Personal Log to losing weight

As a mid 30s man he's not at risk of losing bone density and if he's eating over 100g a day if good quality protein with regular weight training and cardio I don't believe he will lose muscle - he'll put it on if anything.

He's talking about 1500-2000 kcals here, not 750.
 
I am thinking of long term as once I'm at my target weight, I intend to continue to eat less calories than I was when putting on weight. Adjusting to suit once closer to my target.


Is there proof a body adjusts to what calories I give it? surely if a body adjusts down with less, it should counter adjust up if you feed it more.

If my body "adapts to 1600cals" then this BMR calcuation is not the same for all individuals, as each person calculation would/could vary due to eating factors. I was told in this thread earlier than it remains the same for all same height and weights etc pretty much, now your saying that isn't the case...

I'm confused.

Plenty of research out there:
ajcn.nutrition.org/content/57/2/127.short

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/ccp/62/1/165/
In this paper at week 27 the severe calorie reduction had lost much more weight (21.45 and 11.86 kg), but by week 52 had regained a lot despite sticking to the same maintenance calories and ended up having less weight loss than the moderate reduction (10.94 and 12.18 kg)

The most important things is looking at long term differences. In trial after trial, subject on a severe calorie restriction do loose a lot of weight short term but will quickly put it back on, even with a controlled diet. Moreover, a moderate calorie deficit is much more manageable in the long term.

If the calories restriction is large then there are reduction in your TDEE as you become more lethargic. People starving in Africa from famine survive a long time on minimal calories because they spend most of their time asleep/half comatose. The end result is you may not see the weight loss at the rate you would expect given the deficit. The risk is even larger if you have low carb macros.

As long as you feel great and are exercising then a large calorie reduction may well see you loose a lot of weight but you might not or you might feel terrible a long the way, and you you main be more inclined to regain a lot of the weight down the road.

BMR wont vary much, TDEE can.



From your own table a 2200 calorie diet would still get you to your goal weight and is more liekly to be adhered to for years to come with lower risks of weight gain. Moreover, you could start at 2500 and still loose weight

http://ajpregu.physiology.org/content/269/1/R222.short

These findings support the hypothesis that the ANS (autonomic nervous system) acts to oppose weight change.
 
doesn't realy support what your saying though,hes not any where close to 420Kcals a day, it also doesn't go into how the calories where measured for the weeks etc, doesn't sound like they where actively involved seeing as it talks about binge eating being reduced in both groups, realy wouldnt be surprising i those who were restricted to 420Kcal eat far more than the 1200Kcal maintenance phase,
If you read enough papers you'll find 99% of health papers are pure junk due to gaping errors in their method.

like the whole red meat is bad last year, despite another bigger better research paper showing it to be absolutely fine, turned out the first paper didnt actively seprate red meat and processed meat, where the second paper did. mmm may have gone off topic on that short rant.
 
Last edited:
I am thinking of long term as once I'm at my target weight, I intend to continue to eat less calories than I was when putting on weight. Adjusting to suit once closer to my target.


Is there proof a body adjusts to what calories I give it? surely if a body adjusts down with less, it should counter adjust up if you feed it more.

If my body "adapts to 1600cals" then this BMR calcuation is not the same for all individuals, as each person calculation would/could vary due to eating factors. I was told in this thread earlier than it remains the same for all same height and weights etc pretty much, now your saying that isn't the case...

I'm confused.

Just aim to lose 0.5-1% of your bodyweight a week. If this happens with x calories then x calories are what's needed. There will be a little metabolic downregulation with dieting but it's not massive. If you've got some time read this.
 
Just aim to lose 0.5-1% of your bodyweight a week. If this happens with x calories then x calories are what's needed. There will be a little metabolic downregulation with dieting but it's not massive. If you've got some time read this.

Well I was 248lb. In the first week I lost 2lb... that is 1% aprox. So that is on track!
 
I'll be interested to see how this goes for you to be honest, I'm only 10ish lbs lighter than you although a fair bit shorter and I couldn't comfortably exist on the sort of kcals you're aiming for for very long even when not training.
 
This may sound rather crude but my big old belly has been fairly solid to the touch. Today I noticed it is far less dense the fat must is dispersing now.

My concern will be excess skin - I have been a 40" waist for around 3-4 years now, I aim to be a 34" eventually. That means flappy skin to sort out! I expect if I lose the wieght I want I can expect to lose maybe 10" to 12" around the belly.
 
Last edited:
I cut weight on 1700 cals, it was tough, great job so far though. Have plenty of water and it will minimise the excess skin. What helped me was once a week having a treat such as a pizza or some ice cream, I went hard in the gym 5 times a week though so I could probably get away with it a bit more.
 
My concern will be excess skin - I have been a 40" waist for around 3-4 years now, I aim to be a 34" eventually. That means flappy skin to sort out! I expect if I lose the wieght I want I can expect to lose maybe 10" to 12" around the belly.

I'd just gone from 38 to 40 when I had enough, went down to a 34 over 12 months and had no problems with skin. You're a young chap and aren't that huge - it's surprising how elastic skin is.
 
This may sound rather crude but my big old belly has been fairly solid to the touch. Today I noticed it is far less dense the fat must is dispersing now.

My concern will be excess skin - I have been a 40" waist for around 3-4 years now, I aim to be a 34" eventually. That means flappy skin to sort out! I expect if I lose the wieght I want I can expect to lose maybe 10" to 12" around the belly.

Another reason to go with a more moderate calorie reduction and a steadier weight loss.
 
Another reason to go with a more moderate calorie reduction and a steadier weight loss.

2lb loss in 1 week... how much slower should i go?

I'd just gone from 38 to 40 when I had enough, went down to a 34 over 12 months and had no problems with skin. You're a young chap and aren't that huge - it's surprising how elastic skin is.

stop coming onto me Dave. :) (I will have to call you Helen)
 
TBH, it is your life, i don't give a ***. Plenty of people, including a nutrition expert, have given you advice.

Lol, 2lbs is perfectly fine, and your comment descridts you even more, if its water weight then he's losing even less than 2lbs a week.
Hat an odd comment which yet again disproves your own statement, much like the last one.
 
Lol, 2lbs is perfectly fine, and your comment descridts you even more, if its water weight then he's losing even less than 2lbs a week.
Hat an odd comment which yet again disproves your own statement, much like the last one.

I never commented on the 2lb loss, quite the oposite since i stated that its too early being only week 1.

nothing i have said is disproven if you understand English.
 
Classic forum comeback, deny you ever said what you said and question others ability to read.

Hang on, this is what trump does too, we're all doomed :eek:
 
Back
Top Bottom