics. You can repudiate the behavior, which most of learned growing up in a less nutritionally aware culture...the way of eating that our parents taught us, but that’s not easy to turn your back on, just like any other set of lifetime habits. Environment? That’s complicated. It includes things like..how much television you watch, how far you live from a Denny’s (for example)...even the size of your dinner plates at home.
It’s hard enough to wake up one day and just decide to change your lifestyle...eat healthy, exercise more etc, but it’s REALLY hard when your set point has your body pumping out massive amounts of ghrelin even if you miss just one meal. The success rate for significant weight loss (defined as losing 50% of your body mass and keeping it off for two years) using diet and exercise alone is repeatedly demonstrated as being about 2%. 98% of people fail at long term weight loss, even with pharmacologic support (google the Fen-phen trial).
Physiology is a bitch.
I guess I'll strive to be that 2% then, not much else I can do. Insurance isn't going to cover any type of surgery for a 255# guy that wants to get down to 190 or so. I haven't had any real issues with being hungry while doing this for a couple months. I guess one way to stay on task is to educate myself about all the reasons you can fail, and try not to do them. I haven't spent a dime on supplements, diet pills, or diet programs, so I won't have the disappointment of spending a bunch of money and failing.
LOL! It was easier keeping my 300 yd long mountainside driveway cleared of snow this winter but I’m still not climbing up on my two story roof because I hate heights! Good on you brother!
If I can lose another 10# I’ll be a happy camper, if I can keep it off I’ll hopefully live to be an ancient happy camper. My parents are both 89 and still kicking in spite of their diet. Biscuits, gravy and pizza are food groups to them, no wonder I managed to pack on excess ballast over my 60 years. Being on the LEO diet plan for over 30 years didn’t help either.
Hmac is the SME in this area. Will, thanks for the information, Hmac, thanks for your input. Between expertise of both of y'all it paints a very clear picture.
I know that at age 50, I have to work twice as hard to lose a quarter as much. And I have to be very disciplined with what and how I eat. Because of multiple issues, I don't work out as much or as long as I used to, and realize that as long as I keep moving in some aspect and eat decently, I have a shot of losing that last 15 pounds that I really need to lose.
If there's anyone thing you you et al can take away from what I and he tend to say, where you will find us in 100% agreement: getting the wight off is not the difficult part per se, it's keeping it off that is. The absolute take home is, finding an approach you can and will maintain forever, with usual ups and downs we all face, that improves general health. Taking the long view is the only view that ultimately works.
This is something that I’ve always struggled with. As a teenager one summer of running and weights and i went from being the fatkid to pretty lean and muscular. I rode that for a while and after grad school i quit working out, ate like crap, and one morning I looked in the mirror and i was 6’3” and 350lb. I joined the gym, cleaned up my diet, cut back in booze, started running as a way to meet people in a new city, and next think I knew i was a lean looking 225 at the end if my first marathon. Being single and living alone it was easy to control my diet. A couple years later, I crossed the finish line of my first Ironman at 245... suddenly i wasn’t living alone, I had to eat around someone else schedule, and with training 28 hr a week and working full time. I ate garbage to keep moving and ate formal sit down meals at home... now, 7 years later. With a family, I’m not in control of my meal schedule, or workout schedule. And I’m 295... even though I did my 14th half Ironman last weekend. The lessons I’ve learned are.
1 it’s time to get serious about diet. And I need to get my wife on board.
2 running is good for me. Long triathlons are not. Running mentally helps me to control my diet. I comeback from a long run tired and nauseous. My body tells me to eat light and sleep. Swimming, I feel great but am voraciously hungry. Amd grab anything I can find. My wife is a snacker, and buys things I never trusted myself to have in the house. Cycling is neutral. I’m not starving. But not burning the same calories.
3 all day activity is great for weight loss. Example, surfing. It’s not a huge caloric burn. But I’m not eating on a surf board. And it’s fun so keeps me going. Hiking is bad, because my wife packs snacks.
Dude. This post is epic.
