Weight loss stopped-how to get going again?

padyjoe

I'm used to be a heavy lad. Bit lighter now but still on the heavy side in relation to cycling. Floating around 100-103 kgs for a 187 cm height. My diet normal, as all of us, me loves the old junk, in moderation though. Despite the weight, in 1.5 years, I got to the stage where I can throw in 60-100k spins without any problems. Last year I did the Tour de KK which 164k, I was wrecked after it, nothing major. I want to drop my weight to 90 kgs to see major improvements. My daily intake is normal, I'm not piling on the pounds. I wonder what I'm doing wrong having stuck at 102 kgs? Have to get more training like weights, swimming? I'd like to see myself going faster and climbing better.

Beasty

You're not necessarily doing anything "wrong" in sticking at 100-103kg. You are simply failing to do something "right" - that's properly count/monitor the calories. Sounds like you've reached your "natural" weight for your current calorie intake and exercise level. Cut the calories further and the weight will drop off again

This time last year I was at 105kg or more. I cut out some of the crap and dropped to 100kg by mid June. I then carefully counted my calories and managed to get down to 90kg or so by the end of September. Since then it's been a harder slog. Managed to drop another couple of kg to 88 by early November and have been hovering around there since.

During the past month I've picked up the cycling and left the diet as it was, and have dropped down to 87kg. I reckon I can go a bit further as I increase my cycling and calorie output, but I will need to supplement that with a bit further restriction to my calorie input. However having "progressed" by 18kg or so over a year I'm happy to consolidate a little longer before increasing my efforts over the summer (when it tend to be a bit easier to keep the weight down)

Jim Stynes

I am hoovering around the 90-92kg mark. Eating the odd bit of crap and chinese at the weekend. Would love to get down to 84/85kg mark. Sort of know myself what I have to do to get down to that weight, it's just the lack of motivation to cut out all the nice things and become hungry at certain times. I have France in July so I need to get my act together asap.

smacl

Jim Stynes wrote: »

I am hoovering around the 90-92kg mark. Eating the odd bit of crap and chinese at the weekend. Would love to get down to 84/85kg mark. Sort of know myself what I have to do to get down to that weight, it's just the lack of motivation to cut out all the nice things and become hungry at certain times. I have France in July so I need to get my act together asap.

Similar enough here. Currently at about 86kg and 185cm, used to compete at under 75kg when martial arts was my thing. Would love to drop back to about 80kg and know exactly what's required but struggle with motivation. Have entered the Orwell Randonee, as I know I'll have to shift some pounds for those hills.

padyjoe

Your case, Beastie, sounds like mine. I think I have to count my calories as well and try to not eat something sweet everyday. And do some more exercise. I see that drop can be achieved in few months, so there's a motivation! I really want to!

Jim! Get that bikini body ready for France, well worth it! ;-) That makes two of us, I'm not going to France, just get some motivaton and keep going!

Slydice

I started tracking my distance using my phone. I noticed it also told me about calories.

Found out calories are how body energy (fuel) is measured and that Maintenance calories for most adults is up around 2000. That can vary on the person though. Their are calculators online which can give you an estimate based on loads of factors.

Anyway, More than maintenance = stored in extra fat. Less = stored fat is removed and used for energy.

All foods have the calories number beside them (look for KCAL on the labels). Phone app gives you rough idea of how much calories used in exercise.

I am useless on the food end of things so I tried the exercise end of things. Noticable weight and fat loss happens when I hit above 1000 calories in exercise.

Thing about it is that less calorie burn is fine. It'll still work out for ya. Just make a plan you are comfortable with.

GalwayGrrrrrl

I use the My Fitness Pal calorie app for logging my food and exercise. You can adjust your daily calories to lose weight (or maintain/gain). It's a pain to weigh your food at first but after a few days it gets easier as your "common" foods are logged already. If you try it for even a few days it will give you an idea where you can easily cut back on calories (for me it's the 9pm munchies).

ford2600

OP what age are you and how long have you struggled with your weight?

Given you are struggling ergo your nutrition isn't ok and probably hasn't been for a long time.

At a guess you don't eat enough fibre from plants or enough protein; among other benefits adding more of both is best method of reducing your appetite.

I'll post a 3 min link at bottom which makes nutrition as simple as you can break it down.

