Weight Loss Thread

Any point in which your body is putting in effort to prompt a change. Obviously, you don't run until you pass out. But, if it's easy, nothing changes (same is true for a lot of things, like emotional growth too). Overweight people need to prioritize cardio. Yes, lifting weights will definitely help. But, cardio helps more. Boring. Tedious. Yes and yes. Punishing? Only if you're doing it wrong. Makes you hungrier? Uh...OK. That's new.

Not sure why people are suggesting to not prioritize cardio for losing weight, just because it's not as easy or fun. This shit usually isn't, which is why millions upon millions of people don't do it, or half-ass it a lie to themselves.

If this thread is about helping each other, don't short-change anyone by saying "oh you don't have to work hard with cardio, just lift". In most cases, that's not going to help them.

I see what you did there. If I disagree that you say I'm a contrarian, I'm proving your point. But if I agree, it means I'm concurring with your assessment that I am a contrarian. NOT FALLING FOR IT!

An elliptical is technically better than walking from an impact/joint standpoint, so hey, no complaints there~ Though spending some time lifting (especially given the relative "size" of lindz exercising time blocks) would probably have a better return on time/energy spent.

I just know that even sedentary smaller people have 25% higher BMRs than lindz is reporting for caloric consumption, without factoring in almost 5 hours a week of low-impact exercise at all. No idea the relative intensity levels of lindz' exercises, but I would hazard that it's an extra 500 +/- over the week of calories burned off the totals. Even if she, as a mostly sedentary person of normal weight (135 is most definitely not overweight for a 5'7 female hah, unless somehow all your fat is concentrated in your stomach or something) had some metabolic adaptation going on, it wouldn't be to the point where she is capable of not feeling hungry consuming 25% (closer to 35% with exercise added in) under the basic energy requirements to simply stay alive and awake for someone her size.

The hormonal imbalance primarily occurs if someone lost a lot of weight and then started normalizing their diet at a faster rate than they lost it. The one study I see says that obese middle aged women tend to have a more efficient system yet tend not to compensate appropriately after dropping 15% of their bodymass, so they regain weight quickly. It could be a thing, but if lindz went up 10lbs and is trying to drop (either weight is still nowhere near obese) those off, that wouldn't be the cause for any perceived plateaus. Admittedly though I'm nobody's doctor, so there could be a rather large backlog of special case information that neither I nor even lindz are aware of that might alter this speculation.

Either way I don't believe in cold fusion.

Rezz_sl said:

Listened to him again; I'm going to say that these girls who are dieting at 1000 (he says 800 at one point) and working out for 2 hours a day? Are either lying about their calories over the course of a week or not really aware of what they are eating, regardless of how "damaged" their metabolic rate is. Then he starts talking at 1600 calories and I go "OK, this is probably right!" But the 1000/800 calorie girls not losing weight? They are not accurately reporting their calories/outright fabricating their intake.

I mean it is probably an issue with people who have weight that fluctuates between normal and low body fat%, but if you are legitimately consuming 1000 calories a day and not a sloth? Something is wrong about the numbers being reported.

Edit - Probably came out a little harsh~ I feel like the most likely situation in lindz (and literally every one of those people who report they can't lose weight on 1000 calories + cardio every day) is very similar to Brahmas. It is not understanding the amount of food/calories you are actually consuming on the daily over periods of time. If you only consume 1000 calories in a day and spend 20 minutes a day doing -any- light exercise? If you are above 3 feet tall and 80lbs, you should feel fatigued as shit all the time, ketosis or not, as well as feeling incredibly/debilitatingly hungry. Like, to the point where you have issues doing daily activities. So odds are, you aren't consuming just 1000 calories, and you should spend some time accurately cataloging what you eat each day and try to more accurately calculate your daily caloric intake based upon that catalog. It makes it a lot easier to give meaningful advice.

If you -are- legitimately consuming 1000 calories a day along with even light activity and unable to lose weight? I would recommend seeing a health professional that specializes in dietary nutrition, because you are an incredible outlier that standard science has issues explaining, regardless of what a personal trainer might say.

Click to expand...

Here's my take on it. All these women making these claims probably don't count drinks (especially alcohol) as calories.

lindz_sl said:

I'm one of those chicks doing 1000 calories, so when you guys are talking 1k calories for a single meal it seems bonkers! Tho I only workout for 45 min a day. 20 cardio and 20-30 with resistance bands. Zero fluctuation on weight in a month and it's driving me crazy. Clearly I need to switch shit up to get over this plateau and be ok with the positive chages to my body I'm seeing, but still I want results on the damn scale too!

Click to expand...

you're not eating enough.

You need to eat more in order to lose weight.

You need calories to fuel your exercise.

Right now you are over training and under eating.

4 x 20 mins HIIT.

Fat+Protein+veg every meal except for protein+veg+carbs post workout.

1600 calories

Ossoi_sl said:

you're not eating enough.

You need to eat more in order to lose weight.

Click to expand...

Never change Ossoi...

never change helping people in this thread who come here and post how terrible their current regime is?

