3000 miles in 10 months... so Why am I still fat?



"GaryG" <garyg@shasta_SPAMBEGONE_software.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Doug Cook" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > The story thus far....
> >
> > 12 years ago - single, 6'3", 180lbs., hair, and competing in citizens
> class
> > triathlons.
> >
> > Fast forward to last July... Married, two kids, mortgage, no hair,
> > sedentary, 279lbs.
> >
> > Sick of that fat man in the mirror, I bought some XXL cycling clothes,
> > dusted off and tuned up my old Trek, and started riding again. Now 10
> > months and close to 3000 miles later... I still weigh 274! I mean...
come
> > on! 3000 miles for 5 pounds?!
> >
> > My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to struggle on 10
mile
> > rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday rides of 15-30 miles each and one
> > weekend ride for 50-70 miles - all solo. My computer puts my average
> speed
> > for these rides between 16-18mph depending upon the particular ups&downs
> of
> > the ride. My HRM says my average rate is usually right about 75% of max
> > (although that can vary, usually on the high side, when the ride has
> > climbing). I feel lean and mean while I ride, but when I get home I
> wonder
> > who that fat guy in the mirror is!
> >
> > I don't diet per se, but I do eat sensibly. The days that I've tracked
my
> > caloric intake it's usually right between 2500 - 3000. One friend who
is
> a
> > "wellness" expert suggests I'm not eating *ENOUGH*. Although she
readily
> > admits she doesn't specialize in athletes ("slovenly couch potato" is
how
> > she describes her typical client), she says that with my activity level
my
> > BMR is 5300... as she explained it that's the number of calories needed
to
> > just maintain my weight! Therefore she thinks my body thinks it's being
> > starved and refuses to let go of the fat. She thinks by eating MORE the
> > body will move away from this starvation reflex and start shedding
pounds.
> > She also suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE
breakfast
> > so the body has to switch to fat because the glycogen stores will be low
> > (sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).
> >
> > Well, I tried to eat 4000 calories today and about died! I felt
horrible,
> > stuffed, tired, etc. I tried riding with just water (no sport drink),
and
> > found myself craving sugar after the ride.
> >
> > Any experts lurking out there that would like to comment? Are there any
> > coaching services online that could help customize my training to help
me
> > lose weight? I can't afford to hire a coach.
> >
> > Any thoughts would be appreciated.
> >
>
> First, congratulations on not being a couch potato! Being physically
active
> is an important component in health, and weight loss.
>
> But, as others have noted, you need to focus on the food (intake) side of
> the weight loss equation. It seems clear that you are consuming too much
> (which is easy to do when you ride a lot).
>
> Your current Body Mass Index is 34.2, which puts you well into the "Obese"
> category. To get your weight down, you need to aim for a long-term, slow
> weight loss of around 1 lb per week. To achieve this, you need a calorie
> deficit of 500 calories per day. I recommend that you focus on reducing
> sweets, sodas, snacks and portion sizes. Even a relatively small
reduction,
> if maintained over time, will result in significant weight loss.
>
> <plug warning=on>
> The trick here is knowing when you are on track, because your weight can
> fluctuate by 2-4 pounds per day and counting calories is difficult and
> time-consuming. I've recently released a weight management program called
> "WeightWare" (www.WeightWare.com) that you may find useful. By weighing
> yourself daily, and using the built-in analytical tools in the program,
> you'll have a much better idea of whether or not you are on track. You
can
> download a free, fully functional version from the website and try it for
45
> days to see if it meets your needs.
> <plug warning=off>
>
> Best of luck, and keep cycling!
>
> ~_-*
> ...G/ \G
> http://www.CycliStats.com - Software for Cyclists
> http://www.WeightWare.com - Your Weight and Health Diary
>

What a shameless plug!! :) Perhaps I could be one of your case studies?
Send me a non-expiring version, and then use my story!
 
On Wed, 19 May 2004 10:41:59 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Rick Onanian wrote:
>:: He's a healthy guy who has fun exercising.
>
>A fit guy who has fun exercising. Health != fit.

I think he's probably healthy too. He didn't say he feels bad...just
that he looks bad.

