slimming down

TheGreatGatsby

And this is the point I make to my girlfriend when she nags me about my eating - I obviously do eat enough because I'm not loosing any weight if anything its going up - how does that work??. If I wasn't eating enough for the amount of exercise I wouldn't be able to ride at the intensity or for the distance I do and I would also be loosing weight.

Does it get harder to loose weight the less you have to loose?

Gats

Doom

TheGreatGatsby wrote:

Does it get harder to loose weight the less you have to loose?

I think you should be focusing on body fat as opposed to weight. Weight fluctuates daily in terms of water retention among other factors and shouldnt be used as a point of reference which is why the BMI calc is so out of date and pointless as a guide.

IMO you need to look at your diet carefully or take the plunge and see a diet specialist as I don't believe you have the balance right for your body type and level of exercise.

Felix-da-house-mouse

Doom wrote:

TheGreatGatsby wrote:

Does it get harder to loose weight the less you have to loose?

I think you should be focusing on body fat as opposed to weight. Weight fluctuates daily in terms of water retention among other factors and shouldnt be used as a point of reference which is why the BMI calc is so out of date and pointless as a guide.

IMO you need to look at your diet carefully or take the plunge and see a diet specialist as I don't believe you have the balance right for your body type and level of exercise.

Is that for me doom or someone else?

jedster

Gats,

I'm surprised that you are not losing weight. Have you had your body fat measured? I suspect it's low and you are carrying fairly little upperbody muscle. Why do you think that 10.5 stone is a good weight for you? I would be pretty lean at 10.5 stone and I'm 5'9.

The reason that I'm surprised that you are not losing weight is that I eat about 2500 calories a day and I'm losing weight. I'm now 12 stone which is the top end of the desirable BMI range. The calorie consumption tables that I have seen suggest that I should use about 2250 calories per day if I don't exercise (other than walking etc). That's a bit different from your estimate. On top of that I probably average 5000 calories of cardio exercise per week (mostly cycle commuting). The difference between the two is then about 3250 which is a bit under 1lb of fat per week - about what I'm shedding at the moment, so it all appears to add up.

J

TheGreatGatsby

no I haven't had my BF measured. I tend to go buy how things look and wobble and the simple tense and pull test. 10.5 I think will be a good balance between being lean and being strong. I think its the weight that I when I look at myself in the mirror I can see I'm thin where as at the moment I just see fat. My face isn't as lean as it would be at 10.5 and thats a pretty good measure for me.

I don't understand why I'm not loosing weight.


Gats

jedster

Well your BMI is about 21 now (by my reckoning) and the desirable range is 18-25 so you're in the bottom half of that. Worth noting though that power atheletes like sprinters and rugby players would typically be above 25 even when being very lean because of the muscle mass that they carry.

How would you describe your build? Are you naturally slightly built? If so then I guess 10.5-11 stone is a good range.

FWIW, I think you should consider doing some weight training. You might find that building more muscle helps to raise you resting metabolic rate and burn more calories.

J

McBain_v1

Hee hee - I watched the "Mow Cop Out-takes" vid clip. I think that I will tumbling sideways if I mess up my tacking lack that guy did. Still, he made the climb on a 39x23 at the end (although the video wasn't clear as to whether he'd cycled 98 miles before attempting the climb - I think that might influence things slightly).

And since there seems to be some confusion on this thread...

loose - adjective 1. not firmly or tightly fixed inplace. 2. not held, tied, or packaged together. 3. not bound or tethered. 4. not fitting tightly or closely. 5 not dense or compact. 6. relaxed: her loose, easy stride. 7. careless and indiscreet: loose talk. 8. not strict; inexact. 9. promiscuous or immoral. 10. (of the ball in a game) in play but not in any player's possession.

lose - verb 1. be deprived of or cease to have or retain. 2. become unable to find. 3. fail to win. 4. earn less (money) than one is spending. 5. waste or fail to take advantage of. 6. (be lost) be lost or killed. 7. evade or shake off (a pursuer)...

No more excuses now for pitiful school boy errors like this:

I obviously do eat enough because I'm not loosing any weight

:?

