Author: Sorting Last Post on Top ↓ Message:
SANDICANE's Photo SANDICANE Posts: 2,073
9/9/14 7:10 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I know I'm planning on putting some muscle on this body so I can feel fitter and eat an extra apple with nut butter each day!

1 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
5
10
15
20
JEANKNEE's Photo JEANKNEE Posts: 2,487
8/2/14 4:15 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Recently, I connected a heart rate monitor to the GPS watch that I use to track fitness activity. Here's what I noticed:
-- the Spark Activity Tracker is generally doing a very good job of estimating calorie burn
-- the estimated calorie burn calculated by the GPS watch was higher prior to my use of the heart rate monitor.

It seems to me that the lower calorie burn calculated with the use of the heart rate monitor is because I have to work harder now to get my heart rate up. My cardio fitness has improved a lot over the past year! I can climb hills hiking now and not even see my heart rate reach 65% of my maximum heart rate. I am confident this was not the case when I first began hiking in hilly terrain.



Edited by: JEANKNEE at: 8/2/2014 (16:22)
Max Lifetime Weight, 211
SP Start Weight, 206.8
Initial SP Goal, 144
Current Ticker Goal, 133


 current weight: -3.8  under
 
5
2.5
0
-2.5
-5
SPARKBJOK's Photo SPARKBJOK SparkPoints: (85,393)
Fitness Minutes: (66,461)
Posts: 3,169
8/1/14 8:23 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
If we keep up our exercise I don't think so but that's only my opinion.

 Pounds lost: 19.0 
 
0
4.75
9.5
14.25
19
MJREIMERS's Photo MJREIMERS Posts: 4,390
7/17/14 10:35 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I really don't know enough to comment. Thank you for the thread! It was very interesting as was the replies!

~Mako~


27 Days until:  Feast & Feathers10K
 
50
37
25
12
0
DIETMYTHS61 SparkPoints: (3)
Fitness Minutes: (0)
Posts: 1
7/17/14 2:00 A

Send Private Message
Reply
This is a common myth if taken literally, meal frequency works not because you burn more calories from digestion ( because digestion calories are insignificant), But because the person with low self control is sated more often allowing them more will power.

If you have will power and and have a healthy relationship with food than you will actually burn more fat with interment fasting. The reason this happens is the body has to use fat storage for energy during several hours of fasting ( 16 hours), if you were to eat every three hours the carbs and excess protein from the meal is used for energy before storage, it is in fact fat sparing just like eating carbs is protein sparing. This assumes eating at maintenance or slightly above, in the end a calorie deficit will be just that and it won't matter much.

I lost 200 pounds on meal frequency, but it is because I had a poor relationship with food, now that I am 10% bf and a hobbyist bodybuilder,I can tell you its easier staying lean with the fasting, even though I eat 300-600 calories over maintenance daily.

BREWMASTERBILL's Photo BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
10/5/12 7:13 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Goal posts moved again. Ad hominen again.

At this point, I've concluded my contribution to this topic. I've presented my findings and folks can make up their own minds. I really don't care one way or the other. I will continue my research independently.

Simple, Effective Strength Training for Beginners www.sparkpeople.com/mypage_public_jo
urnal_individual.asp?blog_id=5425006


Current Program bb531.wordpress.com/about/

"In god we trust, all others bring data."

"You can't make people smarter. You can expose them to information, but your responsibility stops there." - Rip


 current weight: 11.0  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
LESLIE871948's Photo LESLIE871948 SparkPoints: (63,131)
Fitness Minutes: (70,603)
Posts: 645
10/5/12 6:57 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Millie, I think you made your own luck. Congratulations on your new self.

It's never over


 current weight: 172.0 
 
365
316.25
267.5
218.75
170
LESLIE871948's Photo LESLIE871948 SparkPoints: (63,131)
Fitness Minutes: (70,603)
Posts: 645
10/5/12 6:53 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Reply to Brewmaster Bill
I find I cannot completely let this go because of the "I called shenanigans" remark. I am sure that you are not trying to offend, but my back went right up.
My credentials: I have a masters degree in nursing, specialty in nursing education. I have actually participated in research studies as a participant, a data collector, and as a part of research teams of various types such as nursing, medicine, and public health. I am familiar with peer reviewed research. You can see me with the chub that I got from my bicycle accident (not because I exercise 6 times a week, but because a cat ran in front of my bike) on the University web page where I work. You could see me now if you want me to take a picture and send it to verify my own regained decent body. I am a transparent, honest person. I personally know people who eat frequently, and it is a critical skill to learn for people with diabetes (we have a pandemic here).
Evidence Based Practice in nursing is a combination of valid and reliable research, the expertise of professionals in the field, and client preference.
An open minded person would not say "Meal frequency is ritualistic noise" Any professional person who was trying to help a group of people lose weight would not try to force an individual to eat 5 meals a day if it were not working for them. Nor would any Open Minded person argue with someone that it was working great for, that it was "against their research", which has as a masthead apparently a study done by Purdue University funded by the pork and egg board. I also did look around as much as I had time to and found good research supporting several benefits from small frequent meals in the areas of glycemic control, maintenance of muscle mass in seniors, and several other things. I don't plan to post a link here because you can certainly find it yourself if you are open minded and inquisitive.
I feel sure that you are not aware that a few of us are tweaked by your communication style. I know I was not aware of that about myself for years. I bear you no ill will. This post is to suggest that people often come off as offensive online when they are trying to promote a cause. I felt I could not leave this part of the discussion without saying that, and I plan to not engage in this part of it any longer. Thanks, Leslie

It's never over


 current weight: 172.0 
 
365
316.25
267.5
218.75
170
MILLIE5522's Photo MILLIE5522 SparkPoints: (42,470)
Fitness Minutes: (17,773)
Posts: 1,352
10/4/12 4:13 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I have only just reached goal so I am very interested in how to maintain my weight. When I started SP I did a spreadsheet of my calorie intake and weight loss. In the first year I had a metabolic rate of 1870 calories a day on average and I lost 28lbs. In the first six months of my 2nd year I had a metabolic rate of 1798 calories on average and I have lost 10lbs. Doing the maths I have found that my metabolic rate has reduced by 4% from last year. That may not sound much but if I were to eat 1870 calories a day (my former metabolic rate) I would put on nearly 8lbs a year and would regain all that I have lost within 5 years! Very easy to do! So it will have to be constant vigilance, strength training and logging on to SP! Wish me luck!!!

