Advice on this Diet and exercise change... advice on

positivenote

Hi,
I'm looking to increase my health overall and increase my strength. I am currently 185lbs 5.9ft and have a rotund belly (42y/old).
This is what I have now undertaken since the middle of Jan and I'm wondering if I keep it up will I see much of a change by the summer...
breakfast used to be weetabix and coffee(no sugar, drop of low fat milk) but is now a nutribullet shake:
Three handfuls of kale
Banana
2 heaped tea spoons of 100% chunky ranitidine butter
Teaspoon chia seeds
Teaspoon honey
25ml almond milk

Lunch: mixed leaf salad with quiche (small serving) or egg and ham, alternatively I'll have soup

Dinner: traditional meat and two veg, or a pasta based dish, or a stir fry with noodles

I have given up drinking apart from a bottle of red over Friday-Sunday, usually with dinner. Chocolate crisps etc have never really appealed to me to be honest.

Exercise wise, I have gone from playing five aside once a week to adding cardio and weights 2-3 times. This consists of 3k jog/run and the following weights:
Legs (hamstrings/flutes) 65 kg
Chest 40 kg
Shoulders 25 (struggle to get through reps)
Arms 40kg

12 reps / 10 reps / 8 reps / 6 reps

As I say I've been at this for around a month and I'll keep it going for a few more months but I'd love some advice on anything I may tweak to get better results. What am I doing right / wrong etc...
thanks

Wexfordthemonk

positivenote wrote: »

Hi,
I'm looking to increase my health overall and increase my strength. I am currently 185lbs 5.9ft and have a rotund belly (42y/old).
This is what I have now undertaken since the middle of Jan and I'm wondering if I keep it up will I see much of a change by the summer...
breakfast used to be weetabix and coffee(no sugar, drop of low fat milk) but is now a nutribullet shake:
Three handfuls of kale
Banana
2 heaped tea spoons of 100% chunky ranitidine butter
Teaspoon chia seeds
Teaspoon honey
25ml almond milk

Lunch: mixed leaf salad with quiche (small serving) or egg and ham, alternatively I'll have soup

Dinner: traditional meat and two veg, or a pasta based dish, or a stir fry with noodles

I have given up drinking apart from a bottle of red over Friday-Sunday, usually with dinner. Chocolate crisps etc have never really appealed to me to be honest.

Exercise wise, I have gone from playing five aside once a week to adding cardio and weights 2-3 times. This consists of 3k jog/run and the following weights:
Legs (hamstrings/flutes) 65 kg
Chest 40 kg
Shoulders 25 (struggle to get through reps)
Arms 40kg

12 reps / 10 reps / 8 reps / 6 reps

As I say I've been at this for around a month and I'll keep it going for a few more months but I'd love some advice on anything I may tweak to get better results. What am I doing right / wrong etc...
thanks

Hey have you ever taught about doin the keto diet? Low carbs high fat its brill way to lose weight and its healthy

Alf Veedersane

Wexfordthemonk wrote: »

Hey have you ever taught about doin the keto diet? Low carbs high fat its brill way to lose weight and its healthy

Its just another way to reduce calorie intake. Nothing special about it.

Wexfordthemonk

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Its just another way to reduce calorie intake. Nothing special about it.

I eat healthy and train 5 days a week iv lost a stone in 30 days and have loads less bloating and things.

Alf Veedersane

Wexfordthemonk wrote: »

I eat healthy and train 5 days a week iv lost a stone in 30 days and have loads less bloating and things.

I'm not saying it's wrong or there's anything wrong with it. But it's about eating fewer calories and the satiety from high fats and moderate carbs helps.

positivenote

any other feedback on what im doing without changing to a different diet? Is it a waste of time or will it be of noticeable benefit

Alf Veedersane

positivenote wrote: »

any other feedback on what im doing without changing to a different diet? Is it a waste of time or will it be of noticeable benefit

You're a month in...are you seeing results?

FizzleSticks

This post has been deleted.

johnnyskeleton

Wexfordthemonk wrote: »

I eat healthy and train 5 days a week iv lost a stone in 30 days and have loads less bloating and things.

Thats not a stone of fat though, unless youve been running a calorie deficit of 1600 per day. That sort of extreme diet is probably not suitable to the OP who isnt massively overweight.

But yeah more exercise eating better will make most people lose weight, gimmick diet or not.

OP how big are your dinners? Im the same in that i can eat healthily during the day but then kinda spoil it with a whopper portion at dinnertime. Maybe measure the amount of pasta/rice/potatos in your serving. Its hassle at the start but once you get used to it you will be able to judge the right serving size by sight or more less.

positivenote

Hi all, thanks for the responses so far. If there is any more feedback on the morning nutribullet recipe im having it would be appreciated.
Just to update my excerise plan I am currently doing this routine 2-3 times a week and would really like some advice on building up muscle:
Seated Leg Press: 70kg
Chest Press: 40kg
Shoulder Press: 25kg
Rear Deltoid: 40kg

12reps/10reps/8reps/last rep as much as I can manage, which is always a struggle...

