Author Topic: Weight Loss Discussion Thread  (Read 1300746 times)

simonp

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1700 on: 23 May, 2011, 01:27:53 pm »
...egg frisbee ...

Round here, we call those things omelettes.

Japanese omelettes?

itsbruce

  • Lavender Bike Menace
Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1701 on: 25 May, 2011, 10:14:41 pm »

I had to Google spurtle to find out what it was

How many NSFW links did you have to skip before you found the right definition?

It’s only 36 calories, per pint, but that’s 1/5 of the calorie deficit I’d be looking for if trying to gradually lose weight.

For the same reason I have half fat mozzarella cheese.  Lower calories, lower saturated fat, and all the protein.
'

Do you generally try to cut the fat content of your meals?  I think it's generally better to look at the overall calorie content.  Fat is very necessary for health and also helps make you feel full.  People on low fat diets often have terrible hunger cravings and tend to crash and binge.
I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked: Allen Ginsberg
The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads: Jeff Hammerbacher

simonp

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1702 on: 25 May, 2011, 10:43:58 pm »

I had to Google spurtle to find out what it was

How many NSFW links did you have to skip before you found the right definition?

It’s only 36 calories, per pint, but that’s 1/5 of the calorie deficit I’d be looking for if trying to gradually lose weight.

For the same reason I have half fat mozzarella cheese.  Lower calories, lower saturated fat, and all the protein.
'

Do you generally try to cut the fat content of your meals?  I think it's generally better to look at the overall calorie content.  Fat is very necessary for health and also helps make you feel full.  People on low fat diets often have terrible hunger cravings and tend to crash and binge.

I was advised to cut saturated fat intake to help get my body fat % down.  Seems to have worked; was as high as 19-20% and is currently 16% and has been as low as 13% at the end of the summer.

I try to achieve around 30% of calories from fat, which is not a particularly low fat diet.  If it’s higher than that, or lower than that, then I don’t worry about it.  The main goal is to avoid high levels of saturated fat and to allow space in my diet for ‘good’ fats.  I’m aiming for a high quality diet.  Check the diet quality score system out, http://getfitslowly.com/2010/11/01/the-diet-quality-score—a-new-twist-on-common-sense-eating/ :

Quote
You also get a pretty good glimpse at Fitzgerald’s dietary philosophy which coincidentally meshes pretty well with mine: eat a diet with lots of fruits, vegetables, and lean proteins as well as a smattering of low fat dairy and healthy fats while avoiding refined carbs, sweets, and fried foods.

This is what I am aiming for.

I’m currently ~71kg with a body mass index of around 21.  Not having any trouble controlling my weight.

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1703 on: 25 May, 2011, 11:14:37 pm »

Quote
You also get a pretty good glimpse at Fitzgerald’s dietary philosophy which coincidentally meshes pretty well with mine: eat a diet with lots of fruits, vegetables, and lean proteins as well as a smattering of low fat dairy and healthy fats while avoiding refined carbs, sweets, and fried foods.



That's a pretty good summary of what I'm trying to do.

I do permit myself a modest amount of chocolate or whatever if I'm within my intake limit. And I don't skimp on the olive or other good oil. I rarely use butter; a tub of notbutter lasts me several weeks.

simonp, salt in rice: I sometimes use Tilda cook in the bag wholegrain basmati - only a trace of salt.

A bag gives 180 g cooked which is a useful sized portion. Takes much longer to cook of course (15 minutes for the wholegrain) compared to the microwavable bags of pre-cooked stuff. So no quicker than cooking it normally, but you don't have to wash the rice or anything, just fling the bag in boiling water and cook the rest of your meal while it simmers.

I'm a bit distrustful of these bagged pre-cooked things like rice and soup. I guess they have come about because of some sort of development in packaging, allowing them just to be pasteurised and then bunged with salt in order to keep the bugs at bay.

Edit: 83.3 kg today. Target now revised to 82 kg.

simonp

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1704 on: 26 May, 2011, 12:42:43 am »
I think the packaging is the main problem.  Not so green.

With the new cooker I'm more tempted to go back to doing rice properly as I can bring a pan to the boil very quickly now.  The "two servings" 250g bags do me just right, by the way. :)  0.2g sodium in that amount isn't that bad, about 8% of the daily limit, but it'd just be a trace in plain brown rice as you say.


simonp

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1705 on: 01 June, 2011, 01:46:40 am »
I am making slow progress on the graphing.  It might be ready by the end of the year at this rate.  ::-)

(It's actually not needing very much more work, it's just finding the time).