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hph
otos-ak-ash3/544942_10151092251777551_
1895510514_n.jpg


 current weight: 133.6 
 
135
132.5
130
127.5
125
BREWMASTERBILL's Photo BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
10/4/12 7:47 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I think you've completely misunderstood my intention. This isn't a right/wrong argument. This is a discussion. You made a point, I called shenanigans and provided evidence to the contrary. You've clearly closed your mind on the topic, my mind is open and I'm interested in evidence to the contrary. I seek knowledge, not an argument.

Anecdotes are not evidence. For example, this gentleman www.leangains.com/ is also a trainer, accomplished lifter and has clients. His regimen is intermittent fasting where you eat 2 large meals and fast at least 16 hours a day. This is a direct contradiction of what you're said. So now who is right? Which is better? He's lean and strong, his clients are lean and strong.

My assertion is that NEITHER is necessarily better because ultimately working hard and eating right are the things that work. Whatever makes that more palatable for the individual is the best path.

Meal frequency is ritualistic noise. Why make this harder than it has to be? I see people getting frustrated that they can't meet the ritual of 5-6 meals per day and 8 glasses of water. So for a meaningless and inconsequential detail, people FAIL. That's a terrible outcome. My aim has always been to make this as simple as it can be, but no simpler.

Do not discount your hard work. Lifting heavy and eating right is what is bringing you success.

This isn't about right/wrong. I don't care who/what is right, so long as it is proven to benefit me and others.

I hope that clarifies my stance and intent.

Simple, Effective Strength Training for Beginners www.sparkpeople.com/mypage_public_jo
urnal_individual.asp?blog_id=5425006


Current Program bb531.wordpress.com/about/

"In god we trust, all others bring data."

"You can't make people smarter. You can expose them to information, but your responsibility stops there." - Rip


 current weight: 11.0  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
NANCYANNE55's Photo NANCYANNE55 SparkPoints: (95,279)
Fitness Minutes: (97,454)
Posts: 5,171
10/4/12 7:13 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Oh, for Pete's sake. I can't point to a peer-related research because I've read so danged much information on this and a bazillion other subjects that I can't possibly keep record of them all. But MY peers all use this as a tactic to help competitors lose for comps and know it works.

I don't have time or energy to argue. You clearly think you are right. There are a lot of people out there who do reading. There are others who are actually living and practicing this every day with real-life people. I fall into both groups. Take that for what it's worth.

Nancy Anne

My blog, about my personal experience and opinions of fitness related stuff: itallmakesadifference.blogspot.com/

My "Recipes For Bodybuilders (And People Who Just Want To Eat Healthier)" facebook page. I have videos here of my cooking yummy stuff! https://www.facebook.com/RecipesForB
odybuilders


 current weight: 174.6 
 
197
186
175
164
153
BREWMASTERBILL's Photo BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
10/3/12 8:54 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Great, you're well studied on the subject, please point me to this peer reviewed research that disputes my peer reviewed research. I'm always more than happy to change my thinking on a topic when real research dictates.

If I relied on anecdotes, my 90 year old grandmother would have me convinced that her pack a day habit is harmless ... because hey, she's 90.

Thank you.

Simple, Effective Strength Training for Beginners www.sparkpeople.com/mypage_public_jo
urnal_individual.asp?blog_id=5425006


Current Program bb531.wordpress.com/about/

"In god we trust, all others bring data."

"You can't make people smarter. You can expose them to information, but your responsibility stops there." - Rip


 current weight: 11.0  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
NANCYANNE55's Photo NANCYANNE55 SparkPoints: (95,279)
Fitness Minutes: (97,454)
Posts: 5,171
10/3/12 6:37 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Hey, Bill! I am sorry I didn't have a chance to get back into this conversation until now. Seems Leslie has done a pretty good job of saying what I would have, anyhow.

I don't have Leslie's background, but I am a personal trainer who not only trains people for fitness, but also makes eating plans to help them lose weight as well as get ready to compete. Additionally, I have done "cutting diets" (aka "volunteered misery") myself. Certainly, when someone is cutting in for a competition every tiny little bit adds up. And when you are talking about someone who is already relatively close to their goal (in this case, competition) in terms of body fat, those little bits can count in ways that either get you a trophy or lose it. For this reason I and virtually every other coach I know of who makes these kinds of meal plans employs frequent (6-7 daily) small meals. Not just because of the very small increase in calorie burn (metabolism) that digestion provides, but also because it keeps the person fueled and less likely to break the diet.

I didn't come to this lightly. I studied extensively before I decided I believed it. For every study I have read about this subject to refute it, I can find more to support it.

Leslie was mentioning things that would raise metabolism in micro-amounts, with the purpose of, as I understand it, cumulatively giving one the edge to either keep the weight off or take off those last few stubborn pounds. I threw in a couple there with equally micro-amounts of benefit.

It really doesn't matter if someone agrees with this or not, but I did at least want to qualify myself. On this board people are of a different mindset than on other boards I participate in. They are not so much of a learning mindset as they are of a supporting one, which is great. So I try not to advise nor tell people why I know what I am talking about, because I can see where it might come across as pompous. But in this case I felt compelled to, because I wasn't just spouting stuff off simply to have something to say. I really do know my stuff, here, and put it into practice with my profession.

Nancy Anne

My blog, about my personal experience and opinions of fitness related stuff: itallmakesadifference.blogspot.com/

My "Recipes For Bodybuilders (And People Who Just Want To Eat Healthier)" facebook page. I have videos here of my cooking yummy stuff! https://www.facebook.com/RecipesForB
odybuilders


 current weight: 174.6 
 
197
186
175
164
153
LESLIE871948's Photo LESLIE871948 SparkPoints: (63,131)
Fitness Minutes: (70,603)
Posts: 645
10/3/12 3:47 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
THAT was me who moved the goal posts. I was responding not to the original thread, but to the idea that more meals daily could raise metabolic rate and being literal when I read it, I was like duh, eating will raise your burn rate for the time it takes to digest the food. All things being equal a person who eats X calories a day and spaces them in 6 meals might burn a tiny bit more calories that day than someone who consumed exactly the same thing in 3 meals. Lose more weight? Hey, I forgot what Kanoe said in the beginning until brewmasterbill reminded me.
That said, since I am a nursing professor I am really well acquainted with health research and all the things people can do to mess with it. I like to look at who funds these things. I have not had time to get into this topic and probably won't but what matters to me today, is what works for me. Not what works for the median or mean of a large research study, even if you could do a good one on diet without a big prison for the setting.

It's never over


 current weight: 172.0 
 
365
316.25
267.5
218.75
170
BREWMASTERBILL's Photo BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
10/3/12 2:44 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
BB, that response wasn't intended for you, it was for LESLIE871948.