Moving more will burn calories but it will also end up with your body calling for more food. Move less and your body will call for less. The system which controls for this is endlessly complicated; it works in lean people like me and is dysfunctional in people who are overweight/obese.

Eating more protein/plant fibre, hiit training, a mix of cardio/weight training may help in correcting dysfunction. In truth if you have struggled for years it will probably always be a struggle.

Endless aerobic training isn't necessarily a cure for being overweight; roll up to an audax event and you'll see as many overweight as lean people despite lads doing north of 15k km per year.

https://youtu.be/vCvOH7CS55M

siochain

Very difficult to out train a bad diet, tracking calories to a slight deficit over an extended period of time is the way to go. Adding in weight lifting will help you to preserve muscle and keep your metabolism fired up during a period of total calories below maintenance.

Other important factors that help me are sleep and keeping carbs less than 100g on non long spin days.

Hmmzis

Replace sweets and other sugary stuff at home and work with fruit. Fruit is nature's candy but the amount of sugars in them are quite small in comparison to any cookie or candy out there. Plus the fruit are also going to provide you with some fibre, minerals and vitamins. It's easy to overeat on gummy bears and ice cream not so easy on apples.
While not technically a fruit avocados are great for the late nigh cravings, tons of fibre and good plant fats in them.

Greek yoghurt with peanut butter for breakfast is one of my favourites for non-training/easy days. For training days porridge with honey and bananas are very hard to beat, gives you energy for ages and gives a nice satiated feeling.

+1 on Myfitnesspal, the barcode scanner is a very convenient feature and it integrates with Training Peaks as well.

padyjoe

Going to be 37 years of age this year. Been overweight since I was a kid. I managed to lose weight and get slimmer in the last 2-3 years. Given the current weather there's not much opportunity for going for a spin. Or do I overindulge after training? I get really hungry and I think I can eat more. Used to go swimming, don't do that anymore. I do turbo trainer, pool of sweat after 40 minutes and don't feel my legs wrecked. I guess have to eat less and exercise more or eat as much and train much more.

ford2600 wrote: »

OP what age are you and how long have you struggled with your weight?

outfox

No more biscuits and sweets and cake and crap around the house is a key measure. If there is crap in the house, you'll end up nibbling it, which just keeps the sugar up/down cycle alive. Only way to beat it is to go cold turkey, which is not possible when they're in a press near you.

Wesser

Weight loss is very much about diet and very little about excercise. It takes, depending on various factors, at least 20 mins of hard cycling to burn off the calories in s glass of milk for example. If you really want to loose weight you need to cut the junk food and alcohol completely, eat slow release carbs such as rice pasta in moderation, eat loads of fruit and veg, eat more protein ie fish lean meat, and look at what fats you add while cooking etc. lots of hidden sugar in loads of food as we all now know. And drink loads of water. If you do this you will drop weight rapidly.

12 sprocket

These posts should be moderated similar to posts on injuries being referred to doctors.

While some of the information here could be quite good for someone who wants to lose weight, the safest way is to work with a qualified Dietician.

This is particularly important for someone who wants to lose weight and perform at a high level in cycling.

There are so many crazy and dangerous ideas about diet out there that to vulnerable people advice from non qualified people can be dangerous and destructive.

RobFowl

I'm with 12sprocket on this one. Diet is vitally important for cycling and indeed and healthy life, needs proper guidance though and lots of dodgy advice out there...

tunney

Run.

Much better at calorie burn than cycling and more time efficient if the goal is weight loss.

nomdeboardie

tunney wrote: »

Run.

Much better at calorie burn than cycling and more time efficient if the goal is weight loss.

In before...

:eek: Bhasphemer! :eek:

Macy0161

Looking for advice to drop a bit of weight and referring to a dietician instead seems a bit extreme to me in the circumstances tbh. There's a whole nutrition and diet forum on boards (which is worth a look op), so it mustn't be boards policy anyway.

My personal experience is to work out your maintenance calories (sticky on nutrition and diet boards), work out your deficit (15%/ 500 calories), and then use myfitnesspal to track, and then honesty (including weighing portions, particularly carbs) when completing it. It won't give you rapid weight loss, but it will be sustainable.