>:: I'm younger and smaller than you, and I can barely survive a 3000
>:: calorie day. I'm a bit abnormal for that, I guess.
>
>Most people don't need any where near 3000 kcals per day.

Well, by "survive" I meant "not commit suicide". I'm absolutely
miserable below 3000 calories in a given day.

>::: She also suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE
>::: breakfast so the body has to switch to fat because the glycogen
>::: stores will be low (sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).
>::
>:: Try it, if you can, and figure out how far you can go before
>:: bonking. Do only that much, then gradually raise it up. This will
>:: certainly get your body running well for the rest of your day, too.
>
>More nonsense. I follow a low-carb diet...that means I'm always low on
>glycogen. Yet, I always ride in the morning with only some coffee in me.
>Unless he is pushing his limits and actually exercising anaerobically, he
>won't bonk out.

So you're saying he won't bonk. How does that make nonsense of my
suggestion to ride as much as possible?

If bonking can only happen when riding anaerobically, does that mean
that by riding slowly, anybody could ride thousands of consecutive
miles with only water, without getting to a point of feeling
energy-less?

>:: 1. CaloriesIn < CaloriesOut == NetLoss. This must happen in time,
>:: even given the 'starvation-mode' reaction of saving fat. Try really
>:: counting calories in and out for a week and see what you get; 10
>:: months of insufficient calories should lose more than 4 pounds.
>
>Which means it was not 10 months of insufficient calories.

That wasn't obvious in what I said?

>:: 2. Health != weight. You're probably pretty damned healthy from all
>:: that riding, regardless of your weight.
>
>Health!=fit!= weight.
>
>He's fit (bicycle fit) for sure. I can't comment on his health since
>there's not my info here on that.

Agreed, but I suspect that all the riding has resulted in health,
especially since he didn't say he had any health problems.

>:: those 40 pounds back. I am at my optimum weight, books and charts
>:: and doctors be damned.
>
>True, to an extent. If he has a belly then perhaps losing some of it might
>help him ride even better. Let's face it, lugging around fat is going to
>slow you down.

Only uphill. It's got practically no effect on flat, and provides a
great gravity assist downhill, as well as a more aerodynamic shape.
--
Rick Onanian
 
On Wed, 19 May 2004 10:41:59 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Rick Onanian wrote:
>:: He's a healthy guy who has fun exercising.
>
>A fit guy who has fun exercising. Health != fit.

I think he's probably healthy too. He didn't say he feels bad...just
that he looks bad.

>:: I'm younger and smaller than you, and I can barely survive a 3000
>:: calorie day. I'm a bit abnormal for that, I guess.
>
>Most people don't need any where near 3000 kcals per day.

Well, by "survive" I meant "not commit suicide". I'm absolutely
miserable below 3000 calories in a given day.

>::: She also suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE
>::: breakfast so the body has to switch to fat because the glycogen
>::: stores will be low (sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).
>::
>:: Try it, if you can, and figure out how far you can go before
>:: bonking. Do only that much, then gradually raise it up. This will
>:: certainly get your body running well for the rest of your day, too.
>
>More nonsense. I follow a low-carb diet...that means I'm always low on
>glycogen. Yet, I always ride in the morning with only some coffee in me.
>Unless he is pushing his limits and actually exercising anaerobically, he
>won't bonk out.

So you're saying he won't bonk. How does that make nonsense of my
suggestion to ride as much as possible?

If bonking can only happen when riding anaerobically, does that mean
that by riding slowly, anybody could ride thousands of consecutive
miles with only water, without getting to a point of feeling
energy-less?

>:: 1. CaloriesIn < CaloriesOut == NetLoss. This must happen in time,
>:: even given the 'starvation-mode' reaction of saving fat. Try really
>:: counting calories in and out for a week and see what you get; 10
>:: months of insufficient calories should lose more than 4 pounds.
>
>Which means it was not 10 months of insufficient calories.

That wasn't obvious in what I said?

>:: 2. Health != weight. You're probably pretty damned healthy from all
>:: that riding, regardless of your weight.
>
>Health!=fit!= weight.
>
>He's fit (bicycle fit) for sure. I can't comment on his health since
>there's not my info here on that.

