Tuesday 3 March 2009
Diet Day +58 (BMI 27.40, 22lbs lost overall)
The rate of loss slowed to almost nothing over the last two weeks. Not because the diet doesn't work but because its very easy to plateau by overeating certain things such as peanuts (my big weakness). Basically if I don't feel hungry chances I'm not actually losing much weight, to lose more than 2lbs a week it seems I need to actually feel like I'm losing weight and that seems to mean feeling hungry (not all the time of course). As I have felt pretty full for the last few weeks it seems I need to start to reduce calorie intake or food amounts to keep the pace of weightloss as before.
Friday 20 February 2009
Diet Day +47 (BMI 27.69, 20lbs lost overall)
1 lb more lost and I have lost 10% of my original starting weight.
Thursday 19 February 2009
Diet Day +45 (BMI 27.83, -19 lbs lost overall)
I have finally dipped below 14st. Getting nearer to my 10% loss point which is normally where most people who are obese aim to get initially. I am slightly off track now to achieve my goal of a BMI of around 26 by the end of the first week of March. I reckon at the current rate I'll be at around a BMI of 27 or 13st 7lbs.
Wednesday 11 February 2009
This chart shows my weight loss as my BMI since I began on 5th Jan. Overall my weight loss has been 17lbs. The red line is my BMI, note the spikes, this is after the weekend! The upper black line is the trend and the lower black line is my goal, which is based on losing 3.5lbs per week. As you can see I have pretty much lost weight and mass in line with my goal and I am at the current rate to finish just above the target. However I fully understand the cause and effect of coming off the diet so it is really will power that can improve the rate of loss and help me to reach the target. On a longer term trend which is to get down to a BMI of around 22 by July 1st 2009 I am well below my target line and very much on course, the loss rate for this long term target is a more manageable 2.5lbs per week which I comfortably beat at the moment.
Thursday 5 February 2009
Diet Day +31 (BMI 28.12, 17 pounds lost overall)
Another 2lbs lost. Just sitting on 14st 0lbs, tantilisingly close to being 13st something for the first time in years.
A small but predictable problem is that my suits are starting to look too big. I feel like a teenager wearing his dads suit! Too early to contemplate buying new ones but a real indication that the weight loss is genuine, and not just "water"...
A small but predictable problem is that my suits are starting to look too big. I feel like a teenager wearing his dads suit! Too early to contemplate buying new ones but a real indication that the weight loss is genuine, and not just "water"...
Wednesday 4 February 2009
Diet Day +30 (BMI 28.41, 15 pounds lost overall)
Another 1lb lost taking the total loss to 1st 1lb (15lbs). Still a way to go before I've lost 10% of my starting weight which is my next milestone at 21lbs lost but I'm getting there.
My target is to get to a BMI of 26.11 by the first week of March. Plotting my BMI scores since I began the diet in Jan shows I am just about on course for my target although I hit a plateau recently. Thankfully weight loss has started again, it has slowed down somewhat since I started but I have a hunch it may speed up slightly. What most people don't realise with dieting is that it isn't a smooth curve of weight loss, its jagged, since your body's energy requirements vary as well as your diet. Of course if you did exactly the same exercise everyday and ate the same thing you might well see a smoother line in decreasing weight but in the real world that's not possible.
Once I hit a BMI of 26.11 I then begin the 2nd phase of my diet which is to go down to a BMI around 24, which is under the overweight limit of 25.
Long term I'd like to get to 22.5 which is where I was in my 20's. Of course in those days I was going to the gym 4 days a week and cycling 50-60 miles a week to work and back, so to get to that level I'll have to start some form of proper exercise programme. My thinking is that once I get to a BMI of around 25 I'll feel psychologically able to do exercise, at the moment I still feel a little self conscious due to "wobbly" bits and carry all this extra weight around is knackering!
My target is to get to a BMI of 26.11 by the first week of March. Plotting my BMI scores since I began the diet in Jan shows I am just about on course for my target although I hit a plateau recently. Thankfully weight loss has started again, it has slowed down somewhat since I started but I have a hunch it may speed up slightly. What most people don't realise with dieting is that it isn't a smooth curve of weight loss, its jagged, since your body's energy requirements vary as well as your diet. Of course if you did exactly the same exercise everyday and ate the same thing you might well see a smoother line in decreasing weight but in the real world that's not possible.
Once I hit a BMI of 26.11 I then begin the 2nd phase of my diet which is to go down to a BMI around 24, which is under the overweight limit of 25.
Long term I'd like to get to 22.5 which is where I was in my 20's. Of course in those days I was going to the gym 4 days a week and cycling 50-60 miles a week to work and back, so to get to that level I'll have to start some form of proper exercise programme. My thinking is that once I get to a BMI of around 25 I'll feel psychologically able to do exercise, at the moment I still feel a little self conscious due to "wobbly" bits and carry all this extra weight around is knackering!
Monday 2 February 2009
Diet Day +29 (BMI 28.55, 14 pounds lost overall)
Had a slow week, a bit up and down. The odd pint of lager, peanuts, the usual stuff, I am acutely aware of how the slightest variation from the diet results in weight gain or a halt in weight loss. Since yesterday I have followed closely the diet principles and was delighted to find that this morning I weighed 14st 3lbs, exactly 1 stone lost since I started the diet on the 5th Jan. My plan was to lose 2 stones or 28lbs in 2 months, I am bang on course with the halfway point being tomorrow.
A key aspect to this dieting succeeding is not eating snacks. My big downfall is peanuts. Although relatively high in protein and low in carbohydrate in large volumes they pack a calorie and carb punch, just the kind of thing I do not need. Nuts are permissable on the diet but only in small quantities, since they are very moreish I intend just to avoid them altogether.
Beer is another problem. Finding the carbohydrate and calorie content of the various commercial lagers is a nightmare. It seems a pint of lager is around 200 cals and 17-20 grammes of carbohydrate, Guinness (my fave) is 18g of carbs and 200+ cals. As I am trying to keep daily intake to 20g of carbs and 1,200 cals having just 1 pint of either lager or Guinness results in me going way over my allowances added to my food intake. Not having carbs in food is crazy and unappetising and cutting calories to have more beer is nuts so I'll just have to stay off the beer until I hit my ideal weight, then I can manage my weight as I am now beginning to understand the cause and effect of what you eat and drink.
A key aspect to this dieting succeeding is not eating snacks. My big downfall is peanuts. Although relatively high in protein and low in carbohydrate in large volumes they pack a calorie and carb punch, just the kind of thing I do not need. Nuts are permissable on the diet but only in small quantities, since they are very moreish I intend just to avoid them altogether.
Beer is another problem. Finding the carbohydrate and calorie content of the various commercial lagers is a nightmare. It seems a pint of lager is around 200 cals and 17-20 grammes of carbohydrate, Guinness (my fave) is 18g of carbs and 200+ cals. As I am trying to keep daily intake to 20g of carbs and 1,200 cals having just 1 pint of either lager or Guinness results in me going way over my allowances added to my food intake. Not having carbs in food is crazy and unappetising and cutting calories to have more beer is nuts so I'll just have to stay off the beer until I hit my ideal weight, then I can manage my weight as I am now beginning to understand the cause and effect of what you eat and drink.
Wednesday 28 January 2009
DIet Day +24 (BMI 28.69, -12 pounds lost overall)
Scraped another 1lb off since yesterday. I need to lose 2 more by the end of this week to remain on course. I will be closely following the diet over the weekend to see if there is another blip, I suspect it is due to carelessness in slipping into bad habits. To consistently lose rate faster than 2lb a week you cannot have any slip ups.
Tuesday 27 January 2009
Diet Day +23 (BMI 28.84, -11 pounds lost overall)
Have hit a plateu at -11 lbs, briefly hit -12lbs on Saturday but crept back up 1lb and have stayed there for a 3rd day. Annoying but this is a direct impact of eating some fast food on Saturday and having Guinness on Sunday. There is a pattern of weight loss in the week and slight gains in the weekends, overall trend is down with an average loss of 3.5lbs per week, which is my original target anyway. Must try to excerpt more will power at the weekends.
Sunday 25 January 2009
Diet Day +19 (BMI 28.84, -11 pounds overall)
Gained 1lb since yesterday. Have not followed diet 100%, I find it very hard to at the weekends and this has resulted in the up/down nature of my weightloss so far. However, the trend is still downwards and average loss per week is 4lbs.
Friday 23 January 2009
Diet Day +18 (BMI 28.84, -12 pounds lost overall)
Another drop of 1 pound. Starting to feel more hungry now in the day and at night. I've got over the "will power hump" whereby the weight loss so far counter acts my hunger pangs between meals making it increasingly unlikely I'll come of the diet and binge on comfort food as I did in the beginning.
