Struggling to reduce weight

volké

Currently I'm 160lbs,and 13% body fat (at a height of 5'9"). I'm not exactly heavy, but then I know I'd be a much better cyclist if I could get down to 150lbs at 7% body fat.

I naturally tend towards 170, and can feel the difference when I'm down to my usual 160, even on low gradients/ flats. So I know another 10 would have a similar impact.

However, I'm really struggling to get lighter. It should be a simple calories in < calories out - but I'm finding that my body seems to really want to hold onto every ounce at the moment. It also punishes me (OK maybe punish is too strong a word :roll:) with immense (again maybe too strong ) hunger and tiredness, even on a relatively modest 500Kcal daily deficit. Over the past few days I've had to just eat normally because I've been very hungry and thought it best to 'listen to my body' for a bit.

I'm keen to maintain my muscle mass; dropping fat to lower my BF% rather than just going for being lighter. I do 3 full body weights sessions a week, eat 1750Kcal + enough to just cover cardio (cycling or running 5-6 days a week), get at least 150g of protein a day, don't eat carbs after 8pm, get plenty of sleep, drink a lot of water. I seem to be following all the usual advice but have just stagnated.

Has anyone got any advice or been in a similar situation before?

Volké

stonehouse

Strikes me that an aim of 7% body fat is a rather low aim!

phil s

I don't think you're eating enough. Try this -

1. work out your resting metabolic rate. (weight in kg x 15.3) + 679 = RMR

2. then figure out whether (excluding cycling) you are (a) mostly sedentary, (b) moderately active, or (c) very active through your normal day. If (a) then multiply RMR x 1.4. If (b) then multiply RMR x 1.7. If (c) then multiply RMR x 2

3. Estimate calories used during exercise. I used to have a powermeter and could work this out almost exactly. Without a PM now I budget for around 700 kCals for an hour's moderate riding, through to around 950 kCal for an hour's fairly hard riding. Figure out roughly what your average weekly calorie expenditure for riding is, divide the figure by 7 and add to the result above.

4. Reduce the resulting figure by 15% and no more.

That equation came from Anita Bean's book and is the one which works for sustainable weight loss without hunger pangs and subsequent moodiness or gorging to overcome a large deficit in calories.

If you can't be bothered being quite so strict then another way is to get a ballpark calorie figure and then pre-prepare your day's meals, including breakfast and eat no more than you've set out. If you get really hungry try fruit, skimmed milk and drink plenty of water.

Team Banana Spokesman

Volké wrote:

I do 3 full body weights sessions a week

thought you wanted to LOSE weight? :?

Volké wrote:

eat 1750Kcal

wtf? men need a MINIMUM of 2500, women 2000 for PROPER BODILY FUNCTIONS. so if you dont get enough, dont complain that your body is acting weird. by starving your body will "hold on to every ounce" as you say.

Volké wrote:

get at least 150g of protein a day

thats loads unless you are actually riding hard as hell every day.
thats 600kcal BTW. so looks like you aint getting much kcal in carbs for actual energy meaning you CANT ride hard as hell.

Volké wrote:

don't eat carbs after 8pm

explain?

amaferanga

Team Banana Spokesman wrote:

Volké wrote:

don't eat carbs after 8pm

explain?

I guess he's referring to the old wives tale: eat after 8 and put on weight

volké

Thanks for the responses.

I'll attempt to answer some of your questions below:

The protein is quite high because I want to maintain my upper body strength for other sports. I don't have a huge amount, but if I dropped muscle from my upper body as well as getting to 7% I'd be at my 'ideal climbing weight' - which isn't really ideal for any other sport besides marathon running.

For the 3 weights sessions my main lifts are deadlifts (lower back) and squats (quads and glutes) to help with cycling power. I also do benchpressing, shoulder pressing and pullups to maintain my upper body as it is rather than building it up, combined with some core work.

My food intake is 1750Kcal + cardio. So if I cycle for 2 hours I get another 1500Kcal, or run for an hour I get 900 extra. And considering that I do at least an hour of running or 1.5 hours of cycling a day - I get about 2750Kcal or more each day. That means I can get plenty of carbs (and fats) in there as well as protein.