Simple, Effective Strength Training for Beginners www.sparkpeople.com/mypage_public_jo
urnal_individual.asp?blog_id=5425006


Current Program bb531.wordpress.com/about/

"In god we trust, all others bring data."

"You can't make people smarter. You can expose them to information, but your responsibility stops there." - Rip


 current weight: 11.0  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
BROOKLYN_BORN's Photo BROOKLYN_BORN Posts: 2,563
10/3/12 2:35 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Hi Bill, Please don't misunderstand, I didn't mean to "move the goal posts." I truly meant that I was unaware that this was and continues to be studied so thoroughly. Actually, in a previous thread I brought up that it was mentioned on the Weight of the Nation documentary that maintainers require fewer calories at a given weight than those whose always weighed that same amount. Then I asked if anyone knew anymore about this.
As far as this thread goes, the 3 meals vs 6 showed up recently as an extension of the original post.

I like data too and I thank you for your efforts to get information out there, but many of the posts here tend to be personal anecdotes, not to denigrate the science but just a note that not everyone fits the statistics.


The race is not always to the swift, but to those who keep on running.


257 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
65
130
195
260
BREWMASTERBILL's Photo BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
10/3/12 1:23 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I don't think we're comparing apples to apples here. The original statement was that eating more meals = higher metabolic rate. I contend this is false, I provide studies and science to back that up.

You moved the goal posts and provided yourself as anecdotal evidence as to why 180 studies cannot be trusted. Surely you can understand my skepticism. You listed a number of confounding factors as well. The factors may or may not be controlled for in each study, who knows, but they are confounders regardless of where you fall on the issue.

Would love the data on blood glucose stabilization. I love data, the more the better. You never have to ask me if I want the data, answer is always 'yes, yes, yes' ... lol.

Let's be clear though, if eating 6 meals a day helps you maintain, that's good for you. It shouldn't be thrown out as fact because it isn't. That's my contention.

Simple, Effective Strength Training for Beginners www.sparkpeople.com/mypage_public_jo
urnal_individual.asp?blog_id=5425006


Current Program bb531.wordpress.com/about/

"In god we trust, all others bring data."

"You can't make people smarter. You can expose them to information, but your responsibility stops there." - Rip


 current weight: 11.0  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
BROOKLYN_BORN's Photo BROOKLYN_BORN Posts: 2,563
10/3/12 1:03 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Wow, I had no idea of all the studies and analysis that's been done.
However, I LIKE eating often throughout the day. It keeps me recharged. DH says that I'm always eating, kind of like a bunny rabbit (a bit of an exaggeration). The difference with SP is now I'm thoughtfully eating healthy stuff instead of my past habit of mindlessly grabbing anything in my line of sight.

The race is not always to the swift, but to those who keep on running.


257 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
65
130
195
260
LESLIE871948's Photo LESLIE871948 SparkPoints: (63,131)
Fitness Minutes: (70,603)
Posts: 645
10/3/12 12:59 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Hi Bill
I am looking for "different" science and coming up dry on this, because it (by itself) is not a significant factor. No one suggests however that eating does not temporarily raise a persons metabolic rate for a short time, and in a small way.
The thing is, are we discussing if the rate goes up when we eat, or if that by itself will cause a person to lose weight. Well, I completely agree that if eating frequent meals is the only thing a person does they will not be seeing much in the way of weight loss success.
That said, take a person such as myself, who is 64 and at one time weighed 365 pounds (possibly more, in those days scales would not measure me unless I went to the truck ones). So take me. I stack. I eat a reasonable number of calories to maintain a normal weight in a person of my height and normal metabolism (not assuming mine is messed up). I lift weights, do yoga for strength, jog, walk, dance, garden, mow, dig, bla bla bla. I eat frequent meals. I drink ice water. I sleep 8 hours a night consistently. I get to compare my food intake and weight loss with others over time because I go to weight watchers. You cannot do a reliable and valid study on me vs people who eat three meals a day, because I do too many things. You end up with a problem with variables. I think if something raises my burn rate for a few minutes and it is easy to do, I am going to do it. Probably why I always lose more consistently than others, and I consistently eat more than others in total calories. Is it 100% my activity level? or my muscle mass? or the 6 meals a day? Clearly no. But as a habit, eating frequent meals stabilizes blood glucose and I can give you data on that one, it promotes muscle strength in elderly women and I got that data, and is even great for GERD. So.

It's never over


 current weight: 172.0 
 
365
316.25
267.5
218.75
170
BREWMASTERBILL's Photo BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
10/3/12 12:03 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Sounds plausible, but studies do not confirm what you are saying.

Of interest ....

examine.com/faq/do-i-need-to-eat-six
-t
imes-a-day-to-keep-my-metabolism-higR>h.html


"A meta-analysis conducted on eating frequency[1] notes that "studies using whole-body calorimetry and doubly-labelled water to assess total 24 h energy expenditure find no difference between nibbling and gorging. Finally, with the exception of a single study, there is no evidence that weight loss on hypoenergetic regimens is altered by meal frequency. We conclude that any effects of meal pattern on the regulation of body weight are likely to be mediated through effects on the food intake side of the energy balance equation".[1] A review article conducted assessing 179 abstracts (of which 10 studies were deemed relevant to assess meal frequency and weight loss interactions) found no significant relation between meal frequency and weight loss, albeit calling for more long-term evidence.[2] These results are found in other review articles on the subject matter.[3][4]

Various individual interventions that modify meal frequency while keeping calories static find that there is no difference in metabolic rate (24 hour energy expenditure) between the two groups[5][6] and that there are no changes in weight loss at the end of the trial periods.[7][8] When calories are dropped significantly, metabolic rate declines slightly but overall declines based on calories and not meal frequency.[8]

One recently published paper actually finds the opposite, and that when comparing 3 meals against 14 meals over a period of 36 hours in a metabolic chamber in healthy males, that there were no significant differences in total energy expenditure and a slight increase in resting energy expenditure in the lower frequency group.[9]"


You has different science?

Simple, Effective Strength Training for Beginners www.sparkpeople.com/mypage_public_jo
urnal_individual.asp?blog_id=5425006


Current Program bb531.wordpress.com/about/

"In god we trust, all others bring data."

"You can't make people smarter. You can expose them to information, but your responsibility stops there." - Rip


 current weight: 11.0  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
LESLIE871948's Photo LESLIE871948 SparkPoints: (63,131)
Fitness Minutes: (70,603)
Posts: 645
10/3/12 11:51 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Bill from a pathophysiological point of view if a person eats smaller *MORE FREQUENT* meals it would have an effect and raise the rate a little bit. This because the process of digestion is a met. rate booster although small.

