1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

pfm Health Club

Discussion in 'off topic' started by Whaleblue, Sep 6, 2018.

  1. Whaleblue

    Whaleblue Southbound

    As a matter of interest, and a bit of an eye opener, I did some calculations earlier. It started when my daughter commented that I didn’t seem to eat an unusually large amount of food (that is, over the last few years, as my weight has just gone crazy).

    The calculator was fired up, and a basic fact looked up; 1lb of body weight is gained from “over-consuming” 3500kcal.

    Over five years, how many kcals does one then need to have over eaten per day to gain, say, 3 stone?

    80.

    That’s three quarters of a small packet of crisps per day.
     
  2. Colin L

    Colin L pfm Member

    Timely thread as my days as a fat bastard need to end.

    12 years ago I was in the gym 6 days a week. 6’ 2” and 90kg, strong and fit. After two back ops and a knee op I weigh 110kg, and my feet and ankles hurt so I can only cycle for exercise.

    I plan to do the 5-2, fasting Monday and Thursday, and cut down the other days. I eat too much and sometimes out of routine, not need. I’m also a nibbles monster so that needs to end as well.
     
    Whaleblue likes this.
  3. Whaleblue

    Whaleblue Southbound

    Sorry Bob - missed your post.

    In “old money” 140.8kg equals “bloody fat bastard”.
     
    webster likes this.
  4. crimsondonkey

    crimsondonkey pfm Member

    My recommendation is always the same, don’t ‘diet’ but instead find a choice of food and activity that maintains you at the weight you’re comfortable with.

    Our body composition is driven 90% by how much and what we eat. Get that at the right equilibrium and you have a sustainable diet for the rest of your life.

    I’m personally a big fan of exercise but for other benefits rather than weight loss. But I’ll keep saying it, you can’t out train a bad diet, so your results will be dictated largely in the kitchen and in the supermarket.

    I’m not a calorie counter but having some idea of what you actually need to maintain your desired weight is helpful, especially when modern work and lifestyles are so sedentary (this is where activity helps but I won’t digress at this point). The average male intake of 2400 cals per day is pretty useless imo, it needs to take into account your frame and build, and start from how many cals to keep you ticking over, and how many on top to fuel your activity. There are calculators for this online. Everyone underestimates how many cals they consume so a week or two of logging will soon calibrate your expectations.

    Two basics that I always recommend - taper your calories, the classic breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince, dinner like a pauper (inside your daily calorie target!).

    Secondly - basic portion control. Buy smaller plates, it works. Even if you improve the composition of your diet and reduce sugar and alcohol %, we all are conditioned by visually checking the size of our meals (and underestimating as above).

    Two final tips - don’t crash your calories too fast - slowly bring your intake down, mentally and physically this is more sustainable. Your stomach will shrink gradually and your brain will adjust hunger/ appetite signals accordingly.

    The number one best exercise in the world bar none, with the greatest benefits? Walking. It’s low impact, great for gently resetting your spine and hips, mentally refreshing, and most importantly it’s much better than sitting for your posture. It won’t burn tons of calories but you can do it frequently and so the impact over time cumulatively is not to be underestimated.

    But back to the core message, although I’m a big fan of exercise, 90% of your weight loss journey is going to be gradually finding the diet that sustainably maintains you at your target weight.

    Good luck to WB and to others on similar paths.
     
    Whaleblue and webster like this.
  5. Marky-Mark

    Marky-Mark pfm Member

    I'm going to politely disagree for a couple of reasons. The first would be the psychological effects of increasing your fitness level often compels an adjustment of diet in order to increase your fitness lev ... it's a vicious (but beneficial) cycle because you look and feel better. In tandem, there is an exponentially improved self body image, giving you that elusive tangible reason for the lifestyle change that diets do not.

    The second is that only exercise will increase lean body mass which, as we know, increases metabolism and calories burned both during and after exercise. Once you drop a couple of clothes sizes and realize you feel better, think better and simply get on better, you come to conclude that the exercise has every bit as much to do with the process as does the diet.
     
