10 ms·

Congratulations on your weight loss! I'm down 30 of a targeted 60lbs weight loss, half way there! It sounds like an interesting study, I can't wait to read the

by lrm242 12y ago

Congratulations on your weight loss! I'm down 30 of a targeted 60lbs weight loss, half way there! It sounds like an interesting study, I can't wait to read the results. My view of weight loss is simple: eat less. I eat anything I want, don't eat until noon each day, do essentially no cardio, and lift weights for less than 30 minutes 2-3 times/week. My weight loss is fairly constant at 1 lb/week. My progress: https://trendweight.com/u/2c41346d238544/ https://trendweight.com/u/2c41346d238544/ (note: chart starts at 210 which is 15 lbs into my weight loss when I started tracking). I say all this only to point out that losing weight can happen regardless of approach. One's chosen approach to losing weight may or may not be suitable to one's personal lifestyle or dietary preferences, but ANY approach can work because the math is infallible: calories in < calories out = weight loss. So, just eat less than what your body needs to burn on a daily/weekly basis. If low-carb makes you happy because you can indulge in 1 lb block of cheese, then by all means go for it. Yes, things like ketogenic diets have other physical effects on our physiology but I prefer a simpler point of view: there are only so many blocks of cheese one can eat before you get tired of it. If you're restricting your carbs, you simply ultimately eat less. The restriction of choice is the root cause, for example. So: for everyone trying to thinking about losing weight, find a diet you buy in to and go for it. Personally, I found the approach of analytically tracking my food and weight and permitting myself to eat ANYTHING I want liberating. I know precisely what I eat every day, and I like that. It fits my personality and liberates me from the nagging choice of where/what to eat. I have my favorite foods and I eat them, and have found ways to do so so that I hit my daily protein target and stay at or under my daily calorie target. The down side to this approach is I don't eat out much because it's hard to know what's in that food (this isn't a downside for ME, though). Don't buy into the need to do a specific diet, all diets can work if you find one that you are in tune with, because ultimately, it's all about finding the optimum path to eat less than what your body needs without sacrificing whatever mental and physical joy you get from food.