I've found a cup of tea (no sugar) or drink of water gets rid of hunger pangs. Tea in particular is very good, I don't drink gallons of the stuff, maybe 3-4 cups a day. The caffeine obviously gives me a little boost but the warming of the drink seems to have a very good effect on getting rid of suppressing the desire to eat. Of course over time I will become more used to eating less than 3,000 calories a day, at my current level of 1,200 to 1,500 of course I am going to feel hungry!
12lbs loss overall and I am beginning to feel lighter all over. Obviously my "beer gut" has reduced, but I also feel slimmer everywhere. I am really excited that if I stay the course I could once again fit into a pair of 32" waist jeans, for the first time in 9 years! With the weight loss I am also experiencing less aches and pains. The effect of carrying around 60lbs of excess body weight must put a strain on muscles, ligaments and so forth. Go only knows what it does to morbidly obsese people...
I've found a cup of tea (no sugar) or drink of water gets rid of hunger pangs. Tea in particular is very good, I don't drink gallons of the stuff, maybe 3-4 cups a day. The caffeine obviously gives me a little boost but the warming of the drink seems to have a very good effect on getting rid of suppressing the desire to eat. Of course over time I will become more used to eating less than 3,000 calories a day, at my current level of 1,200 to 1,500 of course I am going to feel hungry!
12lbs loss overall and I am beginning to feel lighter all over. Obviously my "beer gut" has reduced, but I also feel slimmer everywhere. I am really excited that if I stay the course I could once again fit into a pair of 32" waist jeans, for the first time in 9 years! With the weight loss I am also experiencing less aches and pains. The effect of carrying around 60lbs of excess body weight must put a strain on muscles, ligaments and so forth. Go only knows what it does to morbidly obsese people...
Wednesday 21 January 2009
Diet Day +17 (BMI 28.98, -11 pounds lost overall)
BMI now below 29, pounds lost into double figures. Diet now going well.
Tuesday 20 January 2009
More dieting myths and rip-offs
The Internet is a fabulous source of information, trouble is 80% of it is biased, unregulated, poorly researched, deceitful crap or porn. That of course means 20% of it is pretty useful, if your interested in truth of course, and not porn.
How many of us have seen these web sites that claim you can lose 20lbs in 2 weeks, or 14lbs in 7 days etc. There are loads out there. Of course when you look at the sites linked to these claims there is nothing concrete, you have to pay to get the "secret" of weight loss. There will be some before and after pictures of some dick-head relaxing on his yacht, resplendent with defined abs, and an ancient picture of the same guy as a lard arse. Gosh, it must work then...?
I did some research, but did not part with any cash of course, into some of these lose weight quick plans. One was bleating on about Cortisol and how this is the cause of YOUR lack of weight control and why some people are naturally thin and others are well, naturally fat and bless them they cannot help it... Shit, all these dietitians and doctors were wrong all along. Anyway, the site advertises a dubious sounding chemical/drug which apparently, magically, lowers you Cortisol when you take it and voila you'll lose weight at the same rate GM is shedding jobs. The site claims many of us (especially the porkers out there) have too much Cortisol, otherwise known as the "stress hormone", and this is a result of the stress of modern life. Basically Cortisol, as a by product, increases the amount of body fat you have, ergo stress=fat. This isn't the only site to mention the Cortisol and body fat thing, this is quite a widespread myth.
As usual this is complete tosh and comes from selective use of findings from proper medical research at least some of which was done in Holland. As with 90% of spurious diet claims there is some element of scientific fact, however they always omit the important points of the original studies or research, which most of the time completely contradict the claims... Anyway, the proper research here was done via the National Institute on Aging and numerous other Dutch health organisations. The study I found was originally undertaken to prove a link between depression and being overweight. It was already established that people suffering from clinical depression had elevated stress levels (and Cortisol of course but this is a Red Herring). Statistically people suffering from depression were overweight then. Now you can see how someone would make the leap to think it was the Cortisol from being depressed that made someone overweight, right? Except the research never mentioned this at all. It merely found a link between obesity and depression. No shit. It doesn't say the person was depressed before being fat, or that the depression was as a result of being fat, just there is a link. Well morbidly obese people are bound to be depressed, I would be. Okay, I'm making light of this serious subject but this is a widely published thing on the net (Cortisol makes you fat) yet this claim doesn't seem to have any real scientific support. Maybe I've not looked hard enough in the medical dictionaries and encyclopedias I've scoured- I should have gone to UKTV's excellent site (haha).
The scientific "truth" seems to be there is a reaction in the blood to elevated Cortisol levels that causes an increase in blood sugar and blood pressure. Cortisol actually increases Lypolisis whereby the body's fat cells are broken down and used for energy- the opposite of what is being claimed... the using up of body fat, Hmmm. But it also decreases muscle takeup of amino acids, (reducing Protein takeup), booo. It can also act as a diuretic causing the body to off-load water and has an anti-inflammatory effect, great. So a bit of a double edged sworded really.
Cortisol is a natural hormone and levels fluctuate in everybody, it is not the definitive cause of being overweight and taking drugs to reduce its levels may have other side effects, far more serious than putting on a few pounds. If someone has too much the last thing they should do is buy some dodgy drug from the Internet and should seek a Physician's advice.
Truth 1. People are mainly fat because they eat too much FOOD. Cutting down on the high calorie foods, or heck, just reducing the overall intake will help them not be so fat.
Truth 2. Nobody is magically thin, they just eat less calories or quantities than fat people.
Truth 3. You cannot safely lose 14lbs of body fat in 7 days without liposuction and as that may involve a general anaesthetic it isn't safe. Unless of course you are a highly dedicated athelete or professional boxer, but it still would not be entirely safe.
Truth 4. There are no quick wins. Losing weight is tough, which is why so many people fail at it. Putting weight on is very easy, which is why increasing numbers of people are now obese in Western Society.
How many of us have seen these web sites that claim you can lose 20lbs in 2 weeks, or 14lbs in 7 days etc. There are loads out there. Of course when you look at the sites linked to these claims there is nothing concrete, you have to pay to get the "secret" of weight loss. There will be some before and after pictures of some dick-head relaxing on his yacht, resplendent with defined abs, and an ancient picture of the same guy as a lard arse. Gosh, it must work then...?
I did some research, but did not part with any cash of course, into some of these lose weight quick plans. One was bleating on about Cortisol and how this is the cause of YOUR lack of weight control and why some people are naturally thin and others are well, naturally fat and bless them they cannot help it... Shit, all these dietitians and doctors were wrong all along. Anyway, the site advertises a dubious sounding chemical/drug which apparently, magically, lowers you Cortisol when you take it and voila you'll lose weight at the same rate GM is shedding jobs. The site claims many of us (especially the porkers out there) have too much Cortisol, otherwise known as the "stress hormone", and this is a result of the stress of modern life. Basically Cortisol, as a by product, increases the amount of body fat you have, ergo stress=fat. This isn't the only site to mention the Cortisol and body fat thing, this is quite a widespread myth.
As usual this is complete tosh and comes from selective use of findings from proper medical research at least some of which was done in Holland. As with 90% of spurious diet claims there is some element of scientific fact, however they always omit the important points of the original studies or research, which most of the time completely contradict the claims... Anyway, the proper research here was done via the National Institute on Aging and numerous other Dutch health organisations. The study I found was originally undertaken to prove a link between depression and being overweight. It was already established that people suffering from clinical depression had elevated stress levels (and Cortisol of course but this is a Red Herring). Statistically people suffering from depression were overweight then. Now you can see how someone would make the leap to think it was the Cortisol from being depressed that made someone overweight, right? Except the research never mentioned this at all. It merely found a link between obesity and depression. No shit. It doesn't say the person was depressed before being fat, or that the depression was as a result of being fat, just there is a link. Well morbidly obese people are bound to be depressed, I would be. Okay, I'm making light of this serious subject but this is a widely published thing on the net (Cortisol makes you fat) yet this claim doesn't seem to have any real scientific support. Maybe I've not looked hard enough in the medical dictionaries and encyclopedias I've scoured- I should have gone to UKTV's excellent site (haha).
The scientific "truth" seems to be there is a reaction in the blood to elevated Cortisol levels that causes an increase in blood sugar and blood pressure. Cortisol actually increases Lypolisis whereby the body's fat cells are broken down and used for energy- the opposite of what is being claimed... the using up of body fat, Hmmm. But it also decreases muscle takeup of amino acids, (reducing Protein takeup), booo. It can also act as a diuretic causing the body to off-load water and has an anti-inflammatory effect, great. So a bit of a double edged sworded really.
Cortisol is a natural hormone and levels fluctuate in everybody, it is not the definitive cause of being overweight and taking drugs to reduce its levels may have other side effects, far more serious than putting on a few pounds. If someone has too much the last thing they should do is buy some dodgy drug from the Internet and should seek a Physician's advice.
