# keep getting stuck...



## jeanice (Apr 2, 2010)

since jan ive been dieting and have only lost 8lbs...i know they said its better to come off slow then anything, i started initially at 1500 calories slowly increasing my cardio when id hit a sticking point, when then didnt work i upped my calories a bit and started to lose again...it started to seem i was losing then kept hitting sticking points every other week.  increased the cardio had 4 regular days of under maintanence calories at 1700 and 3 days at lower calories somewhere between 1200-1300 depending if i was doing cardio or 100% off from training...currently my macros are 50% p, 30% f and 20% carbs...i just keep hitting sticking points too often and the fat loss seems too slow...

weight is 132 somewhere like 18% bf...
and i am 5'2 and female...

my current diet is like this...

meal 1 25 grams protein, 25 grams outs

train

meal 2 5 whites,  1/5 cup blueberries or 1/2 cup oatmeal

meal 3 25 grams shake - 20 almonds

meal 4 5-6 oz of lean protein 1/2 cup brown rice or 4 oz yam with green beans or broccoli...

meal 5 25 grams shake

meal 6 7-9 oz lean protein green veggies with tblspn olive oil...

meal 7 5 egg whites...

cardio last 2 weeks was 6 days for an hour, it started at 4 days for 30 mins..

someone suggested hitt next week...i lift usually 4 days a week...

any suggestions would be appreciated! thanks


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 3, 2010)

jeanice said:


> since jan ive been dieting and have only lost 8lbs...i know they said its better to come off slow then anything, i started initially at 1500 calories slowly increasing my cardio when id hit a sticking point, when then didnt work i upped my calories a bit and started to lose again...it started to seem i was losing then kept hitting sticking points every other week.  increased the cardio had 4 regular days of under maintanence calories at 1700 and 3 days at lower calories somewhere between 1200-1300 depending if i was doing cardio or 100% off from training...currently my macros are 50% p, 30% f and 20% carbs...i just keep hitting sticking points too often and the fat loss seems too slow...
> 
> weight is 132 somewhere like 18% bf...
> and i am 5'2 and female...
> ...



If you aren't losing weight anymore, and you've only lost 8 pounds, upping your calories makes no sense.

The concept of "starvation mode" is exaggerated horribly and often taken out of context. You are clearly not at a caloric defecit at all.


It sounds like you've used some formulas to calculate your maintanance calories, etc.

Remember that these formulas are averages, they absolutely cannot be counted on by themselves to determine your calorie needs, they are only starting points.

The greatest predictor of weither or not you are consuming enough, too much or too few calories is your weight.

You are eating too many calories to lose. Simple as that.

Remember, you have to lose in order to starve, so if you haven't lost a great deal of weight, you are in no immediate danger of starving so stop upping your calories.

P.S. I wouldn't count on my own calculations of caloric intake too closely because even Ph.D's cannot count calories outside of the lab with reliable accuracy. Always assume a margin of error. So view your weight as the best meter of how appropriate your diet is to your goals.


----------



## Christopherg.EU (Apr 5, 2010)

8 pounds in 4 months is a great effort. I wouldn't get too worried.

My advice to you would be to ...

1. Set your fat loss goal for the next 4 months. Diarise it.
2. Change your training routine-not drastically though-what I mean is, keep your cardio sessions, but (a) work at 60% of your maximum heart rate twice per week and (b) work in some intervals twice per week.
3. Make your weight training session really intense by shortening rests between sets, adding a little more weight to the exercise, supersetting,... just spice it up!
4. Have a blood analysis done. It will do you no harm. Important things to look out for will be your thyroid function, glucose tolerance...readings that will give you insight into "YOU".
5. See a dietician. Give her your current eating plan and blood test analysis. 

I believe you can reach your goal in time. Keep it up.
Happy Training


----------



## sassy69 (Apr 6, 2010)

When I look at your diet, the diet looks clean & decent amounts of things, but if I'm counting correctly, all I see is about 50 g of carbs from your first meal of "25 g outs" (I'm not sure what you're saying there??) & 1/2 c oats (about 25 g carb). The one hitch w/ "low carb" is that if you stay too low to use carbs as your primary energy source but not low enough to go into ketosis (Atkins style dieting) then you're basically burning up your preferred energy source too quickly, and when that's gone, you start to bog down. Personally I would up the carbs at least to 80g / day or else carb cycle, or do a carb up once every 3-4 days (e.g. CKD diet)

There are other approaches, one of which you've been playing with called calorie cycling as well.


----------



## Phineas (Apr 6, 2010)

sassy69 said:


> When I look at your diet, the diet looks clean & decent amounts of things, but if I'm counting correctly, all I see is about 50 g of carbs from your first meal of "25 g outs" (I'm not sure what you're saying there??) & 1/2 c oats (about 25 g carb). The one hitch w/ "low carb" is that if you stay too low to use carbs as your primary energy source but not low enough to go into ketosis (Atkins style dieting) then you're basically burning up your preferred energy source too quickly, and when that's gone, you start to bog down. Personally I would up the carbs at least to 80g / day or else carb cycle, or do a carb up once every 3-4 days (e.g. CKD diet)
> 
> There are other approaches, one of which you've been playing with called calorie cycling as well.



Are you saying with low-carb it's either all or nothing?

I haven't performed a full-on cut yet, but have read a lot about the science behind it. Personally, I'm turned off of the idea of low-carb, or at least really low carb. I can't see how it's healthy to deprive the body of its primary energy source -- even with refeeds. 

Wouldn't a calorie deficit suffice? Of course, the protein needs to remain, so the macros will automatically change and carbs will of course decrease. I just can't imagine training intensely enough while on a cut to maintain mass if you're main source of fuel is fat, which, if I'm not mistaken, burns inefficiently because it requires more oxygen (?).