alexmchale 12y ago
Hey, congrats to you! I'm pretty much in your exact boat. I started the year at 267 and I'm down to 225 now. My goal is an even 200 (or I'll sometimes say 199 for the joy of seeing that 1 in the front). I've done it just as you have -- by eating less. At the start of my diet I was counting calories on a daily basis -- but after a while I started learning to pay attention to the calories of everything I eat. Now I simply keep a running tally in my head and know where I'm at. I'm fine with estimating when I need to. The biggest change for me is learning to be happy with smaller portions. I used to eat 3 enchiladas, then have another 2, then another 3,.. THEY ARE SO DELICIOUS! Now I know going in that I'm going to make my plate and that's it. There's times I wish I could have more, but enjoying the one plate is the biggest key to my success so far. The other side of it is avoiding calorie landmines. It's so easy to accidentally eat an extra thousand or two calories while eating out by not paying attention. Knowledge is power :).
- dabernathy89 12y ago
  You and I have literally the same progress since the beginning of the year (mid 260s to 225). I don't really have much to add to that, I just find it interesting :)
- beachstartup 12y ago
  i'm about 20 pounds into a 40 pound goal. i too, like/liked to gorge. i wasn't obese so it was never a serious psychological problem, i'm just something of a hedonist. i've found that intermittent fasting allows me to occasionally (occasionally!) gorge and satisfy that hedonist inside of me. i also do low carb so i will combine this with a carb cheat day maybe every couple of months. my weakness is popcorn so i will enjoy a small popcorn at the movies after dinner. conversely, if i accidentally eat a 'calorie land mine' as you put it, i'll just skip the next couple of meals. i just focus on work instead. i think most 'naturally' skinny people do this anyway. i was eating 3 (or more) meals a day no matter WHAT and that's not necessary healthy.
alexmchale 12y ago
Oh the other side of it --- weighing in frequently and drinking a ton of water! I weigh myself most nights. I know what days I didn't get enough water, because I'll have "lost" 2 pounds that day. That tells me that (1) I need to immediately drink some more water and (2) drink extra the next day. Dehydrating yourself will have a negative impact on weight-loss long-term.
- eru 12y ago
  Are you only weighing at nights or also in the morning?
ioddly 12y ago
Conversely, I've lost a bunch of weight by not tracking calories (or anything for that matter, beyond glancing at nutritional labels). I focus on eating protein, fiber and fat so I fill up quickly. Our approach might seem to be at odds but the mechanism of action is the same: we eat less. Figure out whatever approach gets you to do that and you win.
zt 12y ago
Completely understand your perspective. I don't subscribe to the calories in < calories out = weight loss philosophy. I think calories are are pretty blunt instrument and that people's body respond to different foods differently. That is, one of the key ideas of the study is that different people respond to foods differently. Let's imagine that everyone had, for example, two responses to sugar: one where your insulin spikes and then comes down immediately and another where it spikes, plateaus, and then comes down later. (This is roughly true). One theory is that if you have one of those profiles your body will respond better (in a weight loss sense) to a low carb diet and if you have another profile then you'd response better to low fat diet. I don't know if that's true -- hence the study! But I think it makes some intuitive sense that our bodies burn calories, pass calories through, etc, differently and that those differences are partially based on the interaction between what we eat and our bodies (genetic) proclivities.
- mikeash 12y ago
  I think that saying calories are the key to weight loss is like saying altitude is the key to flight. If you want to fly, the key is to keep your altitude up. It is technically true and even useful in a way, but the truly difficult part is how to keep your altitude up. Run a caloric deficit and you will lose weight, guaranteed. Just like if you maintain altitude above the ground you're flying. But how to run a caloric deficit day to day is the trick. You can look at it and say "just eat less", but eating is such a deep, fundamental drive that it's never that easy.
  - beachstartup 12y ago
    a common analogy is telling an alcoholic to 'just drink less' sure, it's true. but it's not very helpful for someone who is in serious psychological trouble.
    - icelancer 12y ago
      Satiety is a completely different issue. I have no problem with those who differentiate, but there are legitimately a lot of people who think the laws of thermodynamics do not apply to human biology.
imanaccount247 12y ago
>If you're restricting your carbs, you simply ultimately eat less. The restriction of choice is the root cause, for example. Yeah, there have been a few studies confirming people on low carb diets simply end up consuming fewer calories. The problem is that it doesn't hold for everyone. I don't get sick of eating cheese and butter and meat. I gained 20 pounds on a keto diet before I switched to a potato diet and started losing weight.
- mamoswined 12y ago
  Yeah, it really is so individual. I lost a lot of weight on keto but overshot and ended up kind of underweight for a bit simply because I find meat and cheese so filling.
trevvvor 12y ago
