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

On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:16:03 -0600, "Doug Cook"

Post by Doug Cook
Any thoughts would be appreciated.

No answers, but a congratulations! You sound like you are in good
shape, getting better. A nice comeback.

Do you still look the same? Muscle is denser than fat, so people often
don't lose weight as they shift from fat to muscle, but the body takes
on a different look.

There was a recent thread in here on 'The Big Fat Con Story' -Mike
Kruger- May 11- you can probably find it in google if it is off your
server. The first paragraph-

"The Guardian has an excerpt from a new book by Paul Campos, "The
Obesity
Myth". The excerpt is titled "The big fat con story."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,1200549,00.html "

You might look over that article.

I'll take being healthy over being slim if I can't have both.

Doug Cook

2004-05-19 05:00:10 UTC

Post by Dan Daniel
On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:16:03 -0600, "Doug Cook"

Post by Doug Cook
Any thoughts would be appreciated.

No, I haven't changed shape. I should have mentioned that I carry almost
all the weight around my waist. Personally, I think I'm rather oddly shaped.
Chest and butt look normal... just a big fat gut in front. I've thought
about the muscle-for-fat theory, but my waistline hasn't changed, and my
clothes don't fit any differently. That's why I'm pretty sure my body just
doesn't touch it's fat stores.

I've read the thread about the fat fraud, but I am fat. I've got this big
inner tube around my middle that interferes with getting into a nice aero
position, puts unnecessary stress on my butt in the saddle (the biggest
reason I don't ride longer), and I'm scared to even think about what I could
do on the climbs if it were gone.

Elisa Francesca Roselli

2004-05-19 08:05:55 UTC

Post by Doug Cook
I've read the thread about the fat fraud, but I am fat. I've got this big
inner tube around my middle that interferes with getting into a nice aero
position, puts unnecessary stress on my butt in the saddle (the biggest
reason I don't ride longer), and I'm scared to even think about what I could
do on the climbs if it were gone.

I'm in a similar position. I don't cycle nearly as much as you because I'm
afraid of the road, but I do an hour a night on an exercycle. Fitness levels
have definitely improved, but my appearance is unchanged.

My body was ruined in the first place by a quarter century of dieting. When I
started at 14, I was thin as a rail. I dieted because all girls diet, it's what
they're supposed to do, and because I didn't much relish the idea of becoming
woman-shaped. Between then and the age of forty, when I stopped, I must have
lost and regained a third or more of my total body mass at least fifteen times.
Every time I starved for months, and every time I came back much fatter than
before. In addition, I went through major depressions, bouts with suicidal
thoughts and lost my opportunity of an academic life because I didn't have the
physical or mental strength to complete my doctorate. I will never, ever diet
again.

But the awareness that one can still be fit without necessarily being thin is
only just beginning to emerge. I'm concentrating on that now.

I've read that cycling does nothing to bellies or to the upper body; it just
muscles up the legs. Certainly that's true in my case. I still have my big fat
thighs - now they are even bigger fat thighs with muscles on top.

Perhaps sit-ups would do the belly trick?

EFR
Ile de France

Ian G Batten

2004-05-19 08:26:18 UTC

Post by Elisa Francesca Roselli
Perhaps sit-ups would do the belly trick?

They won't. They willimprove the muscles, but will not reduce the
amount of fat (modulo their calories burnt while doing them, which are
negligible).

ian

Pbwalther

2004-05-19 13:25:51 UTC

Post by Ian G Batten

Post by Elisa Francesca Roselli
Perhaps sit-ups would do the belly trick?

They won't. They willimprove the muscles, but will not reduce the
amount of fat (modulo their calories burnt while doing them, which are
negligible).

Quite correct. From all I have heard, you can not "spot" reduce. All doing
situps will do is give you superb muscle tone under the layer of fat on your
tummy.

Rick Onanian

2004-05-19 12:27:41 UTC

On Tue, 18 May 2004 23:00:10 -0600, "Doug Cook"

Post by Doug Cook
Chest and butt look normal... just a big fat gut in front. I've thought

...

This is an aerobelly. Learn to use it. Get a saddle that works for
your body. Survive the climbs, even though everybody passes you
(including the little kid in the fifty pound recumbent). Fly past
them going down the hill using your gravity-assist. Retain your
speed better on flat land because you have more inertia for the same
frontal area.

Embrace your aerobelly.
--
Rick Onanian

S o r n i

2004-05-19 16:15:39 UTC

Post by Rick Onanian
Embrace your aerobelly.

So then, like, ride no-handed?

Bill "in a literal mood, I guess" S.

Dennis Ferguson

2004-05-19 20:01:04 UTC

Post by Doug Cook

Post by Dan Daniel
On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:16:03 -0600, "Doug Cook"

Post by Doug Cook
Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Does diabetes run in your family? You are describing the classic body
shape of someone who may be predisposed to that.

If this is a possibility you might want to seek professional advice about
your diet. The friend I had who matches your description eventually
discovered (if I recall correctly) that to lose fat he had to not only
tip the calorie balance but also dramatically reduce the amount of simple
sugars he consumed, replacing it with calories from other sources. The
problem involved something about how borderline diabetics' bodies
process sugar, though I didn't pay enough attention to be able to tell
you more than that.

If this is your situation I think you'll want professional advice about
what to do about it. You can't just cut all sugar out of your diet since
some sugar consumption (e.g. fruit) is necessary for your health, so if
you are serious about losing the weight you really need someone to help
you manage this.

Dennis Ferguson

Badger_South

2004-05-19 05:59:44 UTC

Post by Doug Cook
My HRM says my average rate is usually right about 75% of max
(although that can vary, usually on the high side, when the ride has
climbing). I feel lean and mean while I ride, but when I get home I wonder
who that fat guy in the mirror is!

What worked/works for me is that I quit eating sugar, bread, and
pasta/potatoes. I switched to fish, chicken, lean beef, green leafy
veggies, cut back on dairy. Read Eades' book on Low carb 'Protein Power'.

You also don't say when you eat, or what you eat. Consider eating smaller
meals, but more often, don't eat after 7pm, drink plenty of water.

Can you suppliment the riding with some jogging, perhaps 3 miles a day, 3
days a week? What about some bodyweight exercises pushups, squats, pullups?
Weight training? Sounds like a lot, but the biking is very efficient and
you may not be taxing the system sufficiently to burn up the calories. I
doubt if you're in any kind of starvation mode eating 2500-3000 calories!!

Congrats on the fitness you've achieved so far.

-B

Pbwalther

2004-05-19 13:30:01 UTC

Post by Badger_South
What worked/works for me is that I quit eating sugar, bread, and
pasta/potatoes. I switched to fish, chicken, lean beef, green leafy
veggies, cut back on dairy. Read Eades' book on Low carb 'Protein Power'.

Well, for much of human history people were lean indeed on a diet of complex
carbs, mainly in the form of grains, vegetables and very little animal
protein. It is quite easy to have a diet like that and be quite lean.

Also, I find that as I do more aerobic exercise, nothing powers the muscles
better then carbohydrates. Eating lots of meat just does not work that well
for me and a good thing to, with my vulnerability to high cholesterol, a high
protein diet would probably put me under a gravestone pretty quickly.

Badger_South

2004-05-19 14:07:51 UTC

Post by Pbwalther

Well, for much of human history people were lean indeed on a diet of complex
carbs, mainly in the form of grains, vegetables and very little animal
protein. It is quite easy to have a diet like that and be quite lean.
Also, I find that as I do more aerobic exercise, nothing powers the muscles
better then carbohydrates. Eating lots of meat just does not work that well
for me and a good thing to, with my vulnerability to high cholesterol, a high
protein diet would probably put me under a gravestone pretty quickly.

No dispute. What works for you is what is important. My bad chol. decreased
and the good increased on a LC diet. You realize that just eating fat does
not make you fat, nor does it cause cholesterol to increase in the blood?

I apologize in advance for the 'convert' tone if any of that slipped in.

-B

Steve Knight

2004-05-19 16:12:18 UTC

Post by Pbwalther
Well, for much of human history people were lean indeed on a diet of complex
carbs, mainly in the form of grains, vegetables and very little animal
protein. It is quite easy to have a diet like that and be quite lean.

humans only started eating grains when we learned to cultivate. we did not
evolve eating grains.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

Denver C. Fox

2004-05-19 16:16:52 UTC

Post by Steve Knight
humans only started eating grains when we learned to cultivate. we did not
evolve eating grains.

And life expectancy was . . . maybe 25 years?

http://members.aol.com/foxcondorsrvtns
(Colorado rental condo)

http://members.aol.com/dnvrfox
(Family Web Page)

David Kerber

2004-05-19 16:45:08 UTC

In article <***@4ax.com>, ***@knight-
toolworks.com says...

humans only started eating grains when we learned to cultivate. we did not
evolve eating grains.

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

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

H. M. Leary

2004-05-19 16:54:31 UTC

Post by David Kerber
toolworks.com says...

humans only started eating grains when we learned to cultivate. we did not
evolve eating grains.

What? The entire primate family eats lots of humans?

Say it ain¹t so!

HAND
I hate T-Storms

--
³Freedom Is a Light for Which Many Have Died in Darkness³

- Tomb of the unknown - American Revolution

David Kerber

2004-05-19 17:12:21 UTC

In article <mikie357-***@news.verizon.net>, mikie357
@forgedabit.net says...

Post by H. M. Leary

Post by David Kerber
toolworks.com says...

humans only started eating grains when we learned to cultivate. we did not
evolve eating grains.

What? The entire primate family eats lots of humans?
Say it ain¹t so!

It ain't so <GGG>!

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

BanditManDan

2004-05-19 17:19:37 UTC

Post by Pbwalther
Well, for much of human history people were lean indeed on a diet of
complex carbs, mainly in the form of grains, vegetables and very
little animal protein. It is quite easy to have a diet like that and
be quite lean.

humans only started eating grains when we learned to cultivate. we did
not evolve eating grains.

But how long has cultivation been around? This is not a new technolog
or anything and the planet wasnt overall fat a 100 to 200 years ago

-

David Kerber

2004-05-19 17:23:13 UTC

Post by Pbwalther
Well, for much of human history people were lean indeed on a diet of
complex carbs, mainly in the form of grains, vegetables and very
little animal protein. It is quite easy to have a diet like that and
be quite lean.

humans only started eating grains when we learned to cultivate. we did
not evolve eating grains.

But how long has cultivation been around? This is not a new technology
or anything and the planet wasnt overall fat a 100 to 200 years ago.

Last I read, 8000 to 10000 years is the current best estimate.

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

Paul Southworth

2004-05-19 06:42:14 UTC

Post by Doug Cook
I don't diet per se, but I do eat sensibly. The days that I've tracked my
caloric intake it's usually right between 2500 - 3000. One friend who is a
"wellness" expert suggests I'm not eating *ENOUGH*. Although she readily
admits she doesn't specialize in athletes ("slovenly couch potato" is how
she describes her typical client), she says that with my activity level my
BMR is 5300... as she explained it that's the number of calories needed to
just maintain my weight! Therefore she thinks my body thinks it's being
starved and refuses to let go of the fat. She thinks by eating MORE the
body will move away from this starvation reflex and start shedding pounds.
She also suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE breakfast
so the body has to switch to fat because the glycogen stores will be low
(sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).
Well, I tried to eat 4000 calories today and about died! I felt horrible,
stuffed, tired, etc. I tried riding with just water (no sport drink), and
found myself craving sugar after the ride.
Any experts lurking out there that would like to comment? Are there any
coaching services online that could help customize my training to help me
lose weight? I can't afford to hire a coach.

If you have health insurance you can probably get covered for a
visit to a dietician, that is the direction I would go. The RD
will most likely have you write down what you eat for a few days
and then make suggestions.

If you're feeling good most of the time then you're probably
eating enough.

--Paul

Badger_South

2004-05-19 06:44:51 UTC

Re-reading your message, I can offer one overall suggestion. Track your
mileage, food intake, type of food, waistline measurement and weight on a
spreadsheet. Weigh yourself every 2nd or 3rd day.

You may be surprised just how much you're eating, how much you're eating at
one meal, how much sugar and starch you're eating, and may be
overestimating the mileage. If you're ranging from 95 to 190 miles during
the week that sounds inconsistent. It may be that you're unknowingly
sabotaging your efforts, by binging during the low mileage weeks. Perhaps
you can smooth it out more, and get 150 miles per week but ride everyday.
AM rides are good, but if you can do some easy jogging in the AM that might
be better, then ride in the evening, and don't eat after 7-8pm.

I went from 270ish to about 200 in 8 months just by cutting out the sugar
and starch and at the time, b/c of an injury did virtually no exercising.

At this point I had gained back some of that, but have lost an additional
30lbs in the last three months just by again cutting out the carbs and
sugar, but in addition I'm biking 20 miles/day 100-110 miles a week.

The reason for the careful tracking is to discover what trends are working
for you, and to help you uncover some things you may be doing
unconsciously, either underestimating or overestimating your efforts or
food intake.

-B

Mathias Koerber

2004-05-19 13:06:25 UTC

Post by Badger_South
You may be surprised just how much you're eating, how much you're eating
at one meal, how much sugar and starch you're eating, and may be
overestimating the mileage. If you're ranging from 95 to 190 miles during
the week that sounds inconsistent. It may be that you're unknowingly
sabotaging your efforts, by binging during the low mileage weeks. Perhaps
you can smooth it out more, and get 150 miles per week but ride everyday.

One more comment (though I too am neither a dietician nor in any way
trained or experienced in any health-related field).

It seems that the body starts burning stored energy (fats) only after
about 1hr (ymmv) orf excercise, so you will need a longer ride to burn off
the readily available energy before you start using up the reserves.
a 15-30 mile (short ride) daily will thus provide a generally good
training but do nothing (much) for loss of weight.

I lost abt 18kg in the first few month of starting cycling again (after
16 years) and ascribe that to the fact that while I did not change my
eating habits much, I went for long rides regularly (at least 2hrs usually
3 or more) which seems to have made a difference. Now (a year later)
I mostly 2 15km rides a day, and do not lose any more weight unless I
do get around to do longer rides (which is rare).