I've gone from 19.5 stone down to my current 12.5 (which I'm happy at, and have moved to maintenance) over the last couple of years. Weight loss isn't complicated - calories out more than calories in. It's willpower that is the hard part. And it is mainly diet - the cliche is "you can't out train a bad diet", but exercise can speed it up/ give you a bit of wriggle room in my experience.

Macy0161

nomdeboardie wrote: »

In before...

:eek: Bhasphemer! :eek:

Compromise - mountain biking gives you a better a calorie burn for time than road cycling!

Taxuser1

There is a wide body of evidence to suggest that wheat in its current state is as addictive as any opiate and the consumption of same leads to an addiction to all products containing wheat. going cold turkey brings your blood sugar back to a normal state and you will be less inclined to indulge in the junk you refer to between meals. your cravings will diminish.

perhaps try to cut down on wheat based products, sauces, and anything where you see it added. which is everywhere.

Enduro

RobFowl wrote: »

I'm with 12sprocket on this one. Diet is vitally important for cycling and indeed and healthy life, needs proper guidance though and lots of dodgy advice out there...

Unfortunately the dodgy advice is just as likely to come from the qualified professionals as anywhere else.

smacl

tunney wrote: »

Run.

Much better at calorie burn than cycling and more time efficient if the goal is weight loss.

Depends on the amount of time available and fitness level. In the winter, if I've less than an hour, running is the way to go as I can be out the door very quickly. If I've a number of hours, cycling is better as that's longer than I can run for, whereas a five or six hour cycle even this time of year is very doable and burns a bunch of calories.

Macy0161

Just a couple of other things I would add - don't trust/ eat up to, the full calorie burn any fitness tracker/ app/ gps device you may have gives you. The apps can vary a fair bit, so which one is accurate? Comparing mapmywalk and strava on my normal lunch time 3k walk they'll show 100 calorie difference. Something with a HRM is more accurate, but obviously if you have tried to get your max accurate/ zones correct it will be better. I aimed for a 500 earned from exercise, so if my garmin was giving me a 1000 burn, I'd allow myself an extra 500 from food. Edit - I do or plan to break rule 42 - my lunch run session my Garmin (with HRM) is giving me 114 calorie less burn than strava, just as another example of this

I really wouldn't get too hung up on where the calories come from. Just make sure you're tracking. There may be evidence/ suggestions that some foods have different effects (like the wheat post), but my experience is that it's all about sticking to the deficit. Don't get swamped by stuff about wheats/ certain food types etc. There is evidence a calorie isn't a calorie based on source, but enough to impact if you're honestly recording? I have major doubts.

I'll repeat it's hard though - harder than I found giving up smoking to be honest. No one comes around the office pushing cigs on you, like they do cakes!

Vincenzo Nibbly

Weight loss is diet, diet, diet - and a bit of exercise. I was in a similar situation and found that it helped to get an understanding of:

• The appetite & satiety hormones - ghrelin & leptin
• The physiological and psychological effects of sugar - there are loads of videos online - Sugar: The Bitter Truth & The Secrets of Sugar are a good start.
• The LCHF thing can be controversial, as it goes against some pillars of the prevailing dietary advice. All I know is it works for me. Diet Doctor is a good place to start although I think they added a membership format recently. I'm not sure where that kicks in, but there is a good deal of info there for free.

Hope this helps and good luck.

tunney wrote: »

Run. Much better at calorie burn than cycling and more time efficient if the goal is weight loss.

Everyone in my circle of friends/family who has taken up running has gotten an injury of some sort. All the gentle ramping-up of mileage in the world doesn't seem to make a difference. I've had to see a physio one time in 5 years of cycling. Low/no impact seems to work better for people in need of losing weight.

ford2600

Vincenzo Nibbly wrote: »

Weight loss is diet, diet, diet - and a bit of exercise. I was in a similar situation and found that it helped to get an understanding of:

• The appetite & satiety hormones - ghrelin & leptin
• The physiological and psychological effects of sugar - there are loads of videos online - Sugar: The Bitter Truth & The Secrets of Sugar are a good start.
• The LCHF thing can be controversial, as it goes against some pillars of the prevailing dietary advice. All I know is it works for me. Diet Doctor is a good place to start although I think they added a membership format recently. I'm not sure where that kicks in, but there is a good deal of info there for free.