Doom

Felix-da-house-mouse wrote:

Is that for me doom or someone else?

Both, generally, to anyone who is listening. I just think focusing on weight can lead people down the wrong path when being healthy should be the ultimate goal.

Felix-da-house-mouse

Doom wrote:

Felix-da-house-mouse wrote:

Is that for me doom or someone else?

Both, generally, to anyone who is listening. I just think focusing on weight can lead people down the wrong path when being healthy should be the ultimate goal.

would you say i have a healthy diet? i might start cutting out the tattie's and eat ,more fresh fish and more vedge and try to lose the bread every day.

Doom

Felix-da-house-mouse wrote:

would you say i have a healthy diet? i might start cutting out the tattie's and eat ,more fresh fish and more vedge and try to lose the bread every day.

I'm not qualified to make that call. As long as you are getting enough carbs from the right sources (no refined sugars) to supplement your energy needs, eating fruit veg and quality protien then you'll be fine.

If you have real concerns then start a food diary and be vigilant about recording everything that passes the lips. After 2 weeks it will be obvious where you are going wrong if at all. If your still not sure take the diary to a doctor or dietician and get them to comment.

craigenty

This formula is quite useful to work out how many calories you need daily when at rest. Then bear in mind that a hilly 5 hour ride can burn over 4000 cals

Using an example of 75 kilos

3.5 x 75kg = 262.5
262.5 divide 1000 = 0.2625
0.2625 x 60 x 24hrs = 378
378 x 5 = 1890Kcals

jedster

Craig,

can you explain the formula?

Is the first line joules per minute required
then to KJ
then multply from mins to days
then convert from KJ to KCal?

If so, what's the basis of the Joules per minute calc and is it really linear with body weight? Is the 3.5 very fixed or does it vary between individuals. Thanks!

J

superlightweight

This is probably a better equation for calculating resting metabolic rate (as it takes into account the main factors that dictate your metabolism: age, weight, height):

10 x Weight (kg)
+
6.25 x Height (cm)
-
5 x Age
then
-161 (women)
+5 (men)

This will give you your resting metabolic rate, which is the number of calories you require to stay alive if you lay on the floor and did nothing for 24 hours! You then need to multiply this figure by an 'activity factor':

1.375 Lightly Active. Light exercise or sports 1-3 days a week
1.55 Moderately Active. Moderate exercise or sports 3-5 days a week
1.725 Very Active. Hard exercise or sports 6-7 days a week

This final figure is the total number of calories you require a day. Exceed this and you will most likely gain weight, consume less and you *should* lose weight. I would recommend a 10-15% reduction from this final figure if you want to lose weight sensibly.

I expect the Great Gatsby is eating too little, i.e. there is too big a difference between his actual intake and his actual requirement e.g. 1300 cals vs 2500 cals. This will encourage your body to hang on to body fat and possibly cannablise muscle tissue for energy, thereby reducing your metabolism

Special K

Babbsy wrote:

TheGreatGatsby wrote:

I do firmly agree with the only way to loose weight is more calories out than in and the greater the deficit the better as far as I'm concerned. As for you get out what you put in I'm not sure I do agree.

Everyday I ride the 20 miles to work before eating and then have breakfast of a coffee and a plum, then every 2 hours or so I have another different piece of fruit usually banana, orange and apple in that order. The last one maybe omitted depending on how I feel. I then ride 14 miles home and have a good home cooked meal within an hour of getting in, followed by a fruit salad with yoghurt and nuts. And thats it every day. Except on weekends when I eat breakfast. saturday is a rest day and sunday is 3hrs+ but thats done before brekky. Now for me thats a considerable amount of food in a day considering I site behind a desk all day but people say its not enough. However, All my rides are done with an average of between 18 and 20mph (bit less on sundays cos its longer so take it easier) burning over 600 cals on the way in and over 400cals on the way home(approx) so for me eating a regular diet during the day is a no no as it it would put me WAY over cals for the day - taking into account an office worker burns around 1100cals only during the day. Its just not enough of a deficit to warrant eating any more food. Also taking in account that my weight fluctuates 2-3lb a week on this diet but never loosing - which is my ultimate goal so the only way is more miles less food.

