Why am I putting on weight - Help
Discussion
I always used to eat when I felt hungry, and put weight on as a result. As others have said, use My Fitness Pal to monitor your calories and when you feel hungry, eat something super light like cucumber, or just get used to feeling hungry. It is possible, and I managed to lose more than 3 stone this way.
Terminator X said:
Even 13.5st is probably too much at 5'10"? I'm 6ft and 12.5st and fairly sure I should be at least half a stone less! Apologies if you are a weight lifter of course which seems to be the standard response to height vs weight queries 
TX.
TX.
I covered this in my response. There's two things at work here:a) The OP is probably eating too much. This is a hunch - we need the OP to do the maths to get the answer to this really. His calorie intake sounds pretty huge though. Solution: Do the maths and yes, MyFitnessPal is excellent. It can be easier just to look up your typical diet and write it down - choose your method. I've used both in the past and have learnt a lot.
b) The OP is eating an astonishing amount of protein and lifting heavy weights with low reps - i.e. a bodybuilding programme. Just to do the maths quickly here off the top of my head, 3-6 eggs a day and 3 chicken breasts is between 130 and 170 grammes a day of protein on just those items alone, before we take into account protein from other sources. He's probably taking in over 200g a day of protein. Someone of normal weight for his height would be recommended to eat 56g a day and an athlete double that, so 112. From memory, I eat about 85g a day and I have a similar workout routine to the OP. He's probably double the athlete figure again plus some more!
Even accounting for his present weight he's eating way too much protein. There are of course health risks to eating this much protein - it's really not good for you. Cholestorol on his diet would also be very excessive. I briefly showed the OP's diet to my wife last night (doctor with a keen interest in sports) and her eyes widened just a little to put it mildly!I doubt his diet is the main cause. His food intake looks pretty good to me, and as he said he has been eating similar to this for years - I think the problem is elsewhere.
What else has changed? are there extra stresses in the OP's life? is he on medication? is he sleeping well? has the intensity of some of his workouts dropped off? how is his digestive health? Look at everything and then maybe change a couple of things at a time. I would add one or two more weights session to start with and break up the big 3 lifts to different days.
Age is a funny thing, you think everything is going great and then you wake up one Sunday morning, look in the mirror and a change seems to have happened overnight. I noticed 3 big changes where my physique suddenly slipped: one at 42, another at 47 and again at 50. Re-evaluate, adjust and crack on.
What else has changed? are there extra stresses in the OP's life? is he on medication? is he sleeping well? has the intensity of some of his workouts dropped off? how is his digestive health? Look at everything and then maybe change a couple of things at a time. I would add one or two more weights session to start with and break up the big 3 lifts to different days.
Age is a funny thing, you think everything is going great and then you wake up one Sunday morning, look in the mirror and a change seems to have happened overnight. I noticed 3 big changes where my physique suddenly slipped: one at 42, another at 47 and again at 50. Re-evaluate, adjust and crack on.
OP's first post could have been written by me, including the diet/protein levels.
My suspicion is that in fact OP is massively under eating, not over eating at all. A quick run of the figures on OP's first post and I'm coming out at around 1100kcal for 60g bran flakes/100ml milk, 3 x skinless chicken breast (325g), 100g brown rice with 3 eggs, assuming of course that my measurements are there or there abouts.
So with a BMR of around 1800, eating 1100kcal, OP should be losing weight shouldn't he according to the calories in/calories burned experts?
My suspicion is that in fact OP is massively under eating, not over eating at all. A quick run of the figures on OP's first post and I'm coming out at around 1100kcal for 60g bran flakes/100ml milk, 3 x skinless chicken breast (325g), 100g brown rice with 3 eggs, assuming of course that my measurements are there or there abouts.
So with a BMR of around 1800, eating 1100kcal, OP should be losing weight shouldn't he according to the calories in/calories burned experts?
Thanks for all the input
Just to clarify, I don't eat 6 eggs every day. I usually do have three eggs for dinner during the week but not at weekends. The chicken breasts, yeah it sounds like a lot and I suppose it is in terms of protein amounts. In terms of volume though it doesn't seem remarkably excessive to me, particularly as I have absolutely nothing else on the plate. I suppose my problem is that I am not used to knowing what a normal amount of food is anymore. Always eaten a lot and maybe it's beginning to catch up on me
Someone nailed it above - the point of concern is the reason for sudden weight gain when my intake of food hasn't changed at all. In fact i would say that I probably eat less now than i have in the past (marginally). So must it therefore be something to do with my change in regime - from cycling for 6-7 hrs a week, and nothing else, to suddenly stepping away from the bike, doing different types of cardio at differing intensities and introducing quite heavy weights. But here's the thing - the weight came on quickly over the course of a month or so, between September and October last year. That was before I even started lifting. When I did start lifting at the back end of October then I did it 3 days a week initially, and split the sessions between legs, chest and arms but saw that my weight had peaked at nearly 100 kg by Christmas and cut it back to once a week in the new year in an effort to stop bulking up too much.