However, the equation above indicated that I should be eating about 350 more each day. So I might try adding in those extra and seeing what happens.

That said, it doesn't take into account lean mass vs overall mass though. Surely someone who weighs 200lbs of mainly muscle burns more calories than 200lbs and heavily overweight? The equation above indicates that its the same for both.

For that reason, I've seen the same equation use 'lean mass' rather than 'weight' before, which is what I used to get 1750. The idea being that lean mass (organs and muscle) actively uses energy, whereas fat just makes your muscles work a bit harder to carry it round. Even an extra 25lbs of fat isn't going to make your body use much more energy if you're sedentary (which is what your RMR represents).

The reason I don't eat carbs after 8pm is actually so I get more sleep for recovery. I find that if I eat fruit, veg, bread, pasta etc in the 2-3 hours before bed then it takes me longer to get to sleep and I like to have a good rest so I can work and train properly the next day.

Also, I don't think 7% is an unattainable target. I'm in my 20s, I eat well, I've cut out alcohol at the moment, and I do a lot of exercise. It will be hard, without doubt, but its not like I've aimed for 4-5% (ProTour level).

I'll try eating 350Kcal/day more and see what happens.

Volké

vorsprung

The figures given above by phil s for the calories used cycling seem a little high to me

At commuting pace, I assume 350 an hour

Volké's 150g of protein a day seems bizarrely high but his aims are not just to loose fat but also to gain upper body strength. Given this ambitious aim I suppose that's fair enough. 2 grams per kilo is a lot.

The reasons for over eating protein are

1) It is inefficient as a food, requiring more calories to digest- but you feel sated
2) After hard exercise, if there isn't enough glycogen in your system your body breaks down muscle as well as fat to make up the short fall. If there are lots of free amino acids( from a protein overdose) then it uses them instead of attacking the muscle.

The reason Volké is "struggling" with loosing weight is

Over the past few days I've had to just eat normally because I've been very hungry and thought it best to 'listen to my body' for a bit.

Most people I've talked to say that if you want to loose weight you have to get used to "that hungry feeling".

Volké's double ambition to gain upper body mass while loosing fat at the same time is a really difficult trick to pull off. Anita Bean is name checked above, she explains how to do it in her book.

phil s

Vorsprung, my figures for cycling come from a correctly calibrated powermeter, where for cycling 1kJ = 1 kCal. Typical training ride for me would yield those figures depending on how hard I am pushing.

ut_och_cykla

There is a chance that you are over estimating what you burn and underestimating what you need calorie wise but only by a small margin.
Say that your BMR is really 1600 and you are only averaging 800 calories of cardio a day - that gives you 2400 kcals a day not almost 2800 - which on a weekly basis would be a plus of 350 g weight gain. And if you are making up burnt calories its easy to eat too many!
Likelyhood is that you are eating right - feeling hungry - adn not burning what you think you are. Check some calculators on the web for runners speed and your weight 70kg - not sure it would amount to 900kcal an hour for example.

Pokerface

phil s wrote:

Vorsprung, my figures for cycling come from a correctly calibrated powermeter, where for cycling 1kJ = 1 kCal. Typical training ride for me would yield those figures depending on how hard I am pushing.

+1


Even going REALLY slow on a turbo (less effort than commuting pace), I can easily burn 500cals an hour.

But my MAX is about 850 an hour.

amaferanga

1h20min at threshold burnt ~1247 kcal on Sunday for me according to my powermeter.

ut_och_cykla

I'm old, slow & fat and have a hard job pressing out much more than 600 kcal an hour so for anyone to assume that they can grind out 900 an hour (without having any kind of tool to measure it )sounds like a weak point in the assumptions on which weightloss is being based. In addition I know that as a girly Phil s /Anita beans calculations leave me overeating/putting on weight. The BMR calcs on Livestrong daily plate seem to work better for me.....

vorsprung

phil s wrote:

Vorsprung, my figures for cycling come from a correctly calibrated powermeter, where for cycling 1kJ = 1 kCal. Typical training ride for me would yield those figures depending on how hard I am pushing.