I guess my point is, over time your body will adjust to what you feed it and utilise what it has available in the most efficient way.

I think you have to look at your overall life style and what you do during the day in comparison to what you eat. For me an office worker who rides to and from work say 13miles each way as an average who then eats a normal breakfast, snack meals of fruit, a normal lunch, snack meal and then dinner is going to put on weight as the calories don't balance ie more in than out.

thats just my opinion though.

Gats

A rough and ready calc

Coffee = 0 cals
4 pieces of friut = 400 cals
Home cooked meal = 600 cals
Fruit salad, yog & nuts = 300 cals

Total intake 1300cals

Cycling commute burns 1000cals

This means you 'live' on 300 cals!

You say an office worker needs 1100 cals, I think even this is probably on the low side. (A 75kg low activity male needs about 2000 cals to maintain weight.)

Obviously this is a broad brush esimate and intake will depend on the type of food you have (black coffee v mochachino with syrup and whipped cream, low fat v full fat yogurt, balance home cooked meal v suet pudding, chips n gravy). Your calorie output is also based on assumptions (how accurately measured is your cycling calorie output) and will be dependent on your weight, age, and inherent DNA.

Having said this though, the fact that you say you are maintaining your weight suggests taht you have teh calorie balance right.

ALERT!
Coffee does not have a neutral effect on blood sugar (and therefore calorie control).

Ifyou are still drinking coffee and going on a calorie-control and training diet you should probably research this a little and consider when or if you drink coffee. (I would go into it, but am not really qualified - I just know that when, on the advise of a dietician, I cut out cofee in the morning it made losing weight easier...)

TheGreatGatsby

according to your calculations I need just under 3,000 cals a day!

Obviously I don't eat that during my working day cos I'm not doing anything but over a week I don't think I'm in too much of a deficit. I reckon only maybe 3-400cals IF that on average. Maybe it makes a difference that I tend to eat nothing all day then eat alot in the evening?

gats

cee

oof johnny sir! some of you folks are quite strict with your diets eh!

I think this has been said and if so I agree. BMI doesn't work in all cases. I am 5'9 and a bit and am 13 stone.

This makes my BMI about 26.5 which is in the overweight category.

I have a reasonably flat stomach, have a fairly muscular build and would not consider myself to be overweight....

I saw somewhere in the thread something about diabetes.......if so, you should maybe consult a doctor about the slimming because as you say, this may be having an effect (i don't know im not a doctor )

chronyx

superlightweight wrote:

This is probably a better equation for calculating resting metabolic rate (as it takes into account the main factors that dictate your metabolism: age, weight, height):

10 x Weight (kg)
+
6.25 x Height (cm)
-
5 x Age
then
-161 (women)
+5 (men)

This will give you your resting metabolic rate, which is the number of calories you require to stay alive if you lay on the floor and did nothing for 24 hours! You then need to multiply this figure by an 'activity factor':

1.375 Lightly Active. Light exercise or sports 1-3 days a week
1.55 Moderately Active. Moderate exercise or sports 3-5 days a week
1.725 Very Active. Hard exercise or sports 6-7 days a week

This final figure is the total number of calories you require a day. Exceed this and you will most likely gain weight, consume less and you *should* lose weight. I would recommend a 10-15% reduction from this final figure if you want to lose weight sensibly.

I expect the Great Gatsby is eating too little, i.e. there is too big a difference between his actual intake and his actual requirement e.g. 1300 cals vs 2500 cals. This will encourage your body to hang on to body fat and possibly cannablise muscle tissue for energy, thereby reducing your metabolism

Nice one, thanks for that

superlightweight

TheGreatGatsby wrote:

according to your calculations I need just under 3,000 cals a day!

Obviously I don't eat that during my working day cos I'm not doing anything but over a week I don't think I'm in too much of a deficit. I reckon only maybe 3-400cals IF that on average. Maybe it makes a difference that I tend to eat nothing all day then eat alot in the evening?

gats

It won't be helping you if you have days and/or long periods where you don't eat very much. Again this will encourage 'survival mode' whereby your body will try to keep hold of energy (=fat) to fulfil your metabolic requirements when no food is being consumed.

