Running/Cycling/Good diet but not much weight loss....

kirkster

kirkster

kirkster

Associate
Joined
14 May 2007
Posts
843
Location
London
Been a serious runner and cyclist in the past. Best 10k was 38 minutes. Natural physique is to be quite a strong and muscular sort and quite lean and can bench 80kg. I am 52, youthful with it. 17st8lb. Waist has gone out to 38" and started to snore last year my GF says. Need to sort this sh$$ out and lose 3 or 4 stone and get down to 32 - 34" again.

I cut out alcohol entirely since New Year's day for dry January. No snacking, no crisps, chocolate, no junk at all. Hard core 100%. Eating sensibly. Drinking lots of water. Diet really is sensible. No eating after 6PM other than some plain popcorn from my machine to snack on.

I have done 5 runs so far amounting to about 20 miles across 5 days. Additionally on Sunday I biked 30 miles. I hope to get back to my previous 60 milers with ease when it gets lighter.

Legs look a bit more muscular and I am sure I have come down a belt notch. Scales hardly moved though.... WTF! Why? No wonder people give up. Wonder if I am putting muscle on so weight is coming off but muscle gain outweighs it (literally!).

Whaddayreckon? Loads of people must have this issue?
 
If you're getting more defined and your belt is coming in then who cares what the scales say.

Although I also agree with the other guys it's been a week, it takes time.
 
kirkster said:
Been a serious runner and cyclist in the past. Best 10k was 38 minutes. Natural physique is to be quite a strong and muscular sort and quite lean and can bench 80kg. I am 52, youthful with it. 17st8lb. Waist has gone out to 38" and started to snore last year my GF says. Need to sort this sh$$ out and lose 3 or 4 stone and get down to 32 - 34" again.

I cut out alcohol entirely since New Year's day for dry January. No snacking, no crisps, chocolate, no junk at all. Hard core 100%. Eating sensibly. Drinking lots of water. Diet really is sensible. No eating after 6PM other than some plain popcorn from my machine to snack on.

I have done 5 runs so far amounting to about 20 miles across 5 days. Additionally on Sunday I biked 30 miles. I hope to get back to my previous 60 milers with ease when it gets lighter.

Legs look a bit more muscular and I am sure I have come down a belt notch. Scales hardly moved though.... WTF! Why? No wonder people give up. Wonder if I am putting muscle on so weight is coming off but muscle gain outweighs it (literally!).

Whaddayreckon? Loads of people must have this issue?
Click to expand...

Results are "unlikely" after a week, but even if it is a "thing" there is also your body's adaptation to exercise: it will be storing more glycogen and therefore more water (and - therefore - more weight). Then there is also the little issue of "healthy" diet vs "calorific deficit" diet: you might be eating salad with lean protein, etc. of even completely vegan/whatever, but if you're eating too much then you still won't lose weight.

And go by what you see: if you look and feel better, then who cares how much you weigh?
 
I started running back in August and have clocked up around 318km since then. How much weight have I lost? Well I was 83Kg and am now 82Kg. I didn't run to lose weight but expected more to come off to be honest.

All weight loss is done in the kitchen.
 
Thanks guys for your input.
The reason for my question is that in the last tear or so when I have made half-hearted attempts to "cut down" I have lost quite a few pounds in the first week or so. 10lb at least. And I was still drinking beer and diet not as good as I am on now. At the moment I am 100% on it, diet and exercise in good order, and i was expecting the weight to come off like before. But it hasn't...
 
kirkster said:
Thanks guys for your input.
The reason for my question is that in the last tear or so when I have made half-hearted attempts to "cut down" I have lost quite a few pounds in the first week or so. 10lb at least. And I was still drinking beer and diet not as good as I am on now. At the moment I am 100% on it, diet and exercise in good order, and i was expecting the weight to come off like before. But it hasn't...
Click to expand...