Not noticing much change if the truth be told but im sure there will be improvement with persistence.
Thanks

TheLass

I teach weight loss classes.
Your lunch and Dinner are perfect (Is there pastry on the Quiche? - search for crustless Quiche recipe for a healthier version).
The shake in my experience is not always a good option as it does not fill you up.
The 2 weetabix were fine (or 40g of porridge) just add some whole fruit to your breakfast (The seeds etc can be high in oil and once you blend the fruit you remove it's fibre and fillingness)

I hope this helps - pasta, rice are also good fillers but get your vegetables with them and lean meat to keep you full and your metabolism working well.

Good Luck with the plan.

SarahMollie

Hi OP,

I think you'd be much better off following a proper diet plan or getting a trainer to work out a meal plan for you. My worry from your diet as outlined is that it seems a bit incomplete - like possibly you're not eating enough.

I started Slimming World 5 weeks ago and have lost 12.5lbs. I've also been working our with small group sessions with a PT, 3x per week. I know I'm getting stronger and I can feel myself developing muscles that I've never had before. In reality my body has probably changed more than my weighloss would even indicate.

There are lots of men of all ages at my SW group, and so many people believe in the plan. Theres nothing faddy about it, its really all about cooking from scratch, minimizing use of oils etc and making sure you balance your carbs with other fruit and veg. You get a small discretionary allowance of Syns per day to use on treatsI'd say I'm eating a fair bit more than what you've outlined and I'm losing weight!

fussyonion

The only thing about diets like SW is that you are still following a plan. Why not learn how to eat healthily and do that for life, where nothing is banned or "synned".

I've seen girls on Instagram measuring stupid things like milk and eating chemical-laden low fat yogurts, shunning good fats like avocadoes because they're not "speed" yet sitting down to a plate of HiFi bars, jellies, chocolate mousses and other crap and thinking that much sugar in one go is healthy because it's within their "syns".

Learn how to eat well, OP, have what you fancy in moderation and move more.
I've done it and lost almost 7 stone in 21 months.

Alf Veedersane

Nothing wrong with following a plan once you're using it as a transition. Better to be guided by some decent principles rather than walking around in the dark.

But there's no doubt that trying to understand the principles of nutrition so you can think critically about these things is where you want to be.

fussyonion

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Nothing wrong with following a plan once you're using it as a transition. Better to be guided by some decent principles rather than walking around in the dark.

But there's no doubt that trying to understand the principles of nutrition so you can think critically about these things is where you want to be.

I agree actually. I do think SW and other plans have their place but sometimes people following them are misguided.
I think if you can incorporate the healthy advice into your everyday life and make better choices, BUT know that nothing is really off limits, then half the battle is won.

Alf Veedersane

positivenote wrote: »

Hi all, thanks for the responses so far. If there is any more feedback on the morning nutribullet recipe im having it would be appreciated.
Just to update my excerise plan I am currently doing this routine 2-3 times a week and would really like some advice on building up muscle:
Seated Leg Press: 70kg
Chest Press: 40kg
Shoulder Press: 25kg
Rear Deltoid: 40kg

12reps/10reps/8reps/last rep as much as I can manage, which is always a struggle...

Not noticing much change if the truth be told but im sure there will be improvement with persistence.
Thanks

Have you tried entering it in MyFitnessPal?

Your diet probably needs tweaking if you're seeing no results. You won't be burning that much with that workout if you're giving yourself too much credit for that

positivenote

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

You won't be burning that much with that workout if you're giving yourself too much credit for that

in addition to the resistance work I do a 3k jog/run on the tread mill and I play 5 a-side football for an hour every week. Ideally i need to loose the belly fat and build up some muscle on my body which has never been in anyway toned.
Im open to advice, thanks

Alf Veedersane

You need to start recording what you eat on MyFitnessPal amd seeing what you can tweak because if you want to lose weight, you need to eat fewer calories than you are.

Todd Gack

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

You need to start recording what you eat on MyFitnessPal amd seeing what you can tweak because if you want to lose weight, you need to eat fewer calories than you are.

And in addition to this I'd recommend a digital scales if you don't have one, they're pretty cheap

Pinch Flat

I got on the scales on 1st January and weighed 108kg / 17 stone. Now 97kg / 15 stone 5 lbs. trying to get another 5 - 7 kg off if I can, but it'll be a lot slower from here on. I'm s Male 45, 6' 2".