Agreed, but I suspect that all the riding has resulted in health,
especially since he didn't say he had any health problems.

>:: those 40 pounds back. I am at my optimum weight, books and charts
>:: and doctors be damned.
>
>True, to an extent. If he has a belly then perhaps losing some of it might
>help him ride even better. Let's face it, lugging around fat is going to
>slow you down.

Only uphill. It's got practically no effect on flat, and provides a
great gravity assist downhill, as well as a more aerodynamic shape.
--
Rick Onanian
 
"Doug Cook" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "GaryG" <garyg@shasta_SPAMBEGONE_software.com> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Doug Cook" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > The story thus far....
> > >
[snipped]
> > >
> >
> > First, congratulations on not being a couch potato! Being physically
> active
> > is an important component in health, and weight loss.
> >
> > But, as others have noted, you need to focus on the food (intake) side
of
> > the weight loss equation. It seems clear that you are consuming too
much
> > (which is easy to do when you ride a lot).
> >
> > Your current Body Mass Index is 34.2, which puts you well into the
"Obese"
> > category. To get your weight down, you need to aim for a long-term,
slow
> > weight loss of around 1 lb per week. To achieve this, you need a
calorie
> > deficit of 500 calories per day. I recommend that you focus on reducing
> > sweets, sodas, snacks and portion sizes. Even a relatively small
> reduction,
> > if maintained over time, will result in significant weight loss.
> >
> > <plug warning=on>
> > The trick here is knowing when you are on track, because your weight can
> > fluctuate by 2-4 pounds per day and counting calories is difficult and
> > time-consuming. I've recently released a weight management program
called
> > "WeightWare" (www.WeightWare.com) that you may find useful. By weighing
> > yourself daily, and using the built-in analytical tools in the program,
> > you'll have a much better idea of whether or not you are on track. You
> can
> > download a free, fully functional version from the website and try it
for
> 45
> > days to see if it meets your needs.
> > <plug warning=off>
> >
> > Best of luck, and keep cycling!
> >
> > ~_-*
> > ...G/ \G
> > http://www.CycliStats.com - Software for Cyclists
> > http://www.WeightWare.com - Your Weight and Health Diary
> >
>
> What a shameless plug!! :) Perhaps I could be one of your case studies?
> Send me a non-expiring version, and then use my story!
>

Well, as they say, "You can't Sell what you don't Tell". :)

As for case studies, I've got my own...2 kids, mortgage, hair (what hair?).
And I'm at my lowest weight in 15 years (yeah!).

Sorry, but I can't afford to give it away and the price (IMO) is pretty
reasonable - currently, $25. But, if you download the trial version and
provide me with some useful feedback (bug reports, suggestions, etc.), I'll
send you a code for $5 off. Fair enough?

~_-*
....G/ \G
http://www.CycliStats.com - Software for Cyclists
http://www.WeightWare.com - Your Weight and Health Diary
 
Doug Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
> The story thus far....

> 12 years ago - single, 6'3", 180lbs., hair, and competing in citizens class
> triathlons.

> Fast forward to last July... Married, two kids, mortgage, no hair,
> sedentary, 279lbs.

Some of your fat has been converted to muscle, so instant weight loss at the
start of the season isn't exactly going to occur. At 279, climbing any hill
is going to take quite a bit of muscle. I think you should probably audit
your food intake and take away the extranous caloric intake. Eliminating
sodas and excessive milk consuption from your diet and the bedtime snack is a
good start. Slowly tapering down and portion control is the key. If you eat
alot of food, your body is going to expect a lot of food or else you are going
to be miserable.

I can't say that cycling makes dieting any easier. After a hard ride, there
are strong cravings for food and it's easy to take in more calories than you
just burned. To make matters worse, under some circumstances the body would
rather burn muscle than burn fat. Insulin spikes and such feel nasty.

I suppose exercise and moderate dieting is the way to go. At 279 it is going
to take a while. Whatever changes you make should be changes that you can
deal with for the long term.