Of course calories in, calories out. That's why I eat 3,000 calories of sand a day to gain weight. Read a few books before ignoring what decades of science are teaching us. 1 pound per week is pretty abysmal, and what you're doing isn't sustainable. Exercising increases your appetite. You're going to gain the weight back. Ketosis works completely independently of how much you eat. How could you possibly be happier constantly monitoring your calories, when instead you could be eating bacon-rich food at will and lose weight without trying?
- girvo 12y ago
  > and what you're doing isn't sustainable. Exercising increases your appetite. You're going to gain the weight back. Says who? If it works for OP and he's kept it up this far, the only way he'll gain that weight back is if he is treating this diet as a short-term fix as opposed to a long-term lifestyle change.
- lrm242 12y ago
  You realize there are no calories in sand, right? You are free to eat as much weight in sand as you like, you'll gain no more weight than what you input. Ketosis works by encouraging your body to release ketones and burn fat. If it fits the way you want to live your life and the foods you want to eat, by all means go for it. You're not losing weight because you don't eat carbs, though. You're losing weight because you're burning more calories than you input. Also, not sure why so mad. I was pretty clear: do whatever works for you. The most important thing is consistency.
7Figures2Commas 12y ago
> My view of weight loss is simple: eat less. I eat anything I want, don't eat until noon each day, do essentially no cardio, and lift weights for less than 30 minutes 2-3 times/week. As someone who lost nearly a third of his body weight and has kept it off for more than half a decade and running, I would provide the following constructive criticism of your approach: weight loss in and of itself is a red herring. What gets lost in so many weight loss discussions is that we're really talking about health. Losing weight, especially when you're overweight or obese, is comparitvely easy; getting healthy is much more difficult. We treat our weight as a proxy for health, but it's not the only one, and once you reach a certain point, it actually ceases to be one of the better measures of one's health. There are plenty of slender people walking around with high cholesterol and high blood pressure, and who can't lift a modest amount of weight or engage in moderate aerobic exertion. They're not healthy by any stretch of the imagination. When you overly restrict calories, you are far more likely to lose significant amounts of muscle. When you regularly skip meals, you mess with your metabolism and blood sugar levels, and there's some evidence you might even increase your odds of developing diabetes. When you fail to consider what you eat, you are less likely to get adequate nutrition. When you avoid sufficient aerobic activity, you put your cardiovascular health (not to mention sustained weight loss) at risk. Obviously, you can lose weight in any number of ways, healthy and unhealthy, but the diet you describe rarely produces sustained weight loss over the long haul and, more importantly, it's not healthy. When you're overweight and want to get in shape, food seems like the enemy, but food is actually your body's fuel and diets that simply reduce its intake and little else are at odds with what we know is conducive to health.
- thret 12y ago
  Yes. Actually the more you exercise, the more you eat. The less you sleep, the more you eat. I eat quite a lot. If someone ever wants to make a doco about not gaining any weight (other than muscle) with [insert crazy 'bad' diet], I'm your guy.
- lrm242 12y ago
  I appreciate the feedback. I agree with you. Losing weight is not the goal, losing fat is. That is why I specifically lift heavy weights 3 times a week, to encourage my body to choose fat over muscle when deciding how to fill the caloric deficit I current live in. My goals are mostly strength based and focused on ratios to body weight: 1.5x BW bench, 2x BW squat, and 2.5x BW dead lift. Given that I was significantly overweight I've made good progress towards these goals, but as I approach the end of my cut I'll be focuesd on adding muscle rather than just preserving it. Thanks again for the thoughtful response.
SloopJon 12y ago
> don't eat until noon each day I'm trying to cut back on my late night snacks, but I don't understand the rationale for not eating in the morning. Great job, BTW. A pound a week sounds great.
- exhilaration 12y ago
  Based on the post, one should eat breakfast: These folks have some common behaviors. Among them is: tracking their weight, tracking what they eat, eating breakfast, and being active.
- blister 12y ago
  It's a part of a concept called "Intermittent Fasting". The basic rationale is that you go from three medium sized meals each day to two larger meals each day. It's something I've been doing for over a year as a way to let my inner fat kid still get to feel like a piggy while keeping calorie intake at a maintenance level. All it takes is skipping breakfast, which doesn't really have a huge effect on my life.
- lrm242 12y ago
  I don't eat breakfast because I do intermittent fasting. The reasoning is simple: (a) once I eat I get hungry, and the 6 small meals method just doens't work for me. I would eat breakfast at 8 and be hungry again by 10. (b) I drink a lot of coffee, if I dont eat the coffee supresses my appetite. I'm simply not hungry in the morning. (c) COmpressing my calories into a smaller window keeps me sated and makes them more fulfilling as I can eat bigger meals. Its good for the soul, if you will.