I will certainly cut back on the protein. It's obviously too much. But I'm struggling to find foods that are easy to prepare, economical enough to buy in quantity, that I can eat enough of to make me feel full, which taste nice, and which don't send me to sleep in my office an hour after ingestion.
Cheers all.
Just to clarify, I don't eat 6 eggs every day. I usually do have three eggs for dinner during the week but not at weekends. The chicken breasts, yeah it sounds like a lot and I suppose it is in terms of protein amounts. In terms of volume though it doesn't seem remarkably excessive to me, particularly as I have absolutely nothing else on the plate. I suppose my problem is that I am not used to knowing what a normal amount of food is anymore. Always eaten a lot and maybe it's beginning to catch up on me
Someone nailed it above - the point of concern is the reason for sudden weight gain when my intake of food hasn't changed at all. In fact i would say that I probably eat less now than i have in the past (marginally). So must it therefore be something to do with my change in regime - from cycling for 6-7 hrs a week, and nothing else, to suddenly stepping away from the bike, doing different types of cardio at differing intensities and introducing quite heavy weights. But here's the thing - the weight came on quickly over the course of a month or so, between September and October last year. That was before I even started lifting. When I did start lifting at the back end of October then I did it 3 days a week initially, and split the sessions between legs, chest and arms but saw that my weight had peaked at nearly 100 kg by Christmas and cut it back to once a week in the new year in an effort to stop bulking up too much.
I will certainly cut back on the protein. It's obviously too much. But I'm struggling to find foods that are easy to prepare, economical enough to buy in quantity, that I can eat enough of to make me feel full, which taste nice, and which don't send me to sleep in my office an hour after ingestion.
Cheers all.
I guess consumption is relative in that a fat kid today probably thinks the amount they consume is alright.
It's interesting I'll grant you because whilst I'm know next to nothing about nutrition and diets I do struggle a little thinking that anyone could consider three chicken breasts for lunch normal.
All I mean by that is that if you go anywhere that sells food, be it McDonalds, Greggs, M&S, wherever, you don't generally see people buying two packs of sandwiches or two Big Macs, I would suspect that if people have an evening meal and there are two of them they probably have a chicken breast, singular.
Sorry, can't get over what sounds to me like a pretty basic "You're eating too much".
It's interesting I'll grant you because whilst I'm know next to nothing about nutrition and diets I do struggle a little thinking that anyone could consider three chicken breasts for lunch normal.
All I mean by that is that if you go anywhere that sells food, be it McDonalds, Greggs, M&S, wherever, you don't generally see people buying two packs of sandwiches or two Big Macs, I would suspect that if people have an evening meal and there are two of them they probably have a chicken breast, singular.
Sorry, can't get over what sounds to me like a pretty basic "You're eating too much".
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: I guess consumption is relative in that a fat kid today probably thinks the amount they consume is alright.
It's interesting I'll grant you because whilst I'm know next to nothing about nutrition and diets I do struggle a little thinking that anyone could consider three chicken breasts for lunch normal.
All I mean by that is that if you go anywhere that sells food, be it McDonalds, Greggs, M&S, wherever, you don't generally see people buying two packs of sandwiches or two Big Macs, I would suspect that if people have an evening meal and there are two of them they probably have a chicken breast, singular.
Sorry, can't get over what sounds to me like a pretty basic "You're eating too much".
Sure. But that person's chicken breast singular will probably be slathered in a calorific sauce of some sort, and there will be other calorific elements on that plateIt's interesting I'll grant you because whilst I'm know next to nothing about nutrition and diets I do struggle a little thinking that anyone could consider three chicken breasts for lunch normal.
All I mean by that is that if you go anywhere that sells food, be it McDonalds, Greggs, M&S, wherever, you don't generally see people buying two packs of sandwiches or two Big Macs, I would suspect that if people have an evening meal and there are two of them they probably have a chicken breast, singular.
Sorry, can't get over what sounds to me like a pretty basic "You're eating too much".
My lunch is just chicken. Nothing else. Even if each chicken breast is a generous 300 cals (I think that's more than generally quoted) then that is 900 cals total for lunch. Sounds within the bounds of normality to me if exercise is taken into account?
Edited by Joey Ramone on Saturday 6th February 19:37
Edited by Joey Ramone on Saturday 6th February 19:38
johnwilliams77 said:
Granfondo said:
Alcohol?