    MikeMA and lordsummit like this.
  6. Paul R

    Paul R pfm Member

    Unfortunately (or in fact fortunately) I think it's more subtle than that. If it were that simple then everybody would end up huge, or emaciated. In practice most people (and certainly when kept away from modern processed foods) maintain weight over a reasonable range without calorie counting and activity monitoring.

    The equilibrium position of your body is to hold onto its weight for a rainy day, so simply reducing intake will make you lethargic and sleepy rather than smaller. The combination of 5:2 and some exercise should move the equilibrium. The 5:2 encourages fat burning, the exercise builds some muscle and demands some energy from the body's reserves. Because you are still eating normally whatever hormone that expects imminent famine should be supressed.

    IMV, without any expert basis of course.
     
  7. Whaleblue

    Whaleblue Southbound

    Sure, in practice it is doubtless rather complex, but my point stands that a small imbalance is all it takes, over time, to make a big difference.
     
  8. The Far North

    The Far North pfm Member

    Toning shouldn't be underestimated as losing weight will result in some skin areas getting a bit looser. Increasing age generally means less elastic skin to tighten up after weight loss, so try to build some kind of toning exercises in as you lose.
     
  9. ks.234

    ks.234 pfm Member

    Only just caught up with this thread.

    My plan is to exercise more to lose weight, nothing serious, just lots of dog walking.

    Presently 17st 6lbs and 6' 2"

    Here's the little fat buster

    [​IMG]
     
    gassor, MikeMA, hifilover1979 and 2 others like this.
  10. Whaleblue

    Whaleblue Southbound

    How does one tone around the really fat bit? Sit-ups I suppose?
     
  11. crimsondonkey

    crimsondonkey pfm Member

    In a word - no.

    People store fat in specific places, belly, chest, love handles, legs and butt etc. Most (but not all) of the evidence points away from specific spot reduction. Firming up your core will help overall and is worthwhile, but you really cannot sit up your way to a slimmer waist by exercise alone. Also crunches and other core based exercises are deemed as better than sit ups.

    Good beginner guide-
    https://breakingmuscle.com/fitness/5-fundamental-core-and-abdominal-exercises-for-beginners

    Bit more advanced -
    https://www.mensjournal.com/health-fitness/10-best-abs-exercises-beginners/

    You do get people who are skinny fat but I don't want to digress away from the simple basic messages of calorie balance and increasing activity in the right proportions, particularly for beginners who can overcomplicate shit just through early enthusiasm.

    Also, don't forget to include alcohol calories if you drink - they can undo any half decent diet and rapidly throw away all your exercise effort/ benefit. I drink, but I have cut down and employ lots of tactics for not letting one glass of wine turn into a bottle - which is a whopping 600-700 cals, largely sugar!
     
    MikeMA, hifilover1979 and Whaleblue like this.
  12. crimsondonkey

    crimsondonkey pfm Member

    Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) calculator -
    https://www.myfitnesspal.com/tools/bmr-calculator

    You might be surprised how few calories are needed just to exist in a rested state. Then think about how many calories are genuinely required to fuel your daily activity.

    I find this helpful to change mindsets for people on how much they really need to eat, and on the other hand, how few calories are required for inactive, sedentary lifestyles.
     
  13. Paul R

    Paul R pfm Member

    I predict that if you were to cut a daily packet of crisps from your diet for 5 years you wouldn't lose 3 stone.

    A normal human in a normal human environment, so not us nor how we live, will maintain a normal body weight over time on a very erratic diet. So, IMO, the key to weight loss is to get back in touch with the not so long ago. 5:2, less sugar and more activity all seem to fit that idiom.

    Good luck.
     
  14. stevec67

    stevec67 pfm Member

    also that if you added a bag of crisps a day, and only that, you wouldn't gain 3 stone either.
     