Smaller meals 3 times a day, maybe even slow you down.

Smaller meals 6 times a day for a decent caloric intake close to your metabolic needs? Absolutely it will have an effect.

It's never over


 current weight: 172.0 
 
365
316.25
267.5
218.75
170
BREWMASTERBILL's Photo BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
10/2/12 9:12 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Eating smaller meals does not raise your metabolism at all. That's a myth.

Simple, Effective Strength Training for Beginners www.sparkpeople.com/mypage_public_jo
urnal_individual.asp?blog_id=5425006


Current Program bb531.wordpress.com/about/

"In god we trust, all others bring data."

"You can't make people smarter. You can expose them to information, but your responsibility stops there." - Rip


 current weight: 11.0  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
MJREIMERS's Photo MJREIMERS Posts: 4,390
10/2/12 8:45 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Great thread! emoticon

~Mako~


27 Days until:  Feast & Feathers10K
 
50
37
25
12
0
NANCYANNE55's Photo NANCYANNE55 SparkPoints: (95,279)
Fitness Minutes: (97,454)
Posts: 5,171
10/2/12 6:28 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Eating smaller meals more frequently also raises metabolism a tad, as does drinking your water very cold.

Nancy Anne

My blog, about my personal experience and opinions of fitness related stuff: itallmakesadifference.blogspot.com/

My "Recipes For Bodybuilders (And People Who Just Want To Eat Healthier)" facebook page. I have videos here of my cooking yummy stuff! https://www.facebook.com/RecipesForB
odybuilders


 current weight: 174.6 
 
197
186
175
164
153
BREWMASTERBILL's Photo BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,080)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,110
10/2/12 10:53 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I largely believe that folks who lose weight through wide deficits are most at risk. Whether through diet, cardio or a combination thereof they have sacrificed lean mass and lowered their metabolic rates substantially. There is evidence that does not substantiate my hypothesis, there is evidence that does. So I'm forced to rely on anecdotes when applying this to myself.

Since incorporating heavy resistance training and replacing fat mass with lean mass, my metabolic rate has increased. This happened while my cardio decreased dramatically and my diet has largely been left unchecked.

Since science is conflicted, I mostly reserve my opinion and only apply this to myself. YMMV, but there seems to be a lot of evidence coming forth that cardio and diet may not be the most efficient path for long term maintenance (which may be part of the reason for high attrition rates). They may help, but rebuilding and maintaining lean mass may be half or more of this equation.

Again, this is just my opinion.

Simple, Effective Strength Training for Beginners www.sparkpeople.com/mypage_public_jo
urnal_individual.asp?blog_id=5425006


Current Program bb531.wordpress.com/about/

"In god we trust, all others bring data."

"You can't make people smarter. You can expose them to information, but your responsibility stops there." - Rip


 current weight: 11.0  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
LESLIE871948's Photo LESLIE871948 SparkPoints: (63,131)
Fitness Minutes: (70,603)
Posts: 645
10/2/12 9:59 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I have not read or heard that it would, but for myself, it burns some calories while I get up to go to the bathroom several times during the night :) the joys of being 64. The Beatles song always pops into my head when I mention my age...

It's never over


 current weight: 172.0 
 
365
316.25
267.5
218.75
170
KANOE10's Photo KANOE10 Posts: 4,577
10/2/12 7:53 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Those are good ideas on raising metabolism. I was wondering if drinking water at night affected the metabolism.

To decide on a weight is to decide on the life you want to live.


156 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
40
80
120
160
LESLIE871948's Photo LESLIE871948 SparkPoints: (63,131)
Fitness Minutes: (70,603)
Posts: 645
10/1/12 9:39 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I was thinking more about this, and about all the "little" things that affect metabolic rate. Somewhere here is a list of 20 things you can do to support weight loss (or somewhere online). This is a passion for me, to learn to manage this forever.
If a person were to tweak their lifestyle and diet to increase metabolism by .05% here and .02% there and use strategies like Slow weight loss (does the body slow metabolic rate from very fast weight loss at the same rate for very slow weight loss?) I doubt that the effects are the same.
Things like consuming peppers that raise metabolic rate
Weight lifting to add muscle mass (which is incompatible with fast weight loss, but then?)
Not eating late in the evening (the long fast is touted in many different places as beneficial) and the body burns fat during the down time.
Varying the calorie intake (same as varying activity when you are getting fit) to keep things shaken up
I am sure you know that research studies give average results, there have to be people there that vary from the mean. I plan to do every little thing to be one of the ones who have the closest thing to a normal metabolism I can achieve. And the other thing is to Enjoy the feelings of hunger, instead of fearing them, reframing that as a positive force in my life that makes life great. (especially at meal time :) )

It's never over


 current weight: 172.0 
 
365
316.25
267.5
218.75
170
KANOE10's Photo KANOE10 Posts: 4,577
10/1/12 8:15 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Leslie.. You are extremely fit! I agree with you about the going for the intensity of the exercise in the challenge zone and will investigate the blue zone idea. I am sorry to hear about your bicycle accident..but you are doing an excellent job of bouncing back on track. That is interesting about varying your calories on different days. I am going to experiment.

To decide on a weight is to decide on the life you want to live.


156 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
40
80
120
160
LESLIE871948's Photo LESLIE871948 SparkPoints: (63,131)
Fitness Minutes: (70,603)
Posts: 645
9/30/12 9:18 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
This is excellent information, and truly supports what I have experienced. I regained after being at goal for four years, and it was directly due to an accident that messed with my activity level. I could not eat less at that time, but to be brutally honest the inactivity caused me to not be able to handle life stress and I ate more.
There do seem to be some things that are variable about this. I am a nursing professor, and I have the unique position to have seen many "proven" things disproven by the human animal. I think that this mans premise is mostly accurate, but I do firmly believe that there are individual differences based upon the rate of weight loss (fast vs slow), the intensity of activity (always challenging yourself, even after you are fit) and muscle mass.
I vote for keeping the intensity of exercise in the challenge zone a lot of the time. Following a food plan like the blue zones where you are 80% full. Varying intake with some days very low calorie, others high, a couple moderate each week. We are animals after all. For the body to act like there is a famine, their needs to be a somewhat consistent famine. You mention lean body mass, (tough yoga is good for this too). Go look at my pictures on my spark page. The one on the bottom is before my bicycle accident, I am 5'8" and I was maintaining that body weight for four years pretty easily eating near 1900 calories a day average, bouncing around between a low of 1500 two days a week, around 2200 one day a week, then the rest in between. I exercised about 6 hours a week, 3 weight training and 3 aerobic. On aerobic days I did whatever it took to make myself exhausted at the end. I am ten pounds over that weight right now. My average intake this last week was 1750 calories daily and I lost almost 2 pounds. I am quite muscular for an old lady.