--
---
Eric Yagerlener
remove "usenet" from email address to reply
 
David Kerber <ns_dkerber@ns_ids.net> wrote:

> We evolved eating most anything which nourish us, and that includes wild
> grains. Why would we have started cultivating grains if we didn't
> already know they were good to eat? And fruit is one of the major food
> sources in forested areas. The entire primate family eats lots of both
> plant and animal materials for food, and that includes humans.

I thought theory was we didn't evolve much brainpower until the diet included
fish, which contains an oil that contributes to brain growth. Then enough
brainpower developed for mankind to process grains?
--
---
Eric Yagerlener
remove "usenet" from email address to reply
 
BanditManDan wrote:
:: Drs wrote:
:: > You can lose weight by losing fat and you can lose weight by
:: losing > muscle. Reducing your calorific intake whilst not
:: maintaining anaerobic > exercise levels wil result in excessive
:: muscle loss. Since muscle is > more metabolically expensive than
:: fat, by maintaining your muscle mass > you are actually able to
:: burn more calories than someone with less > muscle. Cycling is an
:: aerobic activity. It does little to preserve > muscle mass because
:: it primarily recruits Type I fibres (endurance). It > also doesn't
:: burn as many calories as people think. You go for a ride, > work
:: like crazy to burn a few hundred calories and then put it straight
:: > back on again and more with a single Big Mac and fries. Cardio
:: has its > place in weight loss regimes but it's third in
:: importance after diet and > anaerobic exercise.
::
::
:: I won't disput what you are saying and in my case I lost 90lbs doing
:: both aerobic & anaerobic exercise. However my primary exercise came
:: mostly from cycling because that's what I ejoyed the most, currently
:: I cycle exclusively and have not gained a pound back. I also know
:: people
:: who lost weight simply dieting and walking as their only form of
:: exercise. I realize that a person can only lose so much weight this
:: way
:: but it does work. As I see it, anything you do to increase activity
:: will burn calories. As long as you consume fewer calories than you
:: burn you
:: will lose weight. Once at the desired weight you simply balance the
:: intake/output.
::
:: Its just that simple. (although I know there is much more scientific
:: information on the subject I'm just summarizing).

You're right too. However, DRS's point, if I may, is that diet is most
important in weight loss. The resistance training really should be second
after dieting because it 1) builds muscle and 2) allows you to keep as much
muscle mass as possible while losing. Cardio is useful for other health
benefits, but if you do too much of it you can actually lose muscle mass, in
addtion to fat. The result of too much of that is that one can become a
"skinny fat person". A skinny fat person will end up really screwed because
the metabolism will be lower, meaning that you'll have to eat less to
maintain weight, compared to the same size person with a greater percentage
of muscle mass. But it is certainly true that if you do another cycling and
control eating, your can burn calories and lose weight effectively. I
personally would not call that optimal weight loss because too much of it
may come from muscle mass rather than fat.
 
On Wed, 19 May 2004 14:45:04 -0700, "GaryG"
<garyg@shasta_SPAMBEGONE_software.com> wrote:

>> What a shameless plug!! :) Perhaps I could be one of your case studies?
>> Send me a non-expiring version, and then use my story!

I don't think it was a 'shameless' plug since GG prefaced that portion of
his post with a <plug> indicator.

>>
>
>Well, as they say, "You can't Sell what you don't Tell". :)
>
>As for case studies, I've got my own...2 kids, mortgage, hair (what hair?).
>And I'm at my lowest weight in 15 years (yeah!).
>
>Sorry, but I can't afford to give it away and the price (IMO) is pretty
>reasonable - currently, $25. But, if you download the trial version and
>provide me with some useful feedback (bug reports, suggestions, etc.), I'll
>send you a code for $5 off. Fair enough?

Very nice of you.

Trying to come across as sincere, but what does your software do that I
couldn't do in a simple XL spreadsheet. My graphs look the same as yours.
Are there additional indicators, or predictors that are not shown on the
page?

Some ppl can't do XL, so there's that.

Best,

-B
 
On 19 May 2004 18:03:28 -0400, [email protected] wrote:

>Eliminating
>sodas and excessive milk consuption from your diet and the bedtime snack is a
>good start. Slowly tapering down and portion control is the key. If you eat
>alot of food, your body is going to expect a lot of food or else you are going
>to be miserable.