I've experimented with carb cycling (incorporating ultra low carb days) and I did NOT like how it was making my body feel. My brain could simply not function, and my muscles felt weak.

I'm cutting beginning June so I guess it's about time to start deciding the route I want to take.


----------



## sassy69 (Apr 6, 2010)

Phineas said:


> Are you saying with low-carb it's either all or nothing?
> 
> I haven't performed a full-on cut yet, but have read a lot about the science behind it. Personally, I'm turned off of the idea of low-carb, or at least really low carb. I can't see how it's healthy to deprive the body of its primary energy source -- even with refeeds.
> 
> ...



If you are not explicitly trying to get into ketosis, making ketones available for your body (and brain!) to run on, then if you're going very low carb w/o any refeeds, you're only giving your body a very small amount of carb to run on and nothing else when that is burnt up. This can be interpreted as a "starvation" state and your body will slow down metabolism to preserve whatever it still has available. 

You can CYCLE carbs over a 3-4 day period and take advantage of the 24-48 hrs your body takes to figure out it no longer has the expected amount of carbs to burn and slows down metabolism, or get into keto (CKD) w/ refeeds. But perpetually staying very low carb w/o going into ketosis doesn't work. The carb cycling uses that small window of time to start dropping your carb intake before your body starts slowing down metabolism, then just before it does, you hit it with a higher carb day. But those ultra low carb days where you are feeling very flaky in the head is your body discovering its run out of carbs for fuel and will start slowing down metabolism again. You can adjust the cycle to a duration & degree that you can handle, but you can do simple like High day / med day  / low day / high day / med day / low day... continue. Or you can add a very low / no carb day as well. I wouldnt' go more than 4 days w/o going back to a high carb day - as you've discovered you really get lethargic. It takes a while to get used to but it does suck. A note, personally , the way I've done carb cycling is I keep my total calories the same every day, but as I decrease carbs, I add in fats so I'm still at the same total cals.

The optimal amount of carb is the carb your body has available and burns efficiently , you refuel and continue the burn rate. When you can get that burn rate going, it is truly amazing how well the body runs. You'll know when you start dropping a lot of water and the fat just continues to drop.


----------



## maseco63 (Apr 6, 2010)

I've been using the cave man method for years now and Im always ready by the summer.  I take in about 500 calories over 4-5 meals and have a huge post wko and or evening meal.  It's anabolic it keeps the body releasing fat!  I hope it helps...


----------



## Phineas (Apr 7, 2010)

sassy69 said:


> If you are not explicitly trying to get into ketosis, making ketones available for your body (and brain!) to run on, then if you're going very low carb w/o any refeeds, you're only giving your body a very small amount of carb to run on and nothing else when that is burnt up. This can be interpreted as a "starvation" state and your body will slow down metabolism to preserve whatever it still has available.
> 
> You can CYCLE carbs over a 3-4 day period and take advantage of the 24-48 hrs your body takes to figure out it no longer has the expected amount of carbs to burn and slows down metabolism, or get into keto (CKD) w/ refeeds. But perpetually staying very low carb w/o going into ketosis doesn't work. The carb cycling uses that small window of time to start dropping your carb intake before your body starts slowing down metabolism, then just before it does, you hit it with a higher carb day. But those ultra low carb days where you are feeling very flaky in the head is your body discovering its run out of carbs for fuel and will start slowing down metabolism again. You can adjust the cycle to a duration & degree that you can handle, but you can do simple like High day / med day  / low day / high day / med day / low day... continue. Or you can add a very low / no carb day as well. I wouldnt' go more than 4 days w/o going back to a high carb day - as you've discovered you really get lethargic. It takes a while to get used to but it does suck. A note, personally , the way I've done carb cycling is I keep my total calories the same every day, but as I decrease carbs, I add in fats so I'm still at the same total cals.
> 
> The optimal amount of carb is the carb your body has available and burns efficiently , you refuel and continue the burn rate. When you can get that burn rate going, it is truly amazing how well the body runs. You'll know when you start dropping a lot of water and the fat just continues to drop.



Good stuff!

I've only recently been introduced to ketosis. I've done some reading, but am interested in learning more. Can you suggest me any detailed articles or even books?


----------



## Marat (Apr 7, 2010)

The Ketogenic Diet by Lyle McDonald is an interesting read.


----------



## sassy69 (Apr 7, 2010)

m11 said:


> The Ketogenic Diet by Lyle McDonald is an interesting read.




Thinking of commonly used keto diets, you can google for:

Cyclic Ketogenic Diet (CKD)
Total Ketogenic Diet (TKD)
Dave Palumbo has a flavor of keto diet many people on RXmuscle.com use
Beverly International competition diets are basically ketogenic.


----------



## Built (Apr 7, 2010)

Phineas said:


> Are you saying with low-carb it's either all or nothing?
> 
> I haven't performed a full-on cut yet, but have read a lot about the science behind it. Personally, I'm turned off of the idea of low-carb, or at least really low carb. I can't see how it's healthy to deprive the body of its primary energy source -- even with refeeds.



Really? How about this: there are NO essential carbohydrates. 

Profound health benefits can be had by going into and staying in ketosis for extended periods of time. 



> Wouldn't a calorie deficit suffice? Of course, the protein needs to remain, so the macros will automatically change and carbs will of course decrease. I just can't imagine training intensely enough while on a cut to maintain mass if you're main source of fuel is fat, which, if I'm not mistaken, burns inefficiently because it requires more oxygen (?).