Truth 1. People are mainly fat because they eat too much FOOD. Cutting down on the high calorie foods, or heck, just reducing the overall intake will help them not be so fat.
Truth 2. Nobody is magically thin, they just eat less calories or quantities than fat people.
Truth 3. You cannot safely lose 14lbs of body fat in 7 days without liposuction and as that may involve a general anaesthetic it isn't safe. Unless of course you are a highly dedicated athelete or professional boxer, but it still would not be entirely safe.
Truth 4. There are no quick wins. Losing weight is tough, which is why so many people fail at it. Putting weight on is very easy, which is why increasing numbers of people are now obese in Western Society.
Monday 19 January 2009
Diet Day +15 (BMI 29.55, -7 pounds lost overall)
Weight remains at 14st 10lbs. Frustrating. The scales only show whole pounds, so I am guessing they roundup up or down at .5 of a pound. I am hoping I'll register a loss tomorrow. Losing 1 pound a day is very ambitious, especially without additional exercise, so I am trying to boost my confidence by remembering that I have lost 7lbs in 14 days, which is 3.5lbs per week and is a very good and sustainable level of weight loss.
I have read many times that daily weigh ins are not to be trusted when dieting, I can see why. Reasons such as hitting short lived plateaus and variations in water retention can cause unreliable daily readings. However, I also think that they can show real cause and effect, which is why some people who diet cannot understand why it isn't working as they do not see the effect of what they are actually eating. Most people who are overweight really underestimate what they eat, the same is probably true when they diet and they are snacking without realising the implications. Because they only do weekly weigh ins they don't see the true cause and effect of coming off a diet, only the averaged out effect which may be to slow weight loss to a crawl. If they had only resisted eating that cake, or that Hamburger they may have shown an increased weight loss. As it is they don't associate the "bad" food with the fact the diet has slowed down or reversed.
I have read many times that daily weigh ins are not to be trusted when dieting, I can see why. Reasons such as hitting short lived plateaus and variations in water retention can cause unreliable daily readings. However, I also think that they can show real cause and effect, which is why some people who diet cannot understand why it isn't working as they do not see the effect of what they are actually eating. Most people who are overweight really underestimate what they eat, the same is probably true when they diet and they are snacking without realising the implications. Because they only do weekly weigh ins they don't see the true cause and effect of coming off a diet, only the averaged out effect which may be to slow weight loss to a crawl. If they had only resisted eating that cake, or that Hamburger they may have shown an increased weight loss. As it is they don't associate the "bad" food with the fact the diet has slowed down or reversed.
Sunday 18 January 2009
Diet Day +14 (BMI 29.55, -7 pounds lost overall)
Gained 1 pound since yesterday. This is probably due to the pint of Guinness and copious amounts of Dry Roasted Peanuts... I had yesterday. Oooops. There is a definite cause and effect with dieting... Will religiously follow my diet today to see if the weight loss begins again tomorrow.
Seems there is a pattern developing with the weekends being a time when the diet slips. Overall trend is still downwards though and I have lost -7 pounds in 2 weeks, (this meets my goal of a 3.5lb average loss per week). If I lose 1lb tomorrow then I'll be firmly back on track.
Seems there is a pattern developing with the weekends being a time when the diet slips. Overall trend is still downwards though and I have lost -7 pounds in 2 weeks, (this meets my goal of a 3.5lb average loss per week). If I lose 1lb tomorrow then I'll be firmly back on track.
Saturday 17 January 2009
Diet Day +13 (BMI 29.41, -8 pounds lost overall)
Still the same as yesterday, third day in a row at this weight. I am not too bothered though as the scales lowest measurement is pounds, so its likely I'm only just 14st 9lbs and providing I stick to my diet I'll hit 14st 8lbs tomorrow.
A big pyschological mark for me is 14st 6lbs, this is the weight I went down to pre Xmas after a bout of flu, of course as illness was the cause of the weightloss it soon went back on again. Once I get below this I will feel like I am really starting to lose weight properly.
A big pyschological mark for me is 14st 6lbs, this is the weight I went down to pre Xmas after a bout of flu, of course as illness was the cause of the weightloss it soon went back on again. Once I get below this I will feel like I am really starting to lose weight properly.
Friday 16 January 2009
Diet Day +12 (BMI 29.41, -8 pounds lost since start)
No pounds lost since yesterday. This is to be expected with daily weigh ins. I am still on track for my target of -3.5 Lbs per week to lose 28 Lbs+ by the beginning of March.
Thursday 15 January 2009
Diet Day +11 (BMI 29.41, -8 pounds lost since start)
Another pound lost. The diet is now kicking in. I've lost over half a stone since beginning and I am starting to feel lighter and thinner, especially around my waist. I've also noted that back ache and other pains are lessening. All in all its great and I am confident I can hit my initial target of 13 stone (182 pounds) by March.
The end goal is of course to get to the middle of my ideal weight band, for me this will be between 11 and 12 stone, (154lbs to 168lbs) with a BMI around 22.
The end goal is of course to get to the middle of my ideal weight band, for me this will be between 11 and 12 stone, (154lbs to 168lbs) with a BMI around 22.
Wednesday 14 January 2009
Diet Day +10 (BMI 29.55, -7 pounds lost since start)
Another 2 pounds loss, I am now fully back on track after the Pizza incident. Total of 7 pounds lost overall.
A target of 60 pounds reduction in total is required to put me to bang in the middle of my ideal weight range, this means I am 10% of the way there. I understand the rate of weight loss does slow down as the body begins to adjust to new levels of food coming in but this is still heartening.
My initial target loss of 30 pounds ( approx 2 stone) by March 3rd looks very doable right now.
A target of 60 pounds reduction in total is required to put me to bang in the middle of my ideal weight range, this means I am 10% of the way there. I understand the rate of weight loss does slow down as the body begins to adjust to new levels of food coming in but this is still heartening.
My initial target loss of 30 pounds ( approx 2 stone) by March 3rd looks very doable right now.
My top 10 dieting myths...
My Top 10 Weight Loss Myths:-
1. Eating late will make you fat, as you will be inactive in the night and the food will not be burnt up and will turn straight to fat.
No it won’t. A calorie is a calorie what ever time you eat it. The digestive system takes about 4 hrs to turn food into fat, depending of what food is eaten of course. But, the body will still be using energy all the time, and the digestive process uses energy too. The main factor is how many total calories you’ve eaten throughout the whole day. If on average you are eating less energy in calories than the body burns up in a day, you’ll lose weight, whenever you eat. This fallacy comes from the general belief that when people eat late at night it is an extra meal or is snacking, since people pre-disposed to do that are likely to be overweight the theory is they are fat because they’ve eaten late…
2. Through diet and exercise you can target areas of fat loss, like the hips and thighs.
How many times do you hear this one?
Sadly it’s wrong. Fat is evenly distributed around the body. It is also burnt off at the same rate from around the body, no one area quicker than another- even if you “target” that area with exercise. Some people think they have a fat arse and thin body, they don’t they probably have a genetically big arse. If they lose fat they’ll still have a proportionally big arse as the rest of the body would have shrunk at the same time. The only way around that is cosmetic surgery or using clothing to balance things out.
3. You are what you eat, eating Fat will make you fat!
Wrong and the kind of gross simplification some diet food companies love to push. Well, what you eat is important but it’s not necessarily what you eat that makes you fat, its how much of it. 500 calories from fat rich foods or vegetables or rice is still 500 calories. Fat is high in calories so eating less will help reduce overall calories consumed and will aid weight loss, but only if these calories are not replaced by something else. Many low fat foods are high in sugars so are really no better for you in terms of weight loss unless you are controlling overall calorie intake. The body converts excess calories to fat, just because the food was fat already doesn’t make it more likely to be turned into fat.
4. Skipping meals will make you put on weight.
How can not eating make you put on weight? This should be followed by “but only if you begin to eat more at other times”. This misconception has come about based on the idea that people that skip meals will still be hungry and are more likely to snack, and when they do this will often be snack foods which tend to be higher in calories. So the net result is that they end up eating more than they would have done. Put it this way though, instead of having a cheese sandwich which is worth 425 cals for lunch at 1.00pm you have a cup of coffee which is 25 cals and you have an apple worth 100 cals as a snack at 3pm as you’re hungry. Assuming for the rest of the day you eat what you would have done your total calories taken in have reduced by 300 cals. In this scenario you’ll lose weight not put it on. Skipping meals is not a good idea because it encourages snacking, if you don’t snack all it will do is make you feel more hungry.