Edited by: LESLIE871948 at: 9/30/2012 (09:27)
It's never over


 current weight: 172.0 
 
365
316.25
267.5
218.75
170
KANOE10's Photo KANOE10 Posts: 4,577
9/30/12 7:06 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Here is the author's further thoughts on the lecture.


OK, so I was kicking all this info around in my head while I was doing cardio this AM (and burning 20% fewer calories than everyone else …grrr… ) and thinking about what this means in the real world. Is there any way that we can RAISE our metabolic rates that have been lowered by losing weight? Dr. Leibel says that small doses of leptin will do the trick, but unless someone’s got a leptin lab in their basement, that’s not available to help us out. Maybe someday, but not today.

Then I remembered the numbers that he had on the slides during his presentation: normal and obese people need 50 calories per kg of LBM to maintain weight as compared to the reduced obese, who only need 42 calories per kg of LBM. He didn’t say for sure, but I’m assuming that LBM = Lean Body Mass. LBM is your total body weight minus the number of pounds of fat on your body – it’s how we determine our body fat percentages.

Here’s my thinking – if we increase LBM, then we increase the number of calories that we can eat in a day and still maintain our new weights, right? More kilograms of LBM that need those 42 calories of energy mean that we can eat a little more or exercise a little less without gaining.

How do we increase our LBM? By adding muscle to our bodies. Every additional kilogram (not pound) of muscle in a normal weight person will burn an additional 50 calories per day, according to Dr. Leibel’s research. For us reduced obese, with our lowered metabolisms, every additional kilogram of muscle will still burn an additional 42 calories a day. So we want to add muscle in order to be able to burn more calories.

How do we add muscle? By lifting weights. Strength training, bodybuilding, resistance training, toning, weight lifting, whatever you want to call it – it’s all the same thing. Lifting weights builds muscle. More muscle increases our LBMs. More pounds of LBM mean that we can eat more food and continue to maintain our new weights. It’s the only way that I can think of to overcome the lowered metabolism caused by weight loss.


To decide on a weight is to decide on the life you want to live.


156 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
40
80
120
160
KANOE10's Photo KANOE10 Posts: 4,577
9/30/12 6:58 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Thanks to everyone who responded. Just to clarify, I did not attend the lecture, I just posted the article.

I have to admit while working out at the gym, that idea of the person next to me was burning off more calories did run through my mind. Later the author points out that if you increase your muscle mass, you will burn more calories and can make up for the difference.

Anyway the article is from www.3fatchicks.com ..Go the forums, then to Living Maintenance, then to Sticky: Some Answers About Genes, Environment, Obesity and Maintenance .

I am hoping you people that follow the paleo diet are right..that eating high protein and low carb fixes the leptin levels and allows you to eat higher calories.

Thanks so much for all of the input. I plan on researching this.

My net result is vigilance is needed for maintenance..no matter what.

Edited by: KANOE10 at: 9/30/2012 (07:11)
To decide on a weight is to decide on the life you want to live.


156 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
40
80
120
160
POPSY190's Photo POPSY190 Posts: 4,738
9/29/12 5:08 P

Community Team Member

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Thank you for this. I think one of the most valuable aspects of this team is the sharing of information specific to our aims and aspirations.

Penny, Christchurch, NZDT GMT+12

Co-captain Panthers BL24
BLC25
www.blcpanth
ers.com


Genealogists live in the past lane.
The past is our definition. We may strive, with good reason, to escape it, or to escape what is bad in it, but we will escape it only by adding something better.


 current weight: 160.0 
 
160
155.25
150.5
145.75
141
TINAJANE76's Photo TINAJANE76 SparkPoints: (65,171)
Fitness Minutes: (45,429)
Posts: 4,247
9/29/12 4:33 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Interesting stuff. Seems to provide scientific evidence of what many of us have observed anecdotally about the maintenance process. Thanks so much for sharing what you learned.


My name's Tina. I lost more than 90 pounds between March 2010 and March 2012 and have been keeping if off ever since.

Central European Time (CET), Venice, Italy


 current weight: -2.0  under
 
5
2.5
0
-2.5
-5
CATMAGNET's Photo CATMAGNET SparkPoints: (38,973)
Fitness Minutes: (51,134)
Posts: 1,183
9/29/12 3:34 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Great post, Kanoe10.

I had read an article here on Spark about transitioning and how one should gradually add calories until you don't gain or lose. It sounds like that's sound advice that I'll be heeding once I get to that point and not worrying so much about the "ranges".

Jane

Camp Good Grief 5k 2012 - 31:50
Gobble Wobble 5k 2012 - 30:00
Turkey Trot 4 Mile Race 2012 - 38:38
Ugly Sweater 5k Fun Run 2012 - 27:19
Move-It Memphis 10K 2013 - 55:36
Germantown Half Marathon - 2:08:53
FedEx St. Jude Classic Fairway 5k - 4/13/2013
Pittsburgh Half-Marathon - 5/5/2013


BROOKLYN_BORN's Photo BROOKLYN_BORN Posts: 2,563
9/29/12 2:18 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Skirnir, Part of the difference with your husband & son is just because they're male. Men just require more calories to maintain. It's frustrating to see a man make a small change and the weight drops off. Women have it harder. With 66% of Americans overweight or worse, and some % fighting anorexia or illness, there are fewer and fewer of those "naturally thin people" out there.

I also wondered about how much weight each member of the research group had to lose and the time it took to lose it. For example, 50+ lbs over 6 months vs 20 lbs over 1 year. Does your body adapt better if it's done slowly? Like sneaking the weight loss in? We would either have to read the full report or this is an area of further research.

In any case, while it's good to have as much information as possible, in the end we have to find what works for us and do it consistently.

The race is not always to the swift, but to those who keep on running.


257 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
65
130
195
260
NANCYANNE55's Photo NANCYANNE55 SparkPoints: (95,279)
Fitness Minutes: (97,454)
Posts: 5,171
9/29/12 2:01 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I'm with HoundLover and Maree- When I make at least 40% of my calories from protein, I can eat at about 2400 calories and maintain. If I eat more carbs, I'm struggling to hold on at 2100.