I cycle daily to and from work, so getting plenty of cardio. I just follow one of the operation transformations from last year - Gerald Keanes on (:pac:) on YouTube. I used 2kg milk plastic bottles filled with water as my weights. I'm impressed with the results - belly just about gone, more energy and clothes a lot looser. I've enjoyed doing the exercises and I'll probably cherry pick a few I can make into a regular routine.

Nutrition wise, I had a pretty good diet - porridge for breakfast, usually a sandwich for lunch and a meat and two veg type dinner, or maybe some pasta. Plenty of fruit as snacks during the day.

I've just cut down my portions hugely - stopped eating biscuits, sweetened yoghurts, and toast at night. Other than that no major changes. Plenty of water as well during the day.

Macy0161

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Have you tried entering it in MyFitnessPal?

Your diet probably needs tweaking if you're seeing no results. You won't be burning that much with that workout if you're giving yourself too much credit for that

3km run probably isn't burning loads, and when I've used a Garmin with hrm, it really depends on how much effort I put in for 5 a side. Just playing rather than consciously trying to emulate full keano box to box wasn't as much as I'd have thought.

I'd try myfitnesspal too, and accurately tot up the calories. That means measuring and maybe honesty (was an issue for me as a former grazer).

Shake in the morning seems light on protein to me. Yogurt and/ or a scoop of whey? Could well be more calories than a couple of wheetabix with milk - not necessarily a problem, just that you can blitz up a significant number of calories without thinking too much about it.

SarahMollie

fussyonion wrote: »

The only thing about diets like SW is that you are still following a plan. Why not learn how to eat healthily and do that for life, where nothing is banned or "synned".

I've seen girls on Instagram measuring stupid things like milk and eating chemical-laden low fat yogurts, shunning good fats like avocadoes because they're not "speed" yet sitting down to a plate of HiFi bars, jellies, chocolate mousses and other crap and thinking that much sugar in one go is healthy because it's within their "syns".

Learn how to eat well, OP, have what you fancy in moderation and move more.
I've done it and lost almost 7 stone in 21 months.

Obviously this would be ideal but if it were that easy, everyone would be slim. Theres a lot of conflicting advice out there these days and often I find people get overwhelmed or mix and match advice and then don't get results.

This is exactly what I'm taking from the OP's diet plan as outlined. I'm generally not in favour of smoothies for weightloss and the lunch actually looks really light, not to mention theres very little variation mentioned. If he's eating basically the same thing day in day out, he'll get bored and it won't stick.

It doesnt have to be SW, but there is merrit in the idea of following a plan devised by a professional, until the OP learns more about diet and nutrition. If you hurt yourself you'd go to a doctor, if you needed legal advice you'd see a solicitor, and I think weightloss is the same. Yes you can muddle through, but your chances of success are increased if you seek out professional help.

SW is affordable for most people and very accessible nationwide. For what its worth, my experience with it so far has had zero to do with Muller Lights/other low fat sweetened yogurts (that was exactly my experience on WW however, probably why I couldnt stick it). I'm cooking from scratch, spending time doing meal prep and using my syns on things like a bit of olive oil, Parmesan cheese and a bit of red wine/gin and tonic at the weekend. And I had some avocado yesterday - you still have to live!

bladespin

SarahMollie wrote:

Obviously this would be ideal but if it were that easy, everyone would be slim. Theres a lot of conflicting advice out there these days and often I find people get overwhelmed or mix and match advice and then don't get results.

Eat less and do more, eat good food as part of a balanced diet, advice that's as old as the hills but some just won't believe it and prefer a 'magic' bullet, call it whatever you like.

SarahMollie

bladespin wrote: »

Eat less and do more, eat good food as part of a balanced diet, advice that's as old as the hills but some just won't believe it and prefer a 'magic' bullet, call it whatever you like.

Again, if it were that easy no one would be overweight.

If following whatever plan works for a person, I don't see the need to be dismissive.

You say "eat good food" but there is plenty of evidence out there that people are now hearing so much contradictory messages about diet that even when they thing they're making the right choices, they're often not.

Smoothies/juicing were a real trend a few years back, lots of people thinking they were doing great, eating healthy food but then couldn't understand why they were gaining weight. Granola is another prime example of something thats frequently marketed as healthy, but is often just as calorie dense as junk food.

Also, some people take your advice to the extreme and cut back on food too much and inadvertently put their body into starvation mode and end up fighting their own metabolism and again ending up disappointed.

Again on exercise, people can over do it if they don't know what they're doing. They can also end up doing endless cardio when maybe something like HIIT training might get them better results, and again end up discouraged.