What ppl don't consider is that, here, it took him 12 years to put this fat
on. In addition he may be decreasing his internal intraperitoneal fat, and
you can't see that.

As a data point, when I lost the weight initially, my waistline decreased
to smaller than my weight when I was 180lbs, and I was measuring it at
200lbs. I could wear 'relaxed' size 31 jeans very comfortably, whereas at
180 when I wore those same jeans, they were so tight I put them away, and
wore 34s. Many feel that the internal, or intraperitoneal fat is more, uh,
'unhealthy' than the spare tire. Your whole body is 'recomposing', IOW.

>I can't say that cycling makes dieting any easier. After a hard ride, there
>are strong cravings for food and it's easy to take in more calories than you
>just burned. To make matters worse, under some circumstances the body would
>rather burn muscle than burn fat. Insulin spikes and such feel nasty.

I don't have a strong craving for food, but I'm riding smaller distances at
this point, and am on LC. I do mix up some half strength Orange Juice and
ice water, and then in an hour have a fish portion and I'm good for about 6
hours. Again, my body my science experiment. ;-p

>I suppose exercise and moderate dieting is the way to go. At 279 it is going
>to take a while. Whatever changes you make should be changes that you can
>deal with for the long term.

Sage advice. As you mention above, eliminating Sugared Soda and Milk will
do it for a -lot- of people. One really doesn't realize how much sugar is
in a can of pop! If you just must have your soda, then dilute it to 1/8th
of the strength and put the rest away. Dilute glucose empties from the
stomach faster than full strength anyway so you'er getting it to your
body/brain sooner, IIRC.

-B

>---
>Eric Yagerlener
>remove "usenet" from email address to reply
 
On Wed, 19 May 2004 18:54:34 -0400, Badger_South <[email protected]>
wrote:
>If you just must have your soda, then dilute it to 1/8th
>of the strength and put the rest away.

Oy! Diluted soda? Ick!

Luckily for me (calorie-wise, anyway), my preferred soda is Diet
Pepsi. No calories, but it will probably cause cancer -- of course,
so will anything else, everything else, or even nothing.

Maybe somebody who likes hi-test soda could dilute it with it's diet
companion; at least the carbonation will be the same.
--
Rick Onanian
 
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Well, most who follow a LC woe are trying to lose weight (fat). From a
> practical POV, they limit carbs and not anything else.

And this fact alone is sufficient to explain the weight loss: by
limiting carbohydrates, they effectively limit calories.

> At a certain point, after having lost a certain
> amount of weight, it does become necessary to limit calories.

Probably because the dieting has reduced their lean body mass. Most
diets reduce lean body mass and thus metabolic rate, and require
further reductions in food consumption.

> The reason this point needs to be made is because for some 20 to 30 years in
> the US it has been claimed that eating fat make syou fat. Excessive calorie
> intake makes you fat. So as long as one isn't eating too many calories,
> there is no need to explicitly limit fat (assuming one is getting adequate
> protein).

True enough, although since fat is so energy dense, it's really easy
to get too many calories with fatty foods.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/
 
On Wed, 19 May 2004 18:37:35 -0400, "Roger Zoul" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>You're right too. However, DRS's point, if I may, is that diet is most
>important in weight loss. The resistance training really should be second
>after dieting because it 1) builds muscle and 2) allows you to keep as much
>muscle mass as possible while losing. Cardio is useful for other health
>benefits, but if you do too much of it you can actually lose muscle mass, in
>addtion to fat. The result of too much of that is that one can become a
>"skinny fat person". A skinny fat person will end up really screwed because
>the metabolism will be lower, meaning that you'll have to eat less to
>maintain weight, compared to the same size person with a greater percentage
>of muscle mass. But it is certainly true that if you do another cycling and
>control eating, your can burn calories and lose weight effectively. I
>personally would not call that optimal weight loss because too much of it
>may come from muscle mass rather than fat.
>

Well-put. As another data point, I had a lot of muscle, but had gotten
overweight as a result of a year-long consulting job where I virtually
lived in the basment PC room at my house coding for 10 hours a day.