Phil, where does the "for cycling 1kJ = 1kCal" idea come from?

Obviously riding a bike isn't 100% efficient so the idea of 1 calorie = 4 joules isn't right
( see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calories etc ) but I've not seen a rule of thumb for direct
conversion of kJ to kcal

phil s

Quoting Alex Simmons -
"By an interesting quirk - the typical gross efficiency of a cyclist is roughly 23-25%, which neatly cancels out the 4.184 joules per calorie, or 4.184 kJ per Calorie.
Hence if your power meter tells you the ride energy output was 1,000 kJ then you can, with reasonable accuracy, know that your total energy expenditure was 1,000 Calories."

Edwin

I think I read somewhere that 1kJ was equivalent to about 1.1 Calories - probably won't hurt most people to estimate it slightly under though. I can also do 800 - 900 kJ in an hour according to the powermeter, but that's pretty much flat out, for example an FTP test or a 2x20.
I wouldn't be able to do that intensity every day, so I'd probably say cut down the weights sessions and get some more miles in on the bike.

sampras38

amaferanga wrote:

Team Banana Spokesman wrote:

Volké wrote:

don't eat carbs after 8pm

explain?

I guess he's referring to the old wives tale: eat after 8 and put on weight

And it is just that...an old wives tale.

sampras38

Volké wrote:

Thanks for the responses.

I'll attempt to answer some of your questions below:

The protein is quite high because I want to maintain my upper body strength for other sports. I don't have a huge amount, but if I dropped muscle from my upper body as well as getting to 7% I'd be at my 'ideal climbing weight' - which isn't really ideal for any other sport besides marathon running.

For the 3 weights sessions my main lifts are deadlifts (lower back) and squats (quads and glutes) to help with cycling power. I also do benchpressing, shoulder pressing and pullups to maintain my upper body as it is rather than building it up, combined with some core work.

My food intake is 1750Kcal + cardio. So if I cycle for 2 hours I get another 1500Kcal, or run for an hour I get 900 extra. And considering that I do at least an hour of running or 1.5 hours of cycling a day - I get about 2750Kcal or more each day. That means I can get plenty of carbs (and fats) in there as well as protein.

However, the equation above indicated that I should be eating about 350 more each day. So I might try adding in those extra and seeing what happens.

That said, it doesn't take into account lean mass vs overall mass though. Surely someone who weighs 200lbs of mainly muscle burns more calories than 200lbs and heavily overweight? The equation above indicates that its the same for both.

For that reason, I've seen the same equation use 'lean mass' rather than 'weight' before, which is what I used to get 1750. The idea being that lean mass (organs and muscle) actively uses energy, whereas fat just makes your muscles work a bit harder to carry it round. Even an extra 25lbs of fat isn't going to make your body use much more energy if you're sedentary (which is what your RMR represents).

The reason I don't eat carbs after 8pm is actually so I get more sleep for recovery. I find that if I eat fruit, veg, bread, pasta etc in the 2-3 hours before bed then it takes me longer to get to sleep and I like to have a good rest so I can work and train properly the next day.

Also, I don't think 7% is an unattainable target. I'm in my 20s, I eat well, I've cut out alcohol at the moment, and I do a lot of exercise. It will be hard, without doubt, but its not like I've aimed for 4-5% (ProTour level).

I'll try eating 350Kcal/day more and see what happens.

Volké

You see, I don't buy this. You're barely getting what most would consider to be the right amount of calories to function (2000-2500) and you're training on top of that. 2750 calories per day for someone involved in exercise is not that much at all. I mean, I probably burn around 7-800 per hour, if that.

ut_och_cykla

sampras38 wrote:

Volké wrote:

Thanks for the responses.

I'll attempt to answer some of your questions below:

The protein is quite high because I want to maintain my upper body strength for other sports. I don't have a huge amount, but if I dropped muscle from my upper body as well as getting to 7% I'd be at my 'ideal climbing weight' - which isn't really ideal for any other sport besides marathon running.

For the 3 weights sessions my main lifts are deadlifts (lower back) and squats (quads and glutes) to help with cycling power. I also do benchpressing, shoulder pressing and pullups to maintain my upper body as it is rather than building it up, combined with some core work.