Ok, I won't

Dandai_sl said:

Maybe I'm alone in this philosophy, but I think your body composition is 80% what you eat, 15% your activity/lifestyle, and 5% genetics. You can be skinny and never do a second of cardio. You don't *have* to do cardio to lose weight if you're overweight. If you want to lose weightfaster, of course cardio will help. But as was pointed out earlier, cardio WILL make you hungrier (I'm not sure why this is a new thing to you).

This thread is definitely about helping each other, which is why I strongly advocate not telling the new people that if they're not uncomfortable they're not doing it right. If you tell people that they must accept a high level of discomfort if they want to lose weight, can you really blame them for not being that motivated to start or stick with it?

Click to expand...

You're correct your body weight is highly depended on diet. If you want to lose weight, you would have to go on a caloric deficit with or without physical activity. As for cardio making your hungrier, that's just simply because it's burning more calories. This is where eating 5-6 times will help some people. If you're eating all day long, constantly replenishing your calories (assuming you're still counting calories), you won't binge eat after doing cardio. It's simply discipline, and you need to find ways around it. I personally don't have time problem. Also everyone is different, as I feel the need to binge eat more after doing heavy lifting.

You're also overlooking something very important about cardio. Aside from burning more calories, working out your cardiovascular system can help raise activity level immensely. A stronger heart can allow the person do higher intensity workouts. And as some others already pointed out, you can't just run at a certain level and stay there. You'll plateau so quickly and never see any improvements. It's like me squatting at 115 forever. My quads will never get stronger. You need to change it up for cardio to be successful. For example, instead of running for 30 minutes at 5 miles per hour every single time, run 15-20 minutes at 6-7 miles per hour every other time. As it gets easier, raise the speed by 10% each time. Afterwards, you can add sprinting into the mix. Interval training is also very effective in raising activity level. Saying cardio is bad mmmmkay is just a bad generalization.

Ossoi_sl said:

you're not eating enough.

You need to eat more in order to lose weight.

You need calories to fuel your exercise.

Right now you are over training and under eating.

4 x 20 mins HIIT.

Fat+Protein+veg every meal except for protein+veg+carbs post workout.

1600 calories

Click to expand...

You missed the part where she admitted she doesnt actually know how many calories shes eating.

Khane_sl said:

Here's my take on it. All these women making these claims probably don't count drinks (especially alcohol) as calories.

Click to expand...

This right here. You had 2 sangrias tonight? That's 500+ calories right there.

Warmuth_sl said:

You missed the part where she admitted she doesnt actually know how many calories shes eating.

Click to expand...

irrelevant, she shouldn't be aiming for 1000 calories whilst doing 4.5 hours of exercise a week

Can we please, please, please not even entertain the idea that "starvation mode" and needing to eat more in order to lose weight is actually a thing.

Khane_sl said:

Can we please, please, please not even entertain the idea that "starvation mode" and needing to eat more in order to lose weight is actually a thing.

Click to expand...

I haven't mentioned that once.

Ossoi_sl said:

you're not eating enough.

You need to eat more in order to lose weight.

Click to expand...

Oh?

Look, if we agree that she is actually eating 1000 calories per day and doing 45 minutes of exercise 6 days per week and somehow still not losing weight, would you not also agree that a different approach is called for?

I -might- believe that it could be a thing with professionals who are constantly fluctuating on weight around a show schedule. But for non-pros (and why the shit would any pro be asking advice here of all places?) it's simply not a thing. Nobody on this forum is doing that type of competition (that I know of) and even guys like Itlan who are doing weird cutting/bulking cycles when they aren't competing aren't suffering from any sort of mal-adaptive response to being on subjectively low caloric diets. It might be possible, though highly unlikely, that someone we as a community interact with might have some weird metabolic adaptation shit going on that makes it slightly more difficult for them to lose weight. But the pure and simple science is that it takes so much energy to physically move the human body in day to day activities, regardless of activity level. Everyone, regardless of their metabolism, is beholden to that. Consuming less fuel than the body needs to literally keep itself alive (caveat: hibernating bears use less energy than fully active bears. Nobody on this forum is hibernating) means you are burning stores of energy in sugars/fats/proteins in the body itself, in that order (even in ketosis!).

It's literally bro-science without the common sense aspect. I'll agree with some common sense bro-science, but this is most definitely not that.

edit - Chaos: If those numbers are correct and her response is not-hungry yet not losing weight? She is an extreme outlier when it comes to how the body handles calories in and energy usage on the daily. Like, borderline superhuman. Nobody on this forum is even remotely qualified to give someone that far outside the spectrum any realistic advice. If those numbers are legitimate, she needs to see a real professional.

I would agree. I'm just saying, given the data we have is true, it isn't so wild to suggest just totally upending her routine and seeing what happens.

Ossoi_sl said:

irrelevant, she shouldn't be aiming for 1000 calories whilst doing 4.5 hours of exercise a week

Click to expand...

Completely relevant, she can aim for 500 or 5000 calories and it wont matter if she doesnt know how much shes consuming