When I went LC, I had a hip injury so I couldn't work out. I was able to
lose more than 40-50lbs on diet alone in about 6-8 months on LC, but I
really -did- the diet to the max, stayed on plan and took my supps and
oils.

Then at the lower weight I was able to exercise and was not ashamed of
showing up at the gym <g>. But had I been aware of what your comments
address more overtly at the time (I knew but didn't correlate), I would
have done some kind of working out at the same time, even if it was just a
15" machine circuit. It really keeps you from going into 'starvation mode',
and surprisingly it only takes getting your pulse up and getting sweaty 4-5
times a week.

Great discussion today, youse guys, Roger and DRS. Thanks for all your
posts!!!

-B
 
Roger Zoul wrote:

> Terry Morse wrote:
> ::
> :: FWIW, you don't have to go anaerobic to deplete your muscle
> :: glycogen. Simply riding at a lower cadence with the same power
> :: output will accelerate the depletion rate. Glycogen usage is tied to
> :: muscle effort.
>
> Er, riding at a lower cadence with high power output (like going uphill in a
> high gear or going very fast on a flat in high gear) is the same thing as
> going anaerobic. Anaerobic activity is what uses sugar for fuel.

A technically correct statement, but not very useful. "Going
anaerobic" to a cyclist means getting your heart rate above the
lactate threshold, not pushing a big gear.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/
 
Doug Cook wrote:
> The story thus far....
> 12 years ago - single, 6'3", 180lbs., hair, and competing in citizens
> class triathlons.
> Fast forward to last July... Married, two kids, mortgage, no hair,
> sedentary, 279lbs.
> Sick of that fat man in the mirror, I bought some XXL cycling clothes,
> dusted off and tuned up my old Trek, and started riding again. Now 10
> months and close to 3000 miles later... I still weigh 274! I mean...
> come on! 3000 miles for 5 pounds?!
> My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to struggle on 10
> mile rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday rides of 15-30 miles each and
> one weekend ride for 50-70 miles - all solo. My computer puts my average
> speed for these rides between 16-18mph depending upon the particular
> ups&downs of the ride. My HRM says my average rate is usually right
> about 75% of max (although that can vary, usually on the high side, when
> the ride has climbing). I feel lean and mean while I ride, but when I
> get home I wonder who that fat guy in the mirror is!
> I don't diet per se, but I do eat sensibly. The days that I've tracked
> my caloric intake it's usually right between 2500 - 3000. One friend who
> is a "wellness" expert suggests I'm not eating *ENOUGH*. Although she
> readily admits she doesn't specialize in athletes ("slovenly couch
> potato" is how she describes her typical client), she says that with my
> activity level my BMR is 5300... as she explained it that's the number
> of calories needed to just maintain my weight! Therefore she thinks my
> body thinks it's being starved and refuses to let go of the fat. She
> thinks by eating MORE the body will move away from this starvation
> reflex and start shedding pounds. She also suggested riding easy first
> thing in the morning BEFORE breakfast so the body has to switch to fat
> because the glycogen stores will be low (sound like a recipe for the
> BONK to me).
> Well, I tried to eat 4000 calories today and about died! I felt
> horrible, stuffed, tired, etc. I tried riding with just water (no sport
> drink), and found myself craving sugar after the ride.
> Any experts lurking out there that would like to comment? Are there any
> coaching services online that could help customize my training to help
> me lose weight? I can't afford to hire a coach.
> Any thoughts would be appreciated.



I can understand why you're asking the question. 3000 miles in ten
months is good going.

Let me ask - are your clothes more lose ? The reason I ask is that what
was fat - can easily turn to muscle. Muscle is heavier than fat. However
if your clothes that we tighter before you started training, have become
lose, then I think I may have an answer for you.

I was in the same predicament as you are. Cycling away gooddo and no
change on the scales. I noticed I was getting fitter but my weight did
not budge. The solution for me was to mix my training - mix my cycling
with running/swimming/walking, but still training mostly by cycling.

This unlocked whatever was preventing me from losing weight. I was also
mindful of my diet (cut out bread completely). It worked for me.