Badger_South

2004-05-19 14:12:55 UTC

Post by Badger_South

everyday.
One more comment (though I too am neither a dietician nor in any way
trained or experienced in any health-related field).
It seems that the body starts burning stored energy (fats) only after
about 1hr (ymmv) orf excercise, so you will need a longer ride to burn off
the readily available energy before you start using up the reserves.
a 15-30 mile (short ride) daily will thus provide a generally good
training but do nothing (much) for loss of weight.
I lost abt 18kg in the first few month of starting cycling again (after
16 years) and ascribe that to the fact that while I did not change my
eating habits much, I went for long rides regularly (at least 2hrs usually
3 or more) which seems to have made a difference. Now (a year later)
I mostly 2 15km rides a day, and do not lose any more weight unless I
do get around to do longer rides (which is rare).

In my experience it takes about 1 hour to get into that 'zone' (which some
ppl don't seem to experience) if you're doing jogging. It takes about 2
hours to get there if you're biking. When 'it' happens, suddenly the effort
seems to disappear and you seem to be able to go on forever.

I've also experienced it with high rep high set weight training, that after
about 90 minutes, suddenly all the work seems very easy.

I didn't start losing rapidly until my rides got up into the 50 to 90
minute range in biking, twice a day. Some days I do fast (for me) 50 minute
rides am, noon and pm.

I'm now losing about 2lbs per week of fat (and gaining more muscle in my
legs).

Seems as though the lower energy demands (and ability to frequently
rest/coast/go downhill) on the bike extends the period that I like to call
the 'fat burning zone' where I fantacize that I'm burning fats, and ketones
and FFA (probably inaccurate, scientifically, but what the hey).

-B

Neil Cherry

2004-05-19 16:04:21 UTC

Post by Mathias Koerber

Post by Badger_South
You may be surprised just how much you're eating, how much you're eating
at one meal, how much sugar and starch you're eating, and may be
overestimating the mileage.

I've also heard that but I'm not sure I beleive that. I've been doing
rides each weekend in the spring, summer and fall that average 60
miles for the last few years. I find the inches come off slowly and
stop around September. First a little background. I ride all year long
(NJ) and my weight goes from ~175 - 196 (the most I've ever weighed),
5'8", medium build, 42 years old. I ride long miles. I'm currently up
to 225-250 miles weeks. Centuries on Saturday and I am commuting twice
a week (20 each way). I've started doing some light weights for the
upper body, push ups, crunches & leg lifts for the rest. I've tried to
watch what I eat but I doubt I'm doing a very good job. I don't watch
my weight but I do measure my middle and I've only lost 2" off the
middle since January (~2000 miles total). The reason I don't watch my
wieght is that I have no scales at home and when I get to work I will
have polished off part of the contents of my Camel Back. So I could
wiegh anywhere from 1 to 6 lbs additinal in water weight. I find the
middle the one location I can't loose the weight easily. I probably
loose it by September and I'll still have a waste of 36" (I'll only
loose the handles but not the rest). I will say this much, my speed is
up, my endurance is up and my climbing has improved some (I live in
the flat lands). I can now push the big ring and still keep my cadence
at ~90 RPM. Oh, on my commute I throw on a BOB trailer and just about
throw everything in there I might possible need (I tell everyone it's
for my llunch ;-). I will be changing my diet in about a month but
first I have a double century to tackle in early June so no changes!

--
Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ***@comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/ (Text only)
http://linuxha.sourceforge.net/ (SourceForge)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/ (HCS II)

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 20:03:41 UTC

Mathias Koerber wrote:
:: On Wed, 19 May 2004 02:44:51 +0000, Badger_South wrote:
::
::
::: You may be surprised just how much you're eating, how much you're
::: eating at one meal, how much sugar and starch you're eating, and
::: may be overestimating the mileage. If you're ranging from 95 to 190
::: miles during the week that sounds inconsistent. It may be that
::: you're unknowingly sabotaging your efforts, by binging during the
::: low mileage weeks. Perhaps you can smooth it out more, and get 150
::: miles per week but ride everyday.
::
:: One more comment (though I too am neither a dietician nor in any way
:: trained or experienced in any health-related field).
::
:: It seems that the body starts burning stored energy (fats) only after
:: about 1hr (ymmv) orf excercise, so you will need a longer ride to
:: burn off the readily available energy before you start using up the
:: reserves.
:: a 15-30 mile (short ride) daily will thus provide a generally good
:: training but do nothing (much) for loss of weight.

I disagree. It all comes down to whether you are controling diet correctly.
A short ride simply won't burn as many calories as a long ride. Also, at
the beginning of exercise the energy system is primarily anaerobic, but the
longer it continues the greater the shift will be to aerobic (assuming
standarding bicycling, not hard sprints or climbing). it doesn't matter
where the energy comes from to fuel the exercise because your body will just
put it back from the food you eat unless you create a deficit.

::
:: I lost abt 18kg in the first few month of starting cycling again
:: (after 16 years) and ascribe that to the fact that while I did not
:: change my eating habits much, I went for long rides regularly (at
:: least 2hrs usually 3 or more) which seems to have made a difference.
:: Now (a year later)
:: I mostly 2 15km rides a day, and do not lose any more weight unless I
:: do get around to do longer rides (which is rare).

It made a difference because you burned more calories with longer rides.
The fact that you do shorter rides now but don't lose any more weight is
simply the result of you not creating sufficient calorie deficit - you're
lighter now, so you either need to do more shorter rides (for greater total
time spent riding) or you need to eat less.

Ron Hardin

2004-05-19 08:20:30 UTC

Count calories. For every cumulative 3500 you take in in excess of
your needs, you gain a pound of fat. Conversely, for every 3500
shy of your needs, you lose a pound of fat.

Just write down the calories of everything you eat and add them up.

Reduce them until you lose weight at the rate you want, two pounds a
week is fine.

Generally if you exercise, you eat more, so it's not a weight loser
alone.

--
Ron Hardin
***@mindspring.com

On the internet, nobody knows you're a jerk.

Bubba@FL

2004-05-19 09:09:33 UTC

Hey Doug,
I'm not a health professional but as an ex-amateur bodybuilder I have done a
great deal of research on this subject. I might be able to help you answer
your question as to why you're still fat. First, your life-style. You are
older, married, have children, bills, and all the stress that goes with it.
Excessive stress alone can be enough to wreck a body. Body type - there are
three basic body types. From your description you fall into what's called
the meso-morphic body type. This just means you have a large frame with
heavy muscle mass. This body type can easily pack on muscle but
unfortunately you also store fat easily, too. Then, there is your choice of
exercise. Bicycling is an excellent form of cardiovascular exercise but does
little to increase overall lean muscle mass. This is mostly because
bicycling is a non-weight bearing type of activity. The only way to increase
lean muscle mass is with some type of weight bearing activity. A simple form
of this is walking. I'm not knocking cycling, I commute to work every day.
Here are a few things that might help you lose some pounds:

Life-style - With family, bills, work, you're gonna have stress. Find simple
positive ways to deal with it that work for you.

Body type - With your body type you should accept the fact that, unless you
are willing to be very disciplined with your diet and work-outs, you are
going to carry some extra weight. Not a big deal. With your current activity
level it sounds like you're in pretty good shape. If you add some
callisthenics a few days a week (push-ups, sit-ups, stretches, etc.) to help
build up lean muscle you'll probably notice a difference, too.

Diet - Again, with your body type, a big obsticle is going to be your slow
metabolic rate. Try to avoid simple carbohydrates (refined sugars, white
breads, etc.) DO NOT do the low-carb/high protein fad diets. They are very
unhealthy and any weight loss is temporary. Forget the three big meals a day
thing and eat smaller meals more often and most importantly, learn to
recognize when you are satisfied, not full! Other than that just try to eat
a balanced diet and drink lots of water.

Unless you are at your doctors office, stay away from scales. As your lean
muscle mass increases you might actually gain a few pounds before your body
starts burning up fat reserves. Nothing discourages people more than scales.
Charting your progress can help you stay on track, too. Educate yourself
about nutrition and learn to read food labels. Sounds silly but most people
really don't understand them such as serving size, types of fats, fats
versus calories, sugars versus carbs. It's all about individual fine tuning.
What works for the guy next to you may not work for you and vise versa. With
knowledge and practice it's a piece of cake. I hope I've been of some help.
Keep the faith and take care -
CHRIS

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

curt

2004-05-19 11:01:07 UTC

Post by ***@FL
Diet - Again, with your body type, a big obsticle is going to be your slow
metabolic rate. Try to avoid simple carbohydrates (refined sugars, white
breads, etc.) DO NOT do the low-carb/high protein fad diets. They are very
unhealthy and any weight loss is temporary. Forget the three big meals a day
thing and eat smaller meals more often and most importantly, learn to
recognize when you are satisfied, not full! Other than that just try to eat
a balanced diet and drink lots of water.

I would hardly call low carbohydrate diets a fad. They have been around
since the 50's that I know of. They are just in the news a lot because
people have wised up. A low carb diet is much more than any fad. It
actually works. You would need to at least read the Atkins book to have an
understanding of how it works, but I can tell from your post you know
nothing about it and just call it a fad diet. You also have lots to learn
about low carbohydrate diets. Who do you think you are calling them
unhealthy? Do you know there are diabetics on this diet and now can go off
there medications? Do you know there are plenty of people that have lost
over 100 pounds and they keep it off with their knowledge of low carb?

I suggest you stick to your X armature body building status and no try and
be a Doctor or nutrition.

If I was the original poster, the first thing I would do is cut the carbs.
What is funny, you suggested the same thing, but you just don't like the
works low carb.

Enjoy,
Curt

Badger_South

2004-05-19 12:23:09 UTC

Post by curt
I would hardly call low carbohydrate diets a fad. They have been around
since the 50's that I know of. They are just in the news a lot because
people have wised up. A low carb diet is much more than any fad. It
actually works.

One thing to mention... There's a 'trick' that has to be mastered for many
to adopt a low carb lifestyle. For me it was this:

1. remove all obvious carbs from the house. That's right, if it's got
sugar, pasta, rice, potatoes, bread, cereal in it, put it in a box and give
it to the neighbors.
2. everyone in the family has to be on the diet, b/c if someone brings in a
loaf of bread on day three you're going to eat it.
3. steel yourself for approximately 7 to 10 days to eat only protein. Since
there's nothing else in the house it's pretty easy.
4. pre-prepare several meals ahead of time so that if you're tempted to
cheat or go off the diet (and you will be) you can go to the fridge and
find a baggie filled with chunks of pre-cooked ribeye, or some delicious
pre-fried sausage, or chunks of turkey or ham and pop them in the 'wave to
head off the pangs. When you make your meals, just cook up twice what you
need each time and put half in the baggies/tupperware. In a few days you'll
have a significant reservoir.
5. have several strategies pre-planned for when you get the urge to cheat.
If you just -have- to have sugar, then eat some fruit, but stay away from
apples, they're carb dense. Some examples are: drink several glasses of
water, perhaps flavored with a bit of lemon juice. Take a tablespoon of
this http://www.naturalhealthconsult.com/Monographs/flax.html. For many ppl
it will cut the cravings.
6. if you slip and re-glycogenize your liver you may have to start over,
but you can be back in BDK (benign dietary ketosis) in a couple days.
7. You -must- read the book, either atkins or eades so that you understand
the process of how insulin plus carbs adds the nutrients into your fat
cells. Much of the info is not quite true, but the core is true. Ultimately
you lose the weight b/c of cutting calories, but on LC this trick will get
you there and keep you there without feeling deprived and 'when can I quit
this diet'.
8. once you do this diet you must continue with restricted carbs. If you go
off you will gain back all the weight and more and the fat will be nastier.
Some ppl can do it twice but it's far less effective the second or third
time.

After you pass day 10 you'll discover you no longer have any desire to eat
carbs, i.e., chips, pretzels, potatoes, pizza, pasta. For me this was the
benefit of the diet. After this point cutting calories wasn't difficult b/c
my appetite was significantly reduced. I've survived for several days in a
row eating small portions of steak, burger, or turkey twice a day as the
fat came off and actually felt like a million bucks.

I've only known one person who was able to get through the 'induction'
period, as this carb restricting is called without clearing out the house
and getting everyone on the diet. Many people start the induction phase,
but for some reason slip - a party at work, mom brings over cookies, etc.
It may take up to 10 attempts, but keep trying.

As a humorous side note, moms are really funny during induction. Mine kept
trying to give me carb dense meals and asking if it was OK for me to have
it. 'honey, can you eat a bowl of sweet potatoes? How about a slice of
pie?' I'm sure most LC dieters have such tales to add. It's a hoot.

HTH,

-B

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 14:10:14 UTC

curt wrote:
::: Diet - Again, with your body type, a big obsticle is going to be
::: your slow metabolic rate. Try to avoid simple carbohydrates
::: (refined sugars, white breads, etc.) DO NOT do the low-carb/high
::: protein fad diets. They are very unhealthy and any weight loss is
::: temporary. Forget the three big meals a day thing and eat smaller
::: meals more often and most importantly, learn to recognize when you
::: are satisfied, not full! Other than that just try to eat a balanced
::: diet and drink lots of water.
::
:: I would hardly call low carbohydrate diets a fad. They have been
:: around since the 50's that I know of. They are just in the news a
:: lot because people have wised up. A low carb diet is much more than
:: any fad. It actually works. You would need to at least read the
:: Atkins book to have an understanding of how it works, but I can tell
:: from your post you know nothing about it and just call it a fad
:: diet. You also have lots to learn about low carbohydrate diets.
:: Who do you think you are calling them unhealthy? Do you know there
:: are diabetics on this diet and now can go off there medications? Do
:: you know there are plenty of people that have lost over 100 pounds
:: and they keep it off with their knowledge of low carb?

Yeah, like me. I've lost 130 lbs on LC and am no longer on any medications
for type 2 diabetes. Fasting BG of 80 and a A1c of 5.1.

::
:: I suggest you stick to your X armature body building status and no
:: try and be a Doctor or nutrition.
::
:: If I was the original poster, the first thing I would do is cut the
:: carbs. What is funny, you suggested the same thing, but you just
:: don't like the works low carb.

Too many people get caught up in the hype about LC...both positive and
negative.