"Alcohol: Past couple of months I've been having one large measure of spirits of an evening. No beer/cider at all."
ben5575 said:
Skinless chicken breast is 110kcal/100g. 2xchicken breasts is 250g so 3 x = 375g = 412kcal
About the same as a 'normal' m&s sandwhich. Big Mac is 563kcal
That says more about junk food than it does the chicken breast! Our normal dinners here at RobM77 Towers barely fit on a large dinner plate and leave us both utterly stuffed, but they're way less than a Big Mac in calorific terms. The difference is that we take fresh veg, rice and a bit of meat or fish and cook it - sounds simple (it is!), but it's a world apart from your average McDonalds or even a shop bought sandwich, most of which are stuffed full of 'empty' calories - things you barely notice but which are horrifically bad for you.About the same as a 'normal' m&s sandwhich. Big Mac is 563kcal
The OP actually sounds like he's eating pretty healthy, normal, fresh and natural food - just a bit too much of it and with way too much bias towards protein. That coupled with those macho weights sessions is a ticket to weighing 15 stone (and there's nout wrong with weighing that if you're into eating three eggs in a session and doing Arnie style workouts). If he ate and did what an F1 driver does then he'd be sub 70kg like an F1 driver of his height, and if he ate and did what Mo Farah did then he'd be 60kg - you are quite simply the product of what you eat and the lifestyle and workouts you choose. It's the OP's food and exercise choices that have made him 15 stone - there's nothing mystical or even wrong about that, it's quite innocent science and maths and would quickly change with a diet and exercise shift.
Dunno. When I was 17 all I did was cycle everywhere, eat the same amount as any normal teenager, play loads of rugby, and never touched weights once, and I weighed in at about 13.5 stone. And I know I ate the same as everyone else because I was at boarding school and my diet was decided for me. I therefore had no control over how much was on my plate, or how many meals I ate.
Again, my query is not 'why do I not weigh 11 stone?' or 'why do I not have the physique of a Formula 1 driver?' That much is obvious. My query was simply why, if my diet HAS NOT CHANGED from that which I have consumed for many years, my weight should suddenly rise by over a stone in a few weeks. That's the bit that is puzzling me. And it came on so quickly, I simply can't attribute it to doing weights, no matter how heavy or not they are.
Again, my query is not 'why do I not weigh 11 stone?' or 'why do I not have the physique of a Formula 1 driver?' That much is obvious. My query was simply why, if my diet HAS NOT CHANGED from that which I have consumed for many years, my weight should suddenly rise by over a stone in a few weeks. That's the bit that is puzzling me. And it came on so quickly, I simply can't attribute it to doing weights, no matter how heavy or not they are.
Edited by Joey Ramone on Sunday 7th February 09:21
Edited by Joey Ramone on Sunday 7th February 09:22
As I said earlier, that's simply the metabolism slowing as you get older. When I was 20 I ate about 50-100% more per day than I do now at age 38. It's normal to have to back off the eating a bit as you get older to keep a stable weight. You may also find other subtle changes in lifestyle take place.
As I keep saying, do the maths on your calorie intake and outside balance. Combine that with weighing yourself at a repeatable time of day - eg after you pee first thing in the morning. Doing both will give you a feeling for how the two relate.
As I keep saying, do the maths on your calorie intake and outside balance. Combine that with weighing yourself at a repeatable time of day - eg after you pee first thing in the morning. Doing both will give you a feeling for how the two relate.
RobM77 said:
You may also find other subtle changes in lifestyle take place.
This is probably more important than we think.As we get older we tend to generally sit down far more. Think about your younger days. You probably went clubbing 3 times a week for 6 hours at a time, stood up all evening in bars, went for kick abouts in the park with your mates during day on the weekend.
20 years later, you spend the evening in watching Emmerdale (or whatever s
t is on TV; I don't have a TV) or reading a book, while the kids are playing in the other room.Saturday afternoon is spent sitting in a pub or restaurant eating off a plank of wood, then you have head over to Costa and sit for another hour after paying £5 hot adult high calorie coffee-flavoured milkshake. Then you go home and watch X Factor. The only time you get up is to get another packet of biscuits from the kitchen.
As a senior manager, you probably spend all day sitting in a meeting or at your desk, probably drinking that adult milkshake I mentioned just now.
The massive drop in movement and an increase in calorie intake takes its toll even if the metabolism only dips very slightly as we age.
While we can't control what we do at work ie if we're at a desk, you can't really go for a jog up and down some stairs every 45 minutes. Nobody really takes a break from their desk. But what you do after hours is up to you.
Joey Ramone said:
Again, my query is not 'why do I not weigh 11 stone?' or 'why do I not have the physique of a Formula 1 driver?' That much is obvious. My query was simply why, if my diet HAS NOT CHANGED from that which I have consumed for many years, my weight should suddenly rise by over a stone in a few weeks. That's the bit that is puzzling me. And it came on so quickly, I simply can't attribute it to doing weights, no matter how heavy or not they are.
Unless there are factors such as illness/injury you have not disclosed the simple fact is you are older, and burn less calories. So you need to eat less or you'll put on weight.IT IS THIS SIMPLE
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff