I was a big bicycle rider after my amputation about 15 years ago. I have a different prosthetic design now that’s superior for everything except I have a little less range of motion in my knee. This made cycling impossible with the last build but I need to try again with the latest build. I have to get my bike straightened out a bit but intend to get it going and try again soon.
Thank you for sharing this info. This sounds very similar to my situation and what I’m trying now. I’ve been around 1600 cal a day and kept macros 75/20/5. Been this way for a couple months and have been losing & gaining the same 3 pounds for the last month. So starting today I’m aiming for 2000 cal while keeping the same macros or less even with the carbs. Hope this does the trick!!
How long after you increased you intake did you see changes?
Well, I almost hesitate to answer as I don’t want to create unrealistic expectations that might not be relevant. Everyone is so unique, as are our particular circumstances along the path. But I’ll share more details in hopes you can get proper context…
In my situation, the weight just kept steadily falling (slowly, mind you) without any noticeable pause or change in the rate of decline.
Please note that I didn’t face a “plateau” of any sort up to that point. I didn’t increase my calories to solve a problem. Instead, my concern was that, if I didn’t increase my calories, I’d be inviting my body to begin resisting my underfeeding it by slowing itself down.
I wasn’t hungry after meals and I was eating to satiety. But it didn’t seem like enough in mathematical terms, at least based on standard guidelines indicating that a man of my size needed over 2000 kcal/day, not 1400-1500.
I just thought it’d be smart to see if I could consume more calories (i.e, specifically fat) during that same IF eating window (usually 18:6 hrs or so) I’d been comfortably following for the longest time - well before I ever went keto.
And so, when I did “up” the calories, instead of stopping the weight loss, it just continued along the same slow and steady glide path downward. Except I had even more energy than before (!)
To clarify for more context, I’m not a plump guy to begin with; I’m about 5’ 9" and currently hover just under 145lbs. I’m pretty lean and fairly athletic for a 60+ yr old. In fact, I have no desire to be weighing less than I do; if you tried to detect any belly fat on me, you have to pinch around to find it. Otherwise, I’m reasonably “well-toned” for a thin-looking guy - you know, a runner’s physique (probably due to 25+ years of jogging)
I should probably also add that I’m blessed with good health… bloodwork indicates that I’m quite insulin sensitive, the lipids look great (Pattern A), blood pressure is quite low, take no Rx meds… and so those factors may contribute as there aren’t any health obstacles in the way or years of damage to undo.
Hope some of this additional context helps as it may be different than your current situation. Am eager to hear how things go for you!
You may be able to do it one legged if you have a trike
We were talking about so-called ‘bad’ carbs and ‘good’ carbs some time ago. Researching another topic I came across the following. It seems to support my contention that a carb is a carb (at least ‘substantially’ ). Pull quote first:
You would expect that since the American Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the American Diabetes Association, and other mainstream medical organizations say that complex carbs are healthy, it must mean that eating complex carbs helps you achieve the cardiovascular and metabolic markers for good health.
In layman's terms, eating these foods should have the effect of better heart health and normal blood sugar levels. But when we actually look at the results of eating many complex carbs, the results aren't so healthy.
There are some general rules of blood sugar health and maintenance we can use as a test to see if complex carb foods are healthy. If the food passes the test rules, it's healthy to eat:
* It's generally recognized by most physicians who treat diabetics that for a person weighing 150 pounds, eating 1 gram of carbohydrate will raise blood sugar 5 mg/dl. We'll use this "normal" measure as our base.
* Normal fasting blood sugar ranges from 70 mg/dl to 99 mg/dl. Some insist that the upper cutoff number for healthy fasting blood sugar is 83 mg/dl. Let's assume we are starting with a baseline blood sugar of 85 mg/dl.
* For good health, post-prandial (after a meal) blood sugars should be below 120 mg/dl one or two hours after the meal. (See original study abstract here.)
As you can see, many of the recommended complex carbs (whole grains, starchy vegetables) really spike blood sugar. The healthy ones all fall into the category of non-starchy, fibrous vegetables.
Realistic about carbs - inspiration
Realistic about carbs - inspiration
I have been following this whole thread and one of the things i see is people that go from 1400 to 1500 cal raising their cal. If I was that low I would probably go in starvation mode at my weight ,size and activity level. Look this isn’t something I want to argue about but it is worth looking at. Yes if all you are looking at is the CICO is all that matters way of eating diet then you will be in for a rough road. What im saying is that If you are eating a keto lifestyle and you hit a wall for a log period of time then maybe you need to check your food intake. nothing more nothing less. The only reason I even keep responding to these type of threads is because I really do believe there is more to it then just eat high fat low carb ,and dont worry about anything else.
I call this breakfast.
This just made me laugh. I don’t eat that much for breakfast but I still liked this.
I just had a chance to listen to this weeks keto dudes show. Had to kinda laugh when carl and the doc are talking about how your body has to burn what you eat before it can burn stored fat. Made me think of this thread.Granted the show is about fasting but still implies to normal diet.
Well that bit is really unconvincing and obviously false. Don’t really care if Carl and the doc said it, or are you possibly just relaying the information inaccurately?
Many keto people never fast and eat three meals a day, and certainly burn fat while eating everyday. Otherwise no one here would be loosing weight. Ridiculous non fact. I will attempt getting through the podcast (no promises), and post what I thought and took away here.
obviously false? Not caring what Carl and that doc say doesnt mean its false. I dont necessarily agree with everything they say either but to say something is obviously false just cause you dont beleive it isnt right either. I could be convinced with long term studies that calories have nothing to do with weight loss but I think your mind wont change no matter what.
@barns First it wasn’t so much about fasting as it was autophagy. And the Dr. says “for some people autophagy during fasting may stop if they consume a little fat.” It was in relation to eating a little butter or HWC during a fast. His comment about burning all the energy you have consumed was about starting autophagy not weight loss. The doctor was Dr. Nadir Ali, a cardiologist.
But there is controversy about how autophagy works. Dr. Fung states that autophagy is driven by the absence of dietary protein and carbohydrates. And there are deeper levels of autophagy after three days of an EF.
With KETO breaking down body fat and using it as fuel is completely different than autophagy or the recycling of sick cells and unnecessary protein structures like a deflated fat cell protein matrix and extra skin.
So I think you got a little mixed up by the presentation and tried to use it to support an erroneous CICO model.
Um , no not mixed up. between 33:30 to around 38 minutes in they are very specific about people doing keto for weight loss. Its fine if you dont agree with them but not agreeing with them doesnt make them wrong. Im not willing to die on this hill but I also dont think people should say with certainty that calories dont matter. When you have a thread titled like this one is then that is exactly what you are trying to say so dont try and say that nobody is saying that calories dont matter.
@barns They’re talking about Chaffles all through the times you list. I do want to hear the part you’re referencing.
I think the big problem with the CICO model is that it assumes CO is constant no matter what CI is. We know that isn’t true, and if the hormones aren’t working properly, the body will just adjust CO to match CI. If you fix the hormones, the CICO stuff takes care of itself.
@FrankoBear Are you really Carrie Brown or do all you people in previous British colonies besides the US and Canada say woffles?
Just how does an A get pronounced as O? Now I get it, you just like to argue with the truth.
Wait…are you telling me you pronounce waffle with a ‘waff’ (like in caffeine), or is it more like wah-ffle.