by lrm242 12y ago

alexmchale 12y ago

Hey, congrats to you! I'm pretty much in your exact boat. I started the year at 267 and I'm down to 225 now. My goal is an even 200 (or I'll sometimes say 199 for the joy of seeing that 1 in the front). I've done it just as you have -- by eating less. At the start of my diet I was counting calories on a daily basis -- but after a while I started learning to pay attention to the calories of everything I eat. Now I simply keep a running tally in my head and know where I'm at. I'm fine with estimating when I need to. The biggest change for me is learning to be happy with smaller portions. I used to eat 3 enchiladas, then have another 2, then another 3,.. THEY ARE SO DELICIOUS! Now I know going in that I'm going to make my plate and that's it. There's times I wish I could have more, but enjoying the one plate is the biggest key to my success so far. The other side of it is avoiding calorie landmines. It's so easy to accidentally eat an extra thousand or two calories while eating out by not paying attention. Knowledge is power :).

dabernathy89 12y ago
You and I have literally the same progress since the beginning of the year (mid 260s to 225). I don't really have much to add to that, I just find it interesting :)
beachstartup 12y ago
i'm about 20 pounds into a 40 pound goal. i too, like/liked to gorge. i wasn't obese so it was never a serious psychological problem, i'm just something of a hedonist. i've found that intermittent fasting allows me to occasionally (occasionally!) gorge and satisfy that hedonist inside of me. i also do low carb so i will combine this with a carb cheat day maybe every couple of months. my weakness is popcorn so i will enjoy a small popcorn at the movies after dinner. conversely, if i accidentally eat a 'calorie land mine' as you put it, i'll just skip the next couple of meals. i just focus on work instead. i think most 'naturally' skinny people do this anyway. i was eating 3 (or more) meals a day no matter WHAT and that's not necessary healthy.

alexmchale 12y ago

Oh the other side of it --- weighing in frequently and drinking a ton of water! I weigh myself most nights. I know what days I didn't get enough water, because I'll have "lost" 2 pounds that day. That tells me that (1) I need to immediately drink some more water and (2) drink extra the next day. Dehydrating yourself will have a negative impact on weight-loss long-term.

eru 12y ago
Are you only weighing at nights or also in the morning?

ioddly 12y ago

Conversely, I've lost a bunch of weight by not tracking calories (or anything for that matter, beyond glancing at nutritional labels). I focus on eating protein, fiber and fat so I fill up quickly. Our approach might seem to be at odds but the mechanism of action is the same: we eat less. Figure out whatever approach gets you to do that and you win.

zt 12y ago

Completely understand your perspective. I don't subscribe to the calories in < calories out = weight loss philosophy. I think calories are are pretty blunt instrument and that people's body respond to different foods differently. That is, one of the key ideas of the study is that different people respond to foods differently. Let's imagine that everyone had, for example, two responses to sugar: one where your insulin spikes and then comes down immediately and another where it spikes, plateaus, and then comes down later. (This is roughly true). One theory is that if you have one of those profiles your body will respond better (in a weight loss sense) to a low carb diet and if you have another profile then you'd response better to low fat diet. I don't know if that's true -- hence the study! But I think it makes some intuitive sense that our bodies burn calories, pass calories through, etc, differently and that those differences are partially based on the interaction between what we eat and our bodies (genetic) proclivities.

mikeash 12y ago
I think that saying calories are the key to weight loss is like saying altitude is the key to flight. If you want to fly, the key is to keep your altitude up. It is technically true and even useful in a way, but the truly difficult part is how to keep your altitude up. Run a caloric deficit and you will lose weight, guaranteed. Just like if you maintain altitude above the ground you're flying. But how to run a caloric deficit day to day is the trick. You can look at it and say "just eat less", but eating is such a deep, fundamental drive that it's never that easy.
- beachstartup 12y ago
  a common analogy is telling an alcoholic to 'just drink less' sure, it's true. but it's not very helpful for someone who is in serious psychological trouble.
  - icelancer 12y ago
    Satiety is a completely different issue. I have no problem with those who differentiate, but there are legitimately a lot of people who think the laws of thermodynamics do not apply to human biology.

imanaccount247 12y ago

>If you're restricting your carbs, you simply ultimately eat less. The restriction of choice is the root cause, for example. Yeah, there have been a few studies confirming people on low carb diets simply end up consuming fewer calories. The problem is that it doesn't hold for everyone. I don't get sick of eating cheese and butter and meat. I gained 20 pounds on a keto diet before I switched to a potato diet and started losing weight.

mamoswined 12y ago
Yeah, it really is so individual. I lost a lot of weight on keto but overshot and ended up kind of underweight for a bit simply because I find meat and cheese so filling.

trevvvor 12y ago

Of course calories in, calories out. That's why I eat 3,000 calories of sand a day to gain weight. Read a few books before ignoring what decades of science are teaching us. 1 pound per week is pretty abysmal, and what you're doing isn't sustainable. Exercising increases your appetite. You're going to gain the weight back. Ketosis works completely independently of how much you eat. How could you possibly be happier constantly monitoring your calories, when instead you could be eating bacon-rich food at will and lose weight without trying?