My food intake is 1750Kcal + cardio. So if I cycle for 2 hours I get another 1500Kcal, or run for an hour I get 900 extra. And considering that I do at least an hour of running or 1.5 hours of cycling a day - I get about 2750Kcal or more each day. That means I can get plenty of carbs (and fats) in there as well as protein.

However, the equation above indicated that I should be eating about 350 more each day. So I might try adding in those extra and seeing what happens.

That said, it doesn't take into account lean mass vs overall mass though. Surely someone who weighs 200lbs of mainly muscle burns more calories than 200lbs and heavily overweight? The equation above indicates that its the same for both.

For that reason, I've seen the same equation use 'lean mass' rather than 'weight' before, which is what I used to get 1750. The idea being that lean mass (organs and muscle) actively uses energy, whereas fat just makes your muscles work a bit harder to carry it round. Even an extra 25lbs of fat isn't going to make your body use much more energy if you're sedentary (which is what your RMR represents).

The reason I don't eat carbs after 8pm is actually so I get more sleep for recovery. I find that if I eat fruit, veg, bread, pasta etc in the 2-3 hours before bed then it takes me longer to get to sleep and I like to have a good rest so I can work and train properly the next day.

Also, I don't think 7% is an unattainable target. I'm in my 20s, I eat well, I've cut out alcohol at the moment, and I do a lot of exercise. It will be hard, without doubt, but its not like I've aimed for 4-5% (ProTour level).

I'll try eating 350Kcal/day more and see what happens.

Volké

You see, I don't buy this. You're barely getting what most would consider to be the right amount of calories to function (2000-2500) and you're training on top of that. 2750 calories per day for someone involved in exercise is not that much at all. I mean, I probably burn around 7-800 per hour, if that.

perhaps teh answer lies in that we're all different. Not only do I function on 2000 kcal a day I get fat on them if I dont exercise quite hard 5 -7 hours a week. I have a sedentary job but am active dog walking , gardening etc too. 2500 & no exercie would make ut & cykla a fat cow!

sampras38

ut_och_cykla wrote:

sampras38 wrote:

Volké wrote:

Thanks for the responses.

I'll attempt to answer some of your questions below:

The protein is quite high because I want to maintain my upper body strength for other sports. I don't have a huge amount, but if I dropped muscle from my upper body as well as getting to 7% I'd be at my 'ideal climbing weight' - which isn't really ideal for any other sport besides marathon running.

For the 3 weights sessions my main lifts are deadlifts (lower back) and squats (quads and glutes) to help with cycling power. I also do benchpressing, shoulder pressing and pullups to maintain my upper body as it is rather than building it up, combined with some core work.

My food intake is 1750Kcal + cardio. So if I cycle for 2 hours I get another 1500Kcal, or run for an hour I get 900 extra. And considering that I do at least an hour of running or 1.5 hours of cycling a day - I get about 2750Kcal or more each day. That means I can get plenty of carbs (and fats) in there as well as protein.

However, the equation above indicated that I should be eating about 350 more each day. So I might try adding in those extra and seeing what happens.

That said, it doesn't take into account lean mass vs overall mass though. Surely someone who weighs 200lbs of mainly muscle burns more calories than 200lbs and heavily overweight? The equation above indicates that its the same for both.

For that reason, I've seen the same equation use 'lean mass' rather than 'weight' before, which is what I used to get 1750. The idea being that lean mass (organs and muscle) actively uses energy, whereas fat just makes your muscles work a bit harder to carry it round. Even an extra 25lbs of fat isn't going to make your body use much more energy if you're sedentary (which is what your RMR represents).

The reason I don't eat carbs after 8pm is actually so I get more sleep for recovery. I find that if I eat fruit, veg, bread, pasta etc in the 2-3 hours before bed then it takes me longer to get to sleep and I like to have a good rest so I can work and train properly the next day.

Also, I don't think 7% is an unattainable target. I'm in my 20s, I eat well, I've cut out alcohol at the moment, and I do a lot of exercise. It will be hard, without doubt, but its not like I've aimed for 4-5% (ProTour level).