5. Eating a big breakfast will kick start your metabolism and help you lose weight in the long run.
Eating more than normal or than you need, will mean you put on weight unless you do additional exercise to burn of the extra calories. Having a fried breakfast when otherwise you’d have eaten nothing, then having your normal diet for the rest of the day will make you into a porker in no time! Your metabolic rate does not increase when you eat something; well it can as a result of digesting the food but this is certainly not enough to cover what extra calories are coming in. Doing exercise or gaining weight either through muscle or fat increases the metabolic rate. The idea is that a big breakfast fills you up and makes it unlikely you’ll snack later on, since the breakfast will contain less calories than the snacks, you’ll end up losing weight. Again though it all depends on what else you do and what the breakfast is… simply eating breakfast will not cause weight loss.
6. “Carbohydrate rich foods like potatoes, rice, pasta, and bread are not fattening unless you put fat (in the form of sauces or butter) on top of them.“
What a load of complete and utter crap! And to make things worse this comes quote comes word for word from a UKTV website where they are trying to de-bunk dieting myths! The link to the article is here:-http://uktv.co.uk/style/item/aid/586544/multipageid/586545
So that means I can eat tons of spuds then does it, and I am guaranteed not to put any weight on? The idiot that wrote the article fails to note that foods high in carbohydrate, like potatoes, contain calories. Unused calories are converted to body fat so over-eating them and any other food for that matter will still make you fat. Bread is notorious for having hidden ingredients and many loaves on sale have relatively high fat contents in any case, as well as a host of chemicals. A classic example of poor advice and poor science!
7. If you lose more than 2 pounds a week it will not be fat but will be lean muscle tissue.
This one was also in the UKTV article above, which has also been copied word for word to other sites offering advice.
This is not true. The amount of weight lost on a diet will be related to what calories you eat versus your BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate) plus any other calories you burn. If you are an overweight adult you can easily lose 2+ pounds by just reducing your calorie intake from whatever to 1,500 calories a day without doing any form of additional exercise, just the calorie difference will do this. If you then do extra exercise on top you will burn extra calories and lose more weight. Doctors, dieticians and nutritionists tend to advise on 2 pounds of weight loss per week as being an optimum level as this can be achieved without crash dieting, which they are obviously not in favour of. Dieting can cause muscle as well as fat loss, but at what level this kicks in depends on the person’s physiology. Generally starving one’s self would be guaranteed to do it but you’d be losing a hell of a lot more than 3 pounds a week if you did that. A good example of taking good science and extracting the wrong answer!
8. Just sticking to a diet is not enough, you need to exercise too.
Another one from the terrible UKTV article and this has been copied to other sites word for word. Some people are so lazy; the original UKTV article has lifted a lot of info from yet another site by the way.
Not true of course, otherwise morbidly obese people who are bed ridden and therefore cannot do any extra exercise would never be able to lose weight by dieting, which of course they can and do. Again, its all about your calorie intake versus your BMR, if you eat less than you need you’ll lose weight without any additional exercise. Of course exercise brings other health benefits, as well as burning calories and assisting weight loss and since overweight people are less likely to do exercise losing weight can sometimes help them to begin. But, exercise being NEEDED for weight loss? Nope, not true. Of course I mean exercise in the sense it is a special effort like jogging or going to the gym. Any activity can be regarded as exercise though, even running the vacuum cleaner round burns calories…
9. In low carbohydrate – high protein diets the weight loss is mostly water.
Guess where this one came from? Yep it’s UKTV again. I’m going to send them an angry email, how can one article be so wrong?
Low carb diets get a bad press; you’re either for them or against them. Most dieticians think they are bad for your health due to often high levels of saturated fats (particularly the Atkins version) and there are also concerns over the lack of vitamin C, calcium and fibre. All true probably, but the diet certainly does result in fat loss. Millions of people have lost a serious amount of weight on low carb diets and this is not all water otherwise they’d be dead from dehydration. Whether or not the weight stays off for good after doing a low carb diet is another argument entirely, but since the myth is about water loss I’m sticking with criticism of that. The same article this statement came from also describes Ketones as compounds produced when the body begins to use up protein for energy. Which is just totally wrong, Ketones are a by product of the burning of stored body fat. They appear when the stored glucose in the Liver is depleted and no additional energy is coming in to the body. In healthy people who are not pregnant this is normally as a result of the body not receiving enough energy… from food or after exercise where energy reserves have been used up. Ketones are present in people on low carb diets because they are consuming less energy than their body needs, hence the body fat being burned. Why can’t people do “proper” research before publishing articles on the internet as fact!?
10. Some special foods, like grapefruit or apples will burn fat just by eating them.
Sorry, I can just lose weight by eating something? Great, I’ll just eat 50 apples a day and I’ll be down to my ideal weight in weeks! This one is mentioned at:-
http://www.momswhothink.com/diet-and-nutrition/fat-burning-foods.html
I love the name of this site: “moms who think”, well they may think but they don’t read, or at least they don’t do proper research before publishing bunkum as advice. The reality is that all food will generate some metabolic activity when it is digested and this will burn up energy in the body in its self, this is on top of the normal metabolic processes of the body. But, there is no specific food you can eat which will cause more stored body fat to be burned in preference to any other source. The only way to do that, as said before, is to reduce calorie intake, do increased levels or exercise or both.
1. Eating late will make you fat, as you will be inactive in the night and the food will not be burnt up and will turn straight to fat.
No it won’t. A calorie is a calorie what ever time you eat it. The digestive system takes about 4 hrs to turn food into fat, depending of what food is eaten of course. But, the body will still be using energy all the time, and the digestive process uses energy too. The main factor is how many total calories you’ve eaten throughout the whole day. If on average you are eating less energy in calories than the body burns up in a day, you’ll lose weight, whenever you eat. This fallacy comes from the general belief that when people eat late at night it is an extra meal or is snacking, since people pre-disposed to do that are likely to be overweight the theory is they are fat because they’ve eaten late…
2. Through diet and exercise you can target areas of fat loss, like the hips and thighs.
How many times do you hear this one?
Sadly it’s wrong. Fat is evenly distributed around the body. It is also burnt off at the same rate from around the body, no one area quicker than another- even if you “target” that area with exercise. Some people think they have a fat arse and thin body, they don’t they probably have a genetically big arse. If they lose fat they’ll still have a proportionally big arse as the rest of the body would have shrunk at the same time. The only way around that is cosmetic surgery or using clothing to balance things out.
3. You are what you eat, eating Fat will make you fat!
Wrong and the kind of gross simplification some diet food companies love to push. Well, what you eat is important but it’s not necessarily what you eat that makes you fat, its how much of it. 500 calories from fat rich foods or vegetables or rice is still 500 calories. Fat is high in calories so eating less will help reduce overall calories consumed and will aid weight loss, but only if these calories are not replaced by something else. Many low fat foods are high in sugars so are really no better for you in terms of weight loss unless you are controlling overall calorie intake. The body converts excess calories to fat, just because the food was fat already doesn’t make it more likely to be turned into fat.
4. Skipping meals will make you put on weight.
How can not eating make you put on weight? This should be followed by “but only if you begin to eat more at other times”. This misconception has come about based on the idea that people that skip meals will still be hungry and are more likely to snack, and when they do this will often be snack foods which tend to be higher in calories. So the net result is that they end up eating more than they would have done. Put it this way though, instead of having a cheese sandwich which is worth 425 cals for lunch at 1.00pm you have a cup of coffee which is 25 cals and you have an apple worth 100 cals as a snack at 3pm as you’re hungry. Assuming for the rest of the day you eat what you would have done your total calories taken in have reduced by 300 cals. In this scenario you’ll lose weight not put it on. Skipping meals is not a good idea because it encourages snacking, if you don’t snack all it will do is make you feel more hungry.
5. Eating a big breakfast will kick start your metabolism and help you lose weight in the long run.
Eating more than normal or than you need, will mean you put on weight unless you do additional exercise to burn of the extra calories. Having a fried breakfast when otherwise you’d have eaten nothing, then having your normal diet for the rest of the day will make you into a porker in no time! Your metabolic rate does not increase when you eat something; well it can as a result of digesting the food but this is certainly not enough to cover what extra calories are coming in. Doing exercise or gaining weight either through muscle or fat increases the metabolic rate. The idea is that a big breakfast fills you up and makes it unlikely you’ll snack later on, since the breakfast will contain less calories than the snacks, you’ll end up losing weight. Again though it all depends on what else you do and what the breakfast is… simply eating breakfast will not cause weight loss.
6. “Carbohydrate rich foods like potatoes, rice, pasta, and bread are not fattening unless you put fat (in the form of sauces or butter) on top of them.“
What a load of complete and utter crap! And to make things worse this comes quote comes word for word from a UKTV website where they are trying to de-bunk dieting myths! The link to the article is here:-http://uktv.co.uk/style/item/aid/586544/multipageid/586545
So that means I can eat tons of spuds then does it, and I am guaranteed not to put any weight on? The idiot that wrote the article fails to note that foods high in carbohydrate, like potatoes, contain calories. Unused calories are converted to body fat so over-eating them and any other food for that matter will still make you fat. Bread is notorious for having hidden ingredients and many loaves on sale have relatively high fat contents in any case, as well as a host of chemicals. A classic example of poor advice and poor science!
7. If you lose more than 2 pounds a week it will not be fat but will be lean muscle tissue.
This one was also in the UKTV article above, which has also been copied word for word to other sites offering advice.
This is not true. The amount of weight lost on a diet will be related to what calories you eat versus your BMR (Basal Metabolic Rate) plus any other calories you burn. If you are an overweight adult you can easily lose 2+ pounds by just reducing your calorie intake from whatever to 1,500 calories a day without doing any form of additional exercise, just the calorie difference will do this. If you then do extra exercise on top you will burn extra calories and lose more weight. Doctors, dieticians and nutritionists tend to advise on 2 pounds of weight loss per week as being an optimum level as this can be achieved without crash dieting, which they are obviously not in favour of. Dieting can cause muscle as well as fat loss, but at what level this kicks in depends on the person’s physiology. Generally starving one’s self would be guaranteed to do it but you’d be losing a hell of a lot more than 3 pounds a week if you did that. A good example of taking good science and extracting the wrong answer!
8. Just sticking to a diet is not enough, you need to exercise too.
Another one from the terrible UKTV article and this has been copied to other sites word for word. Some people are so lazy; the original UKTV article has lifted a lot of info from yet another site by the way.
Not true of course, otherwise morbidly obese people who are bed ridden and therefore cannot do any extra exercise would never be able to lose weight by dieting, which of course they can and do. Again, its all about your calorie intake versus your BMR, if you eat less than you need you’ll lose weight without any additional exercise. Of course exercise brings other health benefits, as well as burning calories and assisting weight loss and since overweight people are less likely to do exercise losing weight can sometimes help them to begin. But, exercise being NEEDED for weight loss? Nope, not true. Of course I mean exercise in the sense it is a special effort like jogging or going to the gym. Any activity can be regarded as exercise though, even running the vacuum cleaner round burns calories…
9. In low carbohydrate – high protein diets the weight loss is mostly water.
Guess where this one came from? Yep it’s UKTV again. I’m going to send them an angry email, how can one article be so wrong?
Low carb diets get a bad press; you’re either for them or against them. Most dieticians think they are bad for your health due to often high levels of saturated fats (particularly the Atkins version) and there are also concerns over the lack of vitamin C, calcium and fibre. All true probably, but the diet certainly does result in fat loss. Millions of people have lost a serious amount of weight on low carb diets and this is not all water otherwise they’d be dead from dehydration. Whether or not the weight stays off for good after doing a low carb diet is another argument entirely, but since the myth is about water loss I’m sticking with criticism of that. The same article this statement came from also describes Ketones as compounds produced when the body begins to use up protein for energy. Which is just totally wrong, Ketones are a by product of the burning of stored body fat. They appear when the stored glucose in the Liver is depleted and no additional energy is coming in to the body. In healthy people who are not pregnant this is normally as a result of the body not receiving enough energy… from food or after exercise where energy reserves have been used up. Ketones are present in people on low carb diets because they are consuming less energy than their body needs, hence the body fat being burned. Why can’t people do “proper” research before publishing articles on the internet as fact!?
10. Some special foods, like grapefruit or apples will burn fat just by eating them.
Sorry, I can just lose weight by eating something? Great, I’ll just eat 50 apples a day and I’ll be down to my ideal weight in weeks! This one is mentioned at:-
http://www.momswhothink.com/diet-and-nutrition/fat-burning-foods.html
I love the name of this site: “moms who think”, well they may think but they don’t read, or at least they don’t do proper research before publishing bunkum as advice. The reality is that all food will generate some metabolic activity when it is digested and this will burn up energy in the body in its self, this is on top of the normal metabolic processes of the body. But, there is no specific food you can eat which will cause more stored body fat to be burned in preference to any other source. The only way to do that, as said before, is to reduce calorie intake, do increased levels or exercise or both.
Tuesday 13 January 2009
Weight loss is both fat and water...
I'm sure most people who have dieted at some point have heard "experts" say that especially in the early stages of a diet the body will lose a lot of water as well as body fat, meaning not all weight loss is fat, in some cases they says its mostly water. I'm not convinced that this is necessarily the case...
It turns out that the average persons body fat deposits are made up of about 15% water.
This maybe a gross misunderstanding of the facts but it would be logical to assume that as you use up stored body fat the underlying structure goes, including the water around it. Meaning for every pound of weight you lose on a diet 15% of that is water, the rest is fat. Obviously water has no calorific content, so does that mean that 1 pound of weight loss is not worth 3,500 calories but actually about 3,000 since 15% of it is water? (1 pound of body fat is equal to 3,500 calories.) I have no idea but this could explain why weight loss seems to be more than expected when calculating potential weight loss from the BMR and calories eaten. This is quite good news really.
I cannot see this as a problem, and I know some people have hang ups about actually losing fat as if it is more important than water. The reality of course is that the water here is stored WITH the fat, its not like you have pools of water located around the body. The body fat stores themselves contain the water, so when you lose fat you lose both together.
How then does the body just get rid of the water, and not the fat, as per the old story about losing mostly water when beginning a diet? Again, I have no idea but I cannot see this as plausible. Why would the body decide to off load only water from fat stores in the event of a reduction of food energy coming in, what purpose does that serve when the body should be looking to metabolise its saved energy to make up the shortfall? I don't buy it as it sounds like one of the "old wives" tales, like not eating late at night as it causes weight gain, which is of course not true.
From what I can see (taking it as a sceptical layman of course), the body's reaction to a downturn in energy coming in from food is to begin to use up stored fat reserves, that's a simple thing to understand and is totally accepted scientifically. Since these reserves include water in their structure when the fat is burned for energy the water is no longer required and is got rid of. The water loss is in line with fat loss, has to be. Now I understand some people can retain more water than others, so its possible they may have a higher ratio of fat to water but I would still imagine that when fat is burned, the fat and water are lost at the same rate.
It turns out that the average persons body fat deposits are made up of about 15% water.
This maybe a gross misunderstanding of the facts but it would be logical to assume that as you use up stored body fat the underlying structure goes, including the water around it. Meaning for every pound of weight you lose on a diet 15% of that is water, the rest is fat. Obviously water has no calorific content, so does that mean that 1 pound of weight loss is not worth 3,500 calories but actually about 3,000 since 15% of it is water? (1 pound of body fat is equal to 3,500 calories.) I have no idea but this could explain why weight loss seems to be more than expected when calculating potential weight loss from the BMR and calories eaten. This is quite good news really.
I cannot see this as a problem, and I know some people have hang ups about actually losing fat as if it is more important than water. The reality of course is that the water here is stored WITH the fat, its not like you have pools of water located around the body. The body fat stores themselves contain the water, so when you lose fat you lose both together.
How then does the body just get rid of the water, and not the fat, as per the old story about losing mostly water when beginning a diet? Again, I have no idea but I cannot see this as plausible. Why would the body decide to off load only water from fat stores in the event of a reduction of food energy coming in, what purpose does that serve when the body should be looking to metabolise its saved energy to make up the shortfall? I don't buy it as it sounds like one of the "old wives" tales, like not eating late at night as it causes weight gain, which is of course not true.
From what I can see (taking it as a sceptical layman of course), the body's reaction to a downturn in energy coming in from food is to begin to use up stored fat reserves, that's a simple thing to understand and is totally accepted scientifically. Since these reserves include water in their structure when the fat is burned for energy the water is no longer required and is got rid of. The water loss is in line with fat loss, has to be. Now I understand some people can retain more water than others, so its possible they may have a higher ratio of fat to water but I would still imagine that when fat is burned, the fat and water are lost at the same rate.
Diet Day +9 (BMI 29.84, -5 pounds since start)
Lost 2 pounds since yesterday, getting back on the diet seems to have had an immediate effect. Hopefully I'll lose 2-3 more pounds by the end of the week to be back on track. (My goal is to lose 3.5 pounds a week, which I do not think is ecessive.)
Looking on the web last night I was shocked at how much biased advice there is out there about weight loss. There are very few sites were they give advice and then not try and sell you their programme, or book or whatever. Since this is completely unregulated how much of this stuff can you trust! Seems to me the only one's you can trust are the government health sites, where they have no particular bias apart from overall health. Turns out their advice all revolves around sensible balanced diets, eating smaller meals, reducing fats and sugars, reducing alcohol intake and doing more exercise... ain't "rocket science" is it?
Looking on the web last night I was shocked at how much biased advice there is out there about weight loss. There are very few sites were they give advice and then not try and sell you their programme, or book or whatever. Since this is completely unregulated how much of this stuff can you trust! Seems to me the only one's you can trust are the government health sites, where they have no particular bias apart from overall health. Turns out their advice all revolves around sensible balanced diets, eating smaller meals, reducing fats and sugars, reducing alcohol intake and doing more exercise... ain't "rocket science" is it?
Monday 12 January 2009
Just added BMI/BMR gadget to this blog
Just added a handy BMI and BMR tool to the blog to the left. I also have a Metric to Imperial/US converter to make it really easy to use.
Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR)
I have been reading up on how the metabolism works since this is useful for understanding how calories are used by the body. (I have already established that understanding calorie usage is a vital component to successful weight loss based on scientific principles.)
The rate at which the human body burns up calories through normal activity is called the Basal Metabolic Rate or BMR, this is the amount of calories a person needs just for their body to function, without any serious level of exercise. This is in essence the amount of calories you will be using right now, today. So it is a really useful thing to know when working out the level of calories required in food consumed to guarantee weight loss.
I found some great free tools which work out your BMR. Now I have no idea how accurate these actually are but my result seems to be plausible based on what I already know. A good site is:-
http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/
Turns out my BMR is 2010. Meaning on a calorie controlled diet of 1,500 cals per day I will be potentially burning 510 cals of body fat to make up the short fall. A crude calculation since it is far more complex but in essence it is how it works. 7 days x 510 = 3,570 cals per week or approximately 1 pound of fat. Hmmm, now it doesn't sound too impressive. This highlights the need to do some form of extra exercise, see my other posts about the potential extra calories that can be used up with "easy exercise".
The rate at which the human body burns up calories through normal activity is called the Basal Metabolic Rate or BMR, this is the amount of calories a person needs just for their body to function, without any serious level of exercise. This is in essence the amount of calories you will be using right now, today. So it is a really useful thing to know when working out the level of calories required in food consumed to guarantee weight loss.
I found some great free tools which work out your BMR. Now I have no idea how accurate these actually are but my result seems to be plausible based on what I already know. A good site is:-
http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/
Turns out my BMR is 2010. Meaning on a calorie controlled diet of 1,500 cals per day I will be potentially burning 510 cals of body fat to make up the short fall. A crude calculation since it is far more complex but in essence it is how it works. 7 days x 510 = 3,570 cals per week or approximately 1 pound of fat. Hmmm, now it doesn't sound too impressive. This highlights the need to do some form of extra exercise, see my other posts about the potential extra calories that can be used up with "easy exercise".
Diet Day +8 (BMI 30.13, +2 pounds since last weigh in)
Damn!!! It seems the Pizza slip up has had much more of an effect than I thought. I have gained another 2 pounds. Worse still my BMI is back over 30 which means I am now officially Obese again. Big lesson learned, you cannot stray from a diet if you want to lose weight! Clearly this is the reason why so many people fail with dieting:-
1) People don't diet successfully and give up (they stray a little a lose heart when the diet doesn't seem to be working).
2) Or, they diet, lose quite a bit of weight then go straight back to eating the same things as before with the same lifestyle and rapidly put the weight back on again.
It seems to take roughly four times longer to lose weight than to put it on again (for me anyway).
1) People don't diet successfully and give up (they stray a little a lose heart when the diet doesn't seem to be working).
2) Or, they diet, lose quite a bit of weight then go straight back to eating the same things as before with the same lifestyle and rapidly put the weight back on again.
It seems to take roughly four times longer to lose weight than to put it on again (for me anyway).
Sunday 11 January 2009
How calories are burnt...
I found some interesting information on how calories are used up by the body. Since this is important in weight loss this is good stuff to know!
It turns out that 1 pound (0.45 kg) of body fat is equivalent to 3,500 calories, meaning this much extra calories need to be burnt off by the body in order to lose 1 pound of fat! How much does 3,500 calories mean in terms of extra exercise?
Well, it all depends on how much you weigh in the first place, since this has a factor in determining the Metabolic rate (see my post about the Science of weight loss for more info). Here is a list of common (easy) forms of exercise that most average people probably do everyday anyway and how many calories they burn. Please note that this is based on someone, like me that weighs 200+ pounds:-
Leisure cycling, (not racing) for 30 minutes- 191 calories burnt
Walking at 2mph (normal walking) for 30 minutes- 126 calories
Housework for 30 minutes- 131 calories
Running, (gentle jog) for 10 minutes- 128 calories
Round of Golf, (walking and carrying clubs) 4 hours- 2,208 calories!!!
Walking up stairs for 5 minutes- 61 calories
Since most people weighing 200 pounds probably already burn up to 2,000 calories a day just doing a normal sedentary daily routine they only need to do an additional 1,500 calories worth of exercise a day to then lose a pound of body fat. This "exercise" need not be going to the gym, playing high impact sports, or even consciously trying to do something "sporty", as the list above shows. For instance, just doing 30 minutes of housework a day would be 10% of the way there. Of course though, this is based on the person in question eating the same diet as before and bear in mind this will be the diet which caused them to be 30% overweight in the first place! So by reducing the number of calories taken in by eating in the first place will reduce the amount of additional exercise required.
Most sensible advice out there implies that rapid weight loss is harmful, and give a rate of about 2 pounds reduction per week as "safe". This means that the 7,000 calories of extra exercise that needs to be done to lose this 2 pounds can be spread out across the week, in other words 1,000 calories per day or an equivalent reduction in calories taken in.
Obviously just not eating can also be unhealthy and sensible advice from actual health professionals generally points to 1,500 calories as a safe minimum amount for daily food intake. This means, for someone my size, that I need to do about 500 calories of extra exercise a day. Believe it or not this could be as simple as taking the stairs instead of the elevator, getting off the bus a stop early and other simple things. No need to go to the gym.
Since the 2,000 calories per day as a basic break even energy requirement is a very rough calculation the reality, (based on my research and limited experience) is that an average person like me will probably lose up to 2 pounds per week by reducing daily calorie intake to 1,500 and doing NO additional exercise at all. This doesn't involve any complex dieting or meal replacements or any other faddy approach, just an appreication of the amount of calories being eaten every day.
It turns out that 1 pound (0.45 kg) of body fat is equivalent to 3,500 calories, meaning this much extra calories need to be burnt off by the body in order to lose 1 pound of fat! How much does 3,500 calories mean in terms of extra exercise?
Well, it all depends on how much you weigh in the first place, since this has a factor in determining the Metabolic rate (see my post about the Science of weight loss for more info). Here is a list of common (easy) forms of exercise that most average people probably do everyday anyway and how many calories they burn. Please note that this is based on someone, like me that weighs 200+ pounds:-
Leisure cycling, (not racing) for 30 minutes- 191 calories burnt
Walking at 2mph (normal walking) for 30 minutes- 126 calories
Housework for 30 minutes- 131 calories
Running, (gentle jog) for 10 minutes- 128 calories
Round of Golf, (walking and carrying clubs) 4 hours- 2,208 calories!!!
Walking up stairs for 5 minutes- 61 calories
Since most people weighing 200 pounds probably already burn up to 2,000 calories a day just doing a normal sedentary daily routine they only need to do an additional 1,500 calories worth of exercise a day to then lose a pound of body fat. This "exercise" need not be going to the gym, playing high impact sports, or even consciously trying to do something "sporty", as the list above shows. For instance, just doing 30 minutes of housework a day would be 10% of the way there. Of course though, this is based on the person in question eating the same diet as before and bear in mind this will be the diet which caused them to be 30% overweight in the first place! So by reducing the number of calories taken in by eating in the first place will reduce the amount of additional exercise required.
Most sensible advice out there implies that rapid weight loss is harmful, and give a rate of about 2 pounds reduction per week as "safe". This means that the 7,000 calories of extra exercise that needs to be done to lose this 2 pounds can be spread out across the week, in other words 1,000 calories per day or an equivalent reduction in calories taken in.
Obviously just not eating can also be unhealthy and sensible advice from actual health professionals generally points to 1,500 calories as a safe minimum amount for daily food intake. This means, for someone my size, that I need to do about 500 calories of extra exercise a day. Believe it or not this could be as simple as taking the stairs instead of the elevator, getting off the bus a stop early and other simple things. No need to go to the gym.
Since the 2,000 calories per day as a basic break even energy requirement is a very rough calculation the reality, (based on my research and limited experience) is that an average person like me will probably lose up to 2 pounds per week by reducing daily calorie intake to 1,500 and doing NO additional exercise at all. This doesn't involve any complex dieting or meal replacements or any other faddy approach, just an appreication of the amount of calories being eaten every day.
