Unutterably Silly Who is on a diet. Come on I know you all are!

[Stitchawl]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Well done! Pretty soon you'll be lighter than me! Unless I lose the weight I intend to lose. Going OK so far.

Probably not, as I'm really beginning to put muscle back on. That's just slower than getting rid of the fat. I'm not really working on that side of it as hard, either. I have no intention of getting into body building. I just want to be back in the condition I was in 30 years ago.


Stitchawl

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Stitchawl

Probably not, as I'm really beginning to put muscle back on.

That is indeed something that only exercise will do. Perhaps in a few years more I'll feel the need.

[Stitchawl]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

That is indeed something that only exercise will do. Perhaps in a few years more I'll feel the need.

It's also really the only thing that will take off the fat. The long walks several times a week, stair climbing every day, and daily PT in the house were what got me to my goal at the start of the New Year. Dieting alone 'may' have removed 5 kilo in that time instead of 23. And now 25.


Stitchawl

[Skibble]

Originally Posted by Stitchawl

Can you say 'Freudian Slip?'

Ha! Sad to say, I do this all the time when I write. I don't think I've ever made a forum post I didn't have to go back and edit for typos later. I think I'll leave this error where it is, though. It's too amusing.

Congrats on your weight loss, Stitchawl! I like the practical, everyday forms of exercise you're using. Like you, I have no interest in body building or hardcore workouts at a gym. I have no intention of trying to become buff and toned; I just want to be able to look at myself in the mirror and feel proud for eating responsibly and dropping the chub.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Stitchawl

It's also really the only thing that will take off the fat. The long walks several times a week, stair climbing every day, and daily PT in the house were what got me to my goal at the start of the New Year. Dieting alone 'may' have removed 5 kilo in that time instead of 23. And now 25.


Stitchawl

It takes a heck of a lot of exercising, though, to get rid of fat on its own. 1lb of fat contains about 3500 calories. Brisk walking uses perhaps 80 calories a mile, so you need to walk about 44 miles to burn a pound of fat. Whereas consuming 500 calories a day less than your body needs will achieve the same thing in a week. A combination of exercise and eating less is, I think, the most effective method.

[Stitchawl]

Originally Posted by Skibble

Congrats on your weight loss, Stitchawl! I like the practical, everyday forms of exercise you're using.

I tried the 'gym' thing... It wasn't for me. Too many people sitting on exercise bikes reading books instead of sweating. Then I realized I didn't need to spend money to get a good workout. I just had to get off my a$$!

I just want to be able to look at myself in the mirror and feel proud for eating responsibly and dropping the chub.

Exactly!

Originally Posted by HarryT

It takes a heck of a lot of exercising, though, to get rid of fat on its own.

Frankly, I doubt it can really be done on its own.

A combination of exercise and eating less is, I think, the most effective method.

Dropping 25 kilo in six months, I have to agree. Eating a LOT less. Not just 500 calories a day less. That works in 'theory.' I reduced my daily intake by 1,500-2,000 calories a day, keeping below 750-1,000 calories a day of fresh, balanced foods. (A 'BurgerKing "Big Wopper w/cheese" is about 1,000 calories by itself! Add in the fries and the numbers really climb!) And exercising diligently almost every day. Long, fast uphill walks, stair climbing instead of elevators, and ordinary calisthenics in the house burned off what years of 3,000 calories a day put on.

It's a shame there isn't some way for each of us to find out 'exactly' how many calories our own bodies use in our 'normal' daily life. There are lots of lists of 'averages,' but everyone's metabolism is different. Add in the differences for muscle mass and you get some real variation in metabolic rates. I'd love to know how much "I" burn when doing some activities.

Stitchawl

[Billi]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It takes a heck of a lot of exercising, though, to get rid of fat on its own. 1lb of fat contains about 3500 calories. Brisk walking uses perhaps 80 calories a mile, so you need to walk about 44 miles to burn a pound of fat. Whereas consuming 500 calories a day less than your body needs will achieve the same thing in a week. A combination of exercise and eating less is, I think, the most effective method.

This is not only a mathematical problem. When you reduce weight by only consuming much less you will send your body to starvation mode in which he keeps all his reserves as he thinks he needs it for surviving. And by just eating normally again (not the big amounts like before) you will again gain a lot of fat and weight.
By combining it with exercise you set your body into a fat burning mode in which he gives free all the unwanted calories and burns the fat.