I'll try eating 350Kcal/day more and see what happens.

Volké

You see, I don't buy this. You're barely getting what most would consider to be the right amount of calories to function (2000-2500) and you're training on top of that. 2750 calories per day for someone involved in exercise is not that much at all. I mean, I probably burn around 7-800 per hour, if that.

perhaps teh answer lies in that we're all different. Not only do I function on 2000 kcal a day I get fat on them if I dont exercise quite hard 5 -7 hours a week. I have a sedentary job but am active dog walking , gardening etc too. 2500 & no exercie would make ut & cykla a fat cow!

With the greatest of respect, if you're putting on weight on 2000 calories a day including exercise, you're diet needs looking at. Prior to cycling I had over 10 years of pretty serious bodybuilding to teach me how the body uses food and I'm convinced something's not quite right.

phreak

I've had a similar thing lately. I've started to keep a diary of calorie input and output. I've worked on a BMR of 1509 (I'm 5'5" and 60kg). I have an office job so don't burn much more than that I shouldn't think, but have generally been eating between 2-3,000 calories per day depending on training.

I rode a 150km sportive on Sunday which skewed the figures a bit but over the past 10 days I'm -3,000 calories or so, yet I've put on a few lbs. As I say, the sportive skewed things a bit as it burnt around 4,000, but on a typical day I'm +/- 100kcals.

meanredspider

When I've got into debates on this stuff on other forums, the way in which you take in calories seems to get highlighted often - I have no idea how valid this is though. Eating little and often is what's recommended. It seems to make sense to me keeping blood sugar levels as balanced as possible.

I have a slightly different problem to the OP where I'm losing fat but gaining muscle and therefore keeping my body mass broadly the same. The only fat that seems to be stubbord is on my belly. That said, I've lost 2" on my waist so I'm 6' with a 32" waist at 45 but still weigh 94kg.

7% body fat seems incredibly low. A friend is an extremely fit fitness instructor and is at 11%. Getting to 7% I'd have thought would need careful supervision and probably professional guidance.

sampras38

meanredspider wrote:

When I've got into debates on this stuff on other forums, the way in which you take in calories seems to get highlighted often - I have no idea how valid this is though. Eating little and often is what's recommended. It seems to make sense to me keeping blood sugar levels as balanced as possible.

I have a slightly different problem to the OP where I'm losing fat but gaining muscle and therefore keeping my body mass broadly the same. The only fat that seems to be stubbord is on my belly. That said, I've lost 2" on my waist so I'm 6' with a 32" waist at 45 but still weigh 94kg.

7% body fat seems incredibly low. A friend is an extremely fit fitness instructor and is at 11%. Getting to 7% I'd have thought would need careful supervision and probably professional guidance.

7% is close to competitive bodybuilding levels and it really isn't advisable to to keep it that low for long.

volké

I thought I'd post back with an update on how I'm progressing. I re-worked the numbers and changed the amount of calories I was allocating to cardio - calculating after each session depending on average speed. So I'm now eating slightly less on some days and slightly more on others. Thanks to whoever posted the calculators, they have been very useful for this.

I've kept my protein intake high - it is needed to prevent your body turning catabolic (burning muscle as fuel) and for muscle repair after exercise. Also, I added in some carbs to my post-weights protein shake in the form of dextrose (sugar). This seems to have had a positive effect on my energy levels too. I no longer feel tired, and only really start to feel hungry towards late evening. Though its quite easily manageable, which is OK.

I haven't weighed myself yet - I only do that every 2 weeks minimum to avoid becoming pre-occupied with addressing what are actually minor, natural fluctuations in body weight. However, I think I have pushed past the plateau and do feel leaner. My abs are slightly more defined and veins slightly more pronounced (especially during exercise), as well as my waist being slightly smaller. They are only slight improvements, but I seem to get getting there. I also went for a quick ride up some hills and it felt slightly easier, though this could be psychological/wind etc.

With respect to 7% being too low - pro body builders are actually 3-4%, as well as manipulating their salt and water levels to look more defined - that's what actually makes it dangerous for them and impossible to maintain. Pro cyclists are typically 5%. I think Bradley Wiggins said he was at 4% for the Tour last year. The difference between reaching 7% and reaching 4% is immense - not just a case of carrying on burning fat as before. That's why I haven't set my target so low.