Bubba@FL

2004-05-19 15:40:12 UTC

I'm sorry to upset you, but the low carb/high protein diet is just that, a
fad. Also, the 1950's were the Golden-Age of fad diets so it's no surprise
that this was spawned from that era. This is an example of our society's
ongoing search for the "quick-fix". It will continue to be popular until the
next mass marketed diet craze comes along. Carbohydrates are critical to
every day body functions. Without them the body has a hard time breaking
down complex proteins into the amino acids it needs, especially those found
in vegetables. Any vegetarian can confirm that. Their carbohydrate intake
levels are usually higher than the average meat-eater yet they stay healthy
and maintain weight. These low-carb diets tell people to avoid starchy
fruits and vegetables like carrots, potatoes, bananas, beans, and corn, all
of which are packed with vitamins, minerals, trace elements, and fiber that
are vital to good health. Perhaps the problem is that the people who
practice these diets do not understand what carbohydrates are. There are
many different types which are broken down into two basic categories,
complex and simple. The simple carbs are the refined sugars and starches. To
the body they are the equivelant of jet fuel and should be eaten in very low
levels. These are also the group of carbs that diabetics are mainly
concerned with since their bodies do not produce enough insulin to
efficiently break them down. Complex carbs are found in all plant based
foods that have not been tampered with by us. Their longer and more complex
"chains" provide the body with a steady energy supply as well as many of the
complex proteins, vitimins, and minerals required for proper cellular
function. Did you know that some complex carbohydrates actually require more
calories to break them down than they provide the body. This, in part, is
why even sedentary vegetarians can maintain their weight.

As a bodybuilder, it is essential that you understand how your body works
and uses the food you put in it or you're wasting your time. Several weeks
before a competition, most bodybuilders will reduce their carbohydrate and
fluid levels to a bare minimum. This is to reduce body fat to a very low
level and make the skin thin and taught, allowing more muscle to be seen.
This is only done for short periods because there's a problem. Because fat
stores contain little or no proteins, vitamins, or minerals the body will
start to scavenge what in needs from muscle tissue and internal organs. This
is basicly what you are doing to your body when you deprive it of complex
carbohydrates. No one yet knows what the affect these diets may have long
term. You could be doing irreversible damage to your body by following these
fads. This is also the reason most of these diets fail. When you deprive
your body of something it needs it sends you signals in the form of powerful
cravings. For most people these cravings become too much and they binge to
satisfy them, eventually gaining all the weight back and then some. This is
the body's way of protecting itself should you decide to do something stupid
like this again. This, in a nutshell, is why these fad diets don't work and
can be dangerous.

The human body is a magnificently complex machine. How your body handles
carbohydrates and other foods was determined by your parents, your genetic
makeup. Everyone is different and must fine tune their diet and lifestyle to
themselves. Be healthy in body and spirit.

One final note - Disagree with me if you will but if you are going to insult
me, please have the decency to improve your vocabulary and spelling to at
least mask your apparent ignorance.

Take care all & keep the faith -
CHRIS

day

Post by ***@FL
thing and eat smaller meals more often and most importantly, learn to
recognize when you are satisfied, not full! Other than that just try to

eat

Post by ***@FL
a balanced diet and drink lots of water.

I would hardly call low carbohydrate diets a fad. They have been around
since the 50's that I know of. They are just in the news a lot because
people have wised up. A low carb diet is much more than any fad. It
actually works. You would need to at least read the Atkins book to have an
understanding of how it works, but I can tell from your post you know
nothing about it and just call it a fad diet. You also have lots to learn
about low carbohydrate diets. Who do you think you are calling them
unhealthy? Do you know there are diabetics on this diet and now can go off
there medications? Do you know there are plenty of people that have lost
over 100 pounds and they keep it off with their knowledge of low carb?
I suggest you stick to your X armature body building status and no try and
be a Doctor or nutrition.
If I was the original poster, the first thing I would do is cut the carbs.
What is funny, you suggested the same thing, but you just don't like the
works low carb.
Enjoy,
Curt

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 16:49:08 UTC

***@FL wrote:
:: I'm sorry to upset you, but the low carb/high protein diet is just
:: that, a fad. Also, the 1950's were the Golden-Age of fad diets so
:: it's no surprise that this was spawned from that era. This is an
:: example of our society's ongoing search for the "quick-fix". It will
:: continue to be popular until the next mass marketed diet craze comes
:: along.

:: Carbohydrates are critical to every day body functions.

Nonsense...provide one credible cite....

:: Without them the body has a hard time breaking down complex proteins
:: into the amino acids it needs, especially those found in vegetables.

First of all, we're talking low carb, not no carb. Secondly, nonsense. I
eat plenty of veggies and my body has no problems breaking them down.
Provide one cite!

:: Any vegetarian can confirm that. Their carbohydrate intake levels
:: are usually higher than the average meat-eater yet they stay healthy
:: and maintain weight.

There are plenty of overweight vegetarians and most of them eat refined
carbs while claiming to be vegetarians.

:: These low-carb diets tell people to avoid
:: starchy fruits and vegetables like carrots, potatoes, bananas,
:: beans, and corn, all of which are packed with vitamins, minerals,
:: trace elements, and fiber that are vital to good health.

You do know that there are other foods that are "packed" with vitamins,
minerals, trace elements and fiber, don't you? What about broccoli,
cauliflower, spinach, cabbage, greens, breen beans, kale, lettuce,
blueberries, strawberries, etc? One can name others too.

Perhaps the
:: problem is that the people who practice these diets do not
:: understand what carbohydrates are.

Nonsense. You don't.

There are many different types
:: which are broken down into two basic categories, complex and simple.
:: The simple carbs are the refined sugars and starches. To the body
:: they are the equivelant of jet fuel and should be eaten in very low
:: levels. These are also the group of carbs that diabetics are mainly
:: concerned with since their bodies do not produce enough insulin to
:: efficiently break them down. Complex carbs are found in all plant
:: based foods that have not been tampered with by us. Their longer and
:: more complex "chains" provide the body with a steady energy supply
:: as well as many of the complex proteins, vitimins, and minerals
:: required for proper cellular function. Did you know that some
:: complex carbohydrates actually require more calories to break them
:: down than they provide the body. This, in part, is why even
:: sedentary vegetarians can maintain their weight.

Nonsense. Any diabetic who has learned to eat to his/her meter will tell
you the effect of eating a potato or banana on their blood glucose. The
bottom line is the number of grams of carbs consumed. Sure, refined carbs
are the worst of the lot, but starchy carbs simulate blood sugar swings in
those who are insulin resistant (most very overweight people) and hence they
want to eat more. That's why on most LC diet those foods are restricted
severely during the weight loss phase and added back in at limited
quantities for maintenance.

::
:: As a bodybuilder, it is essential that you understand how your body
:: works and uses the food you put in it or you're wasting your time.

Nonsense. All you need to do is start young, lift heavy, rest, and eat.
Then practice dieting. Being a bodybuilder doesn't make you an expert on
much other than perhaps how to execute movements.

:: Several weeks before a competition, most bodybuilders will reduce
:: their carbohydrate and fluid levels to a bare minimum. This is to
:: reduce body fat to a very low level and make the skin thin and
:: taught, allowing more muscle to be seen.

Nonsense. Reducing carbs to a bare minimum will not, in and of itself,
result in reduced bodyfat. You're going to need to restrcit calories
relative to maintenance requirements.

This is only done for short
:: periods because there's a problem. Because fat stores contain little
:: or no proteins, vitamins, or minerals the body will start to
:: scavenge what in needs from muscle tissue and internal organs.

Nonsense...What about the protein that comes from diet? Reducing carbs
doesn't mean reducing dietary protein.

This
:: is basicly what you are doing to your body when you deprive it of
:: complex carbohydrates.

Good grief.

:: No one yet knows what the affect these diets
:: may have long term. You could be doing irreversible damage to your
:: body by following these fads.

I'm in better health than I have been in years. I've been doing LC since
Oct 2001, too.

This is also the reason most of these
:: diets fail. When you deprive your body of something it needs it
:: sends you signals in the form of powerful cravings.

What a joke....

For most people
:: these cravings become too much and they binge to satisfy them,
:: eventually gaining all the weight back and then some.

A single binge won't result in gaining all the weight back. And if people
who have been LCing occasionally do eat carbys foods, it's only because they
taste good. Having them once in a while won't make much difference, as long
as they remain the exception rather than the rule.

This is the
:: body's way of protecting itself should you decide to do something
:: stupid like this again. This, in a nutshell, is why these fad diets
:: don't work and can be dangerous.

Nonsense.

::
:: The human body is a magnificently complex machine. How your body
:: handles carbohydrates and other foods was determined by your
:: parents, your genetic makeup. Everyone is different and must fine
:: tune their diet and lifestyle to themselves. Be healthy in body and
:: spirit.

Wow...

::
:: One final note - Disagree with me if you will but if you are going
:: to insult me, please have the decency to improve your vocabulary and
:: spelling to at least mask your apparent ignorance.

Well, you've made your ignorance very obvious, Bubba.

::
:: Take care all & keep the faith -
:: CHRIS
::
:: curt <***@verizon.net> wrote in message
:: news:T7Hqc.782$***@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
:::
:::: Diet - Again, with your body type, a big obsticle is going to be
:::: your slow metabolic rate. Try to avoid simple carbohydrates
:::: (refined sugars, white breads, etc.) DO NOT do the low-carb/high
:::: protein fad diets. They are very unhealthy and any weight loss is
:::: temporary. Forget the three big meals a day thing and eat smaller
:::: meals more often and most importantly, learn to recognize when you
:::: are satisfied, not full! Other than that just try to eat a
:::: balanced diet and drink lots of water.
:::
::: I would hardly call low carbohydrate diets a fad. They have been
::: around since the 50's that I know of. They are just in the news a
::: lot because people have wised up. A low carb diet is much more
::: than any fad. It actually works. You would need to at least read
::: the Atkins book to have an understanding of how it works, but I can
::: tell from your post you know nothing about it and just call it a
::: fad diet. You also have lots to learn about low carbohydrate
::: diets. Who do you think you are calling them unhealthy? Do you
::: know there are diabetics on this diet and now can go off there
::: medications? Do you know there are plenty of people that have lost
::: over 100 pounds and they keep it off with their knowledge of low
::: carb?
:::
::: I suggest you stick to your X armature body building status and no
::: try and be a Doctor or nutrition.
:::
::: If I was the original poster, the first thing I would do is cut the
::: carbs. What is funny, you suggested the same thing, but you just
::: don't like the works low carb.
:::
::: Enjoy,
::: Curt

David Kerber

2004-05-19 16:51:33 UTC

In article <***@uni-berlin.de>, ***@hotmail.com
says...

...

Post by Roger Zoul
:: Without them the body has a hard time breaking down complex proteins
:: into the amino acids it needs, especially those found in vegetables.
First of all, we're talking low carb, not no carb. Secondly, nonsense. I
eat plenty of veggies and my body has no problems breaking them down.
Provide one cite!

Veggies typically have plenty of carbs anyway.

Post by Roger Zoul
:: Any vegetarian can confirm that. Their carbohydrate intake levels
:: are usually higher than the average meat-eater yet they stay healthy
:: and maintain weight.
There are plenty of overweight vegetarians and most of them eat refined
carbs while claiming to be vegetarians.

Refined sugar is still a vegetarian food: it comes from sugar beets or
sugar cane.

...

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

curt

2004-05-19 17:08:37 UTC

This isn't a quick fix. Many people are on low carb for life. You need to
read about this and not just talk.

Good heavens, you really have not read anything about this. The more I read
what you are writing the more I realize you have not done any reading on
this subject. You are just labeling low carb diets and not learning about
them.

I really can't summarize the whole process to you, but I do recommend you
read Dr. Atkins book. I don't care if you don't believe in what he states
or not....I do care that you have an understanding of what he believed
before you say it is just a fad.

I think you are going to see the fad around for many many years. It will
out live us, because it is right for many people.

Post by ***@FL
I'm sorry to upset you, but the low carb/high protein diet is just that, a
fad.

First of all, your first sentence show your ignorance. The popular diets
are low carbohydrates. That doesn't mean high protein.

Post by ***@FL
Also, the 1950's were the Golden-Age of fad diets so it's no surprise
that this was spawned from that era. This is an example of our society's
ongoing search for the "quick-fix". It will continue to be popular until the
next mass marketed diet craze comes along.

That is unlikely. As you are seeing or in your case choosing not to see,
many doctors (something you are not) are starting to realize that low carb
diets improve a host of things for people. Peoples blood work comes back
much better in most cases when on low carb. People are losing weight and
improving their health. You need to read, not bury your head in the sand.

Post by ***@FL
Carbohydrates are critical to
every day body functions. Without them the body has a hard time breaking
down complex proteins into the amino acids it needs, especially those found
in vegetables.

Interesting. I eat tons of vegetables on my low carb diet. I don't know
where you got the idea you can't eat vegetables?

I can see your mind is made up and you ran out of steam. Usually when
someone attacks someone's spelling, they have run out of ammunition.

All I can say, is read the book to better understand how the body works. If
you don't read the book and have an understanding of what the view is, how
can you have an opinion?

Curt

PS: your misspelled words ;) BTW, I have none. ;)

equivalent, vitamins, basically, obstacle

Post by ***@FL
Any vegetarian can confirm that. Their carbohydrate intake
levels are usually higher than the average meat-eater yet they stay healthy
and maintain weight. These low-carb diets tell people to avoid starchy
fruits and vegetables like carrots, potatoes, bananas, beans, and corn, all
of which are packed with vitamins, minerals, trace elements, and fiber that
are vital to good health. Perhaps the problem is that the people who
practice these diets do not understand what carbohydrates are. There are
many different types which are broken down into two basic categories,
complex and simple. The simple carbs are the refined sugars and starches. To
the body they are the equivelant of jet fuel and should be eaten in very low
levels. These are also the group of carbs that diabetics are mainly
concerned with since their bodies do not produce enough insulin to
efficiently break them down. Complex carbs are found in all plant based
foods that have not been tampered with by us. Their longer and more complex
"chains" provide the body with a steady energy supply as well as many of the
complex proteins, vitimins, and minerals required for proper cellular
function. Did you know that some complex carbohydrates actually require more
calories to break them down than they provide the body. This, in part, is
why even sedentary vegetarians can maintain their weight.
As a bodybuilder, it is essential that you understand how your body works
and uses the food you put in it or you're wasting your time. Several weeks
before a competition, most bodybuilders will reduce their carbohydrate and
fluid levels to a bare minimum. This is to reduce body fat to a very low
level and make the skin thin and taught, allowing more muscle to be seen.
This is only done for short periods because there's a problem. Because fat
stores contain little or no proteins, vitamins, or minerals the body will
start to scavenge what in needs from muscle tissue and internal organs. This
is basicly what you are doing to your body when you deprive it of complex
carbohydrates. No one yet knows what the affect these diets may have long
term. You could be doing irreversible damage to your body by following these
fads. This is also the reason most of these diets fail. When you deprive
your body of something it needs it sends you signals in the form of powerful
cravings. For most people these cravings become too much and they binge to
satisfy them, eventually gaining all the weight back and then some. This is
the body's way of protecting itself should you decide to do something stupid
like this again. This, in a nutshell, is why these fad diets don't work and
can be dangerous.
The human body is a magnificently complex machine. How your body handles
carbohydrates and other foods was determined by your parents, your genetic
makeup. Everyone is different and must fine tune their diet and lifestyle to
themselves. Be healthy in body and spirit.
One final note - Disagree with me if you will but if you are going to insult
me, please have the decency to improve your vocabulary and spelling to at
least mask your apparent ignorance.
Take care all & keep the faith -
CHRIS

Post by ***@FL
Diet - Again, with your body type, a big obsticle is going to be your

slow

Post by ***@FL
metabolic rate. Try to avoid simple carbohydrates (refined sugars, white
breads, etc.) DO NOT do the low-carb/high protein fad diets. They are

very

Post by ***@FL
unhealthy and any weight loss is temporary. Forget the three big meals a

day

Post by ***@FL
thing and eat smaller meals more often and most importantly, learn to
recognize when you are satisfied, not full! Other than that just try to

eat

Post by ***@FL
a balanced diet and drink lots of water.

Post by curt
understanding of how it works, but I can tell from your post you know
nothing about it and just call it a fad diet. You also have lots to learn
about low carbohydrate diets. Who do you think you are calling them
unhealthy? Do you know there are diabetics on this diet and now can go

off

Post by curt
there medications? Do you know there are plenty of people that have lost
over 100 pounds and they keep it off with their knowledge of low carb?
I suggest you stick to your X armature body building status and no try and
be a Doctor or nutrition.
If I was the original poster, the first thing I would do is cut the carbs.
What is funny, you suggested the same thing, but you just don't like the
works low carb.
Enjoy,
Curt

2004-05-19 16:48:54 UTC

"curt" <***@verizon.net> wrote in message news:T7Hqc.782$***@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
<snip>

Post by curt
I suggest you stick to your X armature body building status and no try and
be a Doctor or nutrition.

Are you a doctor or nutritionist?

C.Q.C.

curt

2004-05-19 18:56:47 UTC

No, but I play one on T.V.

Seriously, I am not a Doctor, but I took the time to read the book by Dr.
Atkins. I just can't stand these people that claim to be experts on low
carb, if they have not even read anything on it. It is like me arguing
about something I know nothing about.

I am not saying everyone should be on a low carb diet, but if you are going
to tell everyone it is crap, you should at least read a book on the subject
to understand what you are putting down.

All I ask is go to the library and read. It isn't that hard to do. If you
disagree with what Dr. Atkins says after you read the book, tell us why.
Most people think low carb eating means you don't eat veggies or fruit and
we all eat steak deep fried for breakfast. It is so silly.

Curt

Post by Q.
<snip>

Post by curt
I suggest you stick to your X armature body building status and no try and
be a Doctor or nutrition.

Are you a doctor or nutritionist?
C.Q.C.

Badger_South

2004-05-19 19:04:08 UTC

Post by curt
No, but I play one on T.V.
Seriously, I am not a Doctor, but I took the time to read the book by Dr.
Atkins. I just can't stand these people that claim to be experts on low
carb, if they have not even read anything on it. It is like me arguing
about something I know nothing about.
I am not saying everyone should be on a low carb diet, but if you are going
to tell everyone it is crap, you should at least read a book on the subject
to understand what you are putting down.
All I ask is go to the library and read. It isn't that hard to do. If you
disagree with what Dr. Atkins says after you read the book, tell us why.
Most people think low carb eating means you don't eat veggies or fruit and
we all eat steak deep fried for breakfast. It is so silly.
Curt

Why, oh why?

After all, more meat for us. <g>

There must be some kind of perverse drive to proselytize, I admit, but
perhaps it would be better to just laugh maniacally.

-B
(or, actually, howl and make carnivore noises)

Jeff

2004-05-19 14:14:11 UTC

"> Hey Doug,

Post by ***@FL
I'm not a health professional but as an ex-amateur bodybuilder I have done a
great deal of research on this subject.

Doug,

There is a lot of misleading and irrelevent information in this post.
Why do people assume that being married with kids is a "high stress"
lifestyle?

These days you will always get a very polarized response on the
subject of low carb diets. There is a lot of backlash against them at
the moment, because of their sudden popularity. Simple statements

Post by ***@FL
DO NOT do the low-carb/high protein fad diets. They are very
unhealthy and any weight loss is temporary.

are very much not supported by current research. It worked extremely
well for me, although I was not as heavy as you are. However one
thing that is definitely true about the program is that it is not for
everyone. I would recommend reading Atkins' book (over the follow-on
imitators) , and deciding for yourself if it is something you would
like to try. You *will* lose weight without being particularly hungry
if you carefully follow the diet as prescribed in the book. Whether
you can deal with the admittedly severe food options is for you to
decide.

One other thing - no human being has a "base metabolic rate" of 5300
calories a day! That is *twice* the amount of calories that a typical
fairly active man needs in a day.

Good luck,
Jeff

Gooserider

2004-05-19 09:41:26 UTC

I don't want to sound harsh, but something is evidently wrong with your
diet. You're burning calories by doing your cardio, so you must be consuming
more calories than you burn. Have you tried incorporating strength training?
You'll burn more calories with more muscle.

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 10:03:15 UTC

Nonsense on not eating enough. You need to eat less. i suggest you use
fitday.com to track everything you eat. Limit calories to about 2200 per
day. You may want to try low-carb if you have problems with
hunger/appetite.

If you're not tracking calories everyday, then you can't be sure you're not
eating much more than you think you are. Riding will no doubt increase your
appetite, especially when you do 50 to 70 miles. My guess is that you're
probably overeating mostly on weekends.

You may want to make all your rides be about the same distance, just to
normalize the appetite they stimulate so you can better control eating.

I suggest you add weight training to your exercise routine.

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

Badger_South

2004-05-19 11:16:57 UTC

Post by Roger Zoul
Nonsense on not eating enough. You need to eat less. i suggest you use
fitday.com to track everything you eat. Limit calories to about 2200 per
day. You may want to try low-carb if you have problems with
hunger/appetite.

I agree he's eating too much, but it may be he's getting too much food at
one time, swelling the stomach, or bingeing during lower mileage weeks, b/c
after all if you're not out biking, you tend to be snacking.

It's pretty easy to be way over your caloric estimate due to things like
gulping a half glass of milk right out of the jug three or four times a day
but failing to count it, or grabbing a chunk of cheese and a couple slices
of lunchmeat in between meals, but not counting it. That's why it's
instructive to write down everything for a representative period, IMO.

It may have been debunked but some ppl still may have problems resulting in
keeping the paunch by continuing to eat and snack after dinner until
bedtime.

Finally, the cravings for sugar shouldn't be happening. That's a sure sign
of 'carb addiction', and insulin resistance.

But don't stop with just these suggestions. Get the bible "The Ketogenic
Diet" by Lyle McDonald, and "Protein Power" by Eades and learn the facts
yourself.

-B

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 14:15:42 UTC

Badger_South wrote:
:: On Wed, 19 May 2004 06:03:15 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
:: <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
::
::: Nonsense on not eating enough. You need to eat less. i suggest
::: you use fitday.com to track everything you eat. Limit calories to
::: about 2200 per day. You may want to try low-carb if you have
::: problems with hunger/appetite.
::
:: I agree he's eating too much, but it may be he's getting too much
:: food at one time, swelling the stomach, or bingeing during lower
:: mileage weeks, b/c after all if you're not out biking, you tend to
:: be snacking.

One advantage of counting calories is that if you eat too much at one meal
you can compensate by eating less later on. For me, I've found it matters
little when I eat as long as I control how much I eat. Swelling the stomach
should NOT happen if you are LCing and counting.

::
:: It's pretty easy to be way over your caloric estimate due to things
:: like gulping a half glass of milk right out of the jug three or four
:: times a day but failing to count it, or grabbing a chunk of cheese
:: and a couple slices of lunchmeat in between meals, but not counting
:: it. That's why it's instructive to write down everything for a
:: representative period, IMO.

Exactly.

::
:: It may have been debunked but some ppl still may have problems
:: resulting in keeping the paunch by continuing to eat and snack after
:: dinner until bedtime.

Yes...however, if you count you can snack...but the trick will be to limit
calories. Doing that while on LC makes it easier to eat less without being
hungry. I find I rarely need to snack.

::
:: Finally, the cravings for sugar shouldn't be happening. That's a
:: sure sign of 'carb addiction', and insulin resistance.
::
:: But don't stop with just these suggestions. Get the bible "The
:: Ketogenic Diet" by Lyle McDonald, and "Protein Power" by Eades and
:: learn the facts yourself.

Right. I recommend Lyle's book, but PP is great too (better than Atkins on
the science).

Badger_South

2004-05-19 14:25:45 UTC

Post by Roger Zoul
:: But don't stop with just these suggestions. Get the bible "The
:: Ketogenic Diet" by Lyle McDonald, and "Protein Power" by Eades and
:: learn the facts yourself.
Right. I recommend Lyle's book, but PP is great too (better than Atkins on
the science).

The thing is, you (the OP) can not just go by what ppl say. You have to
understand the 'science' behind it. It's all based on insulin response.

It doesn't mean you have to be committed and disciplined. For me, though,
being on LC allows me to 'intellectually' take control of my eating.
Otherwise, being a carb addict, I could eat a horse made of pizza twice a
day. <g>

-B

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 15:31:28 UTC

Badger_South wrote:
:: On Wed, 19 May 2004 10:15:42 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
:: <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
::
::::: But don't stop with just these suggestions. Get the bible "The
::::: Ketogenic Diet" by Lyle McDonald, and "Protein Power" by Eades and
::::: learn the facts yourself.
:::
::: Right. I recommend Lyle's book, but PP is great too (better than
::: Atkins on the science).
::
:: The thing is, you (the OP) can not just go by what ppl say. You have
:: to understand the 'science' behind it. It's all based on insulin
:: response.
::
:: It doesn't mean you have to be committed and disciplined. For me,
:: though, being on LC allows me to 'intellectually' take control of my
:: eating. Otherwise, being a carb addict, I could eat a horse made of
:: pizza twice a day. <g>

Me too. Actually, there are many who fall into the same boat. Understanding
the science of it will allow you to understand why you can pick up 10 lbs of
weight over a weekend, but then lose it quickly the following week once you
resume LC eating.

Badger_South

2004-05-19 17:02:12 UTC

Post by Roger Zoul
:: On Wed, 19 May 2004 10:15:42 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
::::: But don't stop with just these suggestions. Get the bible "The
::::: Ketogenic Diet" by Lyle McDonald, and "Protein Power" by Eades and
::::: learn the facts yourself.
::: Right. I recommend Lyle's book, but PP is great too (better than
::: Atkins on the science).
:: The thing is, you (the OP) can not just go by what ppl say. You have
:: to understand the 'science' behind it. It's all based on insulin
:: response.
:: It doesn't mean you have to be committed and disciplined. For me,
:: though, being on LC allows me to 'intellectually' take control of my
:: eating. Otherwise, being a carb addict, I could eat a horse made of
:: pizza twice a day. <g>
Me too. Actually, there are many who fall into the same boat. Understanding
the science of it will allow you to understand why you can pick up 10 lbs of
weight over a weekend, but then lose it quickly the following week once you
resume LC eating.

This is, as you know, the TKD diet, in which you allow carbing up (within
reason) on weekends, presumably to reset your system and metabolism.

If you can do this, very good. I on the other hand have to keep a much
tighter reign on my carb intake. One slice of pizza and I know I risk
'falling off the wagon'. It's more a mental thing, and I know that's
atypical. It does allow me to foist a smug and superior attitude upon all
the weak and slovenly ppl around me though. (LOL, sarcasm meter pegging out
to the max).

-B

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 19:36:03 UTC

Badger_South wrote:
:: On Wed, 19 May 2004 11:31:28 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
:: <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
::
::: Badger_South wrote:
::::: On Wed, 19 May 2004 10:15:42 -0400, "Roger Zoul"
::::: <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
:::::
:::::::: But don't stop with just these suggestions. Get the bible "The
:::::::: Ketogenic Diet" by Lyle McDonald, and "Protein Power" by Eades
:::::::: and learn the facts yourself.
::::::
:::::: Right. I recommend Lyle's book, but PP is great too (better than
:::::: Atkins on the science).
:::::
::::: The thing is, you (the OP) can not just go by what ppl say. You
::::: have to understand the 'science' behind it. It's all based on
::::: insulin response.
:::::
::::: It doesn't mean you have to be committed and disciplined. For me,
::::: though, being on LC allows me to 'intellectually' take control of
::::: my eating. Otherwise, being a carb addict, I could eat a horse
::::: made of pizza twice a day. <g>
:::
::: Me too. Actually, there are many who fall into the same boat.
::: Understanding the science of it will allow you to understand why
::: you can pick up 10 lbs of weight over a weekend, but then lose it
::: quickly the following week once you resume LC eating.
::
:: This is, as you know, the TKD diet, in which you allow carbing up
:: (within reason) on weekends, presumably to reset your system and
:: metabolism.

No, what I described is the CKD...you do it to refill my glycogen so that
you can train harder the next week (assuming you're lifting). The TKD is
where you take much smaller amounts of carbs (say 50 g) either pre or post
(or both) workout. The former is usually much harder to do well and results
in a lot of water-weight gain. The latter is much easier to do, and usually
doesn't land you with 10 lbs of water weight, but it is not as much fun. On
a CKD you want to limit fat intake as well.