It's all about running a deficit and maintaining sufficient stimulus to maintain muscle (no need to go as intensely as you do to build it), and sufficient protein to remain nitrogen positive. 
The rest comes down to appetite control, and that's where fats can really shine. For some. 

Some folks really do seem to feel more comfortable on lower fat, higher carbs. I'm not one of 'em, but you might be. 

Either way is fine. Just pick one.





> I've experimented with carb cycling (incorporating ultra low carb days) and I did NOT like how it was making my body feel. My brain could simply not function, and my muscles felt weak.
> 
> I'm cutting beginning June so I guess it's about time to start deciding the route I want to take.



You may find that after staying in ketosis for a couple of weeks, you get to feel really good that way, and better able to flip back and forth between fuel sources. 

Something to consider.



sassy69 said:


> If you are not explicitly trying to get into ketosis, making ketones available for your body (and brain!) to run on, then if you're going very low carb w/o any refeeds, you're only giving your body a very small amount of carb to run on and nothing else when that is burnt up. This can be interpreted as a "starvation" state and your body will slow down metabolism to preserve whatever it still has available.


Okay, this is interesting. 

And I have never heard of this before. Got anything I can read on this, Sassy?


sassy69 said:


> You can CYCLE carbs over a 3-4 day period and take advantage of the 24-48 hrs your body takes to figure out it no longer has the expected amount of carbs to burn and slows down metabolism, or get into keto (CKD) w/ refeeds. But perpetually staying very low carb w/o going into ketosis doesn't work.


It doesn't? Why not?

Calories in calories out. 

Starvation mode takes a LOT longer than a couple of days of low carbs!

Meal Frequency and Energy Balance | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald


			
				Lyle said:
			
		

> Quite in fact, it takes at least 3-4 days of fairly strict dieting to impact on metabolic rate (and some work on fasting shows that metabolic rate goes UP acutely during the first 72 hours of fasting);





sassy69 said:


> The carb cycling uses that small window of time to start dropping your carb intake before your body starts slowing down metabolism, then just before it does, you hit it with a higher carb day. But those ultra low carb days where you are feeling very flaky in the head is your body discovering its run out of carbs for fuel and will start slowing down metabolism again.


I never, ever feel flaky on low carbs. I understand some do, but not everyone. 



sassy69 said:


> You can adjust the cycle to a duration & degree that you can handle, but you can do simple like High day / med day  / low day / high day / med day / low day... continue. Or you can add a very low / no carb day as well. I wouldnt' go more than 4 days w/o going back to a high carb day - as you've discovered you really get lethargic. It takes a while to get used to but it does suck. A note, personally , the way I've done carb cycling is I keep my total calories the same every day, but as I decrease carbs, I add in fats so I'm still at the same total cals.


Where the way I have done it, is to go high on the high-carb days, and very low calorie on the low carb days, since low carb kills my appetite and high carb makes me hungry. I train and take advantage of the carbs on the high days, with more food, and manage a deficit through the low carb days. 

Ultimately, if you run a deficit and maintain muscle, you'll drop fat. Pick your poison. 


> The optimal amount of carb is the carb your body has available and burns efficiently , you refuel and continue the burn rate. When you can get that burn rate going, it is truly amazing how well the body runs. You'll know when you start dropping a lot of water and the fat just continues to drop.



It is a very individual thing, to be sure. No one metric will fit everyone here.


----------



## danzik17 (Apr 7, 2010)

For reference, though the study was done on mice and not humans:

A high-fat, ketogenic diet induces a unique metabolic state in mice -- Kennedy et al. 292 (6): E1724 -- AJP - Endocrinology and Metabolism

Basically demonstrating that ketosis did not induce a significant drop in leptin nor in testosterone (amongst others - those were the two that I searched for).  Interestingly enough, they also demonstrated that metabolism went up or that at equivalent calorie levels, a mouse in ketosis lost significantly more fat than one on high carbs.

Why that is I'm not sure - maybe the inherent conversions of fats --> ketones has a lower efficiency than carbs --> glucose?  Or possibly it's that your body is more ready/willing to burn already existing fats since it's in a very low insulin state and already running on ketones?


----------



## Built (Apr 7, 2010)

Thanks for that danzik. My suspicion is that the ketogenic diet was higher in protein and thus promoted a nitrogen-positive state. Ketosis is of course a muscle-sparing metabolic condition, so the combination is a winner, at least in vermin. 

At the very least, we know ketosis doesn't IMPEDE fat loss - and for me, a more comfortable way of dieting that at the very least doesn't make things WORSE makes me happy!


----------



## danzik17 (Apr 7, 2010)

Built said:


> Thanks for that danzik. My suspicion is that the ketogenic diet was higher in protein and thus promoted a nitrogen-positive state. Ketosis is of course a muscle-sparing metabolic condition, so the combination is a winner, at least in vermin.
> 
> At the very least, we know ketosis doesn't IMPEDE fat loss - and for me, a more comfortable way of dieting that at the very least doesn't make things WORSE makes me happy!



Actually that's a good point.  The ketogenic diet wasn't high in protein at all, it was actually extremely LOW (9.5% calories from protein or so).

*Edit*  The other diets used in the study had much higher protein content - forgot to mention that. *

They stated they did not record significant muscle wasting either.  That goes along with the idea that after the initial stages of entering ketosis, muscle is preserved fairly well.


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 8, 2010)

Phineas said:


> Are you saying with low-carb it's either all or nothing?
> 
> I haven't performed a full-on cut yet, but have read a lot about the science behind it. Personally, I'm turned off of the idea of low-carb, or at least really low carb. I can't see how it's healthy to deprive the body of its primary energy source -- even with refeeds.
> 
> ...



You are so right. Super low carb diets are so unhealthful, and it's pretty well established that they don't work over time.

There are many health risks associated with super low carb diets that people don't even think about. Ketogenic diets impair cognitive functioning, increase the risk for gastro-intestinal problems which can be long term (and in the case of cancer, life threatening), emotional/mood problems, deficiencies (which can lead to liver problems, cardiovascular problems, bone density issues), etc.

And, they don't work in the long run. 

I know people are gonna say things like "I concentrate better and have more energy when I'm in ketogenesis". That's BS, that's like someone telling you they drive better after they've had a few drinks.


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 8, 2010)

sassy69 said:


> If you are not explicitly trying to get into ketosis, making ketones available for your body (and brain!) to run on, then if you're going very low carb w/o any refeeds, you're only giving your body a very small amount of carb to run on and nothing else when that is burnt up. This can be interpreted as a "starvation" state and your body will slow down metabolism to preserve whatever it still has available.
> 
> You can CYCLE carbs over a 3-4 day period and take advantage of the 24-48 hrs your body takes to figure out it no longer has the expected amount of carbs to burn and slows down metabolism, or get into keto (CKD) w/ refeeds. But perpetually staying very low carb w/o going into ketosis doesn't work. The carb cycling uses that small window of time to start dropping your carb intake before your body starts slowing down metabolism, then just before it does, you hit it with a higher carb day. But those ultra low carb days where you are feeling very flaky in the head is your body discovering its run out of carbs for fuel and will start slowing down metabolism again. You can adjust the cycle to a duration & degree that you can handle, but you can do simple like High day / med day  / low day / high day / med day / low day... continue. Or you can add a very low / no carb day as well. I wouldnt' go more than 4 days w/o going back to a high carb day - as you've discovered you really get lethargic. It takes a while to get used to but it does suck. A note, personally , the way I've done carb cycling is I keep my total calories the same every day, but as I decrease carbs, I add in fats so I'm still at the same total cals.
> 
> The optimal amount of carb is the carb your body has available and burns efficiently , you refuel and continue the burn rate. When you can get that burn rate going, it is truly amazing how well the body runs. You'll know when you start dropping a lot of water and the fat just continues to drop.



The body and brain do not run on ketones. Ketones are a by product o gluconeogenesis. The kidneys work very hard to remove them from the body, as they are unwanted waste.

Glucose is the only energy form on which the brain can run.


----------



## VanessaNicole (Apr 8, 2010)

Built said:


> Really? How about this: there are NO essential carbohydrates.
> 
> Profound health benefits can be had by going into and staying in ketosis for extended periods of time.
> 
> ...



Hey, Built! I haven't been around here in ages. 

Anyhow, I would be interested to hear more about the health benefits of a ketogenic diet.

I would agree that caloric deprivation has profound health benefits...well, actually only one, but that one is a significantly longer life span (at least in rats). That benefit is probably because the reduction in digestion and processing of food reduces oxidative stress, and therefore cell damage and death.

In my opinion, the high intake of animal proteins associated with a ketogenic diet negates any benefits one might reap from the aformentioned reduced calorie diet (which, according to most of the studies on this subject, is defined as 30% below maintanance, none of us would want to live like that long term and a ketogenic diet isn't that. No increased longevity has been consistently shown with a smaller defecit).

A lot of the nutrients supplied by plant food sources (by that I mean grain, beans, veggies, fruit, etc.) are like antedotes to animal fats and proteins. They remove waste, provide antioxidants (to reduce cell damage which inevitably results from the process of consuming and digesting), affect hormones related to the absorption of nutrients.....I could go on.


----------



## sstp138 (Apr 8, 2010)

Go Keto helped me lose 20 lbs in 10 weeks and lost alot of BF!! Start 225lbs 30% bf Now 205 20% bf!!!  Dont forget CARDIO everyday


----------



## DaMayor (Apr 8, 2010)

VanessaNicole said:


> *The body and brain do not run on ketones*.
> Glucose is the only energy form on which the brain can run.



Really?

Then what the heck have I been running on for the past two months?

Ketosis | here:


----------



## Marat (Apr 8, 2010)

VanessaNicole said:


> The body and brain do not run on ketones.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Glucose is the only energy form on which the brain can run.



This simply isn't a fact. Thirty years ago researchers were already uncovering the purpose  of ketones. 

Metabolism of Ketone Bodies by the Brain - Annual Review of Medicine, 24(1):271 - First Page Image



VanessaNicole said:


> Ketones are a by product o gluconeogenesis. The kidneys work very hard to remove them from the body, as they are unwanted waste.



They are not unwanted waste, they are an energy source in the absence of glucose.

It sounds like you are mistaking ketosis with ketoacidosis, or more commonly, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). These are completely different issues and the health issues that you may be thinking of are related to DKA and not ketosis. 


I'm keeping the biochem to a minimum, so in short: healthy individuals have plenty of insulin while individuals with Type 1 DM don't. Not having insulin to suppress glucagon causes glucose from the liver to be ultimately excreted. Ultimately, a cascade of issues arise as a result of a lack of insulin -- salts and vitamins are lost and not reabsorbed is an example. 

Bottom line: Ketosis isn't dangerous until an individual falls into a state of ketoacidosis. Fortunately, healthy individuals generally won't fall into ketoacidosis because insulin is always available to buffer against glucagon.


----------



## Built (Apr 9, 2010)

VanessaNicole said:


> You are so right. Super low carb diets are so unhealthful, and it's pretty well established that they don't work over time.


I restored myself to excellent health on a very low carb diet. I continue to eat far lower levels of carbohydrate than most. Nine years in, I continue to reap the rewards. 