Though obviously your body fat percentage doesn't remain exactly constant, so it is possible to be 7-8% for several months with proper nutrition. Just make sure calories in = calories out and you'll stay the same.

Also, the PT at 11% might be on a clean bulk (building muscle with a slight calorie surplus of clean food) before cutting down for summer, or he might just be maintaining before a summer cut. Most good PTs are close to cover model standard, which is about 7% at a weight that would put them just about in the 'overweight' category of BMI.

EKIMIKE

Volké you seem to be able to counter everyone's suggestions with facts and example's.

How can anyone help you if you're such an expert? ( i'm not being sarcastic)

I don't know much about this sort of thing but 7% body fat seems awfully low as a constant target figure. Maybe as a peak for a section of a season but you haven't said anything about peaking for an event.

I'd recommend paying for a nutritionist services as it seems you've got everything sussed but you're still not achieving your target. Or maybe you need to re-evaluate your target? You say that reducing Body Fat Percentage from 7% to 4% is an immense effort yet you're looking to reduce yours by more? I know it gets harder as you get lower but you're still at the thin end of the wedge relatively speaking and you're wanting to lose 2% more.

volké

My problem has been sorted by paying closer attention to what I'm actually burning on cycling or running each day and accounting for variation in intensity between workouts, rather than just using a 'block' figure for each session. Paying closer attention to how many calories I'm actually using was suggested by some of the earlier posters - whose advice I am grateful for.

The reason I seem to know so much is that I have been at 8% before, so getting lean isn't something new to me. That's why I don't accept people saying that I can't get down to 7% - because I've been within 1% of it before. It seems perfectly reasonable to me to disregard comments that tell me I can't do something when I know for a fact that I can. And meaning no disrespect to them, because they took the time to read and reply to my post, and are probably great people, and are probably better cyclists than me; but maybe they just don't want to believe it can be done because it means they could achieve it too if they were willing to put in the effort. Now I know that might sound confrontational, but I'm honestly not looking for an argument. I just don't think its right that people should ever tell me what I can't do. I don't think that's unreasonable and I hope you understand that.

Now when I've leaned down before, it was achieved through a hard weights routine, a strict high protein/low carb diet/1700-17500Kcal diet and no cardio. It was all about the diet to lose fat and the weight routine to maintain/build muscle. So that's a tried and tested formula for me.

However, now that I have an interest in cycling, and also running, I'm trying to increase my fitness at the same time. That adds a new dimension to training that I'm not used to; so I just needed a little guidance on why I seemed to have plateaued. It seems strange, but burning fat by doing cardio isn't something I'm used to; so I hadn't quite got my diet dialled in properly to match my training. Thankfully I seem to have it sorted now, and it was quite a simple fix - my calculations were just a bit out initially. But by paying closer attention to exactly how much exercise I'm doing has me progressing again.

If it seemed like I'm not taking advice about eating protein and keeping a weights routine its because I know how my body responds if I don't do those - it gets weaker, loses muscle mass, and leads to an increase in body fat percentage. I might be lighter, but I'm 'softer' and weaker - both in my legs and my upper body. And as much as I want to improve my cycling, I also don't want to get weaker, because that will limit me in other sports.

Also, I never said it was a year round figure. I typically hold about 11% through summer (though as I said, I was once lower) and go to 15-16% in the winter.

I hope this clarifies things, and I'm sorry if I've offended anyone with this reply, that wasn't my intention.

Volké

Paul E

What's the "normal" range for body fat percentage then?

EKIMIKE

Apologies if my post sounded confrontational Volké.

It just seems really bizarre how you seem to have all this stuff sussed/ covering all the bases but you're still not getting to your target. The fact you've already been down to 8% makes it even more confusing. I wasn't questioning you - more why the well thought out methods weren't doing it for you.

Like you've said it's maybe not about your diet but your excercise methods (in combination with your diet of course).

Anyway man, I hope you get to your target. Sounds like you're working hard at it. Congrats if you have done.