::
:: If you can do this, very good. I on the other hand have to keep a
:: much tighter reign on my carb intake. One slice of pizza and I know
:: I risk 'falling off the wagon'. It's more a mental thing, and I know
:: that's atypical. It does allow me to foist a smug and superior
:: attitude upon all the weak and slovenly ppl around me though. (LOL,
:: sarcasm meter pegging out to the max).

:) Lots of people are you like. I can, however, do a CKD. I've done enough
of them to be able to get right back on track the following monday. The
hard part for me is keeping the CKD clean - that is, limiting the fat intake
while getting the carbs and protein.

Badger_South

2004-05-19 20:04:10 UTC

Post by Roger Zoul
No, what I described is the CKD...you do it to refill my glycogen so that
you can train harder the next week (assuming you're lifting). The TKD is
where you take much smaller amounts of carbs (say 50 g) either pre or post
(or both) workout. The former is usually much harder to do well and results
in a lot of water-weight gain. The latter is much easier to do, and usually
doesn't land you with 10 lbs of water weight, but it is not as much fun. On
a CKD you want to limit fat intake as well.

Ah, right you are. I stand corrected. I use a version of the TKD, but
wasn't paying attention as you described the Cyclical Ketogenic Diet. I
think I would find that harder to do, but I'm WAGing. ;-)

Post by Roger Zoul
:: If you can do this, very good. I on the other hand have to keep a
:: much tighter reign on my carb intake. One slice of pizza and I know
:: I risk 'falling off the wagon'. It's more a mental thing, and I know
:: that's atypical. It does allow me to foist a smug and superior
:: attitude upon all the weak and slovenly ppl around me though. (LOL,
:: sarcasm meter pegging out to the max).
:) Lots of people are you like. I can, however, do a CKD. I've done enough
of them to be able to get right back on track the following monday. The
hard part for me is keeping the CKD clean - that is, limiting the fat intake
while getting the carbs and protein.

Ah so. What would a typical weekend menu under your CKD regime?

Interesting - thx for the details!

-B

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 23:31:10 UTC

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

Bread, rice, potatoes, SF cookies made from oats, baked chips, pancakes (no
butter on any of that)...try to limit table sugar and fruit sugar as well as
fat (what fats you do get you'd like to be EFAs). You want starches that
metabolize to glucose. You also get sufficient protein.

Steve Knight

2004-05-19 16:21:59 UTC

how is it nonsense? I was stuck for awhile not loosing and cycling 5 days a
week. once I started increasing my food intake I started loosing 2 pounds a
week. I had to find the sweet spot.

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

curt

2004-05-19 10:12:41 UTC

You should buy that Atkins book. You don't have to follow it, but you
should understand the principles of it. It will be a very big help in
losing weight. I would suspect if you cut your carb intake to below 100 a
day, you would lose 30 pounds in two or so months with your exercise. That
is a guess, but you being a male and riding a bicycle, you will drop fast
most likely.

If you don't want to get serious about losing weight that much, then try and
cut the carbs back at dinner time at least. No potatoes, pasta, sugar and
drink plenty of water. An example of a good dinner would be fish and salad
with dressing or some kind of meat with green leafy vegetables. If you just
want to really lose weight you can go low carb all the way, you don't have
to watch you fat intake. When people read that, it scares them. I am not
sure why. Your body is a machine that changes every 24 to 48 hours. Lets
say you start eating fats and proteins and cut carbs. Do you know your body
will start burning fat? It does. I used to weigh 250 pounds over 5 years
ago. I got down to 210 for a few years on low carb and then I got down to
183, which is where I am now. My body fat is a little below 15% and I am 38
years old. I plan on losing another 5 pounds over the next two months.

Enjoy,
Curt

Denver C. Fox

2004-05-19 11:34:02 UTC

I too am always trying to lose some of those pounds. I have your same body
type. As you get older, it gets harder! (I am 64 yo)

Some general suggestions:

1. Do weight bearing exercises. I do a lot of free weights and machines -
several hours a week. The muscle will make you look and feel better, and
muscle will burn more calories.

2. Your friend is not correct in how many calories you need everyday. I don't
know where she got those figures. Some charts show about 35 calories burned
per mile. If you are riding 100 miles per week, and everything else stays the
same, you might lose a pound per week from exercise. However, the exercise may
make you hungrier and you can easily offset that 3500 calories burned by biking
by increased eating.

3. Eat several small meals per day - nutritious food. Whole grains, fruits,
veggies, lean meats. Small portions, about the size of your fist. IMHO, the
research on Atkins style diets as to long term effects is still not resolved.
However, the South Beach or the Zone diet are much more moderate, while
incorporating some of the Atkins features.

Extensive bicycling can be a factor in developing osteoporosis. Walking,
weight lifting and other weight-bearing activities can help to prevent the
osteo.

Good luck.

http://members.aol.com/foxcondorsrvtns
(Colorado rental condo)

http://members.aol.com/dnvrfox
(Family Web Page)

Terry Morse

2004-05-19 13:57:29 UTC

Post by curt
If you just
want to really lose weight you can go low carb all the way, you don't have
to watch you fat intake. When people read that, it scares them. I am not
sure why.

Reading "you don't have to watch you(r) fat intake" doesn't scare
me. It makes me laugh. If P.T. Barnum were still alive, I think he'd
also find the humor in it.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 14:28:04 UTC

Terry Morse wrote:
:: "curt" wrote:
::
::: If you just
::: want to really lose weight you can go low carb all the way, you
::: don't have to watch you fat intake. When people read that, it
::: scares them. I am not sure why.
::
:: Reading "you don't have to watch you(r) fat intake" doesn't scare
:: me. It makes me laugh. If P.T. Barnum were still alive, I think he'd
:: also find the humor in it.

Where is the humor in it? I've lost 130 lbs on a low carb diet without
worrying about fat intake other than to not eat too many calories. And I
have improved blood lipids to show for it.

Terry Morse

2004-05-19 15:18:16 UTC

Post by Roger Zoul
:: Reading "you don't have to watch you(r) fat intake" doesn't scare
:: me. It makes me laugh. If P.T. Barnum were still alive, I think he'd
:: also find the humor in it.
Where is the humor in it? I've lost 130 lbs on a low carb diet without
worrying about fat intake other than to not eat too many calories. And I
have improved blood lipids to show for it.

The humor is that it is a ridiculous statemet. If you eat too much
food, no matter what it's made of, you will gain weight. The
statement should correctly read "you don't have to watch your fat
intake, as long as you don't eat too much of it". Wow, there's a
revelation!
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 16:54:58 UTC

Terry Morse wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::
::: Terry Morse wrote:
:::::
::::: Reading "you don't have to watch you(r) fat intake" doesn't scare
::::: me. It makes me laugh. If P.T. Barnum were still alive, I think
::::: he'd also find the humor in it.
:::
::: Where is the humor in it? I've lost 130 lbs on a low carb diet
::: without worrying about fat intake other than to not eat too many
::: calories. And I have improved blood lipids to show for it.
::
:: The humor is that it is a ridiculous statemet. If you eat too much
:: food, no matter what it's made of, you will gain weight. The
:: statement should correctly read "you don't have to watch your fat
:: intake, as long as you don't eat too much of it". Wow, there's a
:: revelation!

Well, most who follow a LC woe are trying to lose weight (fat). From a
practical POV, they limit carbs and not anything else. For the very
overweight, they get an appetite suppression effect from the removal of
carbs. That is mostly sufficient to result in reduced calorie intake.
Hence, they lose weight. At a certain point, after having lost a certain
amount of weight, it does become necessary to limit calories. However, that
doesn't imply directly limiting fat....

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

Terry Morse

2004-05-19 23:11:16 UTC

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

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

Post by Roger Zoul
At a certain point, after having lost a certain
amount of weight, it does become necessary to limit calories.

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

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

True enough, although since fat is so energy dense, it's really easy
to get too many calories with fatty foods.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

curt

2004-05-19 17:17:21 UTC

Post by Terry Morse

How silly this is. Usenet at its finest. I guess I need to state the
obvious when speaking to someone like yourself. Of course you shouldn't
over-eat. My point was, you don't have to concern yourself with how much
fat you eat. Not meaning you can eat as much food as you want. You still
need to find the amount of calories that is right for you.

Geez.
Curt

Badger_South

2004-05-19 17:47:38 UTC

Post by curt
How silly this is. Usenet at its finest. I guess I need to state the
obvious when speaking to someone like yourself. Of course you shouldn't
over-eat. My point was, you don't have to concern yourself with how much
fat you eat. Not meaning you can eat as much food as you want. You still
need to find the amount of calories that is right for you.
Geez.
Curt

I think it bears repeating. One of the 'problems' with low fat or low
calorie diets is all the tedious calorie counting and weighing of food that
you have to do. Sure, ppl learn how to do it and soforth.

But on LC you don't have to ever weigh anything or count any calories. The
appetite is under control, you decide what you eat with your intellect, and
for me, I feel better without all that food in me.

After you get through the induction phase you spend your time looking at
the numbers on the scale dropping and grinning like a fool, usually high as
a kite and going shopping for the next smaller size pair of black jeans.

-B

curt

2004-05-19 17:14:02 UTC

I thought it would be understood that a person shouldn't over-eat. I just
assumed that was a given. Oh, thanks for fixing my typo. That is really
helpful in the discussion.

Curt

Post by Terry Morse

Post by curt
If you just
want to really lose weight you can go low carb all the way, you don't have
to watch you fat intake. When people read that, it scares them. I am not
sure why.

Max

2004-05-19 11:20:22 UTC

Hi Doug,

I can totally sympathize with you, man. BTDT -- still DT.

It's real simple, v. bottom line: you're going to have to focus on the
food end.

I'm in a similar position, gained about 30# after i quit smokes (no big
deal, i bike, right). Gave myself a year of "grace time" then hammered
my ass off for over a year, commuting...great legs, big fat belly and
absolutely no change in weight. :-/

i substituted a lot of garden veggies for my gigantor steaks and buckets
of sushi rice :-) and have gotten pretty good results.

I'm pretty sure it's an age thing. keep riding and count those
calories!

bon chance!

.max
p.s. kudos on the miles

--
the part of <***@earthlink.net>
was played by maxwell monningh 8-p

Rick Onanian

2004-05-19 12:29:34 UTC

On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:16:03 -0600, "Doug Cook"

Post by Doug Cook
Fast forward to last July... Married, two kids, mortgage, no hair,
sedentary, 279lbs.
Sick of that fat man in the mirror, I bought some XXL cycling clothes,
dusted off and tuned up my old Trek, and started riding again. Now 10
months and close to 3000 miles later... I still weigh 274! I mean... come
on! 3000 miles for 5 pounds?!

No. 3000 miles for good physical and spiritual health.

Post by Doug Cook
My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to struggle on 10 mile
rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday rides of 15-30 miles each and one
weekend ride for 50-70 miles - all solo. My computer puts my average speed
for these rides between 16-18mph depending upon the particular ups&downs of
the ride. My HRM says my average rate is usually right about 75% of max
(although that can vary, usually on the high side, when the ride has
climbing). I feel lean and mean while I ride,

This tells the story well. I wish I was as fast as you. I did that
kind of speed yesterday, for a short group ride...and that's a new
personal record.

Post by Doug Cook
but when I get home I wonder who that fat guy in the mirror is!

He's a healthy guy who has fun exercising.

I'm younger and smaller than you, and I can barely survive a 3000
calorie day. I'm a bit abnormal for that, I guess.

Post by Doug Cook
admits she doesn't specialize in athletes ("slovenly couch potato" is how
she describes her typical client), she says that with my activity level my
BMR is 5300... as she explained it that's the number of calories needed to
just maintain my weight! Therefore she thinks my body thinks it's being

5300 sounds strong; but she could be right. 2500 to 3000 certainly
sounds insufficient; the weight should fly off, except...well, see
what I say at the end regarding optimum weight..

Post by Doug Cook
starved and refuses to let go of the fat. She thinks by eating MORE the
body will move away from this starvation reflex and start shedding pounds.

Possible. I've heard such before.

Post by Doug Cook
She also suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE breakfast
so the body has to switch to fat because the glycogen stores will be low
(sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).

Try it, if you can, and figure out how far you can go before
bonking. Do only that much, then gradually raise it up. This will
certainly get your body running well for the rest of your day, too.

You might also try other strategies, such as rides where you are
insufficiently fueled, but not completely starved; this would be
under the heading of "using a little glycogen to burn a lot of fat".

Post by Doug Cook
Well, I tried to eat 4000 calories today and about died! I felt horrible,
stuffed, tired, etc. I tried riding with just water (no sport drink), and
found myself craving sugar after the ride.

Sounds like me when below 4000 calories per day.

Post by Doug Cook
Any experts lurking out there that would like to comment? Are there any

Just self-proclaimed demi-experts.

Post by Doug Cook
Any thoughts would be appreciated.

1. CaloriesIn < CaloriesOut == NetLoss. This must happen in time,
even given the 'starvation-mode' reaction of saving fat. Try really
counting calories in and out for a week and see what you get; 10
months of insufficient calories should lose more than 4 pounds.

2. Health != weight. You're probably pretty damned healthy from all
that riding, regardless of your weight.

3. Your body may just be programmed for this weight at this age. If
this is your body's preferred weight, who are you to argue with your
body? Listen to your body!

A couple years ago, I dieted and rode (mostly dieted; couldn't ride
while feeling so hungry) some 40 pounds away, putting me at the top
of the recommended weight range. I felt terrible. I don't know if I
was healthy, but I sure didn't feel so until I slowly got most of
those 40 pounds back. I am at my optimum weight, books and charts
and doctors be damned.