--
 
Badger_South wrote:
:: On Wed, 19 May 2004 15:36:03 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
:: <[email protected]> wrote:
::
::: No, what I described is the CKD...you do it to refill my glycogen
::: so that you can train harder the next week (assuming you're
::: lifting). The TKD is where you take much smaller amounts of carbs
::: (say 50 g) either pre or post (or both) workout. The former is
::: usually much harder to do well and results in a lot of water-weight
::: gain. The latter is much easier to do, and usually doesn't land
::: you with 10 lbs of water weight, but it is not as much fun. On a
::: CKD you want to limit fat intake as well.
::
:: Ah, right you are. I stand corrected. I use a version of the TKD, but
:: wasn't paying attention as you described the Cyclical Ketogenic
:: Diet. I think I would find that harder to do, but I'm WAGing. ;-)
::
::::: If you can do this, very good. I on the other hand have to keep a
::::: much tighter reign on my carb intake. One slice of pizza and I
::::: know
::::: I risk 'falling off the wagon'. It's more a mental thing, and I
::::: know that's atypical. It does allow me to foist a smug and
::::: superior
::::: attitude upon all the weak and slovenly ppl around me though.
::::: (LOL, sarcasm meter pegging out to the max).
:::
::: :) Lots of people are you like. I can, however, do a CKD. I've
::: done enough of them to be able to get right back on track the
::: following monday. The hard part for me is keeping the CKD clean -
::: that is, limiting the fat intake while getting the carbs and
::: protein.
::
:: Ah so. What would a typical weekend menu under your CKD regime?

Bread, rice, potatoes, SF cookies made from oats, baked chips, pancakes (no
butter on any of that)...try to limit table sugar and fruit sugar as well as
fat (what fats you do get you'd like to be EFAs). You want starches that
metabolize to glucose. You also get sufficient protein.
 
Terry Morse wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::
::: Terry Morse wrote:
:::::
::::: FWIW, you don't have to go anaerobic to deplete your muscle
::::: glycogen. Simply riding at a lower cadence with the same power
::::: output will accelerate the depletion rate. Glycogen usage is tied
::::: to muscle effort.
:::
::: Er, riding at a lower cadence with high power output (like going
::: uphill in a high gear or going very fast on a flat in high gear) is
::: the same thing as going anaerobic. Anaerobic activity is what uses
::: sugar for fuel.
::
:: A technically correct statement, but not very useful. "Going
:: anaerobic" to a cyclist means getting your heart rate above the
:: lactate threshold, not pushing a big gear.

True, but I was just trying to give an example...I do my best not to push
big gears...but I've only been riding since last September and had to suffer
the winter layoff.
 
Terry Morse wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::
::: Well, most who follow a LC woe are trying to lose weight (fat).
::: From a practical POV, they limit carbs and not anything else.
::
:: And this fact alone is sufficient to explain the weight loss: by
:: limiting carbohydrates, they effectively limit calories.
::
::: At a certain point, after having lost a certain
::: amount of weight, it does become necessary to limit calories.
::
:: Probably because the dieting has reduced their lean body mass. Most
:: diets reduce lean body mass and thus metabolic rate, and require
:: further reductions in food consumption.

I'm certain that's true for a lot of people...however, I don't think it's
true in my case....if anything, I've added LBM since going LC...since I
weight train for hypertrophy and I started before I'd lost too much weight.
But the sheer fact that I lug around 130 lbs less than I did before means
that moving takes less energy, so I have to further restrict intake now.

::
::: The reason this point needs to be made is because for some 20 to 30
::: years in the US it has been claimed that eating fat make syou fat.
::: Excessive calorie intake makes you fat. So as long as one isn't
::: eating too many calories, there is no need to explicitly limit fat
::: (assuming one is getting adequate protein).
::
:: True enough, although since fat is so energy dense, it's really easy
:: to get too many calories with fatty foods.

Very definitely. Atkins definitely did his readers a disservice by leading
them to believe they'd never have to count calories.
 