Nancy Anne

My blog, about my personal experience and opinions of fitness related stuff: itallmakesadifference.blogspot.com/

My "Recipes For Bodybuilders (And People Who Just Want To Eat Healthier)" facebook page. I have videos here of my cooking yummy stuff! https://www.facebook.com/RecipesForB
odybuilders


 current weight: 174.6 
 
197
186
175
164
153
SKIRNIR's Photo SKIRNIR Posts: 5,223
9/29/12 1:55 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Very interesting information. And I guess it makes sense that our bodies are different after we have lost a lot of weight, but I was really hoping that at some point, it would get easier. IE I don't feel as hungry as I used to, but there are still tough days and I wish I could just trust my body. But I don't think I can. I have a time coming up next summer, where for a week I won't have internet access and won't have control over how my food is prepared. I am afraid I will gain at that point, but I do know I can loose it again, if I need to. I can also set myself up to be on the low side before the time begins...

I did have one thing that bothered me in the information provided... " It’s important to note that the metabolisms of the obese are identical to normal people." I find that hard to imagine. I see what my son and husband eat and how much exercise they do and oh, I have it so much harder. Now admittedly they can trust their stomachs and bodies way more than I can trust mine. I do get a bit jealous here and there. I just don't understand how naturally thin people can eat whatever they want and not exercise much and don't gain weight. Yes, many people claim oh, they will as they age and well, some do and some don't. How can that not be a metabolism difference?

3/31/12 Trailbreaker half marathon 13.1 miles in 3 hours 13 minutes
4/20/13 Neighborhood Watch 5K 39:17.6
10/5/13 5K Grace Pet Fest 38:47.6
12/1/13 Secret City Half Marathon around 3 hours and 4 minutes
4/19/14 Butterflies for Hope 5K for Lupus 39:23.8 (I hurt my back a few days before, and though it was my first official 5K with some jogging, my back hurt, so was very slow.)


 current weight: 5.9  over
 
10
5
0
-5
-10
MAREE1953's Photo MAREE1953 SparkPoints: (79,390)
Fitness Minutes: (98,513)
Posts: 1,384
9/29/12 1:23 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Thank you teammates. Low carb high protein eating has been the difference for me. Exercising 90 min 5days a week and eating "healthy" was not enoughto lose weight. And I have to keep careful watch to maintain. I'm so grateful to have found this team

 current weight: 3.9  over
 
5
2.5
0
-2.5
-5
GOTTAPLAN4U Posts: 290
9/29/12 12:58 P

Send Private Message
Reply
This information probably doesn't change the way losers and maintainers treat exercise and calories. I have to believe that as BREWMASTERBILL's "head in the game" analogy implies, those who get success do it by thinking and acting on their own behalf, not blindly following the rules of a computer estimated-calories-burned program.

However it does provide a rationalization for the tough work that is required. We all like a better understanding. And there is always the hope that further research will lead to approaches that are helpful.

So I wonder when does the "reduced obese" effect kick in? After 5 lbs are lost, or 50? Were any of his obese subjects previously super obese, or even more obese? I guess I'm asking, did he explain the pedigree of his obese subjects that were showing the normal metabolic rate?


WILLOWBROOK5's Photo WILLOWBROOK5 SparkPoints: (10,797)
Fitness Minutes: (29,091)
Posts: 248
9/29/12 11:38 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Thanks for the excellent summary, Kanoe10. It certainly is something to keep in mind and consider as we work to maintain our losses. However, I refuse to refer to myself as a reduced obese, however accurate, LOL. I may be a biscuit away from being overweight, but I am at a healthy BMI, darn it. :-D. Thanks again. You have given me a lot to think about.

 October Minutes: 0
 
0
500
1000
1500
2000
HOUNDLOVER1's Photo HOUNDLOVER1 Posts: 8,194
9/29/12 11:16 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
None of this is a concern for me any more because I have experienced that while my body used less energy and maintained on fewer calories after losing the weight for many years, since I have been eating low-carb for about the last 8 months that both insulin-sensitivity and probably leptin levels have optimized to where I can maintain even with little exercise. When I had to take 6 weeks off from most exercise (all but walking) I only gained two pounds and this was due at least in part to boredom eating higher carb (mostly more dairy) foods. Before low-carb this would have resulted in a 10 lbs. gain. I can't prove this, of course, but would challenge anyone to try it. My story is typical, just take a look at some of the low-carb/paleo/primal groups on Spark. Exercise has many benefits, especially changing body composition and overall fitness, but is not the most powerful tool for maintenance by a long shot. Just my opinion. emoticon

Birgit

Edited by: HOUNDLOVER1 at: 9/29/2012 (11:17)
You can talk to God all you want and that's great, but the changes happen when you start listening to him.

BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE IN OTHERS.




 Body Fat %: 16.0
 
23.6
21.7
19.8
17.9
16
SUZYMOBILE's Photo SUZYMOBILE Posts: 9,901
9/29/12 11:06 A

Community Team Member

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Yup, I remember your posting. I just didn't want to believe it at the time, lol!

"Awareness is all."

"Letting go is much harder than fighting."
—SUZYMOBILE

"Everything is exactly the way it's supposed to be."

“Life is about not knowing, having to change, taking the moment and making the best of it, without knowing what’s going to happen next.” —Gilda Radner

"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change;
the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference." --Reinhold Niebuhr


 current weight: 10.2  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
BROOKLYN_BORN's Photo BROOKLYN_BORN Posts: 2,563
9/29/12 10:48 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Thank you for posting the source of this research, specifically:
“He said that, in order to maintain our weight, we reduced obese need to eat 15 - 20% fewer calories per day than a comparable person – same height, weight and gender etc – who never was obese.”

This fact was also included in the “Weight of the Nation” Documentary but likely lost in the hours long 4 part program.

A few weeks ago I posted a thread asking if anymore knew more about it. My question was:
I was just thinking about the HBO 4 part series, specifically the research that concluded the caloric needs for a person who had met their weight loss goal was less than a person who had always been that same weight.
I don’t remember the percentage differential or the exact numbers. It was something like this.
A woman who weighed 140 throughout her adult life needs about 1800 calories/day to maintain. But one who lost 50 lbs to reach the 140 lb goal needs only 1650 to maintain.
This research was only a small part of the series, but of special interest to me in maintenance. Does anyone else remember this or have an opinion of its validity?
Could this be one reason people find it hard to maintain?

Thank you again for confirming this.


The race is not always to the swift, but to those who keep on running.