Oh, and that said, here's one other thing: See the damned doctors!
Not just your friend; go to a general practitioner to find out if
something is _wrong_ with you, maybe a disease. Let the GP recommend
anybody he thinks you should see.
--
Rick Onanian

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 14:41:59 UTC

Rick Onanian wrote:
:: On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:16:03 -0600, "Doug Cook"
:: <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
::: Fast forward to last July... Married, two kids, mortgage, no hair,
::: sedentary, 279lbs.
:::
::: Sick of that fat man in the mirror, I bought some XXL cycling
::: clothes, dusted off and tuned up my old Trek, and started riding
::: again. Now 10 months and close to 3000 miles later... I still
::: weigh 274! I mean... come on! 3000 miles for 5 pounds?!
::
:: No. 3000 miles for good physical and spiritual health.
::
::: My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to struggle on
::: 10 mile rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday rides of 15-30 miles
::: each and one weekend ride for 50-70 miles - all solo. My computer
::: puts my average speed for these rides between 16-18mph depending
::: upon the particular ups&downs of the ride. My HRM says my average
::: rate is usually right about 75% of max (although that can vary,
::: usually on the high side, when the ride has climbing). I feel lean
::: and mean while I ride,
::
:: This tells the story well. I wish I was as fast as you. I did that
:: kind of speed yesterday, for a short group ride...and that's a new
:: personal record.
::
::: but when I get home I wonder who that fat guy in the mirror is!
::
:: He's a healthy guy who has fun exercising.

A fit guy who has fun exercising. Health != fit.

::
::: I don't diet per se, but I do eat sensibly. The days that I've
::: tracked my caloric intake it's usually right between 2500 - 3000.
::: One friend who is a "wellness" expert suggests I'm not eating
::: *ENOUGH*. Although she readily
::
:: I'm younger and smaller than you, and I can barely survive a 3000
:: calorie day. I'm a bit abnormal for that, I guess.

Most people don't need any where near 3000 kcals per day.

::
::: admits she doesn't specialize in athletes ("slovenly couch potato"
::: is how she describes her typical client), she says that with my
::: activity level my BMR is 5300... as she explained it that's the
::: number of calories needed to just maintain my weight! Therefore
::: she thinks my body thinks it's being
::
:: 5300 sounds strong; but she could be right. 2500 to 3000 certainly
:: sounds insufficient; the weight should fly off, except...well, see
:: what I say at the end regarding optimum weight..

I'd bet money she's wrong. There is no way this guy is in starvation mode
while doing all that exercise. In the so-called starvation mode, the body
shuts things down in an attempt to lower energy requirements. With all of
this riding, if his body did that, he'd be a mess because he'd be
overtrained after 10 months...

::
::: starved and refuses to let go of the fat. She thinks by eating
::: MORE the body will move away from this starvation reflex and start
::: shedding pounds.
::
:: Possible. I've heard such before.

Nonsense. If he followed her advice he'd gain weight.

::
::: She also suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE
::: breakfast so the body has to switch to fat because the glycogen
::: stores will be low (sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).
::
:: Try it, if you can, and figure out how far you can go before
:: bonking. Do only that much, then gradually raise it up. This will
:: certainly get your body running well for the rest of your day, too.

More nonsense. I follow a low-carb diet...that means I'm always low on
glycogen. Yet, I always ride in the morning with only some coffee in me.
Unless he is pushing his limits and actually exercising anaerobically, he
won't bonk out.

::
:: You might also try other strategies, such as rides where you are
:: insufficiently fueled, but not completely starved; this would be
:: under the heading of "using a little glycogen to burn a lot of fat".
::
::: Well, I tried to eat 4000 calories today and about died! I felt
::: horrible, stuffed, tired, etc. I tried riding with just water (no
::: sport drink), and found myself craving sugar after the ride.
::
:: Sounds like me when below 4000 calories per day.
::
::: Any experts lurking out there that would like to comment? Are
::: there any
::
:: Just self-proclaimed demi-experts.

:)

::
::: Any thoughts would be appreciated.
::
:: 1. CaloriesIn < CaloriesOut == NetLoss. This must happen in time,
:: even given the 'starvation-mode' reaction of saving fat. Try really
:: counting calories in and out for a week and see what you get; 10
:: months of insufficient calories should lose more than 4 pounds.

Which means it was not 10 months of insufficient calories.

::
:: 2. Health != weight. You're probably pretty damned healthy from all
:: that riding, regardless of your weight.

Health!=fit!= weight.

He's fit (bicycle fit) for sure. I can't comment on his health since
there's not my info here on that.

::
:: 3. Your body may just be programmed for this weight at this age. If
:: this is your body's preferred weight, who are you to argue with your
:: body? Listen to your body!

Well, you may have a point there. At this weight he can be both fit and
healthy, so getting trim may just be a result of societal bias and norms.

::
:: A couple years ago, I dieted and rode (mostly dieted; couldn't ride
:: while feeling so hungry) some 40 pounds away, putting me at the top
:: of the recommended weight range. I felt terrible. I don't know if I
:: was healthy, but I sure didn't feel so until I slowly got most of
:: those 40 pounds back. I am at my optimum weight, books and charts
:: and doctors be damned.

True, to an extent. If he has a belly then perhaps losing some of it might
help him ride even better. Let's face it, lugging around fat is going to
slow you down.

::
:: Oh, and that said, here's one other thing: See the damned doctors!
:: Not just your friend; go to a general practitioner to find out if
:: something is _wrong_ with you, maybe a disease. Let the GP recommend
:: anybody he thinks you should see.
:: --
:: Rick Onanian

Terry Morse

2004-05-19 15:26:37 UTC

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

FWIW, you don't have to go anaerobic to deplete your muscle
glycogen. Simply riding at a lower cadence with the same power
output will accelerate the depletion rate. Glycogen usage is tied to
muscle effort.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 16:58:01 UTC

Terry Morse wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::
::: Rick Onanian wrote:
::
:::::: She also suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE
:::::: breakfast so the body has to switch to fat because the glycogen
:::::: stores will be low (sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).
:::::
::::: Try it, if you can, and figure out how far you can go before
::::: bonking. Do only that much, then gradually raise it up. This will
::::: certainly get your body running well for the rest of your day,
::::: too.
:::
::: More nonsense. I follow a low-carb diet...that means I'm always
::: low on glycogen. Yet, I always ride in the morning with only some
::: coffee in me. Unless he is pushing his limits and actually
::: exercising anaerobically, he won't bonk out.
::
:: FWIW, you don't have to go anaerobic to deplete your muscle
:: glycogen. Simply riding at a lower cadence with the same power
:: output will accelerate the depletion rate. Glycogen usage is tied to
:: muscle effort.

Er, riding at a lower cadence with high power output (like going uphill in a
high gear or going very fast on a flat in high gear) is the same thing as
going anaerobic. Anaerobic activity is what uses sugar for fuel.

David Kerber

2004-05-19 17:13:32 UTC

In article <***@uni-berlin.de>, ***@hotmail.com
says...

...

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

Which is another way of saying the EXACT same thing.

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 20:06:42 UTC

David Kerber wrote:
:: In article <***@uni-berlin.de>, ***@hotmail.com
:: says...
::
:: ...
::
::::: FWIW, you don't have to go anaerobic to deplete your muscle
::::: glycogen. Simply riding at a lower cadence with the same power
::::: output will accelerate the depletion rate. Glycogen usage is tied
::::: to muscle effort.
:::
::: Er, riding at a lower cadence with high power output (like going
::: uphill in a high gear or going very fast on a flat in high gear) is
::: the same thing as going anaerobic. Anaerobic activity is what uses
::: sugar for fuel.
::
:: Which is another way of saying the EXACT same thing.

EXACT same thing as what? My point was that you generally do have to go
anerobic to deplete muscle glycogen.

Terry Morse

2004-05-19 23:16:17 UTC

A technically correct statement, but not very useful. "Going
anaerobic" to a cyclist means getting your heart rate above the
lactate threshold, not pushing a big gear.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA http://bike.terrymorse.com/

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 23:33:49 UTC

Terry Morse wrote:
:: Roger Zoul wrote:
::
::: Terry Morse wrote:
:::::
::::: FWIW, you don't have to go anaerobic to deplete your muscle
::::: glycogen. Simply riding at a lower cadence with the same power
::::: output will accelerate the depletion rate. Glycogen usage is tied
::::: to muscle effort.
:::
::: Er, riding at a lower cadence with high power output (like going
::: uphill in a high gear or going very fast on a flat in high gear) is
::: the same thing as going anaerobic. Anaerobic activity is what uses
::: sugar for fuel.
::
:: A technically correct statement, but not very useful. "Going
:: anaerobic" to a cyclist means getting your heart rate above the
:: lactate threshold, not pushing a big gear.

True, but I was just trying to give an example...I do my best not to push
big gears...but I've only been riding since last September and had to suffer
the winter layoff.

Rick Onanian

2004-05-19 21:04:07 UTC

On Wed, 19 May 2004 10:41:59 -0400, "Roger Zoul"

Post by Roger Zoul
:: He's a healthy guy who has fun exercising.
A fit guy who has fun exercising. Health != fit.

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

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

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

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

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

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

That wasn't obvious in what I said?

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

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

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

Only uphill. It's got practically no effect on flat, and provides a
great gravity assist downhill, as well as a more aerodynamic shape.
--
Rick Onanian

Michael Libby

2004-05-19 13:00:25 UTC

Post by Doug Cook
Sick of that fat man in the mirror, I bought some XXL cycling clothes,
dusted off and tuned up my old Trek, and started riding again. Now 10
months and close to 3000 miles later... I still weigh 274! I mean... come
on! 3000 miles for 5 pounds?!
My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to struggle on 10 mile
rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday rides of 15-30 miles each and one
weekend ride for 50-70 miles - all solo. My computer puts my average speed
for these rides between 16-18mph depending upon the particular ups&downs of
the ride. My HRM says my average rate is usually right about 75% of max
(although that can vary, usually on the high side, when the ride has
climbing). I feel lean and mean while I ride, but when I get home I wonder
who that fat guy in the mirror is!

3000 miles in ten months in 300 miles a month. That's only about 10 miles
a day. At 16 MPH you are riding for 38 minutes a day on average. Whether
that's "enough" exercise depends on how much other exercise you get. But
just for the sake of comparison, I get more than that just commuting to
work, doing errands on the weekend, and throwing in a weekly joyride of
one to two and a half hours (I average 15 miles a day at similar speeds).

As someone else said, cycling is a very efficient use of energy, so this
doesn't burn as many calories as you might think. At my height/weight your
38 minutes of cycling vigorously would only burn 465 calories. You can
find out for yourself how much that would burn at this calorie counter I
found on the web: http://www.caloriesperhour.com/index_burn.html

What I found interesting with that calculator was going through my whole
day (all 24 hours including sleep) and seeing just how much I was burning
in the rest of my life. A lot less than I thought.

Is it possible that you are compensating for the exercise by actually
doing less other active stuff? You know, "Well, I've already ridden my
bike a bunch today... so I think I'll let the wife walk the dog." That
sort of thing.

Then you have to be very careful to add up calorie intake. In my case, one
big surprise was the morning bowl of granola-- certainly healthy from a
fiber and whole grains perspective, but a calorie disaster in the amounts
I eat. One serving on this stuff is about half a cup. Ha! Those
"serving size" amount in nutritional information are a joke. You have to
be very careful with them when adding up your daily caloric intake. I've
seen so many bottles of juice or bags of chips or whatever labeled as
two, even three, servings, that it almost seems deceptive.

Only once you have accurate estimates of your calorie intake and calorie
expenditure can you possibly decide where to go next. Obviously if you
aren't losing weight you either have to eat less or exercise more. If you
are really eating between 2000 and 3000 calories a day, I'd try to
increase activity before trying to eat less food.

Personally I'm not big on diets that are low-fat or low-carb. It seems
to me the body needs a healthy balance (and that the specific balance is
different person to person). I would definitely skip the soda pop, beer,
candy, cheese, red meats (of course, I'm vegetarian so I simply avoid all
meats), and definitely order baked, broiled, grilled foods over fried,
especially deep-fried. I'm also a big fan of whole grains, refined grains
lose a lot of their vitamins, minerals, and proteins during processing.

Since I started biking regularly a few months ago, I've lost over 10
pounds, and I changed my diet very little overall. In fact, at first I
was downing 600 calories a day worth of protein powder mixed in soy milk
to help my muscles recover from riding (not sure if even that was all
that necessary). Now I save that for after rides of an hour or more and
eat pretty much like I have for a long time, except for the soda pop.

-Michael
www.andsoforth.com

Disclaimer: I'm not a professional dietician or fitness trainer. This
information is for entertainment purposes only. Consult your physician
before making any major diet or exercise plan changes. Contents may settle
during shipping. Unwanted side effects include: boredom, irritability, and
top-posting.

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 14:49:11 UTC

Michael Libby wrote:
:: On Tue, 18 May 2004 22:16:03 -0600, Doug Cook wrote:
::
::: Sick of that fat man in the mirror, I bought some XXL cycling
::: clothes, dusted off and tuned up my old Trek, and started riding
::: again. Now 10 months and close to 3000 miles later... I still
::: weigh 274! I mean... come on! 3000 miles for 5 pounds?!
:::
::: My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to struggle on
::: 10 mile rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday rides of 15-30 miles
::: each and one weekend ride for 50-70 miles - all solo. My computer
::: puts my average speed for these rides between 16-18mph depending
::: upon the particular ups&downs of the ride. My HRM says my average
::: rate is usually right about 75% of max (although that can vary,
::: usually on the high side, when the ride has climbing). I feel lean
::: and mean while I ride, but when I get home I wonder who that fat
::: guy in the mirror is!
::
:: 3000 miles in ten months in 300 miles a month. That's only about 10
:: miles a day. At 16 MPH you are riding for 38 minutes a day on
:: average. Whether that's "enough" exercise depends on how much other
:: exercise you get. But just for the sake of comparison, I get more
:: than that just commuting to work, doing errands on the weekend, and
:: throwing in a weekly joyride of one to two and a half hours (I
:: average 15 miles a day at similar speeds).
::
:: As someone else said, cycling is a very efficient use of energy, so
:: this doesn't burn as many calories as you might think. At my
:: height/weight your 38 minutes of cycling vigorously would only burn
:: 465 calories. You can find out for yourself how much that would burn
:: at this calorie counter I found on the web:
:: http://www.caloriesperhour.com/index_burn.html
::
:: What I found interesting with that calculator was going through my
:: whole day (all 24 hours including sleep) and seeing just how much I
:: was burning in the rest of my life. A lot less than I thought.
::
:: Is it possible that you are compensating for the exercise by actually
:: doing less other active stuff? You know, "Well, I've already ridden
:: my bike a bunch today... so I think I'll let the wife walk the dog."
:: That sort of thing.
::

It's going to be hard to do a lot of extra stuff after riding for 70 miles.
Most people don't do that much work in an entire week. Remember, this guy
is around 275lbs.