The "science" of weight loss
I have been scouring the web for information and advice on successful weight-loss. 9o% of "advice" seems to imply you have to buy something, such as a membership of a club, a book, "special" meals or food or whatever, to lose weight. Well, the "rule" I am following first and foremost is that I must not spend any money whatsoever in the pursuit of weight loss, so by definition most advice is not applicable although you can still pick up nuggets of information for free.
I decided to use "proper" science to aid me in my efforts, which is scientifically proven facts about how diet causes body fat gain and loss in humans. There is a lot of Pseudo science about and some claims made by proponents of the various diet strategies out there are either just plain wrong or take a lot of real science and twist the facts somewhat. Detox seems to be a term used widely that has little scientific creditability, some Low Carb diets seem to imply you can break scientific laws on “Thermodynamics” (more of that later), so finding out what is or isn’t scientifically “true” is a bit of a challenge. One thing is for sure: what you eat is directly related to the amount of body fat you have, but its how this relationship works that appears to be the key to unlocking the reasons for weight loss and gain, and therefore how to lose weight successfully.
Body fat is a result of the human body storing unused energy from what is consumed. A marvellous thing, save what is not needed now for when it might be, but this brilliant function is a double edged sword.
Human evolution has developed this automatic system in the body to deal with times of famine and feast, when food supplies were not as predictable as they are in the modern society. The idea is that when times are good the body stores up energy, humans over-consume, their bodies automatically programmed to know that at some point in the future they may need to rely on their “energy savings” for survival. Since most people these days in the modern world do not encounter famine they tend to never use up these saved stores of energy in their bodies as they have no need to, hence they put on weight if they are eating too much, (which it seems most of us are pre-disposed to do when times are good, which they perpetually are in the modern world). The end result is that a large proportion of people in the modern world are likely to be overweight to some degree, some more than others, something borne out in numerous studies.
The human body like all living things is a complex machine, and like any machine it requires energy to function, in other words fuel. Body fat and food is converted into energy by the body to supply the muscles, since the heart is a muscle that must never stop- a supply of energy to the body is critical. Food also supplies nutrition, things necessary for the correct function of the systems within the body such as vitamins, minerals, proteins etc. So food is necessary and since no single food gives the full range of nutritional requirements the diet needs to be varied. This all means simply not eating anything at all or just eating one type of food is not a good idea when it comes to weight loss as the body will soon stop working as it is lacking vital nutritional elements, even when stored body fat can supply energy.
The body burns energy at different rates, this is called the Metabolic Rate. Basically it is NOT true that average people have different metabolic rates, which is an excuse sometimes used to explain why some people are fat and others thin. Stored body fat is a result of taking in more energy in the form of food than is being burned off by the body in the Metabolic process. The Metabolic rate can be increased by exercise, so it is more likely that a thin person is either eating less than a fat person or taking more exercise but eating the same. Either way both bodies are functioning in basically the same way with no significant differences. The Metabolic rate can also be increased based on the size of a person, so rather perversely if you take two people the same height, one is overweight or fat the other is a ‘normal’ size and is thin the fat person will burn off more energy from food than the thin person without any additional exercise, simply because their body has to work that little bit harder to do normal things, such as walking or even sleeping. This is due to the extra weight and size of the body. (The heart for instance has more blood to pump round longer distances.) This explains why, when you take a team of professional sportsmen or a random group of soldiers from the same army, they nearly always have similar physiques, even if their heights differ. Their exercise regimes and food intakes are managed and will generally be the same for everyone, so they all have similar amounts of stored body fat.
The potential energy in food is measured in calorific content or calories. Most foods these days are labelled with their calorie content, or if not this information is widely available. This makes it rather easy to calculate how much energy food is providing. The body burns calories at different rates but roughly this will be 1 calorie per minute for a normal person when at rest or sleeping. This means an average human who does literally nothing all day long will still burn 1,440 calories per day. Since most people do not sleep for 24 hours they will require more than this to function and maintain their body fat or weight. The accepted figure for energy requirements for an average person is about 2,000 calories per day. Therefore, if an average person eats less than this amount their body will begin to use up stored body fat and they will begin to lose weight.
The rate of stored energy usage will be increased if the person eating less than their basic energy requirement also takes part in additional exercise, such as jogging or going to the gym resulting in extra calories being required.
Note there is nothing in this basic analysis that says anything about GI, carbohydrate or protein or food combinations or anything else for that matter. Simply put, science makes it clear that weight gain and loss is a simple equation, its all down to how much energy the body requires and how much it receives in the form of food. With all of the seemingly successful "fad" diets and plans the basic overriding similarity between all of them is that they reduce overall calorie intake.
Scientifically then, the key for my “diet” to be successful will be understanding how much energy my food is providing and how much I need, this way I can ensure that my body begins to use the stored body fat as energy and I’ll lose weight.
I decided to use "proper" science to aid me in my efforts, which is scientifically proven facts about how diet causes body fat gain and loss in humans. There is a lot of Pseudo science about and some claims made by proponents of the various diet strategies out there are either just plain wrong or take a lot of real science and twist the facts somewhat. Detox seems to be a term used widely that has little scientific creditability, some Low Carb diets seem to imply you can break scientific laws on “Thermodynamics” (more of that later), so finding out what is or isn’t scientifically “true” is a bit of a challenge. One thing is for sure: what you eat is directly related to the amount of body fat you have, but its how this relationship works that appears to be the key to unlocking the reasons for weight loss and gain, and therefore how to lose weight successfully.
Body fat is a result of the human body storing unused energy from what is consumed. A marvellous thing, save what is not needed now for when it might be, but this brilliant function is a double edged sword.
Human evolution has developed this automatic system in the body to deal with times of famine and feast, when food supplies were not as predictable as they are in the modern society. The idea is that when times are good the body stores up energy, humans over-consume, their bodies automatically programmed to know that at some point in the future they may need to rely on their “energy savings” for survival. Since most people these days in the modern world do not encounter famine they tend to never use up these saved stores of energy in their bodies as they have no need to, hence they put on weight if they are eating too much, (which it seems most of us are pre-disposed to do when times are good, which they perpetually are in the modern world). The end result is that a large proportion of people in the modern world are likely to be overweight to some degree, some more than others, something borne out in numerous studies.
The human body like all living things is a complex machine, and like any machine it requires energy to function, in other words fuel. Body fat and food is converted into energy by the body to supply the muscles, since the heart is a muscle that must never stop- a supply of energy to the body is critical. Food also supplies nutrition, things necessary for the correct function of the systems within the body such as vitamins, minerals, proteins etc. So food is necessary and since no single food gives the full range of nutritional requirements the diet needs to be varied. This all means simply not eating anything at all or just eating one type of food is not a good idea when it comes to weight loss as the body will soon stop working as it is lacking vital nutritional elements, even when stored body fat can supply energy.
The body burns energy at different rates, this is called the Metabolic Rate. Basically it is NOT true that average people have different metabolic rates, which is an excuse sometimes used to explain why some people are fat and others thin. Stored body fat is a result of taking in more energy in the form of food than is being burned off by the body in the Metabolic process. The Metabolic rate can be increased by exercise, so it is more likely that a thin person is either eating less than a fat person or taking more exercise but eating the same. Either way both bodies are functioning in basically the same way with no significant differences. The Metabolic rate can also be increased based on the size of a person, so rather perversely if you take two people the same height, one is overweight or fat the other is a ‘normal’ size and is thin the fat person will burn off more energy from food than the thin person without any additional exercise, simply because their body has to work that little bit harder to do normal things, such as walking or even sleeping. This is due to the extra weight and size of the body. (The heart for instance has more blood to pump round longer distances.) This explains why, when you take a team of professional sportsmen or a random group of soldiers from the same army, they nearly always have similar physiques, even if their heights differ. Their exercise regimes and food intakes are managed and will generally be the same for everyone, so they all have similar amounts of stored body fat.
The potential energy in food is measured in calorific content or calories. Most foods these days are labelled with their calorie content, or if not this information is widely available. This makes it rather easy to calculate how much energy food is providing. The body burns calories at different rates but roughly this will be 1 calorie per minute for a normal person when at rest or sleeping. This means an average human who does literally nothing all day long will still burn 1,440 calories per day. Since most people do not sleep for 24 hours they will require more than this to function and maintain their body fat or weight. The accepted figure for energy requirements for an average person is about 2,000 calories per day. Therefore, if an average person eats less than this amount their body will begin to use up stored body fat and they will begin to lose weight.
The rate of stored energy usage will be increased if the person eating less than their basic energy requirement also takes part in additional exercise, such as jogging or going to the gym resulting in extra calories being required.