Oh, btw, Greenbank: I'm probably going to have to fiddle around to work-around your "PBP" entry in August.  :P



He's not the only one doing it

I did this:


                try:
                    weight = float(m.group(1))

                except ValueError:

                    weight = None



Which is a fairly generic way of not falling over when people put random shite in the cells.

simonp

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1706 on: 01 June, 2011, 01:56:47 am »
Just added myself to the weight reports and went back through the thread for some retrospective data.  Despite a few fluctuations along the way (I’d forgotten about the 4kg weight loss in a day or so from food poisoning back in March) I have been a fairly constant weight this year.

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1707 on: 01 June, 2011, 03:38:55 pm »
81.7 kg today. That's getting on for a 10 kg loss  :)

I'd say I am eating very well indeed - just making more careful choices and totting up the intake as I go. 1850 Cal / day is not exactly arduous. I still get to do the odd chocolate low-grade pig-out.  

I'll re-adjust my target to 80 kg and I think that'll do.

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1708 on: 01 June, 2011, 04:07:09 pm »
81.7 kg today. That's getting on for a 10 kg loss  :)

I'd say I am eating very well indeed - just making more careful choices and totting up the intake as I go. 1850 Cal / day is not exactly arduous. I still get to do the odd chocolate low-grade pig-out.  

I'll re-adjust my target to 80 kg and I think that'll do.

 :thumbsup: Excellent effort there SP

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1709 on: 01 June, 2011, 11:27:08 pm »
I rewarded myself by allowing myself to be seen in public wearing my Assos 851 jacket. There's nothing quite like Assos for accentuating any non-essential rotundity.

Bloody great jacket that I've hardly worn lately.

I'm not quite ready to be seen in my (now ageing) Assos jersey though.

simonp

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1710 on: 03 June, 2011, 11:06:11 am »
At what point does being thin become being scrawny?

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1711 on: 03 June, 2011, 12:01:08 pm »
At what point does being thin become being scrawny?


I don't think it's possible to be scrawny and have muscles.
Although I've lost a heap of weight I don't think I look thin or scrawny at the moment, in fact I'm not exactly sure which bit of me the weight has come off from  :-\
I don't really get what my weight is doing at the moment, I've done relatively few miles in the past 2 weeks as I rest my hand, eaten plenty (although mostly healthy stuff) and yet a decade low of 56.2kg this morning.

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1712 on: 03 June, 2011, 12:13:39 pm »
I haven't actually weighed myself for a while, but I'm eating everything in sight and I keep writing cheesecake on the shopping list, which is a sure sign of not getting enough calories onboard.

Although my mileage only has me around 20 or so on yacf BikeJournal, I do as much time skating again, and it seems much more effective than cycling at burning off weight, despite being at a lower intensity.
Your Royal Charles are belong to us.

simonp

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1713 on: 03 June, 2011, 12:15:13 pm »
At what point does being thin become being scrawny?


I don't think it's possible to be scrawny and have muscles.
Although I've lost a heap of weight I don't think I look thin or scrawny at the moment, in fact I'm not exactly sure which bit of me the weight has come off from  :-\
I don't really get what my weight is doing at the moment, I've done relatively few miles in the past 2 weeks as I rest my hand, eaten plenty (although mostly healthy stuff) and yet a decade low of 56.2kg this morning.

I'm not muscular.

It might be worth keeping a food diary (LiveStrong maybe?) to see if you really are eating enough for your activity levels.

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1714 on: 03 June, 2011, 12:20:16 pm »
At what point does being thin become being scrawny?


Well, my BMI is 19, or thereabouts. Nobody has called me scrawny, at least not to my face. Only positive comments (BMI was over 26 a couple of years ago). Got my calorie balance pretty sorted - weight has been stable for a while, despite fluctuating distance ridden.

I don't think you look scrawny. Lean, yes.

hellymedic

  • Just do it!
Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1715 on: 03 June, 2011, 12:20:58 pm »

Although my mileage only has me around 20 or so on yacf BikeJournal, I do as much time skating again, and it seems much more effective than cycling at burning off weight, despite being at a lower intensity.

Low intensity exertion is probably a better way of losing weight than high intensity exercise. Though fewer calories are burnt, the proportion of fat is higher and the blood sugar glycogen thing swings less, which does not stimulate TEH HUNGER so much.

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1716 on: 03 June, 2011, 12:30:38 pm »

Although my mileage only has me around 20 or so on yacf BikeJournal, I do as much time skating again, and it seems much more effective than cycling at burning off weight, despite being at a lower intensity.

Low intensity exertion is probably a better way of losing weight than high intensity exercise. Though fewer calories are burnt, the proportion of fat is higher and the blood sugar glycogen thing swings less, which does not stimulate TEH HUNGER so much.

It actually seems to depress hunger, weirdly!  The surprising thing to me is that all my cycling and skating is combined, so I wouldn't have expected such an effect (i.e. commute, skate, commute).

Oh, remember ages ago we were talking about why high intensity intervals don't affect my insulin sensitivity?  I found out more detail the other day:
Diabetes and Sport - Runsweet.com-Diabetes and Sport

This is the team that dealt with Steve Redgrave, and who I'm under the care of now.  Lucky me, they are a really superb group of people!!!
Your Royal Charles are belong to us.

simonp

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1717 on: 03 June, 2011, 12:46:05 pm »
At what point does being thin become being scrawny?


Well, my BMI is 19, or thereabouts. Nobody has called me scrawny, at least not to my face. Only positive comments (BMI was over 26 a couple of years ago). Got my calorie balance pretty sorted - weight has been stable for a while, despite fluctuating distance ridden.

I don't think you look scrawny. Lean, yes.

Riding fixed has changed some things. My weight is constant but my thighs are bigger/more defined. The question is: what's got smaller?

Edit: thighs are 58cm used to be 57cm. Back of fag packet calc suggests extra 0.5-1kg weigh there. Calves seem bigger too, not sure how much. Waist down from 34" to 32-33". Weight down from lifetime peak of 76kg to 70kg now. I think it's my arms that are scrawny not my legs. Thigh measurement is actually larger than average (good as it prevents CV disease). Calves were always a bit weedy but riding fixed is also helping with that.

Chris S

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1718 on: 03 June, 2011, 12:57:29 pm »
At what point does being thin become being scrawny?


Well, my BMI is 19, or thereabouts. Nobody has called me scrawny, at least not to my face. Only positive comments (BMI was over 26 a couple of years ago). Got my calorie balance pretty sorted - weight has been stable for a while, despite fluctuating distance ridden.

I don't think you look scrawny. Lean, yes.

Riding fixed has changed some things. My weight is constant but my thighs are bigger/more defined. The question is: what's got smaller?

*snigger*

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1719 on: 03 June, 2011, 01:29:58 pm »
Edit: thighs are 58cm used to be 57cm. Back of fag packet calc suggests extra 0.5-1kg weigh there. Calves seem bigger too, not sure how much. Waist down from 34" to 32-33". Weight down from lifetime peak of 76kg to 70kg now. I think it's my arms that are scrawny not my legs.

I am now imagining you looking something like this:



 ;D

d.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

hellymedic

  • Just do it!
Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1720 on: 03 June, 2011, 01:35:40 pm »
Have you met Giraffe?  ;) ;D

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1721 on: 03 June, 2011, 01:39:31 pm »
No, but I'm guessing his username is descriptive.

d.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1722 on: 03 June, 2011, 02:00:50 pm »
I guess the answer to disproportionately building leg muscles is to do some non-cycling upper body strength exercises. When I used to go to the gym in the dim and distant past I tended to avoid those machines because I don't particularly want muscley arms. I just did the ones that toned abs. Having said that I don't want to get saggy bat wings as I get older either!

hellymedic

  • Just do it!
Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1723 on: 03 June, 2011, 02:05:46 pm »
I guess the answer to disproportionately building leg muscles is to do some non-cycling upper body strength exercises. When I used to go to the gym in the dim and distant past I tended to avoid those machines because I don't particularly want muscley arms. I just did the ones that toned abs. Having said that I don't want to get saggy bat wings as I get older either!

Bingo wings come from fat and loose skin.
You won't get them if you don't get a fat body, fat arms and then lose much weight. Your arms are too slender and are unlikely to blow out unless you do massively..

simonp

Re: Weight Loss Discussion Thread
« Reply #1724 on: 03 June, 2011, 02:06:52 pm »
The last time I went to the gym and did upper body work was nearly 4 weeks ago. I think I rowed 700km in the last season, and routinely swimming 1-2km per week. Plus my abs + core routine I've been doing.

All of that has been on hold since the wrist injury.