:: Then you have to be very careful to add up calorie intake. In my
:: case, one big surprise was the morning bowl of granola-- certainly
:: healthy from a fiber and whole grains perspective, but a calorie
:: disaster in the amounts I eat. One serving on this stuff is about
:: half a cup. Ha! Those "serving size" amount in nutritional
:: information are a joke. You have to be very careful with them when
:: adding up your daily caloric intake. I've seen so many bottles of
:: juice or bags of chips or whatever labeled as two, even three,
:: servings, that it almost seems deceptive.
::
:: Only once you have accurate estimates of your calorie intake and
:: calorie expenditure can you possibly decide where to go next.
:: Obviously if you aren't losing weight you either have to eat less or
:: exercise more. If you are really eating between 2000 and 3000
:: calories a day, I'd try to increase activity before trying to eat
:: less food.

I wouldn't. 3000 kcals is a lot of food. Depending on his age and LBM,
that might be a lot. And keep in mind that is what he got on the days it
bothered to count. He might be eating well over 3000 kcals per day. hence,
he really needs to track what he eats and start limiting calories.

::
:: Personally I'm not big on diets that are low-fat or low-carb. It
:: seems
:: to me the body needs a healthy balance (and that the specific
:: balance is different person to person).

How does one define a "healthy balance?"

I would definitely skip the
:: soda pop, beer, candy, cheese, red meats (of course, I'm vegetarian
:: so I simply avoid all meats), and definitely order baked, broiled,
:: grilled foods over fried, especially deep-fried. I'm also a big fan
:: of whole grains, refined grains lose a lot of their vitamins,
:: minerals, and proteins during processing.
::
:: Since I started biking regularly a few months ago, I've lost over 10
:: pounds, and I changed my diet very little overall. In fact, at first
:: I was downing 600 calories a day worth of protein powder mixed in
:: soy milk to help my muscles recover from riding (not sure if even
:: that was all that necessary). Now I save that for after rides of an
:: hour or more and eat pretty much like I have for a long time, except
:: for the soda pop.

Obviously, for the OP, who already said he eats sensibly, what worked for
you isn't going to work for him.

Pbwalther

2004-05-19 13:46:26 UTC

how

Post by Doug Cook
she describes her typical client), she says that with my activity level my
BMR is 5300.. as she explained it that's the number of calories needed to
just maintain my weight! Therefore she thinks my body thinks it's being
starved and refuses to let go of the fat. She thinks by eating MORE the
body will move away from this starvation reflex and start shedding >pounds.
She also suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE breakfast
so the body has to switch to fat because the glycogen stores will be low
(sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).

Well, what she is talking about does not make thermodynamic sense. If you are
burning 5300 calories per day and say consuming 3550 calories per day then you
would have a 1750 calorie deficit. Your body can not take calories from the
air for crying out loud! Your body has to make up the deficit by burning fat
and there is no way around that. So either she is off on your caloric
expenditure or you are underestimating your consumption or a little of both.

Now she is right in one sense. Many sedentary people go on diets. When you
restrict calories, many people's bodies go into a sort of famine reaction in
which the body scales down its metabolic rate in order to survive. As a
result, some people lose very little weight dieting and what they lose is often
muscle and not fat.

Exercising forces the body to increase the metabolic rate. Daily aerobic
exercise and being prudent with the diet is a good way to lose or maintain
weight. Also exercise and a little weight lifting will make the body keep the
muscle because you are using it and the body will preferentially lose fat.

The thing is that you can do a pot load of exercise and not burn much fat.
Now, assuming burning 50 calories per mile, your 3,000 calories would be 42 lbs
of fat. However, many people up their food consumption in response to exercise
and that is probably what you have done.

Now, one can lose a considerable amount of weight exercising and being prudent
with diet. I did a 2 week bicycle tour in the rockies. We did an average of
75 miles per day with quite a bit of climbing and then walking around seeing
things on top of that. I made sure I ate plenty of complex carbs and
vegetables to replace my glycogen each day. I ate some sweets also on the rest
stops and took ate a modest amount of fats and meats. After I got back, I was
amazed that I had lost 10 lbs in 14 days. So it can be done.

Of course, many people gained weight on the tour. They did this by having an
extra meal during the day consisting of a big burger, fries, and a large
sundae.

Badger_South

2004-05-19 14:19:18 UTC

Post by Pbwalther
The thing is that you can do a pot load of exercise and not burn much fat.
Now, assuming burning 50 calories per mile, your 3,000 calories would be 42 lbs
of fat. However, many people up their food consumption in response to exercise
and that is probably what you have done.

You lost me here. 42 lbs of fat? huh, who what? Typo?

Post by Pbwalther
Now, one can lose a considerable amount of weight exercising and being prudent
with diet. I did a 2 week bicycle tour in the rockies. We did an average of
75 miles per day with quite a bit of climbing and then walking around seeing
things on top of that. I made sure I ate plenty of complex carbs and
vegetables to replace my glycogen each day. I ate some sweets also on the rest
stops and took ate a modest amount of fats and meats. After I got back, I was
amazed that I had lost 10 lbs in 14 days. So it can be done.

It would be neat to try that and to see what the body craved. I find that
even if I stay on a LC diet occasionally I'll get the urge to eat something
off plan. Once day I ate nothing but apples. Must have eaten about 10 of
them. Of course we were visiting an apple orchard, heh, but the next day I
was back on LC no problem.

The trick is you have to experiment and find what works for you. If I was
going to be biking 75 miles per day I might indeed convert to a complex
carb diet, and would definitely suppliment with M&Ms or Sweet tarts in
addition to the LC diet.

Did you maintain the loss of the 10 lbs after you came back? Was it really
fat, i.e., did your waistband feel loose?

Post by Pbwalther
Of course, many people gained weight on the tour. They did this by having an
extra meal during the day consisting of a big burger, fries, and a large
sundae.

Yeah, upping the fat along with sugar during the meal is a recipe for diet
disaster. ;-) Plenty of high caloric food plus lots of insulin spiking in
the susceptible person. When I was a teenager, this kind of eating would
not have made a difference - I could eat everything in sight.

-B

"El Paisano"

2004-05-19 17:28:59 UTC

Post by Badger_South

You lost me here. 42 lbs of fat? huh, who what? Typo?

I think that would be 3000 miles not 3000 calories. And about 40lbs of
weight loss not 40lbs of fat.

Matthew

BanditManDan

2004-05-19 13:59:50 UTC

Wow does this sound familiar. My story has been almost identical t
yours except I managed to lose the weight with no problems. When
started I was 260lbs @ 6'1", eighteen months later I was down to 170lbs
How did I do it?

I basically did what other have already suggested . I began to kee
track of my exercise and food intake usin
http://www.fitday.comwww.fitday.com. Another very confusing think for m
was how much caloric intake I should eat daily. What I discovered wa
that "ALL" the experts (including the FDA) over estimated that dail
caloric requirement just as your friend has done. 4000 calories is WA
too high for just about everybody. What I would suggest is to reduc
your daily calories for one week and see if you begin to drop weight
Continue to do this until you start to drop 1 to 2 pounds a week an
then just leave your diet alone

In the end it really is just an input/output issue. Calories in an
calories out. Simple

Good luck. :

Dan

-

Badger_South

2004-05-19 14:21:27 UTC

Wow does this sound familiar. My story has been almost identical to
yours except I managed to lose the weight with no problems. When I
How did I do it??
I basically did what other have already suggested . I began to keep
track of my exercise and food intake using
http://www.fitday.comwww.fitday.com. Another very confusing think for me
was how much caloric intake I should eat daily. What I discovered was
that "ALL" the experts (including the FDA) over estimated that daily
caloric requirement just as your friend has done. 4000 calories is WAY
too high for just about everybody. What I would suggest is to reduce
your daily calories for one week and see if you begin to drop weight.
Continue to do this until you start to drop 1 to 2 pounds a week and
then just leave your diet alone.
In the end it really is just an input/output issue. Calories in and
calories out. Simple.
Good luck. :)
Dan.

Cool. Good job! Yeah, tracking your food is pretty much an essential.

I figure most ppl eat about twice what they really need.

I lost 20lbs in a month just by getting into induction, losing the carb
cravings and eating fish, turkey, nuts and green beans, cheese and eggs,
two small meals a day, plus about 3 snacks.

-B

psycholist

2004-05-19 14:45:12 UTC

Cycling alone won't do it. It's non-weight bearing. If you're going to
rely heavily on cycling, you'll need to do MUCH more of it (3,000 miles may
sound like a lot to you. I've done 5,300 so far this year). You'll also
need to do some intense rides each week. Don't just go through the motions
of pedaling. You're going to need to do some hard riding.

All that may not be enough. Adding a cross-training activity would help. I
walk in the mornings and I do 15 minutes of core strength exercises.

Most important of all is diet. Fat is fat. Keep it to a minimum. I had a
cholestrol problem a couple of years ago (despite a ton of riding). I
simply stopped eating anything that had any cholesterol at all. I lost 12
pounds in 6 weeks and lowered my cholestrol 60 points. Now I watch that AND
saturated fat to keep losing weight.

Good luck!

Bob C.

Badger_South

2004-05-19 17:10:47 UTC

Post by psycholist
Most important of all is diet. Fat is fat. Keep it to a minimum. I had a
cholestrol problem a couple of years ago (despite a ton of riding). I
simply stopped eating anything that had any cholesterol at all. I lost 12
pounds in 6 weeks and lowered my cholestrol 60 points. Now I watch that AND
saturated fat to keep losing weight.
Good luck!
Bob C.

Can you give an example of foods that you stopped eating, and their
cholesterol content? This is pretty interesting.

Did you continue the 'no cholesterol' diet for longer than the 6 weeks, or
was that a temporary measure to bring your weight down?

-B

BanditManDan

2004-05-19 17:38:22 UTC

I don't know why cycling alone wouldnt be enough. It's a great calori
burn and as long as your not consuming more than you burn it shoul
result in weight loss. Not that theres anything wrong with weigh
bearing exercise or cross training but a person can lose weight eve
without exercise if they control their diet sufficiently

Dan

-

Badger_South

2004-05-19 17:53:42 UTC

I don't know why cycling alone wouldnt be enough. It's a great calorie
burn and as long as your not consuming more than you burn it should
result in weight loss. Not that theres anything wrong with weight
bearing exercise or cross training but a person can lose weight even
without exercise if they control their diet sufficiently.
Dan.

A non-scientific comment on this. When I was in college I rode my bike
everywhere, and it was nothing to go ride to the next city and back on a
lark, and suffered nary a sore muscle, ever.

Now, I ride at 15mph for 10-15 miles and I'm cooked, down 4-5lbs, even
drinking some water, and I feel the same as after jogging three to four
miles, or lifting weights for 90 minutes. (Of course I'm larger, more
muscular, body-builder type physique, and 80lbs heavier. Then I was skinny
and 145lbs)

So it -appears- to me that I'm burning up a lot of calories, and in
addition I stay warm for several hours, and have to open all the windows in
the winter.

It might be an effect of age, or efficiency on the machine, or metabolism.
But it appears that for some this amt of biking would be very efficient at
burning calories, while for others it would be a sub-optimal workout, and
more like a stroll in the park, if you'll pardon some hyperbole.

-B

DRS

2004-05-19 17:54:16 UTC

Cycling alone won't do it. It's non-weight bearing. If you're

going to > rely heavily on cycling, you'll need to do MUCH more of
it (3,000 miles > may sound like a lot to you. I've done 5,300 so
far this year). You'll > also need to do some intense rides each
week. Don't just go through the > motions of pedaling. You're going
to need to do some hard riding. > All that may not be enough.
Adding a cross-training activity would help. > I walk in the
mornings and I do 15 minutes of core strength exercises.
I don't know why cycling alone wouldnt be enough. It's a great calorie
burn and as long as your not consuming more than you burn it should
result in weight loss. Not that theres anything wrong with weight
bearing exercise or cross training but a person can lose weight even
without exercise if they control their diet sufficiently.

You can lose weight by losing fat and you can lose weight by losing muscle.
Reducing your calorific intake whilst not maintaining anaerobic exercise
levels wil result in excessive muscle loss. Since muscle is more
metabolically expensive than fat, by maintaining your muscle mass you are
actually able to burn more calories than someone with less muscle. Cycling
is an aerobic activity. It does little to preserve muscle mass because it
primarily recruits Type I fibres (endurance). It also doesn't burn as many
calories as people think. You go for a ride, work like crazy to burn a few
hundred calories and then put it straight back on again and more with a
single Big Mac and fries. Cardio has its place in weight loss regimes but
it's third in importance after diet and anaerobic exercise.

--
A: Top-posters.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 19:43:27 UTC

DRS wrote:
:: "BanditManDan" <***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
:: news:iYMqc.25375$***@fe15.usenetserver.com
::: Psycholist wrote:
::: > Cycling alone won't do it. It's non-weight bearing. If you're
::: going to > rely heavily on cycling, you'll need to do MUCH more of
::: it (3,000 miles > may sound like a lot to you. I've done 5,300 so
::: far this year). You'll > also need to do some intense rides each
::: week. Don't just go through the > motions of pedaling. You're
::: going to need to do some hard riding. > All that may not be
::: enough. Adding a cross-training activity would help. > I walk in
::: the
::: mornings and I do 15 minutes of core strength exercises.
:::
::: I don't know why cycling alone wouldnt be enough. It's a great
::: calorie burn and as long as your not consuming more than you burn
::: it should result in weight loss. Not that theres anything wrong
::: with weight bearing exercise or cross training but a person can
::: lose weight even without exercise if they control their diet
::: sufficiently.
::
:: You can lose weight by losing fat and you can lose weight by losing
:: muscle. Reducing your calorific intake whilst not maintaining
:: anaerobic exercise levels wil result in excessive muscle loss.
:: Since muscle is more metabolically expensive than fat, by
:: maintaining your muscle mass you are actually able to burn more
:: calories than someone with less muscle. Cycling is an aerobic
:: activity. It does little to preserve muscle mass because it
:: primarily recruits Type I fibres (endurance). It also doesn't burn
:: as many calories as people think. You go for a ride, work like
:: crazy to burn a few hundred calories and then put it straight back
:: on again and more with a single Big Mac and fries. Cardio has its
:: place in weight loss regimes but it's third in importance after diet
:: and anaerobic exercise.