Although you are right to think of the overall picture i.e. a weeks worth of caories in/out, you want to avoid too much variation on a daily basis. "i won't eat today because i havn't exercised" is probably not a good approach as your body won't settle into a pattern of fual storage/utilization (much like human nature, our bodies don't like change!)

TheGreatGatsby

I eat throughout the day but just a little so never longer than 4 hours between eating something and I eat exactly the same each day until the evening when obviously my meals change.

I was thinking maybe eating less on my rest days because of not exercising but always find myself trying to stock up for the next days long rides when I do a 3-4 hour ride early morning before breakfast.

Gats

Jeff Jones

It's that period between dinner and dinner that is too long. A coffee and a plum isn't breakfast! And two or three bits of fruit isn't lunch. Your body's barely going to notice that and just slow itself right down to cling onto its reserves. Added to that you're probably not getting enough nutrients, which may be causing your temporary blindness, dizziness and mood swings.

The solution is not to eat less, it's to restructure your diet properly so that you eat first thing in the morning and get out of that starvation mode.

As a contrast, I'm a bit over 11 stone and 6ft tall, and I ride about the same as you do during the week. But I start the day with a decent bowl of porridge with yoghurt, nuts and blueberries (5-600 cal), then ride 45km, then have a glass of milk + coffee + Daim bar (not ideal but I like them), three muesli bars, a cheese + ham baguette and an apple by lunchtime. Afternoon snack: another muesli bar or a cake + an apple. Dinner: I guess about 175g of raw pasta (cooked, of course) or the equivalent + whatever I have with it. Dessert: half a 100g block of chocolate, fruit, yoghurt, bits to fill up the corners until I'm not hungry. Sometimes I'll add a few pints of beer to this. Sometimes many pints.

On rest days I'll eat the same, but on the weekends a fair bit more because I ride more.

This is not a diet designed to lose weight, although I have, it's designed to keep me fueled up. It's more than twice what you're eating too.

Have a rethink.

TheGreatGatsby

I have been considering restructuring the meals due to reading this post and I think I will try adding in a 'proper' breakfast - well, more than just a plum! - and something more than just fruit for lunch. I'm gonna try this for a bit and see what happens but I hope to god it won't make me put on weight! As that's the one thing I'm trying to avoid!

Gats

Jeff Jones

Everything I've ever read and experienced points to the old adage that breakfast is the most important meal of the day.

It took me a while to get this - I used to go out for two hours on just a bit of fruit and a muesli bar - but eventually I was convinced by a sports nutritionist to have a proper meal so I could train properly. Result: I didn't put on any weight and I got faster.

Now I keep the size of my brekky the same, no matter if I'm having a rest day or doing 100 miles.

Conversely, when I don't eat first thing I get really hungry/tired mid-afternoon. That's never a good thing because I'll overcompensate on junk.

TheGreatGatsby

I'd love to see a real sports nutritionist/scientist and get weighed/fat measured and generally health tested to see where I'm at and have thing properly explained and maybe even a plan of what I COULD be eating without loosing weight.

Gats

davelakers

Jeff Jones wrote:

It's that period between dinner and dinner that is too long. A coffee and a plum isn't breakfast! And two or three bits of fruit isn't lunch. Your body's barely going to notice that and just slow itself right down to cling onto its reserves. Added to that you're probably not getting enough nutrients, which may be causing your temporary blindness, dizziness and mood swings.

The solution is not to eat less, it's to restructure your diet properly so that you eat first thing in the morning and get out of that starvation mode.

As a contrast, I'm a bit over 11 stone and 6ft tall, and I ride about the same as you do during the week. But I start the day with a decent bowl of porridge with yoghurt, nuts and blueberries (5-600 cal), then ride 45km, then have a glass of milk + coffee + Daim bar (not ideal but I like them), three muesli bars, a cheese + ham baguette and an apple by lunchtime. Afternoon snack: another muesli bar or a cake + an apple. Dinner: I guess about 175g of raw pasta (cooked, of course) or the equivalent + whatever I have with it. Dessert: half a 100g block of chocolate, fruit, yoghurt, bits to fill up the corners until I'm not hungry. Sometimes I'll add a few pints of beer to this. Sometimes many pints.

