Becoming deliberately less bulky in middle age.
Discussion
Louis Balfour said:
It really isn't. There is more to it. As I said previously, I think it is a sort of hysteresis.
But you can call me a unicorn if you want. If I can call you Dorothy.
:-) Honestly, I’ve read thousands of pages and listened to probably hundreds of hours of high quality content on this stuff. Metabolic differences are very small. You will lose weight fast if you reduce your daily intake by 200-500 calories. But you can call me a unicorn if you want. If I can call you Dorothy.
ORD said:
Louis Balfour said:
It really isn't. There is more to it. As I said previously, I think it is a sort of hysteresis.
But you can call me a unicorn if you want. If I can call you Dorothy.
:-) Honestly, I’ve read thousands of pages and listened to probably hundreds of hours of high quality content on this stuff. Metabolic differences are very small. You will lose weight fast if you reduce your daily intake by 200-500 calories. But you can call me a unicorn if you want. If I can call you Dorothy.
But in all seriousness, cals in vs cals out is important. Of course it is.
But there are other factors, diet history and gut function to name but two. I also as I said up there ^ I think there are certain weights / sizes at which a person's body "settles" and I am increasingly of the opinion that may be influenced by training history.
Louis Balfour said:
ORD said:
People’s metabolisms vary by only a small amount. And exercise burns surprisingly few calories. People differ hugely in how much high calorie food they eat.
Drop the junk food and you’ll likely lose weight.
I don't eat junk food. The closest I come to it is a Chinese meal very occasionally from a quality takeaway and I usually stick to the meat and vegetable dishes. No sugar, cakes, sweets, processed food (outside a rasher of bacon on Saturday).Drop the junk food and you’ll likely lose weight.
But anyway, the main thrust of my post has been lost. I don't have a problem with losing fat. The problem is that my body seems to consider 14 stone my "natural" weight. If I exercise a lot, which keeps me stay fit and strong, that is where I end up. No doubt as I age and my test drops that will change somewhat. But I'd rather it was a controlled process.
I may bin the weights entirely for a bit and stick with various forms of cardio. I row a lot, so I probably don't NEED the weights.
Burrow01 said:
Louis Balfour said:
ORD said:
People’s metabolisms vary by only a small amount. And exercise burns surprisingly few calories. People differ hugely in how much high calorie food they eat.
Drop the junk food and you’ll likely lose weight.
I don't eat junk food. The closest I come to it is a Chinese meal very occasionally from a quality takeaway and I usually stick to the meat and vegetable dishes. No sugar, cakes, sweets, processed food (outside a rasher of bacon on Saturday).Drop the junk food and you’ll likely lose weight.
But anyway, the main thrust of my post has been lost. I don't have a problem with losing fat. The problem is that my body seems to consider 14 stone my "natural" weight. If I exercise a lot, which keeps me stay fit and strong, that is where I end up. No doubt as I age and my test drops that will change somewhat. But I'd rather it was a controlled process.
I may bin the weights entirely for a bit and stick with various forms of cardio. I row a lot, so I probably don't NEED the weights.
Burrow01 said:
Louis Balfour said:
ORD said:
People’s metabolisms vary by only a small amount. And exercise burns surprisingly few calories. People differ hugely in how much high calorie food they eat.
Drop the junk food and you’ll likely lose weight.
I don't eat junk food. The closest I come to it is a Chinese meal very occasionally from a quality takeaway and I usually stick to the meat and vegetable dishes. No sugar, cakes, sweets, processed food (outside a rasher of bacon on Saturday).Drop the junk food and you’ll likely lose weight.
But anyway, the main thrust of my post has been lost. I don't have a problem with losing fat. The problem is that my body seems to consider 14 stone my "natural" weight. If I exercise a lot, which keeps me stay fit and strong, that is where I end up. No doubt as I age and my test drops that will change somewhat. But I'd rather it was a controlled process.
I may bin the weights entirely for a bit and stick with various forms of cardio. I row a lot, so I probably don't NEED the weights.
Boosted LS1 said:
Agreed. People who struggle for food never get fat. The 3rd world is proof of this as are parts of the UK. It's hardly rocket science and we don't need fancy diets. Eat less, you'll lose weight. How hard can that be to understand?