Of all the variables associated with weight loss, you may have mentioned something here... Weight loss is mostly about calorie deficit: eating a healthy diet to excess is a great way to gain weight, whereas eating a crap diet in deficit is a bad (but effective) way to lose weight.

So previously, you may have lost weight even if your body was getting poisoned (or whatever)... this time your body is functioning well, but may well have too much stuff to play with.

Either way, stick at it (not "100% on it" because this implies it is possible to be "off it," too) and if something isn't working cut down the calories.
 
kirkster said:
Thanks guys for your input.
The reason for my question is that in the last tear or so when I have made half-hearted attempts to "cut down" I have lost quite a few pounds in the first week or so. 10lb at least. And I was still drinking beer and diet not as good as I am on now. At the moment I am 100% on it, diet and exercise in good order, and i was expecting the weight to come off like before. But it hasn't...
Click to expand...



If you cut calories heavily and loose weight quickly you will find you have probably just lost water weight as your body empties its glycogen stores.

This time you maybe be doing something different, e.g. the exercise, which is promoting glycogen replenishment.
 
I'm on my 3rd bootcamp since last August and started at 102kg bymid December i had lost 9kg and that was with a lot of gym and bootcamp classes. Ive dropped 4" off waist but i still have a gut. I feel so much fitter though.

Crazy how quick you gain back though. 3rd bootcamp started last Tuesday and is gained 1.9kg since mid December. It was xmas after all.

So back on calorie deficit and gym 3 times a week plus the bootcamp.
 
Thanks for all the tips guys. Yeah, point taken about water weight loss before etc. I just need to keep at it.

Did a 10k last night in 58min 34s which I was well chuffed at with me being 17st 7lb. It is a bit hard on my joints though at that weight and I'm hobbling a bit this morning. Will just do upper body weights later.

My immediate goal is 14stone 6 lb (200lb) which is a 3st or 42lb weight loss goal and hopefully 34" waist. By end of April.
 
A few years ago I watched a documentary about Gary Barlow - the Take That dude. He has a history of weight gain and loss. He said that now he is older, he simply has to accept that food portions have be much smaller and he and to eat less if he is to remain slim.

I also read somewhere that the human body (all primates to be exact) is remarkably efficient and that we actually do no need that much food to survive on. Had that not been the case, and we needed thousands of calories every day like we can so easily get now, we would have died out on the plains of Africa millions of years ago. It's actually a GOOD thing from a life science aspect that we don't need that much food. However, for people who have put weight on (c'est moi), it is not so good.......
 
Don't do too much running too quickly or you'll really regret it!

I started running last year to train for triathlons. I'm very fit anyway, but never ran. After going out and doing numerous 10ks each week, my knees very quickly said nope! It takes time for your joints etc to get used to it, even if you are fit already and can run the distance comfortably.
 
Shadowness said:
Don't do too much running too quickly or you'll really regret it!

I started running last year to train for triathlons. I'm very fit anyway, but never ran. After going out and doing numerous 10ks each week, my knees very quickly said nope! It takes time for your joints etc to get used to it, even if you are fit already and can run the distance comfortably.
Click to expand...
Yep, agreed - very aware of that. No more running now until Saturday or Sunday and even then it'll be 2 or 3 miles.
 
kirkster said:
Thanks for all the tips guys. Yeah, point taken about water weight loss before etc. I just need to keep at it.

Did a 10k last night in 58min 34s which I was well chuffed at with me being 17st 7lb. It is a bit hard on my joints though at that weight and I'm hobbling a bit this morning. Will just do upper body weights later.

My immediate goal is 14stone 6 lb (200lb) which is a 3st or 42lb weight loss goal and hopefully 34" waist. By end of April.
Click to expand...


As you start back running, especially at your weight, it is import to gradually increase running load over many months as alluded to above. But It is also very important to properly pace your runs. Running for the most part should be at an easy pace. Ignore times for 10km etc., just go out at an easy pace where you can talk easily. As an added benefit, you will burn far more caloires if you did say a slower 12km than a hard 10km effort.
 