girvo 12y ago
> and what you're doing isn't sustainable. Exercising increases your appetite. You're going to gain the weight back. Says who? If it works for OP and he's kept it up this far, the only way he'll gain that weight back is if he is treating this diet as a short-term fix as opposed to a long-term lifestyle change.
lrm242 12y ago
You realize there are no calories in sand, right? You are free to eat as much weight in sand as you like, you'll gain no more weight than what you input. Ketosis works by encouraging your body to release ketones and burn fat. If it fits the way you want to live your life and the foods you want to eat, by all means go for it. You're not losing weight because you don't eat carbs, though. You're losing weight because you're burning more calories than you input. Also, not sure why so mad. I was pretty clear: do whatever works for you. The most important thing is consistency.

7Figures2Commas 12y ago

> My view of weight loss is simple: eat less. I eat anything I want, don't eat until noon each day, do essentially no cardio, and lift weights for less than 30 minutes 2-3 times/week. As someone who lost nearly a third of his body weight and has kept it off for more than half a decade and running, I would provide the following constructive criticism of your approach: weight loss in and of itself is a red herring. What gets lost in so many weight loss discussions is that we're really talking about health. Losing weight, especially when you're overweight or obese, is comparitvely easy; getting healthy is much more difficult. We treat our weight as a proxy for health, but it's not the only one, and once you reach a certain point, it actually ceases to be one of the better measures of one's health. There are plenty of slender people walking around with high cholesterol and high blood pressure, and who can't lift a modest amount of weight or engage in moderate aerobic exertion. They're not healthy by any stretch of the imagination. When you overly restrict calories, you are far more likely to lose significant amounts of muscle. When you regularly skip meals, you mess with your metabolism and blood sugar levels, and there's some evidence you might even increase your odds of developing diabetes. When you fail to consider what you eat, you are less likely to get adequate nutrition. When you avoid sufficient aerobic activity, you put your cardiovascular health (not to mention sustained weight loss) at risk. Obviously, you can lose weight in any number of ways, healthy and unhealthy, but the diet you describe rarely produces sustained weight loss over the long haul and, more importantly, it's not healthy. When you're overweight and want to get in shape, food seems like the enemy, but food is actually your body's fuel and diets that simply reduce its intake and little else are at odds with what we know is conducive to health.

thret 12y ago
Yes. Actually the more you exercise, the more you eat. The less you sleep, the more you eat. I eat quite a lot. If someone ever wants to make a doco about not gaining any weight (other than muscle) with [insert crazy 'bad' diet], I'm your guy.
lrm242 12y ago
I appreciate the feedback. I agree with you. Losing weight is not the goal, losing fat is. That is why I specifically lift heavy weights 3 times a week, to encourage my body to choose fat over muscle when deciding how to fill the caloric deficit I current live in. My goals are mostly strength based and focused on ratios to body weight: 1.5x BW bench, 2x BW squat, and 2.5x BW dead lift. Given that I was significantly overweight I've made good progress towards these goals, but as I approach the end of my cut I'll be focuesd on adding muscle rather than just preserving it. Thanks again for the thoughtful response.

SloopJon 12y ago

> don't eat until noon each day I'm trying to cut back on my late night snacks, but I don't understand the rationale for not eating in the morning. Great job, BTW. A pound a week sounds great.

exhilaration 12y ago
Based on the post, one should eat breakfast: These folks have some common behaviors. Among them is: tracking their weight, tracking what they eat, eating breakfast, and being active.
blister 12y ago
It's a part of a concept called "Intermittent Fasting". The basic rationale is that you go from three medium sized meals each day to two larger meals each day. It's something I've been doing for over a year as a way to let my inner fat kid still get to feel like a piggy while keeping calorie intake at a maintenance level. All it takes is skipping breakfast, which doesn't really have a huge effect on my life.
lrm242 12y ago
I don't eat breakfast because I do intermittent fasting. The reasoning is simple: (a) once I eat I get hungry, and the 6 small meals method just doens't work for me. I would eat breakfast at 8 and be hungry again by 10. (b) I drink a lot of coffee, if I dont eat the coffee supresses my appetite. I'm simply not hungry in the morning. (c) COmpressing my calories into a smaller window keeps me sated and makes them more fulfilling as I can eat bigger meals. Its good for the soul, if you will.