My point is the OP seems to have made up a plan of the top of his head. Surely following a plan thats been constructed by professionals to balance diet/exercise (regardless of what that plan is) is going to be more efficient in getting results.

bladespin

SarahMollie wrote: »

Again, if it were that easy no one would be overweight.

If following whatever plan works for a person, I don't see the need to be dismissive.

You say "eat good food" but there is plenty of evidence out there that people are now hearing so much contradictory messages about diet that even when they thing they're making the right choices, they're often not.

Smoothies/juicing were a real trend a few years back, lots of people thinking they were doing great, eating healthy food but then couldn't understand why they were gaining weight. Granola is another prime example of something thats frequently marketed as healthy, but is often just as calorie dense as junk food.

Also, some people take your advice to the extreme and cut back on food too much and inadvertently put their body into starvation mode and end up fighting their own metabolism and again ending up disappointed.

Again on exercise, people can over do it if they don't know what they're doing. They can also end up doing endless cardio when maybe something like HIIT training might get them better results, and again end up discouraged.

My point is the OP seems to have made up a plan of the top of his head. Surely following a plan thats been constructed by professionals to balance diet/exercise (regardless of what that plan is) is going to be more efficient in getting results.

I'm not dismissing anyone, believe me, I had struggled with weight control for years until I actually researched and figured it out, TDEE - 20 - 25%
Follow a decent marco breakdown and get some exercise.

The SW plan can work for some but I see no reason to pay for common sense that's freely available, it's simple enough to find and if you follow the rule -if it sounds too good then it is you won't go far wrong.

My point about the 'magic bullet' is that so many want to dismiss the above as they aren't willing to put the effort in and want a quick fix.

Mellor

TheLass wrote: »

I teach weight loss classes.
Your lunch and Dinner are perfect (Is there pastry on the Quiche? - search for crustless Quiche recipe for a healthier version).
The shake in my experience is not always a good option as it does not fill you up.
The 2 weetabix were fine (or 40g of porridge) just add some whole fruit to your breakfast (The seeds etc can be high in oil and once you blend the fruit you remove it's fibre and fillingness)

Hi TheLass, Can I ask what qualifications do you have that you teach "weight loss classes"?

Reason I'm asking is that I find it very strange that you think a traditional (meat and veg, pasta, stir fry noodle) type dinner is perfect.
These are typical dinners that people are eating that leads them to weight gain in the first place.

I'm also not sure why you think blending fruit removes the fibre. It doesn't, you are mixing up juicing and blending.

Macy0161 wrote: »

3km run probably isn't burning loads...

Shake in the morning seems light on protein to me. Yogurt and/ or a scoop of whey? Could well be more calories than a couple of wheetabix with milk - not necessarily a problem, just that you can blitz up a significant number of calories without thinking too much about it.

The 3lm run is about 250 cals FWIW.

I agree regarding the shake. I'm assuming that "100% chunky ranitidine butter" was supposed to say peanut butter. 2 heaped spoonful, plus honey, plus seeds and banana could easily be 500 cals. It's not a bad high energy shake actually, which is not what the OP is probably after.

Mellor

SarahMollie wrote: »

There are lots of men of all ages at my SW group, and so many people believe in the plan. Theres nothing faddy about it, its really all about cooking from scratch, minimizing use of oils etc and making sure you balance your carbs with other fruit and veg. You get a small discretionary allowance of Syns per day to use on treats!

The bolded part about oils/fats is what makes SW faddy imo. This idea that fat is bad is wrong. SW is basically a typical low fat diet plan from the 80s.

Making fat out to be the villain is exactly why people struggle to adjust when they reach a goal weight. They eat "normally", put back on the weight, and go back on the SW plan.
Learning about actual nutrition, instead of a gimmicked plan would prevent this.

I agree there's loads of conflicting advice.
But most of the confusing is stuff coming from all the different gimmicks. Like fat free, lemon detox, blood type, carrot and tomato diet etc.

I'm cooking from scratch, spending time doing meal prep and using my syns on things like a bit of olive oil, Parmesan cheese and a bit of red wine/gin and tonic at the weekend. And I had some avocado yesterday - you still have to live!

That's all very healthy sounding, but you are still making fat out to be the villain.

A typical example of the issue with SW is the SW guilt free wedges - "you can eat as much as you want" because they are guilt free no syn. A ridiculous idea to push. A normal portion is fine obviously. But an "eat as much as you want portion" for somebody who generally overeats is a ridiculous.

Don't get me wrong, SW isn't bad. I know people that it worked for. It's certainly better than most of the alternatives. But I still think it feeds into a lot of the misconceptions that cause issues and confusion for dieters.

SarahMollie wrote: »

Granola is another prime example of something thats frequently marketed as healthy, but is often just as calorie dense as junk food.