You can't count on getting the wife to join. You HAVE to find a way to make it work with or without her involvement. This is a new dynamic I'm trying to figure out in real time as well. I have a feeling your gal and mine are a lot a like. She's lucky and naturally very lean. I wish my struggle was to add muscle. I feel I'm at the opposite. I feel my genetics stray me toward being skinny fat or just fat, as evidenced by others in my family. She, on the other hand, can pound pizza.
I like long slow runs for mental health, as they give me a sense of calm. But, for weight loss, intervals are where its at. The ideal interval length is 3:00-5:00. This will hurt some people's feelings that think they can run hard for :30 and count it as an interval. It takes much longer than that for your HR to even elevate to a point where you are training near your max. When the average person's HR crosses 120 BPM, they will feel very exerted. This isn't ideal for interval or VO2 max training, which calls for much more.
Easy pace training is good for mental health, but intervals are where its at for weight loss. They are HARD workouts. It sucks. Consider doing 4x 800m at your 5k race pace. If you're on a treadmill add 1.0 incline. When I was 30, that would have been an off day. At near 41, by the 4th interval, its hard w HR in the mid 170s. 800m or 1200m are ideal interval lengths for running. 200m are good for form drills, 400m to a lesser extent, but the exertion at time is key. It takes a bit to build up your HR.
Its about you. You cannot depend on the actions of others. You have to make it work in your situation.
I don't run any more. It just hurts too much for too long (basically no lumbar spine, poor disc composition, and other back pathology
Thanks, Uncle Sam). I have found other forms of aerobic exercise for the same benefits where I don't hurt after.
We're going through the same thing with my mother, two shot knees due to arthritis so she can't run, a bad back that only lets her even *stand* for maybe two minutes and morbid obesity--we're trying to get her down to "surgery weight" but with her only having three hour sessions between cardiac rehab and physical therapy a week, it's slow. Hard to get nutritional support because of the fact that her HMO doesn't even wanna let you talk to a nutritionist unless you agree to schedule surgery for half your guts cut out and even then all they can say is "Mediterranean Diet and eat more fish whether you're allergic to 'em or not"... but we're slowly putting points on the board, two steps forward then one back, a pound or two here and another there.
Obesity is of the 2000s as AIDS was of the 1980s, only no one seems to realize it.
Sorry. Took me a bit to get back to this. Things have improved diet wise. I’ve gotten used to just eating less at those sit down meals. And cutting back on the snacks. My wife has kind of acquiesced to the idea that I can just eat a few bites and then just focus on feeding the baby. It’s a slow conversion. But I’m trying to make it permanent.
And I’m with you in the 800 and 1200 repeats. That’s the best way I’ve found to really improve pace and endurance. The long weekend runs are part of my “alone time.” My usual week consists of an interval day, a tempo day and a long day. Plus two extra short slow runs after a bike day. Signing up for races is what keeps me consistent and motivated. My next 70.3 is the end of September in Augusta and I’m hoping to seriously redeem myself from Virginia...
It's well understood within the public health sectors and such, but the public does not care, vs not realize it per se. And there's some trying their best to have people accept obesity as normal and healthy. It may be "normal" today by the shear numbers, but it sure as chit is not healthy.
There are still people who smoke, for chrissakes.
Obesity is a very complex and misunderstood disease. Relative to your statement above, most people look down their nose and think that the solution is as simple as... "just push yourself away from the table, fatass".
Precisely! No one is not aware of the dangers of smoking at this point, yet millions still do it. My mothers generation at least had an excuse of sorts as they didn't know how bad it was, and they were being told dangers were overblown, etc. My mother would say she would have never started had she known of the dangers. She died of smoking related cancer at 58, one week before 9-11.
People are now being sent mixed messages too now, when you see crap like this, it's easy to see how some will fool themselves into thinking it's acceptable.
It just goes along with today's social norms that everyone is a winner, even the losers. The term "fat shaming" wasn't even a term until a few years ago. Now it's mainstream, everyone is perfectly healthy regardless of their weight as long as they are comfortable being obese. Heck, even Sports Illustrated has an obese cover model that you better not say anything about or you are a hater and a (fill in the blank) phobe. I got made fun of in junior high school for begin fat. Well, I decided I didn't like it so I started eating right and working out. And that healthy lifestyle has stuck with me ever since.