Mike

volké

Paul E wrote:

What's the "normal" range for body fat percentage then?

I don't really know. There's sites that say its 15-18%, but I don't know whether they're right or not. I'm pretty sure it depends on what kind of average you take, and where your sample is from etc. I think 15-18 may refer to the average 'healthy' male, but whether it's actually the average of the population I don't know - I would guess its actually higher. I only know what I consider to be normal for me.

EKIMIKE wrote:

Apologies if my post sounded confrontational Volké.

It just seems really bizarre how you seem to have all this stuff sussed/ covering all the bases but you're still not getting to your target. The fact you've already been down to 8% makes it even more confusing. I wasn't questioning you - more why the well thought out methods weren't doing it for you.

Mike

Don't worry about it. It did seem odd, but it seems I wasn't paying enough attention to the varying intensity of my cardio and accounting for it in my diet.

Volké

emerywd

"Also, I don't think 7% is an unattainable target. I'm in my 20s, I eat well, I've cut out alcohol at the moment, and I do a lot of exercise. It will be hard, without doubt, but its not like I've aimed for 4-5% (ProTour level). "


I'm no expert on this subject, but I do know that Pro's do not stay at 4 or 5% for any length of time. Check out what Wiggins did last year.
http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/articl ... -way-23825

I think I remember an interview with the man himself, suggesting he was at anout 7% just for the the tour only. Any longer and he'd be vunerable to illness and injury due to a weak immune system.

I can't help feeling your goals are mixed up. You need a long term healthy fat %, which will allow you to taper down for specific events whilst training hard the rest of the time. If you want to lose weight outside of short term events, you will need to lose muscle mass.

Wiggins made no secret that he lost muscle mass and managed to maintain almost all of his power. He also made a concerted effort to lose upper body muscle mass, gained from track training and not needed on the road.

You're trying to achieve something he spent 9 months training for, supported by the worlds best nutritionists and trainers (team gb and allen lim/garmin), for 3 weeks of the year only.

You're being unrealistic if you think you can stay at 4 or 5% on a long term basis and stay healthy. Unless your name is Ramussen ;-)

cirlam

With regards to 7%, I'm currently 6.8-6.9% (measured during a recent research experiment, so fairly accurate!), and have no problems with immune system, and whilst I am skinnier than most, I am still looking to lose weight to about 5% (hey i've got big goals!). I've been to see a nutritionist and have a coach etc, and the main thing with losing weight is...........forget calorie counting.

100 calories of chocolate and 100 calories of lets say brocolli will do very different things to your body. Sugars cause an insulin spike causing your body to go into storage mode. by eating low GI foods, you get rid of this insulin spike and your body won't go into storage mode.

You want to be eating most (if not all) of your carbs around the times you are training, and directly after training, make sure you eat HIGH gi foods, so your body does go into storage mode and replenishes the fuel burnt in your muscles, aid recovery and give you the energy to last the rest of the day. However try not to eat any fat at this time, otherwise that will go straight on your waste line, as your body is in storage mode.

The idea behind not eating carbs after 8 is actually pretty sound, if you really want to lose weight then with your evening meal, cut out the carbs completely (well you can have some - plenty of veg is fine, but potatoes and starchy veg, bananas are not!) - its not easy but it does work. Also avoid "low fat" branded foods, as more often than not, they replace the fat with sugar. Fat doesn't cause the insulin spike, and is highly filling, so DON'T avoid it - eat good fats such as those found in nuts, seeds, olive oil, as they have unsaturated fats that actually help your body metabolise the fat you already have.

By eating a substantialy less amount of energy that you need, you are making your body go into survival mode and metabolism will be crawling along, so when you eat more, as you are low on energy, it goes straight into storage.
Eat plenty of the right foods at the right time and you will lose weight - the key is not to make your body go into storage mode by starving it, or eating foods that cause an insulin spike.

Finally, eat often - I eat 7 times a day, little and often keeps your hunger at bay so you don't binge in one sitting, and the constant eating keeps your energy levels and metabolism speeding along.

Pokerface

I'm currently at 30% body fat. But most of it is in my head.