Originally Posted by Stitchawl

It's a shame there isn't some way for each of us to find out 'exactly' how many calories our own bodies use in our 'normal' daily life. There are lots of lists of 'averages,' but everyone's metabolism is different. Add in the differences for muscle mass and you get some real variation in metabolic rates. I'd love to know how much "I" burn when doing some activities.

You can start by wearing a pulse watch (?, heart rate monitor) a whole day long or for some days. It's not completely correct as it is also based on some average statistics but it is a beginning.

[Stitchawl]

Originally Posted by Billi

You can start by wearing a pulse watch (?, heart rate monitor) a whole day long or for some days. It's not completely correct as it is also based on some average statistics but it is a beginning.

Interesting...
How do you use heart rate to calculate metabolism? Is it a certain number of beats equals burn rate?


Stitchawl

[Billi]

In principle yes, but it is a little bit more refined.
The watch takes into account your age, height, weight, heart rate while not doing anything, maximal heart rate ... and also if you are exercising below or above your aerobic threshold. As I said, as the calculations are based on general statistics they may not be 100 percent correct for you especially, but it gives a very good general line how much calories one is burning. But I think it is not worth buying a heart rate monitor only for this one day/one week of testing if one has no other use of it.

[Stitchawl]

Originally Posted by Billi

In principle yes, but it is a little bit more refined.
The watch takes into account your age, height, weight, heart rate while not doing anything, maximal heart rate ... and also if you are exercising below or above your aerobic threshold. As I said, as the calculations are based on general statistics they may not be 100 percent correct for you especially, but it gives a very good general line how much calories one is burning. But I think it is not worth buying a heart rate monitor only for this one day/one week of testing if one has no other use of it.

Hmmmm..... I would imagine that if one wore it every day for a few weeks, you could get some sort of 'average' worked out. I might just look into this... I imagine a watch like this does more than just monitor heart rate. Might be fun to have!

Of course if I were 30 years younger, I'd just find a pretty nurse to follow me around all day with a stethoscope and count. But then... if she were really pretty, that would probably throw off my heart rate.... Maybe the watch would be a better idea. I'm going to look around the net and see how much they are. Thanks, Billi!


Stitchawl

[orlok]

I'm relatively happy that I only put on 3lbs over the festive period (suspended my fasting days for about a week and a half), so am now back into it big time, at the moment having one day on, one day off in terms of fasting to try to catch up. My wife bought me a Daily Activity Monitor for Christmas, which measures things like calories expended, distance walked and peaks of physical activity. Not sure how accurate it really is, but will hopefully give trending of how active I am over the long-term. I'm hoping it will encourage me to get exercising regularly.

On that subject, I saw a programme on TV last night about new research that shows 3 minutes of HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training) exercise PER WEEK is as good, if not better, than the 5 half-hour sessions recommended by the government. Definitely needs more investigation .

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by orlok

On that subject, I saw a programme on TV last night about new research that shows 3 minutes of HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training) exercise PER WEEK is as good, if not better, than the 5 half-hour sessions recommended by the government. Definitely needs more investigation .

That's I suspect, is talking about benefit for your heart. That's rather different from extended exercise for the purpose of burning calories. 3 minutes exercise a week, no matter how "high intensity" it may be, certainly isn't going to burn many calories .

I try to average 3-4 miles brisk walking on a weekday, and perhaps double that at the weekend. It's pounding out the miles that burns fat.

[orlok]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's I suspect, is talking about benefit for your heart. That's rather different from extended exercise for the purpose of burning calories. 3 minutes exercise a week, no matter how "high intensity" it may be, certainly isn't going to burn many calories .

I try to average 3-4 miles brisk walking on a weekday, and perhaps double that at the weekend. It's pounding out the miles that burns fat.

I have to admit to being sceptical about the 3 minute a week claim, too, but there is something in HIIT as concept. For example, a 154 pound person running at a pace of 8 mph burns 320 calories in 20 minutes. That same person, walking at 3 mph for an hour, burns 235 calories. Additionally, the claim is that after a high-intensity session, your body continues burning calories at a higher rate than normal for the rest of the day, and even into the next day.

Also, according to a 2011 study presented at the American College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting, just 2 weeks of high-intensity intervals improves your aerobic capacity as much as 6 to 8 weeks of endurance training.

[ProfCrash]

I wanna get back to the gym. I miss my elliptical and the weights.

[orlok]

I'm back to my pre-Christmas break weight , so I'm pleased with that. Achieved through a one-day-on-one-day-off fasting regime in the last week. So the challenge now is to lose another 4 pounds to get to my target weight, at which point I'll just work on stabilising, and probably move to a one day per week fasting schedule. Happy New Year .