Low carb diets improve lipid profiles and promote weight loss better than low fat diets. Read pubmed, it's all through the literature. 



VanessaNicole said:


> There are many health risks associated with super low carb diets that people don't even think about. Ketogenic diets impair cognitive functioning, increase the risk for gastro-intestinal problems which can be long term (and in the case of cancer, life threatening), emotional/mood problems, deficiencies (which can lead to liver problems, cardiovascular problems, bone density issues), etc.


They promote cognitive functioning for a variety of individuals. Alzheimers patients even improve on ketogenic diets - ketone bodies provide richer fuel than glucose. With reduced blood flow, this allows the brain to be better fuelled (most of the brain works just fine on ketones; the retina requires glucose and your body will make sufficient glucose through gluconeogenesis for this purpose).

Ketogenic diets are also helpful for a variety of neurological conditions, including migraine, epilepsy, and interesting you should mention, cancer. There are some forms of brain cancer that only respond to ketogenic diets. Cancer involves impaired mitochondrial function. Cancer NEEDS glucose. Feed your body its second choice fuel - the one cancer cannot thrive on - and guess who wins?


> And, they don't work in the long run.


No diets work in the long run. You have to make lifestyle choices that maintain the loss. D'uh!


> I know people are gonna say things like "I concentrate better and have more energy when I'm in ketogenesis". That's BS, that's like someone telling you they drive better after they've had a few drinks.


Wow. You really don't know what this feels like, do you?

I went on the Atkins diet in the fall of 2001. I have ADHD, and that first time I hit ketosis was the first time in my life I ever really felt normal. It was just so easy to focus. Keep in mind, I work as an analyst, and my education is in mathematics. I don't work on simple stuff, and ketosis enhances my cognitive ability in a very profound way. My energy is much, much better in ketosis as well. The only place I notice the drop is in strength training, but my lifts don't go down. Just the training volume. 


VanessaNicole said:


> The body and brain do not run on ketones. Ketones are a by product o gluconeogenesis. The kidneys work very hard to remove them from the body, as they are unwanted waste.
> 
> Glucose is the only energy form on which the brain can run.



Wow. Is that what they taught you in school? Seriously? Vanessa, I am so disappointed. That's a damned shame what your school is doing to you. 



VanessaNicole said:


> Hey, Built! I haven't been around here in ages.
> 
> Anyhow, I would be interested to hear more about the health benefits of a ketogenic diet.
> 
> ...





DaMayor said:


> Really?
> 
> Then what the heck have I been running on for the past two months?
> 
> Ketosis | here:



No kiddin'! I must be dead!



m11 said:


> VanessaNicole said:
> 
> 
> > The body and brain do not run on ketones.
> ...



m11, thank you for this excellent post. I was trying to think of the difference between ketosis and ketoacidosis just the other day, and that's it, the insulin to oppose glucagon. Bingo. 

Muah!


----------



## jeanice (Apr 25, 2010)

wow thanks guys youve been a great help! i really dont know, it seems as if i hit a sticking point almost every other week and my bf does not go down...maybe i am just bad with a caliper? i did a measurement today, which i seem to do every week and im now at 130 my waist is still at 27...this is my current diet, i tried out the diet solution from scivation and it seems that it worked then im stuck again! ...


meal 1 25grams protein (usually a shake) 4am...

meal 2 3 egg whites, 2 whole eggs, either 4 oz yam or 1/2 cup oats with one serving of fruit.

meal 3 1 scoop shake, with 16 almonds

meal 4 5oz protein with veggies, either green beans or broc with 2 tsp olive oil, 1 serving fruit

meal 5 1 scoop shake 22-25 grams and 16 almonds

meal 6 same as meal 4...minus the fruit


my training changed to 4 days lifting  - lifting days 20 mins on the stairmasters

non lifting days 45 mins intervals...

i lost 2lbs last week and this week nothing, i think i def might consider calorie cycling or carbing up every 3 to 4 days...my question is what is the major difference between carb up every 3-4 days or a cheat meal every 3-4 days?

help once again would be appreciated...


----------



## Built (Apr 25, 2010)

FitDay - Free Weight Loss and Diet Journal

Macros?


----------



## jeanice (Apr 25, 2010)

140 grams protein, 60 grams carbs and 50 grams fat. i know the scale is the worse answer as far as progression...but i suck with the caliper and the tape measure seems to read 26.5 - 27 for the last 3 weeks....!


----------



## Built (Apr 25, 2010)

The scale is an excellent way to track progress - if you pay attention to the trend line. 

Okay so you're running (does quick arithmetic...) 1250 calories a day (?) 

You lost two pounds last week, nothing this week and you are now declaring this a failure? 

Really? Why?


----------



## sassy69 (Apr 25, 2010)

Also you're only measuring waist? Your fat is deposited all over your body , not just your waist. I think you need to just stick to what you're doing and have faith in the process. Your body doesnt' just respond linearlly just because you started up a diet. Just stay with it and keep to it consistently and honestly. Your body is constantly changing and responding to your lifestyle - the program of diet & training that you are following. Just stay with it and don't pre-anticipate failure.  

This is one of the biggest challenges of competition prep - most people at at least 16 weeks out from a target date. It takes a good 3 weeks of consistent diet &t rainign to set up a 'burn rate' and then you just keep it running.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 25, 2010)

i guess im just extremely hard on myself...i hear the scale is good and the scale is bad because it does not say how much bf your are losing etc...i would think losing each week would be good? no? i could be totally wrong...i still have not figured out my body. in your opinions? what is a good way to track progress? i feel if i dont lose every week its a sticking point...maybe every 2 weeks i should check? i was measuring all over my body...what are the best places to measure? this week i didnt even bother because i saw the scale and waist and didnt want to measure the rest of my body...im obsessed with numbers.


----------



## Built (Apr 25, 2010)

Track calories.

Weigh daily, empty naked and unfed, first thing in the AM.

Don't track anything else. Just weigh yourself and look in the mirror, and weigh your food. 

Look at the trend line for your weight. (I use fitday for this purpose)
You'll see it going down when it's working. Don't panic about when it pops up - we're women; we invented bloat.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 25, 2010)

heres my question, how will i truely know when progress slows? what to change? and what not to change? unfortunately my scale at the gym is on the gym floor. i gotta invest in one! bloat tell me about it lol. trend line? i gotta check it out. how and where is the trendline on fitday? i use that daily to track calories.


----------



## Built (Apr 25, 2010)

Go to the "reports" tab, and then select "weight change"


----------



## jeanice (Apr 25, 2010)

so basically everyday just weigh myself and then enter it everyday and it will track it? when i hit a sticking point i know i can come here now! thanks a lot everyone!


----------



## Built (Apr 25, 2010)

Basically, yep.

Another thing that can be useful is to figure out how much of a deficit you are running, and use that to predict when you'll hit a target, say, five pounds away. 

For instance, if you figure you're running a 400 calorie a day deficit, that's 2800 a week. This SHOULD produce a loss of about 0.8 lbs per week - so you should hit a five pound loss in about 6 or 7 weeks.

Set the target weight and date on fitday, track your weight daily and see how close you are to that line over time. 

That's what I do. When losses slow, you can see it because the trend line and your data points don't coincide - and you know what to do when that happens. 

As Sassy noted, run with this for a while.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

Built said:


> Basically, yep.
> 
> Another thing that can be useful is to figure out how much of a deficit you are running, and use that to predict when you'll hit a target, say, five pounds away.
> 
> ...





thank you ill do that...now is that just diet alone? I dont know why i cant change my weight today, there are so many tabs! lol. is that calorie restriction accurate on fitday? I have to click om my weight log i believe every time...well my deficit seems to be 130*15 =1950 maitanence my cals range depending on what type of fats i due, because for eg the extra carbs in almonds so the highest day could actually be 1471 kcals...so my deficit  day is 479 a day x 7 3353 a week...


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

whats 3353 a week? i wanna try and get it up to one lb a week...


----------



## Marat (Apr 26, 2010)

Just to hold you over until Built or Sassy come by:

A 3500 calorie/week deficit will theoretically result in one pound of fat loss. Because there is a bit more complexity in terms of determining how much fat one will lose in a given period of time, you'll still see some fluctuations even if you are at a precise 3500 calorie deficit. However, essentially any degree of deficit will ensure some sort of fat loss for that week.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

of course...the scale toys with me lol...even though the scale doesnt move i know i could potentially be losing bf or inches somewhere...thats my downfall! numbers...and thanks for the advice, much appreciated.


----------



## Built (Apr 26, 2010)

jeanice said:


> whats 3353 a week? i wanna try and get it up to one lb a week...



You're too tiny to run this strong of a deficit - unless it's very short term or something like a PSMF. 

You have to look at the reduction from maintenance. If someone has a maintenance of 3000 calories a day, 2500 will produce a one-pound-per-week loss. This is only a reduction of 17% from maintenance. 

But if your maintenance is 1800, you'll have to drop to 1300 to lose a pound a week - and that's almost a 30% deficit. 

Make better sense now?


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

well im 130 now so im assuming times 15 is a good place to start...130*15 = 1950...1940-500 =1450 a day...did i add something wrong lol? maybe my post was confusing...whats psmf? so are you saying run off a percentage rathern then a general of 500 a day type thing? that means if i did a percentage, my calories would actually go up...how come im too tiny to run such a large deficit? i know i ask a lot of questions lol. what would be the best approach to keep the fat loss consistent? I have to work with this trendline more often.


----------



## Built (Apr 26, 2010)

jeanice said:


> well im 130 now so im assuming times 15 is a good place to start…


It's a good place to start, but this does not mean it is your actual maintenance. Maintenance you find by tracking.



jeanice said:


> 130*15 = 1950...1940-500 =1450 a day...did i add something wrong lol?


Nope, that's how you subtract 500 from 1940.

1450 is pretty low, don't you think?



jeanice said:


> maybe my post was confusing...whats psmf?


Let me google that for you



jeanice said:


> so are you saying run off a percentage rathern then a general of 500 a day type thing?


Yes. Of course. 


jeanice said:


> that means if i did a percentage, my calories would actually go up...


Yes again. 


jeanice said:


> how come im too tiny to run such a large deficit?


Because it's more stress on your body to run a 500 calorie a day deficit than it is for a 250 lb man to run a 500 calorie a day deficit. 

Don't you think so?


jeanice said:


> i know i ask a lot of questions lol. what would be the best approach to keep the fat loss consistent?



You can't. Fat loss is never consistent - and this is particularly true when you are as lean as you are now. 

As you become progressively leaner, your body will fight you harder. To protect you from the famine, it will try to help you drop muscle and preserve fat - and all the while, your appetite will grow. You need to do things to prevent this from happening as much as  possible - your strategy will need to change over time.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

wow i never considered myself to be lean! 17% to me is like eh mediocore...lol...so you think id actually do myself justice doing a 20% deficit...bringing my cals up to 1560? fitday is my savior when it comes to eating i must say...now is it bad to incorporate one cheat meal a week or a clean carb up is better?


----------



## sassy69 (Apr 26, 2010)

When you talk about how much FAT you're losing, it is typical to talk about 0.5 lb of BODYFAT lost / week (if dieting) - but the scale goal will typically show 1-2 lb (which includes water weight). I think really what's more important is to get your body to hit a really efficient burn rate - getting really aggressive w/ your diet will get a loss down faster, but IMO it is less maintainable. If you find a reasonable cut rate and then stick w/ it w/ consistent diet, training & cardio you should see the following start to happen:

- you pee a lot (esp at night) - this is when you know the fat is coming off
- you have good energy and sleep well
- you're neither starving nor "Not hungry" 

This is the nirvana of dieting for me - I see the scale start to come down (I tend to hold at pretty well-established sticking points) and I can definitely see the difference in how my clothes fit.  It often happens when you're NOT looking for it - this means if you've been doing a program for a couple weeks and you're checkign every day for "results" you're goign to get frustrated. If you check, e.g. the scale once / week and pay attention to how your clothes fit, and just "DO" the program as it is a part of your regular daily life, THEN you'll start to see results. I guess when you look for them, you just set up an expectation and its not there yet.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

the peeing a lot is an everyday thing for me. at night...not so sure...i tend to sleep through the night.


----------



## Built (Apr 26, 2010)

jeanice said:


> lol...so you think id actually do myself justice doing a 20% deficit...bringing my cals up to 1560? fitday is my savior when it comes to eating i must say...now is it bad to incorporate one cheat meal a week or a clean carb up is better?


You just need to run a deficit. As you run deeper into your cut, a starchy refeed can be a wonderful thing. 



sassy69 said:


> When you talk about how much FAT you're losing, it is typical to talk about 0.5 lb of BODYFAT lost / week (if dieting) - but the scale goal will typically show 1-2 lb (which includes water weight). I think really what's more important is to get your body to hit a really efficient burn rate - getting really aggressive w/ your diet will get a loss down faster, but IMO it is less maintainable. If you find a reasonable cut rate and then stick w/ it w/ consistent diet, training & cardio you should see the following start to happen:
> 
> - you pee a lot (esp at night) - this is when you know the fat is coming off
> - you have good energy and sleep well
> ...



You just said something really interesting about water loss. 

A pound of adipose tissue holds 3500 calories - but a pound of lipid - any type of fat or oil - would have around 4100 calories of energy. Adipose tissue isn't just fat - it's fat, water, and a tiny bit of protein in the cell membranes and endoplasm. 

Complicating matters is the well-known but poorly understood "whoosh" phenomenon. Yanno, where you don???t seem to lose forever - and then you pee out five pounds overnight? One conjecture I've read (and like) is that as lipid-stores are depleted, the fat-cell fills with water to maintain volume - until it hits a "critical mass", at which point it finally cries "uncle" and releases a bunch of water. 

Hence the peeing. 



jeanice said:


> wow i never considered myself to be lean! 17% to me is like eh mediocore???


I'm 14% in my avatar shot. Women figure competitors come in around 10%-12%; BB 8%-10%. Healthy lean for a woman is 20%-25%. (Skinny-fat fashion models are ideally about 30%).

17% is quite lean. 

How lean are you trying to get?


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

im aiming for 12%-14% a 6 pack isnt showing quite yet lol. well im in a deficit now and ill run with it! i do appreciate all the advice  : ) Ive been dieting since January...about 16 weeks now.


----------



## Built (Apr 26, 2010)

jeanice said:


> im aiming for 12%-14% a 6 pack isnt showing quite yet lol. well im in a deficit now and ill run with it! i do appreciate all the advice  : ) Ive been dieting since January...about 16 weeks now.


How long will you remain at 12% once you are there? Is there an event or a date you're aiming for?

Also - just curious here - where do you tend to carry your bodyfat - in the middle, or on your ass/thighs?


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

Built said:


> How long will you remain at 12% once you are there? Is there an event or a date you're aiming for?
> 
> 
> 
> Also - just curious here - where do you tend to carry your bodyfat - in the middle, or on your ass/thighs?



my 25th bday! and just overall feeling good, how long will i remain there? i have no idea..are u hinting at something?...carry fat? good question...id rather carry it in my ass and thighs, why were do u like carrying it?


----------



## sassy69 (Apr 26, 2010)

jeanice said:


> my 25th bday! and just overall feeling good,* how long will i remain there? i have no idea..are u hinting at something*?...carry fat? good question...id rather carry it in my ass and thighs, why were do u like carrying it?



I think the primary reason is that when people make a big push for a very low bodyfat, I don't know that they think beyond the day they actually get to that point - i.e. you don't just hit & stay there when you go off the diet. Its one thing to drop bodyfat / wt, its another thing to maintain. If its at a point that is significantly lower than your body's "set point" (i.e. where it likes to sit if you aren't doing anything special in terms of diet or training - just the point that reflects your regular lifestyle and natural metabolism), then you will need to actually keep up w/ the program to "train" your body to operate at that lower set point. 

E.g. when I diet down for BB competition - I spent 12-20 weeks dialing in to something around 7% bodyfat but within a week after the show, I'm back up and settlign in around 15%.  I can make it LOOK like a pretty good degree of leanness but it wont' necessarily be a really low bodyfat %.

The question is primarily around the expectations you have once you hit that goal. For most its not a maintenance level.


----------



## Built (Apr 26, 2010)

jeanice said:


> my 25th bday! and just overall feeling good, how long will i remain there? i have no idea..are u hinting at something?...carry fat? good question...id rather carry it in my ass and thighs, why were do u like carrying it?



Nowhere. 

???

Are you an apple, or a pear?


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

Built said:


> Nowhere.
> 
> ???
> 
> Are you an apple, or a pear?




i misread ur post sorry, i thought u said where would you rather carry the fat? im an apple, and the fat stays in my stomach, i have no ass whatsoever...id like to see where i could take my body and maintain somewhere between 14-15%...


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

sassy69 said:


> I think the primary reason is that when people make a big push for a very low bodyfat, I don't know that they think beyond the day they actually get to that point - i.e. you don't just hit & stay there when you go off the diet. Its one thing to drop bodyfat / wt, its another thing to maintain. If its at a point that is significantly lower than your body's "set point" (i.e. where it likes to sit if you aren't doing anything special in terms of diet or training - just the point that reflects your regular lifestyle and natural metabolism), then you will need to actually keep up w/ the program to "train" your body to operate at that lower set point.
> 
> E.g. when I diet down for BB competition - I spent 12-20 weeks dialing in to something around 7% bodyfat but within a week after the show, I'm back up and settlign in around 15%.  I can make it LOOK like a pretty good degree of leanness but it wont' necessarily be a really low bodyfat %.
> 
> The question is primarily around the expectations you have once you hit that goal. For most its not a maintenance level.




id like to be at a lower bf% id like to compete someday, feel better in some of my old clothes..overall be leaner, feel good and look good.


----------



## Phineas (Apr 26, 2010)

If 20-25% is healthy lean for a woman then why does that amount look drastically different on a man? 

I've seen tons of pictures of men at 20% and they're carrying a great deal of fat. Even I'm about 15% and, though I'm not "fat" or "chubby", I'm not super lean, either.

Can you explain this please?


----------



## sassy69 (Apr 26, 2010)

For the purpose of competition - if you can maintain 15-16% bf off season, then you're doing great, but w/ the caveat that if you need to build muscle, then you'll need to give in and let it get a little more. Body composition manipulation is often all about cycling thru growth and cut phases depending on your goals.  Whatever you want to maintain needs to have a targeted lifestyle to support it.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 26, 2010)

sassy69 said:


> For the purpose of competition - if you can maintain 15-16% bf off season, then you're doing great, but w/ the caveat that if you need to build muscle, then you'll need to give in and let it get a little more. Body composition manipulation is often all about cycling thru growth and cut phases depending on your goals.  Whatever you want to maintain needs to have a targeted lifestyle to support it.




well hopefully ill step on stage one day... im taking it one day at a time to achieve my fitness goals.


----------



## sassy69 (Apr 26, 2010)

jeanice said:


> well hopefully ill step on stage one day... im taking it one day at a time to achieve my fitness goals.





Times were different when I started lifting - everyone was doing Jane Fonda and I was often given the look like "YTF aren't you in the Women's area?" After 20 yrs it was starting to get stale because I had no focused goal and also didn't know how to put the diet w/ it to get results. Getting on stage was one of the major red letter dates in my life. Its both the biggest mindfuck and the most incredible thing I've ever done.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 27, 2010)

hopefully When I get to that point and I see "when" not if you can help me through...u and built already have me in the last 2 days so much...i know it takes time and im more then dedicated to take the steps...


----------



## jeanice (Apr 27, 2010)

getting leaner for now is my goal, then maintaining being lean, not extremely lean but like you said somewhere between 15-16%. Im at 17 possibly 18 and why dont i feel lean? i guess i will always have that mentality if im not shredded i havnt met my goal...


----------



## Built (Apr 27, 2010)

jeanice said:


> Im at 17 possibly 18 and why dont i feel lean?



Maybe you're not quite as lean as you think? Just playing devil's advocate. How were you tested?


----------



## jeanice (Apr 27, 2010)

im probably not to be honest, i have an accumeasure caliper that i use.


----------



## Ginger1961 (Apr 28, 2010)

Fascinating thread!  I have never gotten so much information in one place EVER!  You ladies are a wealth.  I've experienced this "whoosh phenomenon" before.  I actually go through all the same things Sassy and my tummy gets sick just before I fall asleep at night.  Don't mind it much though because I know what is happening.  Good luck Jeanice.


----------



## NeilPearson (Apr 28, 2010)

jeanice said:


> the peeing a lot is an everyday thing for me. at night...not so sure...i tend to sleep through the night.



If you sleep through the night, you probably aren't peeing... or I'm sure you would know


----------



## sassy69 (Apr 28, 2010)

NeilPearson said:


> If you sleep through the night, you probably aren't peeing... or I'm sure you would know



This is something most competitors experience as they start to dial into show time - because its a very focused diet, when the burn rate is set up its an amazing thing - when the fat starts to come off, the peeing every 2 hrs starts. I probably can't speak for casual dieters because I haven't been "casual" about my dieting for 15 yrs. But if you're on a tight program and you've established the sweet spot, it is amazing to see how efficient the body runs.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 28, 2010)

NeilPearson said:


> If you sleep through the night, you probably aren't peeing... or I'm sure you would know



all im saying the peeing at night thing im not so sure about, i dont pee at night i havnt experienced the getting up in the middle of the night thing often...obviously im not peeing.


----------



## jeanice (Apr 29, 2010)

Ginger1961 said:


> Fascinating thread!  I have never gotten so much information in one place EVER!  You ladies are a wealth.  I've experienced this "whoosh phenomenon" before.  I actually go through all the same things Sassy and my tummy gets sick just before I fall asleep at night.  Don't mind it much though because I know what is happening.  Good luck Jeanice.



thank u! good luck to u as well.


----------



## jeanice (Jun 28, 2010)

here i am at 126, new update!







still debating on my next move...i want to do a show next year, figure to be exact.


----------



## Built (Jun 28, 2010)

Hey right on, you're down six pounds since the beginning of April. Nice, slow losses. 

How much more you figure you need to drop?


----------