Correct!

BanditManDan

2004-05-19 20:02:24 UTC

Post by DRS
You can lose weight by losing fat and you can lose weight by losing
muscle. Reducing your calorific intake whilst not maintaining anaerobic
exercise levels wil result in excessive muscle loss. Since muscle is
more metabolically expensive than fat, by maintaining your muscle mass
you are actually able to burn more calories than someone with less
muscle. Cycling is an aerobic activity. It does little to preserve
muscle mass because it primarily recruits Type I fibres (endurance). It
also doesn't burn as many calories as people think. You go for a ride,
work like crazy to burn a few hundred calories and then put it straight
back on again and more with a single Big Mac and fries. Cardio has its
place in weight loss regimes but it's third in importance after diet and
anaerobic exercise.

I won't disput what you are saying and in my case I lost 90lbs doin
both aerobic & anaerobic exercise. However my primary exercise cam
mostly from cycling because that's what I ejoyed the most, currently
cycle exclusively and have not gained a pound back. I also know peopl
who lost weight simply dieting and walking as their only form o
exercise. I realize that a person can only lose so much weight this wa
but it does work. As I see it, anything you do to increase activity wil
burn calories. As long as you consume fewer calories than you burn yo
will lose weight. Once at the desired weight you simply balance th
intake/output

Its just that simple. (although I know there is much more scientifi
information on the subject I'm just summarizing)

Dan

-

Roger Zoul

2004-05-19 22:37:35 UTC

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

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

Badger_South

2004-05-19 23:15:12 UTC

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

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

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

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

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

-B

2004-05-19 15:02:49 UTC

my two cents worth...

My guess is that for the 15 to 30 mile rides, you are only burning 400 to
700 calories (a guestimate). If you're taking in 3000 calories (or more) it
will be tough to lose weight.

Good luck and keep them miles rolling!

Brad

Steve Knight

2004-05-19 16:10:24 UTC

I have had this problem too. when I found the right spot and ate more I started
loosing far more. Now I have to redo it and I am trying to find the sweet spot.
pretty pathetic to have to eat more to loose (G)

--
Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes
Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices
See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions.

Matt O'Toole

2004-05-19 16:18:04 UTC

That still may be more than you need. Plus, what about the days you're not
tracking? A 500 calorie difference a day equals a pound a week -- one way or
the other. The days you're burning more than you eat are probably being offset
by the ones when you're not paying attention. You may very well be eating more
on those days without realizing it.

Post by Doug Cook
One friend who is a "wellness" expert suggests I'm not eating
*ENOUGH*. Although she readily admits she doesn't specialize in
athletes ("slovenly couch potato" is how she describes her typical
client), she says that with my activity level my BMR is 5300... as
she explained it that's the number of calories needed to just
maintain my weight! Therefore she thinks my body thinks it's being
starved and refuses to let go of the fat. She thinks by eating MORE
the body will move away from this starvation reflex and start
shedding pounds. She also suggested riding easy first thing in the
morning BEFORE breakfast so the body has to switch to fat because the
glycogen stores will be low (sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).

All this is nonsense, and probably based on the typical kind of pseudo-science
most of these pop nutritionists and "experts" buy into. First of all, the same
principles apply to athletes as everyone else. Second, there's no way you have
a BMR of 5300 -- even mountaineers who repeatedly hump 50 LB loads up 3000', 45
deg slopes don't need that much food. Tour de France riders hardly need that
much.

Post by Doug Cook
Well, I tried to eat 4000 calories today and about died! I felt
horrible, stuffed, tired, etc. I tried riding with just water (no
sport drink), and found myself craving sugar after the ride.

This is a red flag to me -- you're a carb addict. Most Americans are. So lay
off the simple carbs! Learn what complex carbs really are, and learn to eat
them in proper moderation. Do this for a month, and the cravings will go away.
I'm not a fan of contemporary low carb diets, but there's a grain of truth in
them along with all the pseudo-science hokum. If you want to read a diet book,
look into the Zone Diet or the South Beach diet. Or eat like a diabetic is
supposed to, even if you're not one. (You may be -- get that checked.)

Post by Doug Cook
Any experts lurking out there that would like to comment? Are there
any coaching services online that could help customize my training to
help me lose weight? I can't afford to hire a coach.

This doesn't have to be expensive or inconvenient. One of my friends is using a
coach who works online. You just plug in your eating and riding stats, plus a
few other things, and get recommendations every few days by email or phone. The
cost is less than, say, a couple of meals out a month. I can get you the info
if you're interested.

Matt O.

Doug Cook

2004-05-19 17:08:37 UTC

(snip)

Post by Matt O'Toole
This doesn't have to be expensive or inconvenient. One of my friends is using a
coach who works online. You just plug in your eating and riding stats, plus a
few other things, and get recommendations every few days by email or phone. The
cost is less than, say, a couple of meals out a month. I can get you the info
if you're interested.
Matt O.

Matt, I would be interested in more info. Could you email it to me?

Thanks

Jacques Moser

2004-05-19 19:51:01 UTC

Post by Doug Cook
The story thus far....
My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to struggle on 10 mile
rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday rides of 15-30 miles each and one
weekend ride for 50-70 miles - all solo.

Being rather frail (130 lb, 5'9"), I don't know anything about diets
and have never really needed to lose weight. But with the years, although
riding a bit (50 miles/wk for commute and leisure), I began to develop a
small but definite (beer ?) belly.

Last fall I did 2 weeks of cycle touring, 80 mi/day with heavy luggage. I
ate tons of food, all kind from fresh vegetables to canned meat, beer and
chocolate. At the end I had lost 15 lb and my small belly.

During the winter, cycling less, I regained some weight.
But more recently, I started training harder for endurance rides. I am
now in the 120 miles range once every about two weeks, with commuting and
easier rides to fill the gaps. Again, it seems that I am burning much
more food in these long, hard rides.

From this, my empirical recommendation would be: for your body to start
really burning fat, you probably have to ride even harder, especially
longer, day long rides.

But before you do anything silly following my incompetent advice, ask
your doctor first ;-)

Jacques

GaryG

2004-05-19 20:24:05 UTC

First, congratulations on not being a couch potato! Being physically active
is an important component in health, and weight loss.

But, as others have noted, you need to focus on the food (intake) side of
the weight loss equation. It seems clear that you are consuming too much
(which is easy to do when you ride a lot).

Your current Body Mass Index is 34.2, which puts you well into the "Obese"
category. To get your weight down, you need to aim for a long-term, slow
weight loss of around 1 lb per week. To achieve this, you need a calorie
deficit of 500 calories per day. I recommend that you focus on reducing
sweets, sodas, snacks and portion sizes. Even a relatively small reduction,
if maintained over time, will result in significant weight loss.

<plug warning=on>
The trick here is knowing when you are on track, because your weight can
fluctuate by 2-4 pounds per day and counting calories is difficult and
time-consuming. I've recently released a weight management program called
"WeightWare" (www.WeightWare.com) that you may find useful. By weighing
yourself daily, and using the built-in analytical tools in the program,
you'll have a much better idea of whether or not you are on track. You can
download a free, fully functional version from the website and try it for 45
days to see if it meets your needs.
<plug warning=off>

Best of luck, and keep cycling!

~_-*
...G/ \G
http://www.CycliStats.com - Software for Cyclists
http://www.WeightWare.com - Your Weight and Health Diary

Doug Cook

2004-05-19 20:54:33 UTC

Post by Doug Cook

Post by Doug Cook
The story thus far....
12 years ago - single, 6'3", 180lbs., hair, and competing in citizens

class

Post by Doug Cook
triathlons.
Fast forward to last July... Married, two kids, mortgage, no hair,
sedentary, 279lbs.
Sick of that fat man in the mirror, I bought some XXL cycling clothes,
dusted off and tuned up my old Trek, and started riding again. Now 10
months and close to 3000 miles later... I still weigh 274! I mean... come
on! 3000 miles for 5 pounds?!
My fitness level has increased tremendously. I use to struggle on 10 mile
rides. Now I do at least 3-4 weekday rides of 15-30 miles each and one
weekend ride for 50-70 miles - all solo. My computer puts my average

speed

Post by Doug Cook
for these rides between 16-18mph depending upon the particular ups&downs

Post by Doug Cook
the ride. My HRM says my average rate is usually right about 75% of max
(although that can vary, usually on the high side, when the ride has
climbing). I feel lean and mean while I ride, but when I get home I

wonder

Post by Doug Cook
who that fat guy in the mirror is!
I don't diet per se, but I do eat sensibly. The days that I've tracked my
caloric intake it's usually right between 2500 - 3000. One friend who

Post by Doug Cook
a

Post by Doug Cook
"wellness" expert suggests I'm not eating *ENOUGH*. Although she readily
admits she doesn't specialize in athletes ("slovenly couch potato" is how
she describes her typical client), she says that with my activity level my
BMR is 5300... as she explained it that's the number of calories needed to
just maintain my weight! Therefore she thinks my body thinks it's being
starved and refuses to let go of the fat. She thinks by eating MORE the
body will move away from this starvation reflex and start shedding pounds.
She also suggested riding easy first thing in the morning BEFORE breakfast
so the body has to switch to fat because the glycogen stores will be low
(sound like a recipe for the BONK to me).
Well, I tried to eat 4000 calories today and about died! I felt horrible,
stuffed, tired, etc. I tried riding with just water (no sport drink), and
found myself craving sugar after the ride.
Any experts lurking out there that would like to comment? Are there any
coaching services online that could help customize my training to help me
lose weight? I can't afford to hire a coach.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.

First, congratulations on not being a couch potato! Being physically active
is an important component in health, and weight loss.
But, as others have noted, you need to focus on the food (intake) side of
the weight loss equation. It seems clear that you are consuming too much
(which is easy to do when you ride a lot).
Your current Body Mass Index is 34.2, which puts you well into the "Obese"
category. To get your weight down, you need to aim for a long-term, slow
weight loss of around 1 lb per week. To achieve this, you need a calorie
deficit of 500 calories per day. I recommend that you focus on reducing
sweets, sodas, snacks and portion sizes. Even a relatively small reduction,
if maintained over time, will result in significant weight loss.
<plug warning=on>
The trick here is knowing when you are on track, because your weight can
fluctuate by 2-4 pounds per day and counting calories is difficult and
time-consuming. I've recently released a weight management program called
"WeightWare" (www.WeightWare.com) that you may find useful. By weighing
yourself daily, and using the built-in analytical tools in the program,
you'll have a much better idea of whether or not you are on track. You can
download a free, fully functional version from the website and try it for 45
days to see if it meets your needs.
<plug warning=off>
Best of luck, and keep cycling!
~_-*
...G/ \G
http://www.CycliStats.com - Software for Cyclists
http://www.WeightWare.com - Your Weight and Health Diary

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

GaryG

2004-05-19 21:45:04 UTC

Post by Michael Libby

Post by GaryG

Post by Doug Cook
The story thus far....

[snipped]

Post by Michael Libby

Post by GaryG
First, congratulations on not being a couch potato! Being physically

active

Post by GaryG
is an important component in health, and weight loss.
But, as others have noted, you need to focus on the food (intake) side of
the weight loss equation. It seems clear that you are consuming too much
(which is easy to do when you ride a lot).
Your current Body Mass Index is 34.2, which puts you well into the "Obese"
category. To get your weight down, you need to aim for a long-term, slow
weight loss of around 1 lb per week. To achieve this, you need a calorie
deficit of 500 calories per day. I recommend that you focus on reducing
sweets, sodas, snacks and portion sizes. Even a relatively small

reduction,

Post by GaryG
if maintained over time, will result in significant weight loss.
<plug warning=on>
The trick here is knowing when you are on track, because your weight can
fluctuate by 2-4 pounds per day and counting calories is difficult and
time-consuming. I've recently released a weight management program called
"WeightWare" (www.WeightWare.com) that you may find useful. By weighing
yourself daily, and using the built-in analytical tools in the program,
you'll have a much better idea of whether or not you are on track. You

can

Post by GaryG
download a free, fully functional version from the website and try it

for

Post by Michael Libby
45

Post by GaryG
days to see if it meets your needs.
<plug warning=off>
Best of luck, and keep cycling!
~_-*
...G/ \G
http://www.CycliStats.com - Software for Cyclists
http://www.WeightWare.com - Your Weight and Health Diary

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

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

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

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

~_-*
...G/ \G
http://www.CycliStats.com - Software for Cyclists
http://www.WeightWare.com - Your Weight and Health Diary

Badger_South

2004-05-19 22:46:19 UTC

On Wed, 19 May 2004 14:45:04 -0700, "GaryG"

Post by GaryG

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

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

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

Very nice of you.

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

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

Best,

-B

e***@chartermi.net

2004-05-19 22:03:28 UTC

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

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

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

--
---
Eric Yagerlener
remove "usenet" from email address to reply

Badger_South

2004-05-19 22:54:34 UTC

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-B

Post by e***@chartermi.net
---
Eric Yagerlener
remove "usenet" from email address to reply

Rick Onanian

2004-05-19 23:02:17 UTC

Post by Badger_South
If you just must have your soda, then dilute it to 1/8th
of the strength and put the rest away.

Oy! Diluted soda? Ick!

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

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

Badger_South

2004-05-19 23:54:07 UTC

Post by Rick Onanian

Post by Badger_South
If you just must have your soda, then dilute it to 1/8th
of the strength and put the rest away.

Oy! Diluted soda? Ick!
Luckily for me (calorie-wise, anyway), my preferred soda is Diet
Pepsi. No calories, but it will probably cause cancer -- of course,
so will anything else, everything else, or even nothing.
Maybe somebody who likes hi-test soda could dilute it with it's diet
companion; at least the carbonation will be the same.

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

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

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

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

-B

Denver C. Fox

2004-05-19 23:07:39 UTC

Post by e***@chartermi.net
Some of your fat has been converted to muscle

A physiological impossibility!

http://members.aol.com/foxcondorsrvtns
(Colorado rental condo)

http://members.aol.com/dnvrfox
(Family Web Page)

limerickman

2004-05-19 23:21:18 UTC