The 3 variables to weight loss/gain

(Bill C) #121

Maybe

(TJ Borden) #122

Bill, are we starting to wear you down? :wink:

I know we went around about empirical data. You now have you’re own. If you’ve been eating a 1500-2000 calorie deficit, and you’re weight has gone up a bit (or even stayed the same), That means your body ISNT using the energy you think it is. CICO or not, there’s no other options there.

Metabolism will slow to match the input. The good news is, it works both ways. When a person with a healthy metabolism increases their caloric intake, they metabolism will increase to burn off the excess. Unfortunately if you force a significant slow down, it can take a long time to bounce back.

I believe the report on the biggest loser contestants said it was about 6 years to get back to a normal metabolism after the damage that was done on the show.

(Jane) #123

Not possible! He needs to reduce his calories!!!
:wink:

(Bill C) #124

On August 27th I began this test. I started at 197. After swimming today I weighed myself and was 187. When I got up this morning I weighed 189.6, so as I exercise I am losing more water weight than before during a workout. Why might that be? Well, I can’t say for sure but it may be due the fact that, as Mary stated above, more fat cells are being replaced by water cells, or put another way, as I am shedding fat my body is retaining more water, thus the larger “weight loss” from working out.

I think it is much too early to determine what is happening. As I have said multiple times, weight loss will not be a straight line process, but I should know a lot more as I move down this path. Not book knowledge but empirical knowledge. And maybe most importantly, we are all unique. Someone who is very overweight and has other issues in play like diabetes, may respond very differently than someone who is in relatively good health.

The other thing I want to add that could be critically important in this data is that the data may be wrong. For example, as I said, I am using Cron-o-meter. That program using my personal stats of height, weight, age, etc. calculates that I am burning 800 calories when I swim for an hour at a “vigorous” pace. That figure could be off by 200 or 300 calories. If so, I could be burning a lot less than I think I am. The Precor that I use is telling me the exact data as I am using it, but that too could be wrong. Again, it supposedly takes into account all of my stats, but are these machines accurate? I don’t know. It’s kind of like a clothing company supposedly selling you a 34" waist pair of pants when in fact you measure 38" but you feel good about buying the 34" so you purchase from that company. In other words, we tend to use data that makes us feel better about ourselves. Why buy from a company that is going to sell me pants that show I am wearing a 38" waist line when I can feel better about myself by purchasing the same thing from a company that sells me that same size with a 34" label on it? I know how absurd that sounds but it is a marketing ploy many companies use. My point being, what is the real data? I honestly don’t know but I think one can figure it out over time, with enough data.

(TJ Borden) #125

See, I knew you were starting to come around. You’re starting to make the case against CICO on your own. :+1:

We’ll keep working on you :joy:

(Bill C) #126

No, on the contrary, I am saying I may not be burning the number of calories I thought I was burning, which would not refute CICO. If anything it may support CICO. Instead of burning more calories than I am consuming I may be in reality breaking even or burning much less than I thought I was.

(TJ Borden) #127

The lack of being able to KNOW, is the root of the flaw with the CICO approach.

It’s okay, you’ll come around, and we’re here to help you get there.

(Bill C) #128

I think we are talking apples and oranges. You are refuting the CICO approach because you believe the body’s metabolism slows to the point that you cannot lose weight on a strictly CICO basis. What I am saying is the reason CICO may APPEAR to not be working is that the data I am using is incorrect. I may not be burning anywhere near what I think I am.

(TJ Borden) #129

Not at all. Actually, if continue the cycle you’ll lose ALL your weight and eventually die. But I’m hoping you come around before that point.

(Bill C) #130

Basing it on what you stated previously.

(TJ Borden) #131

And it will. Your body will prioritize energy to essential functions. But at some point, your input will be less than the minimum you need. That is true starvation. You will pull stored far, breakdown protien and muscle, and eventually die.

(Bill C) #132

Guys get ripped all the time, taking their body fat down to as low as 8%. I’m not interested in getting it down that low but I find it amusing that you think by me wanting to trim my fat levels I am going into a death spiral. If I can take it down to 15% that will be fine.

(KetoQ) #133

I’ve been following this thread during the week with interest, and after some thought, have formulated a (friendly) contribution.

I find that creating a 1500-2000 calorie deficit on a consistent basis is actually quite easy on keto, furthermore, you can achieve that deficit while increasing your daily food intake.

You essentially increase your physical activity. But by pure diet alone, I find creating that level of deficit over a long period is difficult, and I think isn’t in the spirit of keto. I say that because whatever way of eating you choose, it has to be enjoyable and satisfying in order to be sustainable long term. Always being hungry and thinking about your next meal is no way to go through life. I think we’ve all been there at one point or another.

I walk 5-7 miles/day, HIIT train 2x week and weight train 3-4x/week. So I can eat my macros, and beyond, and still create that deficit most days.