On Wed, 19 May 2004 19:02:17 -0400, Rick Onanian <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 19 May 2004 18:54:34 -0400, Badger_South <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>If you just must have your soda, then dilute it to 1/8th
>>of the strength and put the rest away.
>
>Oy! Diluted soda? Ick!
>
>Luckily for me (calorie-wise, anyway), my preferred soda is Diet
>Pepsi. No calories, but it will probably cause cancer -- of course,
>so will anything else, everything else, or even nothing.
>
>Maybe somebody who likes hi-test soda could dilute it with it's diet
>companion; at least the carbonation will be the same.

Yeah, it's ickky. Your idea sounds good/better.

I drink Diet Ginger Ale, one of the ones with very little if any
after-taste, IMO. Diet Dr Pepper is probably equal or better, but I always
feel bloated if I drink more than half a can of that.

Wonder if they'll come out with a 'splenda' version. Despite the chlorine
warnings that stuff is pretty good. Canadians have been drinking it for
years.

OTOH, I now have three of those funny hats with the fold down ear flaps.
It's puzzling.

-B
 
"Badger_South" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 19 May 2004 14:45:04 -0700, "GaryG"
> <garyg@shasta_SPAMBEGONE_software.com> wrote:
>
> >> What a shameless plug!! :) Perhaps I could be one of your case studies?
> >> Send me a non-expiring version, and then use my story!
>
> I don't think it was a 'shameless' plug since GG prefaced that portion of
> his post with a <plug> indicator.
>
> >>
> >
> >Well, as they say, "You can't Sell what you don't Tell". :)
> >
> >As for case studies, I've got my own...2 kids, mortgage, hair (what
hair?).
> >And I'm at my lowest weight in 15 years (yeah!).
> >
> >Sorry, but I can't afford to give it away and the price (IMO) is pretty
> >reasonable - currently, $25. But, if you download the trial version and
> >provide me with some useful feedback (bug reports, suggestions, etc.),
I'll
> >send you a code for $5 off. Fair enough?
>
> Very nice of you.
>
> Trying to come across as sincere, but what does your software do that I
> couldn't do in a simple XL spreadsheet. My graphs look the same as yours.
> Are there additional indicators, or predictors that are not shown on the
> page?
>
> Some ppl can't do XL, so there's that.
>
> Best,
>
> -B
>

Well, for one thing, it's a lot *prettier* than Excel <g>.

Seriously, there's probably nothing you can't do in Excel that WeightWare
does, but for most folks it's easier to use a dedicated application. In
addition, it's easier to play around with the data - changing From and To
dates, for instance, to see how your weight has changed over time. The
default "Calendar" view
(http://www.shastasoftware.com/WeightWare/CalendarTab.htm ) would be
difficult to reproduce in Excel, and allows you to see your weekly and
monthly progress at a glance.

And, some of the calculations that WeightWare does automatically would be a
challenge to program in Excel - the "Moving Average" graph uses an
exponentially smoothed moving average, and the "30 Day Calorie Trend" graph
(http://www.shastasoftware.com/WeightWare/graphs.htm ) calculates the trend
for the 30 days preceeding each day in the range using linear regression.

WeightWare also includes tools for analyzing your Body Mass Index and
comparing yours against US averages, tools to set appropriate weight goals
for yourself and others, and tools for estimating your body fat percentage.
It also tracks other key health data, including resting heart rate, blood
pressure, body fat percentage, amount of sleep, how you're feeling, body
measurements, and various lab tests (cholesterol, PSA, blood glucose, etc.).

Hope I've answered your questions, and thanks for asking!

GG
http://www.WeightWare.com
Your Weight and Health Diary
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Re: 3000 miles in 10 months... so Why am I still fat?
Replies
0
Views
311
Road Cycling
P
P
D
OP Update - 3000 miles in 10 months... so Why am I still fat?
Replies
64
Views
4K
Road Cycling
Tom Keats
T
D
OP Update - 3000 miles in 10 months... so Why am I still fat?
Replies
69
Views
3K
Road Cycling
Tom Keats
T
P
Re: 3000 miles in 10 months... so Why am I still fat?
Replies
8
Views
489
Road Cycling
Terry Morse
T
D
3000 miles in 10 months... so Why am I still fat?
Replies
234
Views
19K
Road Cycling
gntlmn
gntlmn
Top Bottom Back