Hope this helps and good luck.



Everyone in my circle of friends/family who has taken up running has gotten an injury of some sort. All the gentle ramping-up of mileage in the world doesn't seem to make a difference. I've had to see a physio one time in 5 years of cycling. Low/no impact seems to work better for people in need of losing weight.

If health is your primary goal with regard to how you exercise, you could do worse than listen to video in this post. (his qualifications are here for all the lads worried on getting dodgy advice http://sigmanutrition.com/episode87/)

Much as I love to ride a bike, trumpetting it as the only thing we need(I'm not aiming that at you Vincenzo Nibbly just a general comment) to be healthy/fit isn't not a very efficent use of time.

Aerobic fitness is just a small element of fitness

EDIT: Meant to paste this in!
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=98110683&postcount=8

PaulieC

padyjoe wrote: »

I'm used to be a heavy lad. Bit lighter now but still on the heavy side in relation to cycling. Floating around 100-103 kgs for a 187 cm height. My diet normal, as all of us, me loves the old junk, in moderation though. Despite the weight, in 1.5 years, I got to the stage where I can throw in 60-100k spins without any problems. Last year I did the Tour de KK which 164k, I was wrecked after it, nothing major. I want to drop my weight to 90 kgs to see major improvements. My daily intake is normal, I'm not piling on the pounds. I wonder what I'm doing wrong having stuck at 102 kgs? Have to get more training like weights, swimming? I'd like to see myself going faster and climbing better.

What do you consider a normal intake ? Are you completely honest with yourself in terms of what you are eating ? I think most of us would say that we eat normally, but I also think that 90% of us are either lying to ourselves or not completely aware of our intake. I have a weakness for biscuits myself. One time I added up all the biscuits I ate in a week and it was an eye opener for sure.

As has been said a few times on the thread, losing weight is more about diet than exercise, so it's best to start there.

Peterx

padyjoe wrote: »

.... Given the current weather there's not much opportunity for going for a spin. .....

Hundreds of people are cycling to work every single day over this winter.
Ice/snow/influenza are the only reasons to not cycle.
Normal Irish weather conditions such as wind or rain are both manageable.

A small shift in perception can massively increase the potential opportunities for exercise.
The current weather is fine for cycling (and perfect for running)

An investment in good mudguards, excellent gloves, good clothes and an excellent weatherproof jacket helps increase the range of weather conditions you can safely cycle in.

Best of luck with the weight loss and it does sound as if a few small changes in your diet will make the difference.
It is extremely difficult to do enough exercise to keep up with unmanaged calorie intake.

edit : https://www.nratraffic.ie/weather/ this webpage gives you the current road temperatures at various places around Ireland. My rule of thumb is I don't go for a spin if it's less than 2 degrees. (sometimes broken if the forecast is for more heat - http://www.yr.no/place/Ireland/Leinster/Kilkenny/ )

tunney

Taxuser1 wrote: »

There is a wide body of evidence to suggest that wheat in its current state is as addictive as any opiate and the consumption of same leads to an addiction to all products containing wheat. going cold turkey brings your blood sugar back to a normal state and you will be less inclined to indulge in the junk you refer to between meals. your cravings will diminish.

perhaps try to cut down on wheat based products, sauces, and anything where you see it added. which is everywhere.

Any credible evidence?

Tenzor07

tunney wrote: »

Run.Much better at calorie burn than cycling and more time efficient if the goal is weight loss.

tunney

Vincenzo Nibbly wrote: »

Everyone in my circle of friends/family who has taken up running has gotten an injury of some sort. All the gentle ramping-up of mileage in the world doesn't seem to make a difference. I've had to see a physio one time in 5 years of cycling. Low/no impact seems to work better for people in need of losing weight.

Mah disagree. I've gotten about as many cycling related injuries as running.

Jim Stynes

tunney wrote: »

Mah disagree. I've gotten about as many cycling related injuries as running.

Cycling is much more dangerous but I would say there are more running related injuries. I am just going by my own experiences and my friends experiences.

Tigerandahalf

I would also recommend running. It is the easiest and cheapest exercise you can do. However try to avoid footpaths. They are a big cause of injuries. Tarred surfaces are more forgiving.

If I am going running at 6pm I wont eat for 2 hrs before it if possible. If I run for an hr and then shower I have gone about 3.5 hrs without eating.
If I was going cycling I could eat 10 mins before I leave.

Try to make a rule of not eating after 9pm. If you get peckish eat some fruit.
Also cut down on your portions at meal times.

A couple of small changes can make a big difference. Don't be going for quick drastic weight loss. Consistency and doing it gradually will bring long term benefits.

Best of luck with it. Even the thinnest of people will have fluctuations in weight.

Overall I find running great as even if I am on holidays and eating and drinking like a king I can throw on my runners at any time and get a jog in. That way you can enjoy the bit of excess.

Macy0161

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

However try to avoid footpaths. They are a big cause of injuries. Tarred surfaces are more forgiving.

Exactly - isn't this what cycle lanes are for!

RobFowl

Macy0161 wrote: »

Exactly - isn't this what cycle lanes are for!

tupac_healy

I'm no expert on the subject, so I can only comment on what has worked for me...

At the start kg last summer I was 79kg and by the end of it I was down to 73kg. The goal is to keep in the best shape as possible as getting married in June.....

There is no big secret, it's been said over and over again, diet and exercise. More than just eating the right foods, you need to plan out when to eat, that's just as important, it's the 'picking' inbetween meals that is the killer. Find ways to cut these out and that's 90% of the battle....


As for exercise, whilst cycling or running are good for cardio (honestly I can't take to cycling at all, I much prefer to run) and will have some impact on weight loss it's a high intensity weight based program your after if weight loss is your main goal. Get yourself a proper workout program with an instructor 2-3 times per week (I do a little bit at home as well when I can) combine that with your diet changes and you will see gains within 2-3 months, significant gains..


Best of luck with it though! Put in the work and you'll reach your goal dude

Hmmzis

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I would also recommend running. It is the easiest and cheapest exercise you can do. However try to avoid footpaths. They are a big cause of injuries. Tarred surfaces are more forgiving.

[citation needed]

Wishbone Ash

padyjoe wrote: »

....I got to the stage where I can throw in 60-100k spins without any problems. Last year I did the Tour de KK which 164k, I was wrecked after it...

Did you do the 160k at a pace above your normal rate? It's possible that you were wrecked due to a higher than normal pace and not necessarily due to your weight.

I can do a 300k without much difficulty at my normal pace but if I did a 100k at an average of say 29/30km/h, I'd be on the sofa for the rest of the day.

Doc07

After your spin, drink a litre of fizzy water and some Valium. Hopefully you will wake up after dinner time or better again the next morning! Joking of course.

I went from 92kg to 79kg in about 18months and the main reason was eating less. I know it's not as simple as calories in v out etc and not getting into carbs v fat v ketone bodies but I would confidently argue with anyone that eating less is the most effective way of losing weight. In terms of pure weight loss(ignoring the performance and cardiovascular benefit) exercise is not that efficient for weight loss.

So I would suggest cutting back on grub. Having said that I would not recommend training for long periods without food (unless you are used to this) and you should eat protein and carbs soon after exercise.

I still crack every now and again and have chips or pizza but I don't eat much bread or crisps anymore. I'm aiming to be down to 75kg at 5'11 in time for WW200

padyjoe

12 sprocket wrote: »

These posts should be moderated similar to posts on injuries being referred to doctors.

I wouldn't mind of getting some advice, not jumping into anything without thinking.

PaulieC wrote: »

What do you consider a normal intake ? Are you completely honest with yourself in terms of what you are eating ?

I eat less compared to my old self. It's hard to say what's normal, I don't weigh my meals, normal enough for a 102 kg lad. I maybe not honest, could be too much nibbling between meals, I have to cut that out. I like eating, sometimes there's an urge, I feel hungry, not for binge rather the meal was to small I ate.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Did you do the 160k at a pace above your normal rate? It's possible that you were wrecked due to a higher than normal pace and not necessarily due to your weight. I can do a 300k without much difficulty at my normal pace but if I did a 100k at an average of say 29/30km/h, I'd be on the sofa for the rest of the day.

It was a normal pace, wasn't really much a wreckage, just feeling exhausted after 6.5 hours exercise, I was ok and on top of that did a spin, not as long though the day after.