On rest days I'll eat the same, but on the weekends a fair bit more because I ride more.

This is not a diet designed to lose weight, although I have, it's designed to keep me fueled up. It's more than twice what you're eating too.

Have a rethink.

I hate you............................................................

webbhost

And this is the point I make to my girlfriend when she nags me about my eating - I obviously do eat enough because I'm not loosing any weight if anything its going up - how does that work??. If I wasn't eating enough for the amount of exercise I wouldn't be able to ride at the intensity or for the distance I do and I would also be loosing weight.

Your metabolism is not fixed, and not eating enough does slow it down.

If you dont eat, then your body goes into somewhat of a "starvation mode". This means that when you "do" eat, it'll get every little ounce of sugars that it can and store it immediately.

I'm sure you have seen the special K advert stating that more people lose weight by eating breakfast than missing breakfast? This is because you are getting the extra meal which makes your body thing that its getting a regular supply, thus speeding up your metabolism and more of what you eat goes to waste (if that makes sense).

I admit ive not been following this thread, but heres a tip for anyone interested if they really want to lose weight:

Every 4 days, revert between eating carbohydrates and protein meals (so on day 1 say try eat as many carbs and as little protein, then on day 4 vice versa. Days between you gradually take more of 1 and less of the other. 4 - 8 you do the reverse so you go back to the original.

By doing this, you confuse your bodys metabolism. Protein and Carbs both require diferent enzymes to be stored, and by doing the above, it confuses your body into releasing the wrong enzyme at the wrong time (so when you eating protein meals, your body releases carb. enzymes and thus cannot store the sugar.)

To make it effective thrugh you have to have 4 meals a day and plenty of water.

fidbod

superlightweight wrote:

This is probably a better equation for calculating resting metabolic rate (as it takes into account the main factors that dictate your metabolism: age, weight, height):

10 x Weight (kg)
+
6.25 x Height (cm)
-
5 x Age
then
-161 (women)
+5 (men)

This will give you your resting metabolic rate, which is the number of calories you require to stay alive if you lay on the floor and did nothing for 24 hours! You then need to multiply this figure by an 'activity factor':

1.375 Lightly Active. Light exercise or sports 1-3 days a week
1.55 Moderately Active. Moderate exercise or sports 3-5 days a week
1.725 Very Active. Hard exercise or sports 6-7 days a week

This final figure is the total number of calories you require a day. Exceed this and you will most likely gain weight, consume less and you *should* lose weight. I would recommend a 10-15% reduction from this final figure if you want to lose weight sensibly.

I expect the Great Gatsby is eating too little, i.e. there is too big a difference between his actual intake and his actual requirement e.g. 1300 cals vs 2500 cals. This will encourage your body to hang on to body fat and possibly cannablise muscle tissue for energy, thereby reducing your metabolism

Superlight weight - this is a great little calculation, where did you get it from?

Oh and Gatsby, it has been said before by other posters but what is going on with you sounds like a body in classic starvation mode if I remember my first year physiology classes correctly. Have a big breakfast it will make a huge difference.

Felix-da-house-mouse

i am just really struggling to get rid of a bit of a belly from winter. i was "laid up" for about 2 months with fractures to both the bones in the right arm and now i seem to struggle to lose the weight off my body thats really been there for years and now i've got into cycling i want it gone.

Russell Smith

I use a Punchbag in the garage and do a 20 minute work out interspersed with a minute of skipping for every 3 minutes of boxing, increasing the number of puches thrown as I go. You'll notice the fate under the arms disapppear.

kenjonessa

If I were to calculate the number calories I consumed and calculated my metabolic rate as per the various equations above. Would it then be possible to calculate my expected weight loss over a given period of time. As an example: My Resting metabolic rate = 1957.5. If I where to have a moderate activity level then my daily requirement would be 3034.1. In the event I restricted my intake to say 2300 kcal a day, there would be a shortfall of 734.1. Does or can this number then translate into Kilo's and grams?

jedster

yes - 3500 calories to 1lb or 2.2*3500 = 7700 calories to 1kg - roughly of course