Generally basing your health choices on marketing is a bad idea. Again that goes back to education being far better than fads and plans.
Nobody with even a basic understanding of calories/macros thought granola was healthy.

Also, some people take your advice to the extreme and cut back on food too much and inadvertently put their body into starvation mode and end up fighting their own metabolism and again ending up disappointed.

That doesn't doesn't happen. Starvation mode is a myth perpetuated by fas diets.
You won't ever eat too little and not lose weight. Can't happen.

Again on exercise, people can over do it if they don't know what they're doing. They can also end up doing endless cardio when maybe something like HIIT training might get them better results, and again end up discouraged.

The difference between the two is minimal. Nobody has ever failed to get results because they did steady cardio instead of HIIT. If they didn't get results, there was a reason.


I'm not trying to pick on your post, so sorry if it comes across like that. You an educated dieter so I'm sure you are doing fine on SW. I'm just trying to highlight that despite that you are still failing for a lot of the gimmicks/myths that these diets push. In the end, its not an issue for you are you are sensible about it. But lots of people aren't sensible at all when it comes to food, they won't see results and instead of learning from it, that find something to blame and continue what they are doing.

SarahMollie

Mellor wrote: »

The bolded part about oils/fats is what makes SW faddy imo. This idea that fat is bad is wrong. SW is basically a typical low fat diet plan from the 80s.

It isnt actually, the plan is updated constantly based on latest dietary guidelines. Its not a static thing and if the advice changes, so does the plan. Also, I (personally) am not a moron, so I pick and choose certain elements (like allowing myself the odd bit of avocado) without losing and sleep over it and am still losing weight. I don't drink soft drinks so I don't then touch any of the diet versions. I don't really eat anything thats a designated low fat food other than 0% greek style high protein yoghurt and 2% milk which I happen to prefer. Everything else is really just cooked from scratch and therefore its fine on the plan.

That's all very healthy sounding, but you are still making fat out to be the villain.

I'm not at all - all I've said is that it needs to be controlled if you're trying to lose weight. Go around free pouring olive oil ala Jamie Oliver and you won't shift the weight. Its still very much part of my diet, but I'm just more conscious of how much I use.

A typical example of the issue with SW is the SW guilt free wedges - "you can eat as much as you want" because they are guilt free no syn. A ridiculous idea to push. A normal portion is fine obviously. But an "eat as much as you want portion" for somebody who generally overeats is a ridiculous.

Now - this is actually showing me that you don't know the SW Plan. Yes, there is no requirement to measure things like potatoes, but the can't account for more than 1/3 of your plate. So any amount of potatoes you eat must be balanced by other vegtables/salad and ideally a lean protien source. So your portion of chips is actually curtailed by how much of the other stuff you can eat. Nowhere does it advocate sitting down to an unlimited portion of chips.

Generally basing your health choices on marketing is a bad idea. Again that goes back to education being far better than fads and plans.
Nobody with even a basic understanding of calories/macros thought granola was healthy.

Nobody intentionally bases their choices on marketing. But if it didnt work, do you think companies would continue to spend vast sums of money on their marketing programmes? Plenty of people are influenced and end up eating all sorts on nonsense, all the time believing that they're making the right choices.

That doesn't doesn't happen. Starvation mode is a myth perpetuated by fas diets.
You won't ever eat too little and not lose weight. Can't happen.

We'll have to agree to disagree - I also dont get your logic as surely fad diets wouldnt want to perpetuate this myth - fad diets are all about a quick fix so the notion of your metabolism actually slowing to protect the bodys fat reserves is counter to a "lose weight quick" scheme!

The difference between the two is minimal. Nobody has ever failed to get results because they did steady cardio instead of HIIT. If they didn't get results, there was a reason.

Sure, if both are done properly and at the right level of intensity. But I think we have all seen people at the gym who have technically spent 30minutes on the treadmill but havent actually done a work out. I'd be a bit like this - left to my own devices I won't push myself so HIIT sessions with a trainer work best as the pace and tempo is maintained to a high level and afterwards I'm in no doubt that I've had a work out.

I'm not trying to pick on your post, so sorry if it comes across like that. You an educated dieter so I'm sure you are doing fine on SW. I'm just trying to highlight that despite that you are still failing for a lot of the gimmicks/myths that these diets push. In the end, its not an issue for you are you are sensible about it. But lots of people aren't sensible at all when it comes to food, they won't see results and instead of learning from it, that find something to blame and continue what they are doing

I personally don't feel like I'm falling for much. I'm following a plan because for me, structure and accountability work. I always ate well, but sometimes just a bit too well (aka fond of treating myself) I have a metabolism that doesnt let me away with anything, and an OH who is naturally thin - living together combined with an office job wasnt a good combination for me so I'm making changes to get back to a size (not weight, weight is actually not that important to me) that I'm happy at. I'm working out 3x per week including HIIT sessions and lifting some weights. I feel leaner and stronger already and am very happy. with how things are going. And I'm not killing myself doing it either - the only real hardship of slimming world is the constant need to go to the supermarket for fresh fruit and veg.

Mellor

SarahMollie wrote: »

It isnt actually, the plan is updated constantly based on latest dietary guidelines. Its not a static thing and if the advice changes, so does the plan.

What changes are you referring tot? Are you saying they are no longer penalise fat? Because in your own words you described SW as "its really all about cooking from scratch, minimizing use of oils etc".

Is 100cals of 0% Fat free yogurt the same as 100cals of full fat yogurt on the SW plan? If one is a syn and the other free, then they are penalising fat.

Also, I (personally) am not a moron, so I pick and choose certain elements (like allowing myself the odd bit of avocado) without losing and sleep over it and am still losing weight.

You eat avocado, great. Do you count it as a syn? Or importantly, is it a syn on the SW plan? Why is that?

Now - this is actually showing me that you don't know the SW Plan. Yes, there is no requirement to measure things like potatoes, but the can't account for more than 1/3 of your plate. So any amount of potatoes you eat must be balanced by other vegtables/salad and ideally a lean protien source. So your portion of chips is actually curtailed by how much of the other stuff you can eat. Nowhere does it advocate sitting down to an unlimited portion of chips.

I'm familiar with the plan, my parents have followed it. I'm aware that carby foods should to be a 1/3. But there's no limit on the size of your overall plate. You can have more of anything, by having a bigger meal overall. This burger and chips looks to more than a 1/3.

Potatos are fine imo, but the same amount of pasta is different story. 1lb between 4 portions is a lot. That's bad portion control imo. Is pasta free?

Nobody intentionally bases their choices on marketing. But if it didnt work, do you think companies would continue to spend vast sums of money on their marketing programmes? Plenty of people are influenced and end up eating all sorts on nonsense, all the time believing that they're making the right choices.

That's precisely the point.
The fact that people are so easily fooled backs up my point. It's better to learn about basic nutrition than mindlessly follow a list of good and bad foods.

We'll have to agree to disagree - I also dont get your logic as surely fad diets wouldnt want to perpetuate this myth - fad diets are all about a quick fix so the notion of your metabolism actually slowing to protect the bodys fat reserves is counter to a "lose weight quick" scheme!

You can disagree if you want. But it's not it true. The evidence shows it doesn't happen. It's a misquote from an old starvation study. The body can't hold on to fat when you eat too little - the laws of conservation of energy.

I've no idea why fad diets perpetuate the myth. But the fact people repeat it all the time proves its being perpetuated.
If fad diets are a quick fix, then medical weight loss plans are the quickest fix (prescription/pharmacy plans). And they typically consist of very low calories, only a few hundred. Where's starvation mode there?

Sure, if both are done properly and at the right level of intensity. But I think we have all seen people at the gym who have technically spent 30minutes on the treadmill but havent actually done a work out.

Exactly, the issue is not pushing themselves. Not the choice between steady cardio or HIIT. Both options are fine if you put the effort in.

I personally don't feel like I'm falling for much. I'm following a plan because for me, structure and accountability work. I always ate well, but sometimes just a bit too well (aka fond of treating myself) I have a metabolism that doesnt let me away with anything, and an OH who is naturally thin - living together combined with an office job wasnt a good combination for me so I'm making changes to get back to a size (not weight, weight is actually not that important to me) that I'm happy at. I'm working out 3x per week including HIIT sessions and lifting some weights. I feel leaner and stronger already and am very happy. with how things are going. And I'm not killing myself doing it either - the only real hardship of slimming world is the constant need to go to the supermarket for fresh fruit and veg.

That sounds great. As I said above, SW is fine when you are sensible about it. as you clearly are. My criticism was aimed more at the typical yo-yo dieter who tends to follow blindly rather than making their own choices.
And I know what you mean about fresh food. I feel like I'm constantly shopping sometimes.

TheLass

Mellor wrote: »

Hi TheLass, Can I ask what qualifications do you have that you teach "weight loss classes"?

Reason I'm asking is that I find it very strange that you think a traditional (meat and veg, pasta, stir fry noodle) type dinner is perfect.
These are typical dinners that people are eating that leads them to weight gain in the first place.

I'm also not sure why you think blending fruit removes the fibre. It doesn't, you are mixing up juicing and blending.

I'm not at liberty to say where I work as this is a personal account, but I have 6 years experience and college backed qualifications. Blending the fruit means it won't fill you for as long, as your body no longer needs to break it down - If you ate the ingredients of the smoothie you would be full for longer. With regards to the Typical dinners - most of the people that are naturally a healthy weight are eating those dinners and not gaining weight. It's getting an overall balance with your food.

Mellor

TheLass wrote: »

I'm not at liberty to say where I work as this is a personal account, but I have 6 years experience and college backed qualifications. Blending the fruit means it won't fill you for as long, as your body no longer needs to break it down - If you ate the ingredients of the smoothie you would be full for longer. With regards to the Typical dinners - most of the people that are naturally a healthy weight are eating those dinners and not gaining weight. It's getting an overall balance with your food.

I wasn't looking for personal information at all, just wondering if there was a background to it. I imagine there's no barrier to entry.

I was talking specifically about the fibre. Blending doesn't remove fibre, that's juicing.

Most people who are overweight are eating lots of typical dinners too. It goes both ways. If somebody does have a bit of weight to lose, chances are their typical dinner isn't perfect.

SarahMollie

Mellor wrote: »

What changes are you referring tot? Are you saying they are no longer penalise fat? Because in your own words you described SW as "its really all about cooking from scratch, minimizing use of oils etc".

You said it was 80's style low fat plan - I said its not static and changes have taken place over time. You can still use oil, you just measure it. What I take from it is that anything that people have a tendency to over consume is measured.

Is 100cals of 0% Fat free yogurt the same as 100cals of full fat yogurt on the SW plan? If one is a syn and the other free, then they are penalising fat.

When they start selling pots of yogurt by calories rather than my size, then maybe this aproach could work. However, they're currently sold in serving sizes typically, so so thats no likely.

You eat avocado, great. Do you count it as a syn? Or importantly, is it a syn on the SW plan? Why is that?

I don't syn it. SW does syn it. I assume its because its its very easy to eat, especially if mashed up and you can get through more than intended pretty quickly. I don't over-consume it however, its probably something I have once a week at most but thats no change from before for me.

I'm familiar with the plan, my parents have followed it. I'm aware that carby foods should to be a 1/3. But there's no limit on the size of your overall plate. You can have more of anything, by having a bigger meal overall. This burger and chips looks to more than a 1/3.

The pictures arent accurate - they regularly don't show the correct proportions to follow the plan. Don't know why they do this.

Anyway, I find the 1/3rd rule works for me. By the time I've eaten the necessary amount of the other foods, I'm full, so my proportion of food that is chips is quite low.

Potatos are fine imo, but the same amount of pasta is different story. 1lb between 4 portions is a lot. That's bad portion control imo. Is pasta free?

Pasta is free. A typical portion I'd cook for myself is about 80-100g max depending on how hungry I am. I do like a pasta dinner the night before a workout. I'd use syns on parmasan chese and some olive oil in this instance.

That's precisely the point.
The fact that people are so easily fooled backs up my point. It's better to learn about basic nutrition than mindlessly follow a list of good and bad foods.

So you're agreeing wtih what I've been saying from the start? However your solution seems to be that as if by magic the entire population should just know more about nutrition? What I'm saying that while thats a great aspiration, its also unrealistic, as its not going to happen over night and we've a real problem right now. Look around you - we're fast on course to be one of the most overweight nations in the world. In my view, something like SW that gives people some good principals and some pretty successful weight losses ought to be encouraged, not undermined.

You can disagree if you want. But it's not it true. The evidence shows it doesn't happen. It's a misquote from an old starvation study. The body can't hold on to fat when you eat too little - the laws of conservation of energy.

I've no idea why fad diets perpetuate the myth. But the fact people repeat it all the time proves its being perpetuated.
If fad diets are a quick fix, then medical weight loss plans are the quickest fix (prescription/pharmacy plans). And they typically consist of very low calories, only a few hundred. Where's starvation mode there?

I'm not denying that these diets work in the short term, but I know from my own experience that my metabolism tends to rebel after a few weeks and usually it results in long term weight gain. A good friend of mine is a big fan of these diets, but everytime she starts one, shes starting from a higher weight.

Exactly, the issue is not pushing themselves. Not the choice between steady cardio or HIIT. Both options are fine if you put the effort in.

I said that as well. I was advocating seeing a professional (ie a PT or at least attending a group class) rather than faffing at the gym and then wondering why its not working. For people who don't have much experience, this is a trap they often fall into. I can get that this doesnt apply to you as you know what you're talking about, but I'm trying to get into the mindset of a beginner like the OP, making it up as they go along and not seeing results. Ultimately do whatever exercise works for you, but get some guidance, at least to start out.

That sounds great. As I said above, SW is fine when you are sensible about it. as you clearly are. My criticism was aimed more at the typical yo-yo dieter who tends to follow blindly rather than making their own choices.
And I know what you mean about fresh food. I feel like I'm constantly shopping sometimes.

Look, like everything SW is not perfect but I think its a positive thing for a lot of people and vastly preferable to a lot of other options out there. From what I've seen, people follow blindly a bit at the start but most just figure out what works for them over time and adjust accordingly.

*Off to Tescos now*

Mellor

SarahMollie wrote: »

You said it was 80's style low fat plan - I said its not static and changes have taken place over time. You can still use oil, you just measure it. What I take from it is that anything that people have a tendency to over consume is measured.

If the penalise oil/fat over and equivalent amount of starchy carbs, then they are still using an 80s mentality. Regardless of what other changes they make. I believe WW have dropped that aspect.
I understand why they do it, energy density. But the overall effect is negative imo. It's the reason a bag of jelly sweets comes with a fat free label.

When they start selling pots of yogurt by calories rather than my size, then maybe this approach could work. However, they're currently sold in serving sizes typically, so so thats no likely.

They sell plenty of yogurts in large tubs where you decide the portion.
Regardless, I'm pretty sure SW have a list of food, or a way to calculate syns.
If they don't penalise fat, then they should be the same value - if they doen't anymore then that's good imo.

I don't syn it. SW does syn it. I assume its because its its very easy to eat, especially if mashed up and you can get through more than intended pretty quickly.

So SW syns it because of the fat, like I said.
I agree, its every easy to eat. I love the stuff

The pictures arent accurate - they regularly don't show the correct proportions to follow the plan. Don't know why they do this.

Anyway, I find the 1/3rd rule works for me. By the time I've eaten the necessary amount of the other foods, I'm full, so my proportion of food that is chips is quite low.

Pasta is free. A typical portion I'd cook for myself is about 80-100g max depending on how hungry I am. I do like a pasta dinner the night before a workout. I'd use syns on parmasan chese and some olive oil in this instance.

I was talking about the ingredient lists, not the photos. The chips and a burger bun is more than 1/3 of that meal.

The pasta is 1/4 lb, or 115g grams per person. That's a huge amount for anyone (a portion is 60-80g or so), but on a weight loss plan it's just silly.
Having pasta as a free food makes no sense. I'd imagine there are plenty of people upsizing that recipe too. 150g of free pasta, tomato sauce and lean meat. Could get close to 1000calories.

So you're agreeing wtih what I've been saying from the start? However your solution seems to be that as if by magic the entire population should just know more about nutrition? What I'm saying that while thats a great aspiration, its also unrealistic, as its not going to happen over night

People joining SW have to learn the plan. I'm saying use that time to teach them about actual nutrition. Straight swap, and much better in the long run.

If SW want use manageable numbers, then make convert the above into to a syns/points/whatever system. All they'd need to do would be to change their current scoring system. A simple fix, anyone could do it for them in minutes.

ford2600

Mellor wrote: »

That doesn't doesn't happen. Starvation mode is a myth perpetuated by fas diets.

http://www.stephanguyenet.com/the-impact-of-weight-loss-on-the-drive-to-eat/

"Starvation response", but Hall & Guyenet aren't exactly quacks

Mellor

ford2600 wrote: »

http://www.stephanguyenet.com/the-impact-of-weight-loss-on-the-drive-to-eat/

"Starvation response", but Hall & Guyenet aren't exactly quacks

That doesn't actually refute anything I said. In fact it backs it up. I've no issue with anything there.

The results suggest that increased eating drive is the primary way in which the starvation response opposes weight loss.

In the study weight loss tapered off because people started to eat more.
That's very different to the usual description of "starvation mode".

Hrududu

This is the only thing I've found worked for me

1. Buy a digital scale for weighing food
2. Go online and find out how many calories it takes to maintain your current weight. Then take 500 from that number for 1lb a week weight loss
3. Know the calories of everything you eat. Work it out by hand or use an app like MyFitnessPal. Sounds like a nuisance but with an app like that it stores your frequent foods so once you've tracked a week or so you can just pick stuff from a list rather than entering it every time (assuming you rotate through similar meals regularly)

Once I started noting calories for each meal I became aware of just how much I was eating. And so made different choices. Keep to the maintenance cals - 500 every day and you should lose 1lb a week.

Add exercise to give yourself more calories to play with

TheLass

As I say I've been at this for around a month and I'll keep it going for a few more months but I'd love some advice on anything I may tweak to get better results. What am I doing right / wrong etc...
thanks[/QUOTE]

How are you getting on?, I see you got lots of different advice, it's not always easy but finding the routine that suits you is going to be the easiest to maintain long term. I hope you are seeing progress and feeling the benefits of your new healthy lifestyle. Best of luck with it.