257 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
65
130
195
260
SUZYMOBILE's Photo SUZYMOBILE Posts: 9,901
9/29/12 10:15 A

Community Team Member

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
OH MY GOD! This is the Rosetta Stone of maintenance! This is like tying up all the little loose ends at the end of the mystery. It is at once confirmation that we are not crazy and depressing! And I'm only exaggerating a little.

Thank you SO much for (a) going to that lecture, (b) taking such good notes, and (c) writing it all up for us. Now I'm going to share it with every maintainer I know! You really should capture it in a blog post, so that it is more widely and easily broadcast.

Unfortunately, we have to ignore what Spark calculates as ranges for us, and work it out for ourselves. I feel bad for all the maintainers who are being good do-bees, staying "within range," and gaining weight.

Edited by: SUZYMOBILE at: 9/29/2012 (10:17)
"Awareness is all."

"Letting go is much harder than fighting."
—SUZYMOBILE

"Everything is exactly the way it's supposed to be."

“Life is about not knowing, having to change, taking the moment and making the best of it, without knowing what’s going to happen next.” —Gilda Radner

"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change;
the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference." --Reinhold Niebuhr


 current weight: 10.2  over
 
15
7.5
0
-7.5
-15
MRSJERRYBUSH's Photo MRSJERRYBUSH Posts: 6,940
9/29/12 10:11 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I found your info to be very informative and helpful. Sure explains a lot for me! Well, now our SP trackers are even more important as we find out our own levels and then fight any urges to eat more. Sounds like good vitamin supplements might be very important also.

142 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
40
80
120
160
PEGGYT3's Photo PEGGYT3 Posts: 2,618
9/29/12 9:53 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Thanks so much for going to the lecture and condensing the info you obtained on how important it is to eat less and exercise more for maintenance. I've kept my weight at my goal for 5 years now and know from experience that even a small deviation from my habitual amount of exercise and/or calories as a maintainer can very quickly put a pound or two back on.
As someone once said, "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom!" Keep up the good work!

Sparkpeople and Jazzercize veteran


Total SparkPoints: 117,105
 
100,000
112,499
124,999
137,499
149,999
SparkPoints Level 20
THECRAZYMANGO's Photo THECRAZYMANGO Posts: 6,473
9/29/12 9:37 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I'd love to read the article. Can I have the link?

Also, I certainly think it's true that our bodies get more efficient with calories and it is harder to burn calories..

-Savannah

Not worth having is easy!




 current weight: 204.0 
 
215
198.75
182.5
166.25
150
KANOE10's Photo KANOE10 Posts: 4,577
9/29/12 9:33 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I ran across this article and wondered if anyone else has heard of this and if it was true.

Does anyone know if this is accurate?

This ended up being very lengthy, but I hope you all take the time to read or skim it because this is really important information about maintenance.

I attended a lecture this week given by Rudolph L. Leibel, head of Molecular Genetics at Columbia Medical School, titled Mechanisms For Body Weight Regulation. We’ve had several discussions here in Maintainers about hormones, weight regulation, and metabolic rates after losing weight and he answered some of our questions. I can’t say these were answers that I wanted to hear, but this is really important stuff, so bear with me and I’ll try to summarize.

The first part of the lecture was all about research into how our bodies regulate their weight. I don’t want to go into the science of it in detail – much of it was over my head! – but the overall picture is that we have a complex system of hormones that act on our brains which control appetite, metabolism, and fat storage. We’re born with certain genes that generate and control these hormones which are then affected by the environment in which we live. His research shows that obesity is about 60% a genetic predisposition with about 40% attributable to our toxic food environment (the way we eat and live today).

Here’s the deal – genetically, we obese (or formerly obese) are the survivors. We’re evolutionarily selected to live in times of famine, when food was scarce and we had to work hard to find it. Think prehistoric times, when dinner meant stalking a woolly mastodon for a week before you could kill and eat it. Then contrast that with how we live now, when dinner means picking up your cell phone and ordering pizza. Food today (often calorie dense) is readily available and requires virtually no work to get it. Our genes are evolutionarily adapted to hoard calories as fat and use them very efficiently. So this system works beautifully if you’re a caveman, but not so well if you work in an office cube.

What this means is that it’s easy for many of us to get fat – not news to most of us. It doesn’t mean that obesity is preordained or that it HAS to happen – that’s still determined by our environment, which boils down to what we eat and how we live.

The second part of the lecture was the reason why I was there – how do we apply this scientific knowledge to weight loss and maintenance? I’m going to break it down into key points -

It’s Calories In Versus Calories Out: He began the second portion of the lecture by citing the First Law Of Thermodynamics – in terms of obesity, it translates into Stored Body Fat = Food Intake – Energy Expenditure. We here at 3FC mean the same thing when we say that you have to eat less (food intake) and move more (energy expenditure) to lose fat. The science of weight loss all comes down to numbers of calories in and out. Forget all the pseudo-science diet books out there about what to eat and not eat – at the end of the day, it’s nothing but numbers and calories.

Dr. Leibel has a lab at Columbia Medical School where he locks in volunteers for up to 27 months and monitors food intake and energy expenditure. He has NEVER had a subject who hasn’t lost weight on a low-calorie diet. They may plateau for a while, which he says is the body replacing lost fat with water temporarily, but ALWAYS lose fat in the end. So he said that people who say that can’t lose weight despite only eating a tiny amount of calories are kidding themselves about their actual food intake. He says that this formula holds true for everyone - Stored Body Fat = Food Intake – Energy Expenditure.

Metabolisms: It takes 50 calories per kg of LBM to maintain the weight of both obese and normal people (people who have never been obese). It’s important to note that the metabolisms of the obese are identical to normal people. The ‘I’m fat because of my metabolism’ argument was shot down in his lab because he discovered that obese and normal people burn calories at exactly the same rate. Obese people are simply taking in – or burning fewer - calories than normal people and storing the excess as body fat.

Back to the equation Stored Body Fat = Food Intake – Energy Expenditure - the energy expenditure (I’m going to abbreviate it as EE) part is made up of three parts: resting energy expenditure, non-resting EE, and thermic (the digestion of food). Resting EE accounts for about 50 – 60% of the calories we burn in a day, thermic accounts for about 5%, and non-resting EE makes up the remainder. If we take in more energy (calories) than we expend, it’s stored in our bodies as protein, glycogen, and fat.

Our Bodies ARE Different!: This is the part that’s relevant to all of us maintainers. Like we’ve long suspected, our metabolisms ARE slower after we lose weight. Scientific research shows that we have to eat less and/or move more to sustain our weight losses.