Does that deficit translate to weight loss? No, not always how I would like. But in defense of Bill, at the end of the day, you do need to create a caloric deficit to lose fat. Its part of the reason why many on this board OMAD and IF.

That said, and in support of Baytowvin and others, I don’t believe in simple CICO. I believe weight loss is much more complex than that. To borrow a line from the great Tom Waites, I think weight loss is more like Chinese algebra. Water retention, amount of sleep, insulin resistance, muscle gain, sodium levels, and more, affect what you see on the scale. Which is why you may not see a linear correspondence of weight loss to caloric deficit.

Fat loss may be happening. However, you may not realize it for days or weeks. And on a very fundamental level, you need to eat at a deficit.

(TJ Borden) #134

Actually, what I’ve said has nothing to do with body fat percentages. What I’m talking about is your approach to caloric restriction affecting your metabolic rate.

(Bill C) #135

I don’t disagree with anything you are saying. It seems we have gotten into a black and white analysis by some. I am trying to figure it out. I have used a strictly keto approach previously and am now using a “blended” approach. If I were getting hungry and feeling starved I would discontinue it. I am more satiated using the current approach (carb cycling) than strict keto. By current approach I mean eating somewhat more carbs, not off the charts but definitely more, and it seems to be working. I am staying in ketosis.

I an not saying I know the answers. I don’t. I am experimenting. Let’s just see how it plays out.

(TJ Borden) #136

I agree with you in the whole, or at least the general idea. Where I’d disagee is the approach:

I would say a caloric deficit is NEEDED to burn fat, but it’s a natural by-product of a ketogenic way of eating. The idea being you are actually getting 100% of the calories you need from the COMBINATION of what you eat and stored fat.

By reaching a fat adapted state, your body starts happily using stored fat for energy. Hunger and satiety signals when you need to supplement stored energy with intake (eating). There is no way to know from day to day how much energy you’re pulling from fat. We know what the maximum amount of calories your body can pull from a pound of fat, but not what it’s ACTUALLY doing.

To restrict calories based on what you THINK you need, and what THINK you’re burning, since a calculator CANT know for sure either, means you’re still undercutting what your body needs, so even though you are pulling some energy from storage, your metabolism will still begin to slow.

The key difference is eating to the deficit your body tells you, based on hunger and satiety, or eating to the deficit your app tells you.

(Bill C) #137

Two things. One, you have given no in-depth analysis of what you believe to be the most effective approach. Two, since guys get ripped by working out and reducing calories all the time, which is what I am currently doing, what exactly do you find wrong in the approach. At this point, all I have heard from you is essentially “you are doing it wrong.” You have made your point. You don’t believe in CICO. As I said, for me the jury is still out. I get it. We don’t agree. But why don’t you share with us what your starting weight was, what it is now, how you have maintained it over time, and give some empirical data to support your findings.

If you keep coming on here to say you are right and I am wrong, I get that message, loud and clear. If, on the other hand, you wish to provide personal findings that have worked over time, by all means. Otherwise, you don’t need to keep telling me the same thing.

(TJ Borden) #138

You seem upset, and here I thought we were finally getting along. You’ve actually said several times that you haven’t been getting results.

You started this thread with a statement that is not in line with the philosophy of the ketogenic way of eating. I maybe the most…persistent in my discussion with you about it. But I’m certainly not the only one that has disagreed with your stance. The most notable being:

Frankly, I couldn’t care less what you do for yourself. Where I generally interject is when you’re presenting your opinions as facts, that this forum know to be debunked, to newbies that are here to learn how the ketogenic way of eating works.

As for my personal data set. I started at between 475 and 500 lbs. After just under a year, I’m at 410-415, and I’ve reversed T2D. I don’t count anything. I couldn’t even ball park guess how many calories I eat a day. I can tell you it’s usually one or two meals a day, rarely outside of an 8-10 hour window, and eat when I’m hungry, and don’t when I’m not. Occasionally I’ve started an extended fast because I went a couple days without hunger.

I have no idea how many calories I burn in a day. I’m not a couch potato. I’m in construction and I generally climb 30-50 flights of stairs a day. I couldn’t tell you how many calories I burn doing that either.

Occasionally when I seem to hit a stall, I’ll fast. Sometimes I eat more. Just like @Janie, I’ve actually broken through a stall by eating more. Although I’m sure you won’t believe me either, which is fine. I don’t have to prove anything to you.

The core difference between our philosophies is what I’m doing is working for me. By your own statements, what you’re doing isn’t working for you.

(Running from stupidity) #139

This feels intuitively correct, in that I’m still super fat but some of it is squishier than it was a month ago, but do we have some science for this? I do not trust intuition very much.

(TJ Borden) #140

@SlowBurnMary knows what she’s talking about, and she has a graphic!!! What more could you want???:rofl::rofl: