General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns. Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 6
 
 
2011-05-16 9:17 AM
in reply to: #3501048

User image

Extreme Veteran
451
1001001001002525
Stoughton, WI
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
jmot - 2011-05-16 7:34 AM

TriMyBest - 2011-05-16 5:45 AM
ttuna - 2011-05-15 10:22 PMThis is hard to understand, but the Atkins diet does work.  Ive seen a fat guy eat huge amounts of calories and lose weight.  All calories are not the same.  
Atkins works just like every other weight loss diet that's effective - it creates a caloric deficit. You may have seen someone "eat huge amounts of calories and lose weight", but I can say with 100% certainty that he was consuming fewer calories than he burned.

How do you account for the ketosis that occurs on the Atkins diet but not on a typical calorie restriction diet in a similar fashion to an uncontrolled diabetic who eats thousands of calories and sheds weight rapidly?

FWIW, I did the atkins thing several years ago. Lost 60# in just over a year and a half. Only real exercise I did was walking. Lots of walking. Followed the carb rules (except I just couldn't stick with salads for more than a couple of weeks. I just hate the stuff, no matter how much bacon or eggs you put in it). Then I fell off the wagon during the holidays.



2011-05-16 11:22 AM
in reply to: #3497945

User image

Veteran
308
100100100
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
Well you do not believe me. It would be so easy to lose weight and have a perfect body if it was all about calories in and out. Have you ever heard about plateau? When I was eating 1200 calories. I was in plateou and was not losing. According to calories theory,  I should be losing weight. I weigh 150 -153 pounds and I my body should burn 1400 when sleeping.
2011-05-16 11:32 AM
in reply to: #3498605

User image

Veteran
308
100100100
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.

Maybe because you're already at a healthy weight??I may be . I weigh 153 pounds. My goal is too be skinny and healthy not just healthy. I would like to look like Jessica Biel for example. I do not think that she is very skinny-just skinny.

2011-05-16 12:58 PM
in reply to: #3501633


54
2525
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.

If you hit a plateau, then your metabolism was slowing down and maybe 1200 calories wasn't a deficit anymore.  Remember that a person's caloric intake requirement isn't static.  So it is still just as simple as calories in versus calories out.  If your metabolism slowed down, then the calories out went down.  If your weight loss had indeed hit a plateau because your metabolism slowed down, then eating 3500 calories is a very quick way to gain a ton of weight.

This is just my personal experience, but I have never found the "calories theory" to not hold true.  I tend to gain weight over the winter as my exercise levels go down some; it's just harder to run 2 hours when it's on a treadmill.  So in spring, I tend to be about 10 lbs heavier than before.  The solution is to simply run a caloric deficit by eating less and exercising more.  The closer I get to goal weight, the harder it is to drop.  But, it always comes off if I work hard enough at it.  This year I'm trying to cut another 10 lbs in addition to the 10lbs of winter weight I picked up.  The first 10 came off relatively easily, but now it's harder to get that last 10 off.  Having said that, it is coming off.  It's taking a lot more work than the first 10, and I've had to double up on some workouts while cutting more calories, but it is coming off.  When you hit a plateau, you will have to adjust things, but the solution isn't to go and double your food intake because you get frustrated.

I used to be the chubby guy who thought that I couldn't cut the weight because of genetics, slow metabolism, plateau, you name it, I figured it applied to me.  In reality, I'm no different than anyone else; it's calories in versus calories out.  I was fairly active before, running, cycling, weights.  But I realized that I simply wasn't doing enough of it and eating too much.  So I corrected both areas and went from 200lbs at 5'10 to 170lbs.  Now I'm looking to go down to 160 lbs and it's taking a lot of work, but the point is that it is working.  It just takes more work than I ever thought it would and requires being hungry a lot, but running a calorie deficit is pretty much the only way to cut weight, simple physics and chemistry, no way to violate that rule of nature.

slonce5 - 2011-05-16 12:22 PM Well you do not believe me. It would be so easy to lose weight and have a perfect body if it was all about calories in and out. Have you ever heard about plateau? When I was eating 1200 calories. I was in plateou and was not losing. According to calories theory,  I should be losing weight. I weigh 150 -153 pounds and I my body should burn 1400 when sleeping.

2011-05-16 1:42 PM
in reply to: #3501927

User image

Veteran
308
100100100
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
well, with constantly changing metabolism it is very difficult to figure out how much calories a person  really needs. If " calories in versus calories out" works, it   is very difficult to apply this method.
2011-05-16 1:43 PM
in reply to: #3501927

User image

Veteran
308
100100100
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
well, with constantly changing metabolism it is very difficult to figure out how much calories a person  really needs. If " calories in versus calories out" works, it   is very difficult to apply this method.


2011-05-16 1:44 PM
in reply to: #3502069

User image

Champion
8936
50002000100050010010010010025
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.

slonce5 - 2011-05-16 1:42 PM well, with constantly changing metabolism it is very difficult to figure out how much calories a person  really needs. If " calories in versus calories out" works, it   is very difficult to apply this method.

Nobody ever said it was easy.

2011-05-16 1:50 PM
in reply to: #3501927

User image

Veteran
308
100100100
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.

Thanks for your replay and good advice. I did not double my calorie intake simply because I was frustrated.I had been frustrated for months eating only 1200 calories and not losing, so I gradually started eating more and more. I have been monitoring myself  and I guess I'm   taking advantage of eating and not gaining.

I realize that losing takes a lot of work and it is not easy. For example  4- mile run follwed by  a mile swim without any fuel are no fun at all.

 



Edited by slonce5 2011-05-16 1:52 PM
2011-05-16 2:19 PM
in reply to: #3500671

User image

Extreme Veteran
389
100100100252525
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
DerekL - 2011-05-15 8:59 PM

And fewer calories are used from celery because it's largely made up of cellulose which isn't able to be digested by humans.  It has absolutely nothing to do with TEF.

See?  Nonsensical statements are easy to disprove.

 

cellulose still has a calorie value.  this calorie value will not enter your blood stream. It is a part of TEF, because to pass it out your system requires energy.

2011-05-16 2:53 PM
in reply to: #3502100

User image

Resident Curmudgeon
25290
50005000500050005000100100252525
The Road Back
Gold member
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
slonce5 - 2011-05-16 1:50 PM

Thanks for your replay and good advice. I did not double my calorie intake simply because I was frustrated.I had been frustrated for months eating only 1200 calories and not losing, so I gradually started eating more and more. I have been monitoring myself  and I guess I'm   taking advantage of eating and not gaining.

I realize that losing takes a lot of work and it is not easy. For example  4- mile run follwed by  a mile swim without any fuel are no fun at all.

 

For most people here this workout is less than 90 minutes and completely doable without ingesting additional fuel during that time.
2011-05-16 3:00 PM
in reply to: #3502251

User image

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
the bear - 2011-05-16 3:53 PM
slonce5 - 2011-05-16 1:50 PM

Thanks for your replay and good advice. I did not double my calorie intake simply because I was frustrated.I had been frustrated for months eating only 1200 calories and not losing, so I gradually started eating more and more. I have been monitoring myself� and I guess I'm � taking advantage of eating and not gaining.

I realize that losing takes a lot of work and it is not easy. For example� 4- mile run follwed by� a mile swim without any fuel are no fun at all.

�

For most people here this workout is less than 90 minutes and completely doable without ingesting additional fuel during that time.

 

I just did that very workout on Thursday. No fuel, only water.



2011-05-16 3:09 PM
in reply to: #3502174

User image

Champion
8936
50002000100050010010010010025
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
synthetic - 2011-05-16 2:19 PM
DerekL - 2011-05-15 8:59 PM

And fewer calories are used from celery because it's largely made up of cellulose which isn't able to be digested by humans.  It has absolutely nothing to do with TEF.

See?  Nonsensical statements are easy to disprove.

 

cellulose still has a calorie value.  this calorie value will not enter your blood stream. It is a part of TEF, because to pass it out your system requires energy.

You have no idea what TEF is.  Please stop.

2011-05-16 3:14 PM
in reply to: #3502285

User image

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
DerekL - 2011-05-16 4:09 PM
synthetic - 2011-05-16 2:19 PM
DerekL - 2011-05-15 8:59 PM

And fewer calories are used from celery because it's largely made up of cellulose which isn't able to be digested by humans.  It has absolutely nothing to do with TEF.

See?  Nonsensical statements are easy to disprove.

 

cellulose still has a calorie value.  this calorie value will not enter your blood stream. It is a part of TEF, because to pass it out your system requires energy.

You have no idea what TEF is.  Please stop.

2011-05-16 3:15 PM
in reply to: #3502266

User image

Resident Curmudgeon
25290
50005000500050005000100100252525
The Road Back
Gold member
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
mrbbrad - 2011-05-16 3:00 PM
the bear - 2011-05-16 3:53 PM
slonce5 - 2011-05-16 1:50 PM

Thanks for your replay and good advice. I did not double my calorie intake simply because I was frustrated.I had been frustrated for months eating only 1200 calories and not losing, so I gradually started eating more and more. I have been monitoring myself� and I guess I'm � taking advantage of eating and not gaining.

I realize that losing takes a lot of work and it is not easy. For example� 4- mile run follwed by� a mile swim without any fuel are no fun at all.

�

For most people here this workout is less than 90 minutes and completely doable without ingesting additional fuel during that time.

 

I just did that very workout on Thursday. No fuel, only water.

Yes, but was it fun? ;^)
2011-05-16 3:19 PM
in reply to: #3502299

User image

Champion
11989
500050001000500100100100100252525
Philly 'burbs
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
the bear - 2011-05-16 4:15 PM
mrbbrad - 2011-05-16 3:00 PM
the bear - 2011-05-16 3:53 PM
slonce5 - 2011-05-16 1:50 PM

Thanks for your replay and good advice. I did not double my calorie intake simply because I was frustrated.I had been frustrated for months eating only 1200 calories and not losing, so I gradually started eating more and more. I have been monitoring myself� and I guess I'm � taking advantage of eating and not gaining.

I realize that losing takes a lot of work and it is not easy. For example� 4- mile run follwed by� a mile swim without any fuel are no fun at all.

�

For most people here this workout is less than 90 minutes and completely doable without ingesting additional fuel during that time.

�

I just did that very workout on Thursday. No fuel, only water.

Yes, but was it fun? ;^)

It was. First OWS of the year.

2011-05-16 3:20 PM
in reply to: #3502266

User image

Master
2094
2000252525
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
mrbbrad - 2011-05-16 4:00 PM
the bear - 2011-05-16 3:53 PM
slonce5 - 2011-05-16 1:50 PM

Thanks for your replay and good advice. I did not double my calorie intake simply because I was frustrated.I had been frustrated for months eating only 1200 calories and not losing, so I gradually started eating more and more. I have been monitoring myself� and I guess I'm � taking advantage of eating and not gaining.

I realize that losing takes a lot of work and it is not easy. For example� 4- mile run follwed by� a mile swim without any fuel are no fun at all.

�

For most people here this workout is less than 90 minutes and completely doable without ingesting additional fuel during that time.

 

 

I just did that very workout on Thursday. No fuel, only water.

NM



Edited by pschriver 2011-05-16 3:21 PM


2011-05-16 3:21 PM
in reply to: #3488574

User image

Master
2404
2000100100100100
Redlands, CA
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.

While I haven't lost a ton of weight during my lifetime, I feel that as a 5'8" male my optimal calorie range per day is somewhere around 1400.  If I go under, I risk illness, go over and I maintain.  One day a week I make sure to each over 2000 calories so my metabolism doesn't change. 

People get way too enamored with daily and weekly calories.  I tend to think that an 800 calorie breakfast, 600 calorie lunch, and 400 calorie dinner is the most effective way for me to lose weight while working out.  Giving people daily totals to reach gets taken advantage of, and eating nothing all day and a 1800 calorie dinner does nothing.  IMO, big dinners are wasted calories since you eat it and typically just go to bed.

I'm also in the camp that sugars are to be avoided.  I can't explain it, but unless you are going to burn it off immediately, they make you hungrier and somehow fatter.

2011-05-16 3:23 PM
in reply to: #3502285

User image

Master
2094
2000252525
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
DerekL - 2011-05-16 4:09 PM
synthetic - 2011-05-16 2:19 PM
DerekL - 2011-05-15 8:59 PM

And fewer calories are used from celery because it's largely made up of cellulose which isn't able to be digested by humans.  It has absolutely nothing to do with TEF.

See?  Nonsensical statements are easy to disprove.

 

cellulose still has a calorie value.  this calorie value will not enter your blood stream. It is a part of TEF, because to pass it out your system requires energy.

You have no idea what TEF is.  Please stop.

So what your saying is the Cabbage Diet is BS

We had a live in babysitter who went on the cabbage diet. She got fatter and sicker and our house began to stink from her constant trips to the bathroom. We ended up getting a new babysitter.

 

2011-05-16 3:41 PM
in reply to: #3502298

User image

Veteran
663
5001002525
Central Point
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
mrbbrad - 2011-05-16 1:14 PM
DerekL - 2011-05-16 4:09 PM
synthetic - 2011-05-16 2:19 PM
DerekL - 2011-05-15 8:59 PM

And fewer calories are used from celery because it's largely made up of cellulose which isn't able to be digested by humans.  It has absolutely nothing to do with TEF.

See?  Nonsensical statements are easy to disprove.

 

cellulose still has a calorie value.  this calorie value will not enter your blood stream. It is a part of TEF, because to pass it out your system requires energy.

You have no idea what TEF is.  Please stop.

Also complained about a weight problem..... 16 tons I believe.

2011-05-16 4:06 PM
in reply to: #3502320

User image

Extreme Veteran
389
100100100252525
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
pschriver - 2011-05-16 3:23 PM
DerekL - 2011-05-16 4:09 PM
synthetic - 2011-05-16 2:19 PM
DerekL - 2011-05-15 8:59 PM

And fewer calories are used from celery because it's largely made up of cellulose which isn't able to be digested by humans.  It has absolutely nothing to do with TEF.

See?  Nonsensical statements are easy to disprove.

 

cellulose still has a calorie value.  this calorie value will not enter your blood stream. It is a part of TEF, because to pass it out your system requires energy.

You have no idea what TEF is.  Please stop.

So what your saying is the Cabbage Diet is BS

We had a live in babysitter who went on the cabbage diet. She got fatter and sicker and our house began to stink from her constant trips to the bathroom. We ended up getting a new babysitter.

 

 

fad single source food diets will lead to failure... with out other variables indicated here...  did she add cabbage to her diet of ice cream shakes and french fries?  Did she go on a binge the day after the diet? 

I do not believe one will gain fat on a pure, raw unprocessed cabbage diet of 2 weeks if they go to a well balanced diet afterwords.

 

2011-05-16 8:37 PM
in reply to: #3502417

User image

Master
2802
2000500100100100
Minnetonka, Minnesota
Bronze member
Subject: RE: Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns.
On a more important note, what has happened to the OP???  MIA....


New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Disappointed with how LITTLE calories triathlon training burns. Rss Feed  
 
 
of 6