AgreeI love eating. Really f
king love it.I've tried all sorts since my late 30s (I'm 51 now) and by far the easiest stick to is the 5/2 with the odd extra week of general abstinence.
I just go to bed early on the days I don't eat much to stop me mowing through the fridge.
Same here. I absolutely love food. Not junk. But good quality, tasty food. I’ve almost never felt ‘full’ in the last decade. I think that’s what you have to accept. If you love food and don’t want to be fat, either move a huge amount or accept that you’ll have to feel tempted to eat and resist it every day.
It’s actually not that hard. But it is constant.
It’s actually not that hard. But it is constant.
ORD said:
Same here. I absolutely love food. Not junk. But good quality, tasty food. I’ve almost never felt ‘full’ in the last decade. I think that’s what you have to accept. If you love food and don’t want to be fat, either move a huge amount or accept that you’ll have to feel tempted to eat and resist it every day.
It’s actually not that hard. But it is constant.
You say that, but when I have been at my leanest I have been far less bothered about food. The fatter the hungrier, generally.It’s actually not that hard. But it is constant.
Louis Balfour said:
gregs656 said:
Louis Balfour said:
This is of course quite true. It can be difficult to reduce food intake when not training.
It is unlikely your training enough to make a difference to your average calorie requirement.Boosted LS1 said:
ORD said:
Stopping lifting will just make you fat. You could lift 5 times a week and lose 2kg per week. Ask any bodybuilder!
Correct, that's why they look obese when they stop training.OP isn’t wrong that there is a degree of metabolic set point thats determined by history-to-date, but imo may be overstating the relative effect of that.
gregs656 said:
Louis Balfour said:
gregs656 said:
Louis Balfour said:
This is of course quite true. It can be difficult to reduce food intake when not training.
It is unlikely your training enough to make a difference to your average calorie requirement.I think it is true to say that the body is quite efficient at preserving energy as it becomes fitter. Which is another reason to change up the exercise you're doing, to provide new challenges. It is possible burn "useful" numbers of calories. I think success is 80% diet however.
mcelliott said:
Giving my own experience, this time last year I was 215ib at 5 7' carrying a lot muscle and pretty lean too, since then I have lost around 28lb simply by reducing calorie intake and upping my cardio, the weight came off without any effort, nearly 50 by the way.
Why did you decide to lose the mass?ORD said:
Same here. I absolutely love food. Not junk. But good quality, tasty food. I’ve almost never felt ‘full’ in the last decade. I think that’s what you have to accept. If you love food and don’t want to be fat, either move a huge amount or accept that you’ll have to feel tempted to eat and resist it every day.
It’s actually not that hard. But it is constant.
I'm not expert but beans and pulses can fill you up without making you fat. Quality dense meals can be very satisfying. Junk food leaves you hungry and after more junk.It’s actually not that hard. But it is constant.
Louis Balfour said:
If I recall correctly it wasn't referenced.
I think it is true to say that the body is quite efficient at preserving energy as it becomes fitter. Which is another reason to change up the exercise you're doing, to provide new challenges. It is possible burn "useful" numbers of calories. I think success is 80% diet however.
Herman Pontzer is a good place to start - I think it is true to say that the body is quite efficient at preserving energy as it becomes fitter. Which is another reason to change up the exercise you're doing, to provide new challenges. It is possible burn "useful" numbers of calories. I think success is 80% diet however.
https://exss.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/779/...
Based on the figures he speculates that we evolved to be active, and use periods of inactivity to take care of (relatively) calorie intense background functions. So modern day inactive people have all this stuff going on all the time, which might explain why being inactive is so bad for your health - this stuff wasn't meant to be happening 24/7.
AFAIK this kind of study hasn't been done on top flight athletes, but none of us are olympians.
Louis Balfour said:
Why did you decide to lose the mass?
Because I didn't feel that comfortable at that weight and although I was eating clean the sheer amount I was consuming to keep that weight was taking a toll on my digestive system, feeling way better now light on my feet a generally a lot healthier.Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff