SubJeff on 2/9/2010 at 17:41
Yeah, I was the same at 21 (though I didn't sit around all day!). I ate the most horrific stuff and was still really thin.
DDL on 2/9/2010 at 17:41
CocoClown: while your metabolic rate does remain elevated after exercise (for several hours), short bursts of intense exercise will not significantly deplete glycogen stores. Back to the marathon example, your average person, with well stocked glycogen, would have to run 18 miles before depleting stocks to a level where fat becomes the predominant fuel. So high intensity sprints would do it, but you'd have to do a LOT of them.
The trick with high intensity exercise, as far as I'm aware, is that your body appears to be better at judging intensity than it is at duration: a short sprint will elevate your metabolic rate considerably, and for a similar duration post-exercise, as a long jog. Thus while you may burn..say..400 kcals jogging for 30mins, then another 300 above your basal metabolic rate in the following three hours, you can burn 50 kcals sprinting for a couple of minutes, and another 300 above your basal metabolic rate in the next three hours. Plus high intensity work is generally better for improving fitness: like lifting weights, your body won't get better at sprinting unless you force it to do stuff it can only just do. And it takes less time. It's not perhaps so good for deliberate, hardcore fat burning, but that's (as noted) pretty long, slow, harsh exercise to do anyway.
D'Juhn: weight lifting, generally speaking, involves lifting just enough weight to slightly damage your muscles: if they're not being forced to do stuff they can only barely do, they don't get the signals to get bigger & better. So as soon as you stop lifting, they go into repair mode: this obviously needs protein, which admittedly your body has a lot of (so in extremis they can cannibalise other, underused muscle tissue and so on), but by providing your body with a sudden supply of easily "digested and incorporated" protein, you make this all easier. Since the time taken from intake to 'in the bloodstream and bioavailable' is sort of vaguely 'progressively, over an hour or two', it doesn't really matter whether you take the protein before, during or after.... as long as it's not like five hours before or after. :)
Also, it doesn't have to be a shake, any protein will do. Obviously shakes are usually optimised for amino-acid balance and ease of digestion, whereas a pork chop requires a bit more effort, but it all looks pretty much the same once in the bloodstream.
SubJeff on 2/9/2010 at 18:19
Much liking your breakdown DDL. Pretty much what we learn re: exercise physiology for recovery post ITU stay. Have a black coffee before your session and you'll find it a little less tough to get going on an empty stomach. Shakes are pretty good because not only do they give you the protein but they are easy to prepare (I often can't be arsed thinking/doing sensible cooking post-session) and as you mix many of them with water you're helping with re-hydration.
Yakoob on 2/9/2010 at 23:35
Thanks for all the helpful input, especially from DDL.
I guess you guys were right, I way underestimated my caloric intake and ended up going into starvation mode when I didn't expect it. It would also explain why, after 4 weeks of biking 5 days a week for an hour (pushing it as fast as I could, even uphills), my thighs were literally dead (as soon as I hit slight incline, major soreness and pain). I had to sell my bike unfortunately, so I picked up half hour jogging in the morning (pre-breakfast), and also pushed up my caloric intake to 2100-2300 range (my base is 2100 without any exercise).
One thing that puzzles me and maybe you can explain. When I first started biking I was also eating around 2300-2500+ cals and I could see a huge increase in muscle strength week 1 to week 2 and I also gained a pound (presumably muscle). But since I wasn't looking to gain muscle but lose fat, I dropped my caloric intake to around 1700 (hey, I figured, if 2500 is enough to gain a pound a week, then 1700 should be enough to be losing almost a pound, right?) But what ended up happening, I started losing weight really rapidly. I lost 8 pounds over the next two weeks (thats 4 a week, way way WAY too unhealthy! So I stopped eating so low and made this thread realizing I'm proverbially "doing it wrong").
Now I know that 500cals/a day is roughly 1 pound. I dropped 800cals a day. I went from gaining 1 pound to losing 4. So net change is 5 pounds. For 800cals a day. I think I broke thermodynamics...
faetal on 2/9/2010 at 23:42
Your body needs calories and protein to build muscle. My guess is you weren't getting enough of one or both.
DDL on 3/9/2010 at 00:14
Also, if you're getting less energy than you need, those damn glycogen stocks come into play again: your body will notice the starvation, and start depleting liver (and partially muscle) glycogen. Glycogen is a very hydrated molecule: it's like a big water sponge. Believe it or not, when you deplete the glycogen levels in starvation, you actually lose a ton of weight fast purely because you can no longer store as much water...about 8 pounds worth, I think. This is why people who assess themselves purely by weight, and try to lose weight by starvation, tend to go "OOH It's working!" for the first week or two, then get annoyed and miserable after that, since now they're actually losing fat (and in starvation, muscle too) rather than water, and that takes a lot longer to lose.
Sugar is your body's one absolute, obligate immediate substantial nutritional need, without it your brain and red blood cells essentially cease to function, very very fast. So we have means of storing it up, and in starvation, making it from other things we have handy (generally protein). This is why the atkins diet works: it doesn't matter how much fat you're jamming into yourself, if the body isn't getting enough carbs, it panics. Protein? Funnelled into sugar synthesis (or 'gluconeogenesis', if you're feeling smug). Fat? Fuck, the body will break down triglycerides and THROW THE FATTY ACIDS AWAY, just to get at the single molecule of glycerol that holds them together, coz hey: three carbons! We can make that into sugar! As I mentioned earlier, we break down fat two carbons at a time: the body has no method for converting two carbon molecules to sugar, only "back up to fat" or "down to carbon dioxide and energy". Fat is useless if you need sugar, so the body just grabs the glycerol and gives you really really funky shits (gut bacteria are more versatile and considerably less fussy).
Atkins makes you shed weight like a bastard, because you are FUCKING YOURSELF UP.
Incidentally, yeast (among other more inventive organisms) have a thing called the glyoxylate bypass, which means they CAN turn two carbon molecules back up into sugar (our cut-off is three carbons), and for this I envy them: if we had that, we could pretty much live exclusively off beer.
Oh, and dvrabel: yes, my diet will probably lead to many long term complaints, but the trick, y'see, is to die of cirrhosis before those complaints catch up with you. :)
Starrfall on 3/9/2010 at 02:45
I think I'm mostly going to repeat things that have already been said. For instance, try mixing in some intervals instead of just steady going when you bike or run. It'll probably help you lose fat and also result in various functional improvments. Along the same lines, make you trips to the gym more than occasional. Weightlifting is good for fat loss but more importantly its good for looking sexier.
Also keep paying attention to what you eat! Your diet looks low in protein. Avoid excessive carbs, most people eat way too many. Don't be taken in by DDL's fear mongering (I joke, I kid), you probably won't start hacking into your liver glycogen until you drop below 50 grams of carbs a day (although if you're biking an hour most days you should still eat more because you're actually burning them unlike the fatties.) If you eat carbs in excess of your glycogen use you'll store them as fat, if you eat less than you use you'll burn fat. And this isn't scary and doesn't fuck you up (if not taken to ridiculous extremes, but that's almost always true), it's how humans lose fat.
edit: that rant is better directed at the real fatties though, which isn't quite whats at issue here, I think
Muzman on 3/9/2010 at 11:41
Every time this bullshit comes up (which isn't to say it's untrue, just annoying. Which isn't to say it's annoying that people say it but... just keep reading anyway) the circuity of convincing your worthless husk that you're actually on the savannah being chased by saber toothed cats on a regular basis, in order to live longer and be more attractive, still boggles my tiny mind. It can't help but put the human condition on that fine line between Black and Comedy every single time.
There's a groovy Cory Doctorow short story which is basically about a super soldier program where implants allow the conscious/unconscious barrier to be crossed. People can literally make themselves fit and strong at will (once they've eaten all the necessary food anyway). I wish they'd hurry up with that. Yeah I'm sure it's very complicated and has dangerous implications all but Muhahaha mad scientists wouldn't trifle with such stuff. But think, for starters, of the air time you'd free up from all the stupid ads about diets and the Abdoer and whatever else. Just think about it!
CocoClown on 3/9/2010 at 14:03
Think it ultimately comes down to energy in > energy out = fatty. Energy out > energy in = lose weight.
Depends on what you're going to burn up and lose though. Or you photosynthesise.
Starrfall on 3/9/2010 at 15:08
Quote Posted by Muzman
Every time this bullshit comes up (which isn't to say it's untrue, just annoying. Which isn't to say it's annoying that people say it but... just keep reading anyway) the circuity of convincing your worthless husk that you're actually on the savannah being chased by saber toothed cats on a regular basis, in order to live longer and be more attractive, still boggles my tiny mind. It can't help but put the human condition on that fine line between Black and Comedy every single time.
FAT WEAKLING SPOTTED why dont you go eat some grubs like a real man
I joke! There's a hell of a lot of room between scavenging for carcasses and bugs on the savannah and the "western diet," though. Avoiding the latter doesn't force you into the former.