Note there is nothing in this basic analysis that says anything about GI, carbohydrate or protein or food combinations or anything else for that matter. Simply put, science makes it clear that weight gain and loss is a simple equation, its all down to how much energy the body requires and how much it receives in the form of food. With all of the seemingly successful "fad" diets and plans the basic overriding similarity between all of them is that they reduce overall calorie intake.
Scientifically then, the key for my “diet” to be successful will be understanding how much energy my food is providing and how much I need, this way I can ensure that my body begins to use the stored body fat as energy and I’ll lose weight.
Diet Day +7 (BMI 28.84 +1 pound since last weigh in)
I have put on 1 pound since yesterday! I have actually gained 1 pound in weight since Friday, after losing 6 pounds in the 5 days previously. (Net loss is still 5 pounds so I am still on the right track I guess providing I stick to the diet.)
I was warned about daily weigh-ins being unreliable and potentially soul destroying, but I am still going to continue with it as it can show a direct link between what is consumed and weight.... The reason for the gain is easy to spot: I came off the diet wagon yesterday and ate some cookie cake and 3 slices of Pizza, the result is an increase of weight of 1 pound. My excuse is that it was my partner Sally's birthday, so a special occasion. I firmly believe if I hadn't had the Pizza and cookie I would almost certainly have lost weight, so the lesson is simple- if you eat crap expect to put on weight. I cannot say I will not be tempted to come off the diet in the future but at least now I know what the impact can be. I wonder how many days it will be before the diet (which I am straight back on) begins to have an effect and I begin to lose weight again?
I was warned about daily weigh-ins being unreliable and potentially soul destroying, but I am still going to continue with it as it can show a direct link between what is consumed and weight.... The reason for the gain is easy to spot: I came off the diet wagon yesterday and ate some cookie cake and 3 slices of Pizza, the result is an increase of weight of 1 pound. My excuse is that it was my partner Sally's birthday, so a special occasion. I firmly believe if I hadn't had the Pizza and cookie I would almost certainly have lost weight, so the lesson is simple- if you eat crap expect to put on weight. I cannot say I will not be tempted to come off the diet in the future but at least now I know what the impact can be. I wonder how many days it will be before the diet (which I am straight back on) begins to have an effect and I begin to lose weight again?
Saturday 10 January 2009
"Before" Photos...
Surprising thing... how little photos of me exist. I must have gone through several thousand digital pictures to find a recent photo of me (taken in the last 2 years) to show me 'before' I started dieting. There were very few. Amazing isn't it but when you are overweight you make sure you're not photographed or only when absolutely necessary, such is the effect on one's self esteem. Anyway, here are some photos taken last year, when my weight was always around 200 pounds...
The beginning... Diet Day +6 (-6 pounds)
Post christmas 2008. Weight 217lbs or 15 stones 3 lbs in Old English! 5' 10" in height and a BMI of 30.56. I am officially obese!!! How the hell did this happen?
Since I was 30 I have struggled to keep the weight off and have steadily put on the pounds, in fact for the last 8 years I have had a 36"to 38" waistline so my current partner has never known me as anything but a porker. Well, that's got to change and my new years resolution is to get back to 10 stones 7lbs, my steady weight throughout my 20's. How many middle aged men would like to do that?
Before embarking on this journey I scoured the web for good stories of other men who have achieved something similar so I could get some inspiration, but couldn't find any, or any advice aimed at someone in my position for that matter. 99% of dietery advice is for women and what there is for men my age assumes you have had a heart attack or require drastic changes in lifestyle due to imminent health risks. I'm just a normal bloke who is a few pounds overweight, I have normal blood pressure, I'm averagely healthy, I don't smoke, I don't drink heavily, I cannot find the time for regular gym sessions nor do I want the expense of memberships, I don't want to enrol in costly diet clubs, plans or crash diets. I like my life as it is, so how can I lose weight yet keep the same life I have now and not pay any money to do so... It must be possible...?
There seems to be a lot of dis-information about the best way to lose weight, crash dieting, complicated plans, low GI (whatever that is), low carb, gyms, expensive meal replacements, you name it. I don't want to spend any money to lose weight, so out go the replacement meal plans, gyms, fat clubs and similar activities. In this quest I plan to try to lose as much weight as quickly as I can but not spend any extra money or effort than I otherwise would have, if it works this could be the best diet ever!!!
The plan is to follow the most successful diet until I initially get to my target weight of 13 stones (182 lbs) which is still slightly overweight but a good start and will be a loss of 35 lbs. If a selected diet doesn't work I'll switch to another, this may involve me trying out several before I reach the goal. I will do my best to exercise maximum will-power and have made sure I have the support of family and friends to help me achieve this, so no ordering in of pizza, chips or Chinese food when I'm around to tempt me!
After reading up on the different types of diet I decided on a hybrid low carbohydrate one... sounds complex but just means this- low fat where possible, nothing high in carbohydtrates- meaning no bread, no potatoes or starchy root vegetables, no rice, no pasta, no sugary foods like biscuits or cakes, no cereals, no beer (argghhh), everything else is OK as long as there is sensible portion sizes and no binging or snacking. Calorie total for each day must not exceed 1,500. This is not an Atkins diet so no 16oz steaks covered in garlic butter! Its all about keeping calorie intake low and since most of the calories in food come from carbohydrates and to a lesser extent fats then by reducing these the plan is that overall calorie intake will drop as well... Of course if you take equal weights of fat (such as butter) and a high carb food, such as bread of course the butter (fat) will have more calories. However, most people eat far more volumes of carbohydrates than they do fats, think of a piece of toast with butter. By eating eating foods lower in fats and carbs the idea is that calorie intake will be reduced but volume will not, a chinese vegetable stir fry for instance is low in both if cooked correctly and will be quite filling.
6 days in and I have gone from 15st 3lbs to 14st 11lbs ( a loss of 6lbs which is nearly half a stone)! So it all appears to be working so far.
Since I was 30 I have struggled to keep the weight off and have steadily put on the pounds, in fact for the last 8 years I have had a 36"to 38" waistline so my current partner has never known me as anything but a porker. Well, that's got to change and my new years resolution is to get back to 10 stones 7lbs, my steady weight throughout my 20's. How many middle aged men would like to do that?
Before embarking on this journey I scoured the web for good stories of other men who have achieved something similar so I could get some inspiration, but couldn't find any, or any advice aimed at someone in my position for that matter. 99% of dietery advice is for women and what there is for men my age assumes you have had a heart attack or require drastic changes in lifestyle due to imminent health risks. I'm just a normal bloke who is a few pounds overweight, I have normal blood pressure, I'm averagely healthy, I don't smoke, I don't drink heavily, I cannot find the time for regular gym sessions nor do I want the expense of memberships, I don't want to enrol in costly diet clubs, plans or crash diets. I like my life as it is, so how can I lose weight yet keep the same life I have now and not pay any money to do so... It must be possible...?
There seems to be a lot of dis-information about the best way to lose weight, crash dieting, complicated plans, low GI (whatever that is), low carb, gyms, expensive meal replacements, you name it. I don't want to spend any money to lose weight, so out go the replacement meal plans, gyms, fat clubs and similar activities. In this quest I plan to try to lose as much weight as quickly as I can but not spend any extra money or effort than I otherwise would have, if it works this could be the best diet ever!!!
The plan is to follow the most successful diet until I initially get to my target weight of 13 stones (182 lbs) which is still slightly overweight but a good start and will be a loss of 35 lbs. If a selected diet doesn't work I'll switch to another, this may involve me trying out several before I reach the goal. I will do my best to exercise maximum will-power and have made sure I have the support of family and friends to help me achieve this, so no ordering in of pizza, chips or Chinese food when I'm around to tempt me!
After reading up on the different types of diet I decided on a hybrid low carbohydrate one... sounds complex but just means this- low fat where possible, nothing high in carbohydtrates- meaning no bread, no potatoes or starchy root vegetables, no rice, no pasta, no sugary foods like biscuits or cakes, no cereals, no beer (argghhh), everything else is OK as long as there is sensible portion sizes and no binging or snacking. Calorie total for each day must not exceed 1,500. This is not an Atkins diet so no 16oz steaks covered in garlic butter! Its all about keeping calorie intake low and since most of the calories in food come from carbohydrates and to a lesser extent fats then by reducing these the plan is that overall calorie intake will drop as well... Of course if you take equal weights of fat (such as butter) and a high carb food, such as bread of course the butter (fat) will have more calories. However, most people eat far more volumes of carbohydrates than they do fats, think of a piece of toast with butter. By eating eating foods lower in fats and carbs the idea is that calorie intake will be reduced but volume will not, a chinese vegetable stir fry for instance is low in both if cooked correctly and will be quite filling.
6 days in and I have gone from 15st 3lbs to 14st 11lbs ( a loss of 6lbs which is nearly half a stone)! So it all appears to be working so far.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