Here’s the deal - it takes 50 calories per kg of LBM to maintain the body weight of either a normal or an obese person. BUT … it takes only 42 calories per kg of LBM to maintain the weight of a reduced obese person (doctors and researchers call those of us who were obese and are now a normal weight the reduced obese).

We ARE different! Dr. Leibel said that we reduced obese may LOOK normal on the outside but our bodies are very different on the inside. He said that, in order to maintain our weight, we reduced obese need to eat 15 - 20% fewer calories per day than a comparable person – same height, weight and gender etc – who never was obese.

Why? The difference in calorie needs comes ALL from changes in NON-resting energy expenditure. The resting rate is unchanged. But our muscle efficiency increases by 15% after weight loss, so we become more efficient in using energy in exercise and everyday activities. And so we burn fewer calories per pound than either a normal weight or an obese person. It’s completely measurable in a lab – all you have to do is put the reduced obese person on a stationary bike and measure energy expenditure. We aren’t going to burn as many calories as normal people do. In practical terms, it means that when you’re at the gym on a treadmill, the person next to you is going to be burning 15-20% more calories than you do even is she is exactly the same height, weight and age (so long as she never was fat). Wonderful, eh?

Leptin Levels: The scientific reason for this change in metabolic rates between normal and obese and reduced obese persons has to do with leptin levels (a hormone). If you google Leibel and leptin, you’ll find a lot of scientific articles about his research that explains it all much better than I can. Currently Dr, Leibel is experimenting with giving reduced obese small doses of leptin to restore its level to that of normal and obese people and it seems to reverse this metabolic slowdown. Unfortunately, it’s not anywhere close to being released as a treatment for weight maintenance (he emphasized that it wouldn’t help for weight loss; it only works for maintainers).

My Thoughts On What This Mean For Us Maintainers: Wow! This is the scientific validation of what I think many of us have long suspected and it’s a reason why it’s so hard to maintain a weight loss. Our own personal experiences and National Weight Control Registry statistics show that we have to eat fewer calories and/or exercise more than normal people in order to maintain our weight losses. Now we know that it’s a FACT and we know why – our non-resting EE slows down by 15 – 20%. Our metabolisms weren’t slower when we were obese but they are genuinely and measurably slower now that we’ve lost the weight. We’re fighting against our own bodies wanting to get fat again.

I went up to Dr. Leibel after the lecture (and waited while he talked to all the MDs and PhDs) and introduced myself by saying that I had a little bit of a different perspective on the issue. I told him that I was a member of the NWCR myself (he had discussed it), told him about our Maintainers group at 3FC, and said that we’re LIVING his research. One of the questions that I asked was - would this slowed down metabolism ever change? Would our bodies adapt to our new weights and our metabolisms ever return to normal? (I was thinking about our Karen here, who’s maintained her weight loss for 15 years) He said no, that the lowered leptin levels were permanent. It’s our bodies' way of trying to make us eat more and get fat again.

But he emphasized that it IS possible to maintain a large weight loss – it’s just a little harder for us to maintain our new normal weights than for people who never have been fat (again, not news to any of us). All these hormones and body weight regulations can be defeated by monitoring our calories in versus calories out because – remember - it’s all numbers. OK, our energy expenditure side of the equation is a little slower than normal people’s. But we still can maintain our weight losses by eating a little less or moving a little more – eating about 15 – 20% less or exercising about 15 - 20% more than normal people.

I sat there with my mouth hanging open for an hour and a half while I listened to all of this. I always suspected that it was all true, but here was the proof. On the one hand, it’s kind of depressing but on the other, I realize that nothing’s changed. Honestly, we’ve all puzzled this out for ourselves already, right?

In mulling all this information over, I’ve got several thoughts:
Maintenance IS harder than losing! Not just psychologically, but for real, measurable physical reasons. Our metabolisms are slowed down by weight loss.

This explains why so many losers regain weight. Our bodies are genetically and biologically programmed to return to our previous obese weights and will lower our metabolisms and release hormones to get us to eat more and burn fewer calories in order to regain fat. It’s a scientific fact – this is what we’re up against.

Once we reach goal weight, not only can’t we go back to our old ways of eating, we can’t even start to eat like normal (never fat) people without gaining weight. Those of us who are the reduced obese are and always will be different and we need to recognize and adapt to that fact.

Therefore, the diet’s not ever going to be over – we’re going to have to eat thoughtfully for the rest of our lives in order to defeat our bodies’ biochemical mechanisms to regain fat.

Exercise is key – in terms of the body fat equation Stored Body Fat = Food Intake – Energy Expenditure we only can safely reduce our food intake by so much (like 1200 calories/day) and then we're forced to burn off the rest through exercise, even though we aren’t going to be using as many calories as normal people do when we exercise.

The worst possible way to maintain a weight loss would be to try to eat intuitively because our bodies will be cueing us to eat more with lowered leptin levels – we need to eat non-intuitively to outwit our bodies' desire to return to obesity.

This explains why metabolic calculators don’t seem to work for many of us who are reduced obese. I always need to eat less/exercise more than any BMR calculator would indicate and now I know why – my BMR is different than that of normal and obese people. I did the BodyGem test, which measures resting EE (which you may recall is unchanged by weight loss) and extrapolates a BMR from that number. Now I know why it was so totally off-base for me – my non-resting EE (which it doesn’t measure) is 15-20% below normal. So of course all its conclusions were wrong for me.

Bottom line – track your calories and exercise and find out exactly what works for YOU to maintain your weight loss. Don’t compare yourself to what normal people eat and how they exercise – we’re not normal people. But we’re not crazy and we don’t have eating disorders – it's a FACT that we have to eat less and exercise more than normal people in order to maintain. The most important thing to take away from this is that it IS possible to maintain large weight losses with some thought and work and planning. And the support we have here in the Maintainers forum is simply priceless.


To decide on a weight is to decide on the life you want to live.


156 Maintenance Weeks
 
0
40
80
120
160
Page: 1 of (1)  

Report Innappropriate Post

Other At Goal & Maintaining + Transition to Maintenance Introduce Yourself to Team Forum Posts

Topics: Last Post:
Fear of relapsing/ /obsession with food ever fade? 3/9/2014 9:44:02 PM
Really Want to Succeed This Time 10/5/2013 11:03:09 AM
Hello, Plateau! 9/6/2014 8:44:35 PM
Attempting to Maintain 11/22/2013 10:16:15 AM
Transitioning 11/22/2013 6:58:37 AM

Thread URL: http://www.sparkpeople.com/myspark/team_messageboard_thread.asp?board=-1x1111x50158307

Review our Community Guidelines