Atkins report #5

Discussion in 'General Fitness' started by Martin W. Smith, Sep 18, 2003.

  1. No weight loss. That was the desired outcome. Since the last report, I have been trying to do two
    things. First, I have been trying to increase my carb intake and decrease my fat intake so as to
    stop weight loss while avoiding weight gain. This is relatively easy to do, especially with the
    added variable of a vigorous exercise program to help enhance calorie burning when needed. Second, I
    have been trying to convert some of the remaining fat to muscle. I don't mean convert directly (I
    don't think fat can be converted to muscle), but I mean I want to continue to burn off fat while
    building some extra muscle.

    On the first point, I have succeeded in stopping the weight loss (no big problem there), and I have
    avoided any weight gain. However, the volitility of the system is higher than I expected. I must
    monitor my weight daily, and I must monitor my intake of carbs and fat, and I must monitor my
    exercise program. All of these are important tools to use to dampen and control the net gain/loss to
    keep it near 0. What I have noticed is that my weight can easily vary by up to 2+ kilos in a single
    day. Since my last report my weight has bounced around between 86 and
    88.5 kilos. I sweat like a horse when I train, and I train almost every day. I am certain that this
    1 to 2+ kilo fluctuation is all glycogen/water, because whenever it gets put on, I always burn it
    off again during the next day's workout. If that workout is light, then the weight migh not come
    off until the second day's workout, in which case I must reduce my intake of food as well.

    This tells me that if I were to stop exercising as much as I do for some days or weeks, I would
    have to reduce my food intake to avoid weight gain. I haven't verified this, however. The reason I
    think it is important to verify it is that I don't know how much glycogen/water I can actually
    carry before my body begins to store fat again. And I don't know how long it will take to store
    some measurable fat. It might be the case that there would be a "grace period" of several days in
    which the fat storage system reasserts itself. I don't intend to let this happen, however. I enjoy
    all the exercise, and I am confident that with the Atkins diet I can easily restrict my food intake
    without increasing hunger and craving. But it is surprising to me how quickly the extra carbs put
    back that 2+ kilos. I suppose that my system is more efficient in that regard, since I train hard
    almost every day.

    On the second point, converting fat to muscle, I believe I have also had considerable success. To
    accomplish this, I have increased the strength component of my training, not by adding heavy lifting
    but by adding a step/weights combination class, a high pulse kick boxing class, and more high
    intensity spinners and aerobics classes. I have also added an interval set during my swim, which is
    rather high intensity. A month ago, when I measured my body fat, it was 19%. Yesterday, when I
    measured it on the same machine at the same time of day (well hydrated) my body fat registered as
    16%. No doubt some of that must be accounted for by machine error or differences in hydration, but
    3% at that level is a big drop, so a significant part of it must be real. Besides that, the mirror
    test is kind to me. I think I look leaner, if not beefier (which I don't want anyway), and I do feel
    stronger during training sessions. I also do well on the corrugated road test.

    martin

    --
    Wesley Clark for President www.AmericansForClark.com

    Martin Smith email: [email protected]
     
    Tags:


  2. 4precious

    4precious Guest

    Saw an interesting tidbit on yahoo yesterday regarding Atkins. There's a growing body of evidence
    that Atkins diet works for a lot of people because they can actually consume more calories while on
    it compared to a low-fat diet, and stay even with people on the latter diet. So maybe a calorie of
    fat, a calorie of protein, and a calorie of carb are not all the same to the human body after all.

    In a tightly controlled study at Harvard, the Atkins dieters were allowed to consume 300 calories
    more per day than the other participants. Over the course of the study, that was 25,000 calories,
    which means they should have weighed more than the other group by 7 pounds. But they didn't - the
    two groups performed the same in terms of weight loss/maintenance.

    http://health.yahoo.com/search/healthnews?lb=s&p=id%3A48245

    Eric
     
  3. Intriguing...thanks for brining this to our attention.

    Here's the take home messages ("executive summary"):

    Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5
    percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate,
    15 percent protein and 30 percent fat.

    In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds, while
    people who got the same calories on the lowfat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise, though,
    was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds.

    "It's very intriguing, but it raises more questions than it answers," said Gary Foster of the
    University of Pennsylvania. "There is lots of data to suggest this shouldn't be true."

    Greene said she can only guess why the people getting the extra calories did so well. Maybe they
    burned up more calories digesting their food.

    Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results
    "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or
    they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry.

    Larry Weisenthal

    Certitude is poison; curiosity is life
     
  4. Mike Edey

    Mike Edey Guest

    It'd be interesting to know if they kept any other info - such as the glycemic index of each set
    of meals....

    --Mike

    On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:09:38 +0000, Larry Weisenthal wrote:

    > Intriguing...thanks for brining this to our attention.
    >
    > Here's the take home messages ("executive summary"):
    >
    > Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5
    > percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate,
    > 15 percent protein and 30 percent fat.
    >
    > In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds,
    > while people who got the same calories on the lowfat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise,
    > though, was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds.
    >
    > "It's very intriguing, but it raises more questions than it answers," said Gary Foster of the
    > University of Pennsylvania. "There is lots of data to suggest this shouldn't be true."
    >
    > Greene said she can only guess why the people getting the extra calories did so well. Maybe they
    > burned up more calories digesting their food.
    >
    > Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the
    > results "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more
    > exercise or they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Larry Weisenthal
    >
    > Certitude is poison; curiosity is life
     
  5. Mjuric

    Mjuric Guest

    On 15 Oct 2003 17:09:38 GMT, [email protected] (Larry Weisenthal) wrote:

    >Intriguing...thanks for brining this to our attention.
    >
    >Here's the take home messages ("executive summary"):
    >
    >Everyone's food looked similar but was cooked to different recipes. The low-carb meals were 5
    >percent carbohydrate, 15 percent protein and 65 percent fat. The rest got 55 percent carbohydrate,
    >15 percent protein and 30 percent fat.
    >
    >In the end, everyone lost weight. Those on the lower-cal, low-carb regimen took off 23 pounds,
    >while people who got the same calories on the lowfat approach lost 17 pounds. The big surprise,
    >though, was that volunteers getting the extra 300 calories a day of low-carb food lost 20 pounds.
    >
    >"It's very intriguing, but it raises more questions than it answers," said Gary Foster of the
    >University of Pennsylvania. "There is lots of data to suggest this shouldn't be true."
    >
    >Greene said she can only guess why the people getting the extra calories did so well. Maybe they
    >burned up more calories digesting their food.
    >
    >Dr. Samuel Klein of Washington University, the obesity organization's president, called the results
    > "hard to believe" and said perhaps the people eating more calories also got more exercise or
    > they were less apt to cheat because they were less hungry.

    What? Less apt to cheat? How in the world can you do a scientific study were the
    participants are "allowed to cheat" at all? More excercise? Uhhhhh wasn't that taken into
    account and monitored? What kind of study was this?

    ~Matt

    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >Larry Weisenthal
    >
    >Certitude is poison; curiosity is life
     
Loading...
Loading...