De Bhál

Use the myfitnesspal app. It's a calorie counter and it hooks up with strava. It opened my eyes up to the world of calorie amounts in foods. Very hard to stick to the recommended calories intake seven days a week but give it a go and you will see results within a few weeks if you're honest with it.

Macy0161

Doc07 wrote: »

I know it's not as simple as calories in v out etc and not getting into carbs v fat v ketone bodies but I would confidently argue with anyone that eating less is the most effective way of losing weight.

It really is as simple as that for the vast majority of people based on the evidence i've heard and read. Purely in terms of losing weight, not necessarily general health.

The key mistakes I see (and have done myself in the past) is not honestly/ accurately record what you are eating. People blame the bread or whatever, and cut it out totally, but is the extra slice or two they were using to mop up the gravy they didn't bother recording that was actually the issue (in that it was reducing their deficit). I was that soldier, and tried a lot of faddy diets before I just went with honest calories in v calories out.

C3PO

Macy0161 wrote: »

It really is as simple as that for the vast majority of people based on the evidence i've heard and read. Purely in terms of losing weight, not necessarily general health.

The key mistakes I see (and have done myself in the past) is not honestly/ accurately record what you are eating. People blame the bread or whatever, and cut it out totally, but is the extra slice or two they were using to mop up the gravy they didn't bother recording that was actually the issue (in that it was reducing their deficit). I was that soldier, and tried a lot of faddy diets before I just went with honest calories in v calories out.

There is increasing evidence that the "a calorie is a calorie" mantra is just not true. I've been doing a lot of reading about this over the last year or so and would recommend "Fat Chance by Robert Lustig" or "The Obesity Epidemic by Zoe Harcombe". It seems that our bodies will process calories in different ways depending on their source and the bottom line is that sugar is the main cause of most of our weight issues.
I personally have had excellent results from increasing my fat intake and lowering my sugar intake without worrying about counting calories etc. I feel great and don't have the constant hunger that I would have had when trying to lose weight using the more traditional diets. I would really suggest having a look at "High Fat/Low Carb" regimes and see how it works for you.

smacl

Jim Stynes wrote: »

Cycling is much more dangerous but I would say there are more running related injuries. I am just going by my own experiences and my friends experiences.

I don't think either is particularly dangerous unless you're taking unnecessary risks or over training. I find getting a bit older (50 this weekend ) listening to your body and allowing a bit more recovery time make huge sense. For running, I use trail runners on soft ground which soaks up a large amount of impact. In terms of recovery, I alternate between running, cycling, hill walking and kettle bells so that I'm doing different exercises on different days while still exercising 6 or 7 days per week. Personally, I find having alternatives great, so that you've got exercises to suit conditions and mood.

Macy0161

C3PO wrote: »

There is increasing evidence that the "a calorie is a calorie" mantra is just not true. I've been doing a lot of reading about this over the last year or so and would recommend "Fat Chance by Robert Lustig" or "The Obesity Epidemic by Zoe Harcombe". It seems that our bodies will process calories in different ways depending on their source and the bottom line is that sugar is the main cause of most of our weight issues.
I personally have had excellent results from increasing my fat intake and lowering my sugar intake without worrying about counting calories etc. I feel great and don't have the constant hunger that I would have had when trying to lose weight using the more traditional diets. I would really suggest having a look at "High Fat/Low Carb" regimes and see how it works for you.

I have read up on it, and while I do get that a calorie isn't calorie, I do think in the context of an overall deficit of 15% or 500 calories, it really is about accurate recording.

The main evidence I have read that low carb/ high fat v high carb/ low fat is whether people stick with it, rather than one being being better than the other (low carb/ high fat appears to be more sustainable). However, I just went with calories and maintaining my protein intake (based on my final goal).

I'm not trying to lose weight at the moment, so I just concentrate on my protein, and I feel the rest looks after itself tbh.

ford2600

C3PO wrote: »

There is increasing evidence that the "a calorie is a calorie" mantra is just not true. I've been doing a lot of reading about this over the last year or so and would recommend "Fat Chance by Robert Lustig" or "The Obesity Epidemic by Zoe Harcombe". It seems that our bodies will process calories in different ways depending on their source and the bottom line is that sugar is the main cause of most of our weight issues.
I personally have had excellent results from increasing my fat intake and lowering my sugar intake without worrying about counting calories etc. I feel great and don't have the constant hunger that I would have had when trying to lose weight using the more traditional diets. I would really suggest having a look at "High Fat/Low Carb" regimes and see how it works for you.

Are you the man I bought a mtb bike off a few years back?

Didn't think you had weight to lose if so.

Yourself and Macy0161 probably have more in common than you might think.
It seems both of ye had a good think about things before starting and looks like you built a diet on what your body needed rather than just cutting foods out.

On hflc when you cut the bread/pasta/rice etc from plate you have to replace it with something (it was probably to large a portion previously anyway); if that something is a larger good quality protein source and loads of veg then your are going to benefit; whether it's the absence of pasta etc or the increased fibre (along with mirconutrients and a much happier gut microbiota) and protein in an experiment with N=1 you can't ever be sure.

When you increase protein like than it's hard not to increase fat also, if tasty they tend to go together. If you had been particularly low fat increasing fat will help with
*absorbtion of fat soluble vitamins
* testosterone production
* cell repair

which would partially explain feeling better.

If your starting point is adequate protein and loads of veg; so say 30% protein and lots of veg as long as fat and carbs are good sources(the fibre hasn't be stripped away and bleached baked and god knows what else) it's really hard to argue which diet macro composition is better than the other.

In the long term you best get your body working with you, will power alone does not stand a chance against leptin, the hypothalmus, ghrelin thyroid etc, especially when you've cut fat and and your body thinks it's famine time.
Junk food(usually a mix of fat/sugar minus protein/fibre) is going to look really appealling. That desire to hunt out calorie dense food and for them to light up rewarding signalling in brain was probably a necessary part of evolution but makes losing weight, in the long term in a toxic food environment really really hard. That's before you add in stress, poor sleep etc etc.
We like to think our rational brain knows best, it truth our ancient animal brain runs the show when it comes to behaviour

OleRodrigo

I won't eat my dinner until it's validated by peer-reviewed research, published in Nature.

Beasty

OleRodrigo wrote: »

I won't eat my dinner until it's validated by peer-reviewed research, published in Nature.

Post the menu here - we'll review it for you .....

mathie

Be very wary of LCHF diets.
Look at the science and studies

Commenting on how to reverse diabetes (essentially the opposite of a LCHF diet) ...

The studies also show that by adopting a low-fat vegetarian diet—free of all animal products and added vegetable oils—individuals can lower their cholesterol, reduce their blood pressure, and lose weight. Best of all, the diet doesn’t demand one count calories, cut portion sizes, or give up all carbohydrates. On the contrary, you can eat as much as you want.

http://www.pcrm.org/media/experts/neal-barnard-diabetes-book

Read up on the China Study and the links between diet an weight and diseases (specifically cancer)

http://www.aicr.org/about/advocacy/the-china-study.html

Dr. T. Colin Campbell’s The China Study is based on his interpretation of research he conducted in the 1970s in China. The Forks Over Knives filmmakers rely heavily on Dr. Campbell’s research and singles out animal products as the real culprits in cancer and other chronic disease. Forks Over Knives points to compelling case studies of people improving their health by turning away from the traditional meat-center, high-sugar American diet and adopting a healthier, lower-calorie vegan diet. Their claim is that animal foods play a major role in causing chronic diseases.

This kind of radical diet change, done carefully and well, will certainly improve overall health. Keep in mind that these diet changes not only eliminated meat and dairy but also eliminated fast food, highly processed foods and sugar-laden drinks. In many cases these changes led to a healthier weight. And a healthy weight = lower cancer risk.

Enduro

The China study has been thorughly debunked at this stage (Have a google for "China Study debunked", or similar).

tommy_tucker

loosing weight with Calories in V Carlories out is true, all weight loss works on that principle, science dictates on that front (unless you have some magical powers to change the laws of thermodynamics)

mathie

Enduro wrote: »

The China study has been thorughly debunked at this stage (Have a google for "China Study debunked", or similar).

My quote wasn't about the China Studys legitimacy. It was about what the American Institute for Cancer Research said about eliminating fast food, highly processed foods and sugar-laden drinks.