  15. crimsondonkey

    crimsondonkey pfm Member

    Other variables including the variation in energy expenditure and calorie intake day to day would outweigh the impact of the crisps in real life.

    All things remaining equal, if removing the crisps created a daily calorie deficit then yes it would be reasonable to expect the equivalent weight loss.

    Emphasis on the ‘if’.
     
  16. Whaleblue

    Whaleblue Southbound

    You are all right.

    You’d simply hit an equilibrium when your weight gain caused you to use an extra 80kcal a day, doing the same activities as you’d done before the increase.

    So, to keep gaining weight one would need to overconsume ever more as the weight went up.

    Of course this all reinforces the fact that losing weight is easier the heavier you are, so my weight loss will, as we all know, slow over time. I’m just hoping that I find an equilibrium where I can buy trousers in vaguely sensible sizes!
     
  17. stevec67

    stevec67 pfm Member

    I reckon you'll get to where you want to be wb. Not overnight, but 3/4 of the way in 6 months, most of the rest in the 6 months after that, then an uneasy truce where you would like to be a bit thinner and fitter but you're happy with where you are, give or take, as long as it doesn't get worse. Job done, and you won't need trousers in a 44 any more.
     
    Whaleblue likes this.
  18. farfromthesun

    farfromthesun pfm Member

    I am about 16 stone, put on an absolute tonne after stopping smoking. Various attempts to lose weight (three or even four stone would be great) start well and then fall apart. It's a bit predictable and very frustrating. I cycle around 6 miles per day (to the station and back), the return journey is a vicious uphill. I try and get in a couple of longer rides at the weekend. I stand all day at work (office job but with a height adjustable desk). I have next to no fat on my legs or backside, it's mostly on my torso. I expect if I lost the three or four stone my neck would end up a bit smaller too.

    I am currently just trying to consume less food and beer, try and make it through the week "being good" (cereals, light pasta or soup lunch with a roll and smaller dinner, no beers) and then weekend try not to worry about it too much. I have found that I fall off the wagon eventually if I try and go totally hard, cold turkey. I need to try and find the balance, but it's taking me quite some time to do so! I have time on my side; I am 40 - but I really need to get a handle on it now or I worry it will never happen.
     
  19. crimsondonkey

    crimsondonkey pfm Member

    Don’t beat yourself up, it’s only too common to try and then feel this way.

    That’s why I always talk about sustainable diets which you can live with for the rest of your life. Crashing calories down always has an equal and opposite reaction. You feel miserable and hungry, deprived, and so your CNS then sabotages you and tips you mentally and emotionally over the edge and into the arms of excess and the fleeting moment of reward/ euphoria.

    You only need a small but consistent calorie deficit to put the body into a metabolic state where it will start using stored fat as fuel. 100-150 cals per day is all you need. If try to go 3000 down to 1000 cals per day for eg, that is a recipe for failure!

    The good news is that you’re active, which is really positive. I think your next steps are to understand the calorie target for the 12-13 st you, and then plan to stagger gently towards it over time and rebalance your diet composition to help you. Carbs aren’t the enemy, sugar is so try to limit that harder, but maintain a healthy proportion of carbs - say 30% of cals to make sure you’re not feeling flat and to fuel your cycling. Higher protein eg 40%, more fibre, and healthy fats - ie nuts, avacado etc.

    You should be looking for 1-2 lbs dropping per week. But don’t get obsessed with the scales, pay more attention to the inputs and the outputs will take care of themselves.
     
    farfromthesun likes this.
  20. Whaleblue

    Whaleblue Southbound

    @farfromthesun, look into the 5:2 “diet”. It sounds as though it may suit you.

    All my previous attempts to lose weight were unsuccessful, either immediately or eventually, as being on a regime 100% of the time was just not doable, for me. I’m something of a black and white thinker, so having two days where I have to watch what I’m eating very carefully, and 5 where I can largely forget about it suits.
     
    farfromthesun likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice