Thread: So what do you guys make of this?

pictures please

I asked the exact same question a while back. I seem to hover between 80-85kg whatever I do. I ate nothing but protein and vegetables (>1,500kcal deficit) for two months and I hardly lost any weight, just a few pounds. During that time strength went up and I ended up looking a whole lot leaner though... somehow.

I don't understand it either.

Need pics to evaluate. But every ones body is different.

Originally Posted by Witchblade

I asked the exact same question a while back. I seem to hover between 80-85kg whatever I do. I ate nothing but protein and vegetables (>1,500kcal deficit) for two months and I hardly lost any weight, just a few pounds. During that time strength went up and I ended up looking a whole lot leaner though... somehow.

I don't understand it either.

I look leaner too...just no weight loss.

Do you put on muscle easily?

I'm pretty sure I put on muscle more easily than the average girl. I'm gonna test my body fat and then eat 3500 calories a day for a few weeks and see if that does anything.

Because I beginning to suspect that I am (gasp) building muscle while on a (rather severe) defecit. I know a lot of people think that can't be done. I disagree, but I also didn't think I would build at the same rate in a 1500 calorie defecit as I did at or above maintainance.

i will probably get destroyed for saying this

but
in my experience my lean weight is very sensitive to the amount of protein im getting

and my bf level seems to be very sensitive to the amount of carbs im getting

ive been on a severe deficit, and all my numbers went up, while loosing weight

and in the end i was probably as lean as ive ever been, and i was lifting more than ever before too

very possible IMHO

vanessa is it possible that you have miscalculated your caloric intake requirements?

Originally Posted by VanessaNicole

I look leaner too...just no weight loss.

Do you put on muscle easily?

I'm pretty sure I put on muscle more easily than the average girl. I'm gonna test my body fat and then eat 3500 calories a day for a few weeks and see if that does anything.

Because I beginning to suspect that I am (gasp) building muscle while on a (rather severe) defecit. I know a lot of people think that can't be done. I disagree, but I also didn't think I would build at the same rate in a 1500 calorie defecit as I did at or above maintainance.

I agree with all your speculations.

I consider myself to be very average with regard to genetics. I'm definitely more endo- than ectomorph though, so that would partially support the theory that we somehow managed to add muscle while losing weight. It's really odd... I can't image we're putting on muscle that rapidly.

Another oddity is that I didn't lose any noticeable water or glycogen weight while cutting. Did you?

With regard to caloric intake calculations, I know for myself that I first rather accurately estimated my caloric intake using food labels and then checked the results using Fitday. The numbers were only a few hundred kcal apart.

Similar thing for me. I've been "cutting" for months now at 2200 calories, and yet I'm still putting weight on (muscle, not fat). I don't really understand it since I'm almost positive that maintenance for me is around 2400 calories. It would suck dropping it a lot lower, but I'm about to try dropping my calories to around 1600-1700 for a few days and then do a 3-3.5k calorie refeed to see how that works. My body just isn't responding to a steady deficit.

Originally Posted by Witchblade

I agree with all your speculations.

I consider myself to be very average with regard to genetics. I'm definitely more endo- than ectomorph though, so that would partially support the theory that we somehow managed to add muscle while losing weight. It's really odd... I can't image we're putting on muscle that rapidly.

Another oddity is that I didn't lose any noticeable water or glycogen weight while cutting. Did you?

With regard to caloric intake calculations, I know for myself that I first rather accurately estimated my caloric intake using food labels and then checked the results using Fitday. The numbers were only a few hundred kcal apart.

No, I didn't notice any water weight loss either. Even when I took I diuretic.

As to the question about my calculations, it's almost impossible to be 100% accurate.

However, I am a Nutritionist and I measure most everything. Aside from that, I also allow for error because the only way to gauge the caloric value of say, a peach, is to use an established average value. Also, I do not measure salad greens or fibrous veggies.

Even if I was a few hundred calories off, that would not explain this phenomenon.

I am exactly the same way. I have also noticed this. I posted my diet in my journal and everyone was saying I wasn't eating enough for my body weight and strength level, however I was getting stronger yet not losing any weight. It was pissing me off, but eventually i just stopped weighing myself and judged progress by my lifting numbers and waist size.

My weight never would fall until I started taking clenbuterol. As soon as I came off of the clen, I ballooned back up 10 lbs in under 2 weeks.

Originally Posted by danzik17

Similar thing for me. I've been "cutting" for months now at 2200 calories, and yet I'm still putting weight on (muscle, not fat). I don't really understand it since I'm almost positive that maintenance for me is around 2400 calories. It would suck dropping it a lot lower, but I'm about to try dropping my calories to around 1600-1700 for a few days and then do a 3-3.5k calorie refeed to see how that works. My body just isn't responding to a steady deficit.

A 200 calorie a day defecit is pretty tiny. In fact, even if you're religiously careful in counting calories you could still be off by 200 calories.

If you maintain on 2400 I'd say dropping to at least as low as 1900 would be necessary for noticable weight loss.

Originally Posted by VanessaNicole

A 200 calorie a day defecit is pretty tiny. In fact, even if you're religiously careful in counting calories you could still be off by 200 calories.

If you maintain on 2400 I'd say dropping to at least as low as 1900 would be necessary for noticable weight loss.

Really - I'll give that a shot then. I'm working on designing a new diet at the moment anyway to reincorporate carbs for the next couple of months. No, it has nothing to do with apples being in season, I swear

For the sake of talking about weird things..

This summer i did some workouts, randomly, without a set schedule, while eating more than i usually would. I did not gain any weight over a 2 month period, not even fat.

Then school started a week and a half ago. I dont have time for breakfast so i grab a trail mix bar. Then for lunch is a bagel because for some reason, i'm not hungry. Then i have some kind of random dinner later in the day. I also have Weightroom in school, so i workout every other day for 1.5 hours. So far i've gone up 3 lbs.

I've gone up more weight by eating less and working out more, than i gained from being a couch potato. .

So the question is, why do I need to create a friggen 1500+ daily caloric defecit in order to lose 1.5 pounds a month?? This goes against everything I believe in.

That's the beauty of monitoring, you learn what works for you, as opposed to what is supposed to work.

Why argue with it, when your own tests have shown what it takes?

For me I find it comes down to activity level. If I'm mostly working at my desk and not doing much else I can get by on about 1000 calories, which in theory is impossible for a 180lb guy - but there ya go.

When I'm training a lot and also busy I can chew through 4,000 calories and be better for it - but NOT if I'm deskbound.

Don't go by what it should be, go by what you've already proven works best.



B.

This also may have to do with what "morph" you are.

Originally Posted by AKIRA

This also may have to do with what "morph" you are.

agreed

im and ecto for sure
i can eat chocolate cake and ice cream to the tune of 4000cal a day
and if im not lifting, i just get skinny as hell



defies all logic

Originally Posted by Ben dur

agreed

im and ecto for sure
i can eat chocolate cake and ice cream to the tune of 4000cal a day
and if im not lifting, i just get skinny as hell

Oh stop bragging.

I've gotten caught up in "the averages trap" in the past....That is, expecting results based on certain, what seemed to be logical and well studied/documented, factors...and was left frustrated/scratching my head more often than not.

I believe that the complexity of physiological/metabolic issues is complex and the variation of each too broad to be (completely) governed by "averages" (e.g., macro grams per lb. bodyweight, kcals per lb. etc. etc.) too much can happen from day to day that might skew the numbers and the results.

I think Biggly said what has been said many times before...it (results) depend(s) on the individual.

thats less of a brag than a bitch

the problem is im more ecto than meso

i can eat 4000 cals a day
300g of protein

and im still skinny as hell

Originally Posted by Biggly

That's the beauty of monitoring, you learn what works for you, as opposed to what is supposed to work.

Why argue with it, when your own tests have shown what it takes?

For me I find it comes down to activity level. If I'm mostly working at my desk and not doing much else I can get by on about 1000 calories, which in theory is impossible for a 180lb guy - but there ya go.

When I'm training a lot and also busy I can chew through 4,000 calories and be better for it - but NOT if I'm deskbound.

Don't go by what it should be, go by what you've already proven works best.



B.

You are so right.

This made me think of a bunch of studies I read in school about the genetics of obesity.

One of them overfed two different types of people. The overweight group gained weight.

But the normal weight group offset a majority of their extra calories through inadvertant activity, like fidgeting or stretching more.

I am beginning to suspect that when I am eating at a defecit my body naturally stops any unnecessary movement (aside from my gym workouts). Then when I over eat I fidget more and sit up straighter and just unconsciously move around more.

Activity has to be a big part of this.

Thanks for bringing that up.

well, logically if your consuming less and not dropping weight. then somewhere you are conserving energy

i would say your hypothesis is understandable
maybe your creating too much of a deficit

maybe you would get by better on a 500 calorie def
or 300 and some cardio

this should amount to 3500 cal a week
and thus a pound a week

or maybe even that is to much
maybe shoot for .5 pound a week

this could keep your body from going into a "starvation/conservation" mode


or possibly with a high deficit you should consider a refeed/"carbup"

whats your bf%??

jk

not numbers, just fit the diet more protein, less carbs.

that´s all.

D'OH! I can't believe I didn't think of that.

Well, here's my follow up.

I've lost four pounds. I think the main difference is that I took a bartending job for extra cash.

So on Wed, Fri and Sat I run around for an extra five hours (10p to 3am).

Also, on the nights when I work I drink a few Kamikazes.

I've been having a hard time adjusting to this new schedule/level of sleep deprivation. As a result I've cut my cardio in about half.

I am still eating about the same.


It has to be my daily caloric expenditure outside of the gym that's making the difference.

Maybe I should get a pedometer.

Now that's what we like to see, a follow up

So often on here we get drive-by posters who ask a question than move onto something or somewhere else and no feedback.


Bartending will deffo fizzle a chunk of calories; it's busy work with a lot of whole-body movement (if a busy bar). Just don't forget alcohol is 7 calories a gram



B.

Originally Posted by Biggly

Now that's what we like to see, a follow up

So often on here we get drive-by posters who ask a question than move onto something or somewhere else and no feedback.


Bartending will deffo fizzle a chunk of calories; it's busy work with a lot of whole-body movement (if a busy bar). Just don't forget alcohol is 7 calories a gram



B.

If only I could forget that. I'd have a lot more fun at work.



I think another thing that makes a difference is that the skimpier one dresses behind the bar the better the money.

I know it's stupid but it honeslty makes my vino and chocolate seem a little less appealing.

Now I'm lost too.

=>

Originally Posted by bio-chem

pictures please