D.P. said:
As an added benefit, you will burn far more caloires if you did say a slower 12km than a hard 10km effort.
Click to expand...

Well yeh because it will late much longer! :p

But seriously, I'm trying to run a lot slower lately. I was guilty of going out and running mostly at my half marathon pace. Now I'm slowing right down, and even trying to do a bit of this 80/20 philosophy.
 
kirkster said:
A few years ago I watched a documentary about Gary Barlow - the Take That dude. He has a history of weight gain and loss. He said that now he is older, he simply has to accept that food portions have be much smaller and he and to eat less if he is to remain slim.

I also read somewhere that the human body (all primates to be exact) is remarkably efficient and that we actually do no need that much food to survive on. Had that not been the case, and we needed thousands of calories every day like we can so easily get now, we would have died out on the plains of Africa millions of years ago. It's actually a GOOD thing from a life science aspect that we don't need that much food. However, for people who have put weight on (c'est moi), it is not so good.......
Click to expand...

We're very efficient at extracting and using calories efficiently. Human's metabolic rates don't vary that much (assuming no disorders like a messed up thyroid or PCOS), a lot of it comes down to the other stuff that makes up the 'calories out' part of the equation, and that tends to decrease as we get older and activity levels drop. The 'calories in' part is made that much harder in the modern developed world because we have virtually unlimited access to food, much of which is often calorie dense and highly palatable and doesn't trigger our satiety response the same way whole foods do. People tend to change their diet significantly when dieting which encourages the yo-yo effect and there's also the whole false dichotomy of foods being 'good' or 'bad' which ends up inadvertently creating restriction/binge circles and disordered eating.

Don't have to track all this, of course, but it still counts:

Copy-of-energy-balance-equation.png


Protein + carb (4 calories a gram), fat (9 calories a gram). There's also alcohol which is sort of a sugar (but is 7 calories a gram).

TEF = thermic effect of food; digesting food uses up energy, with the different macronutrients on the left taking more/less energy to metabolise than one another (protein is the most 'expensive' to digest). The smallest contributor.

Physical activity = or EE/exercise activity, calories burnt during deliberate exercise. Usually not that much unless you do a lot of endurance stuff or are a professional athlete of some capacity.

NEAT = non-exercise activity thermogensis, which is all the energy you use for things like walking the dog, gardening, taking the stairs vs the lift, fidgeting and so on. This particular component of calories out can vary MASSIVELY among people in two ways. One is daily activity; two identical people in all ways except vocation will have a large disparity between energy needs if one works a standing manual job, and the other is office chair bound). Two is response to both calorie deficits and surpluses; some people will compensate hugely either way (moving less without realising to compensate for a deficit and vice versa for a surplus) and some won't (meaning they tend to lose weight quicker and gain it faster).

Resting Metabolic Rate = the number of calories that your body burns while it's at rest, i.e your 'coma calories' required to maintain weight while totally sedentary. Often used interchangeably with BMR, although they're slightly different.
Click to expand...
 
After breaking my hip last year I put on 2st in 3 months, the downside of doing it over Christmas....all that cake & chocolate sat there begging to be eaten :D

It took me 5 months to shift it, thats someone who has been a keen cyclist for 10+ years.
I did the same, dropped beer for 2 months, ate a strict 1400cal per day diet, high protein low carb.

That, along with getting active again soon shifted it & I'm actually 6lbs lighter now than my pre accident weight.

GIve it some time & you'll soon see a change.
 
kirkster said:
I also read somewhere that the human body (all primates to be exact) is remarkably efficient and that we actually do no need that much food to survive on. Had that not been the case, and we needed thousands of calories every day like we can so easily get now, we would have died out on the plains of Africa millions of years ago.
Click to expand...

And the corollary is that we are naturally drawn to sweet and fatty foods as it was rare and so if you saw it you needed to eat it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom