Diet Help...

[dr_esteban]

I disagree on both of the above. I was involved in a big accident, 5 years ago, after the first two and a half years of recovery I gained about 25 kg due to physical inactivity. At that time I bought a recumbant rowingbike, adjusted for me (handicapped after the accident) and lost abt 14 kg in the first 6 weeks and another 15 in the 3 months after that. It fellt great and still does, and I'm still the same weight.

Remember that you don't only lose fat. You also lose water and, if you don't exercise, muscle.
To lose one kg of pure fat a week would be a really, really good result.

@Stratos
Well, RDA for sugar is about 100g/day. But that includes ALL sugar, including milk-sugar and fructose consumed in fruit/veggies.
But as long as your diet includes all the nutritients you need, is balanced and matched with a bit of exercise, your sugar cubes aren't that bad.
There's no such thing as bad food. There's only an imbalanced diet. Going to the nearest fast-food parlour eating the XXL menu isn't bad once a month. Not even if matched with soda. Doing it one a week is.
Having a bit of candy (you should consider your surared coffee like candy) a day isn't bad.

I wouldn't be overly concerned with losing a little muscle mass, that is more an issue for bodybuilders/athletes making a cut

A calorie controlled diet plus increasing exercise is pretty much a full proof plan.

 

[scalyblue]

Considering that muscle is one of the primary things that burns calories, losing muscle mass is counterproductive to losing fat.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Considering that muscle is one of the primary things that burns calories, losing muscle mass is counterproductive to losing fat.

And yet someone who weighs 400 pounds might actually want to lose some muscle mass. Shocking, but true.

 

[FCAAP_Dan]

I doubt that. Not many 400 lbs people have a lot of lean body mass.

i've lost almost 20 lbs in the past 7 weeks. Less fast food, more salads, and 10 to 12 miles of walking a week.

track what you eat and your exercise at fitday.com

 

[borrofburi]

I doubt that. Not many 400 lbs people have a lot of lean body mass.

I dunno, they generally have the muscle mass to carry around an extra couple hundred pounds all the time. I don't think I'd get very far if you strapped a 200 pound backpack to me.

 

[FCAAP_Dan]

I doubt that. Not many 400 lbs people have a lot of lean body mass.

I dunno, they generally have the muscle mass to carry around an extra couple hundred pounds all the time. I don't think I'd get very far if you strapped a 200 pound backpack to me.

They don't get very far either.

We're not talking about sumo wrestlers, we're talking about just an average man weighing 400 lbs. He might have slightly more skeletal muscle than you, but he's far from having a high amount of lean body mass. I'm sure his mobility and endurance is no where near your mobility.

 

[Salv]

I dunno, they generally have the muscle mass to carry around an extra couple hundred pounds all the time. I don't think I'd get very far if you strapped a 200 pound backpack to me.

They don't get very far either.

We're not talking about sumo wrestlers, we're talking about just an average man weighing 400 lbs. He might have slightly more skeletal muscle than you, but he's far from having a high amount of lean body mass. I'm sure his mobility and endurance is no where near your mobility.

I tend to agree with borrofburi (and you to a certain point). A few extra kilos on the arms alone makes quite a difference on the shoulders and what not. If you wear those weighted wrist pads for a day you'll see what I mean. Even though a heavier guy will have a lot more fat, they're also going to have more lean muscle than the average guy?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I doubt that. Not many 400 lbs people have a lot of lean body mass.

Have you ever looked at a fat man's calves? Like oak trees! :lol:

 

[Durakken]

I can leg press well over 500 lbs with one leg >.> The problem with that is the last time i tried to get into the machine it was too small height wise and after a certain weight the angle and such was just impossible to do to get into the machine

My right leg is less muscular than most people my weight according to one doctor, which is kind of expected considering that I have been favoring it for so long.

as far as upper body strength... it depends. Given knowledge and just straining myself way above what I should for bref lift i can lift quite a bit, but reliable lifting I can't lift half as much as i should be able to (ie my own body weight)

My stamina and such has also fallen due to not being able to do what I used to be able to because of my back problem so yeah...

However i would say my endurance is still higher than most peoples jsut because I'm me and I'll keep going even if it's at a crawl till i can't or think that it will injur myself to do more...

Overall I'd say i'm more healthy than most my size so that should tell you bout people my size...but that's a bit unfair because most people who weigh similar amounts are rather round and I'm not so meh whatever.

 

[FCAAP_Dan]

I tend to agree with borrofburi (and you to a certain point). A few extra kilos on the arms alone makes quite a difference on the shoulders and what not. If you wear those weighted wrist pads for a day you'll see what I mean. Even though a heavier guy will have a lot more fat, they're also going to have more lean muscle than the average guy?

I don't disagree that a larger person would have more skeletal muscle to move the extra weight, but it still comes down to how much more. What body fat percents are we talking about here?

Someone that's 400 lbs and 60% BF has 160 lbs of lean body mass, about 80 lbs of skeletal muscle. Which is about the same amount of skeletal muscle a normally fit 200 lbs person has. Of course, a 400 lbs person with 50% BF has more muscle. So it comes down to body composition. Not to mention muscle composition depending on fiber type.


But back to the main point of this tangent, why would someone in the right mind want to lose healthy muscle?

 

[stratos]

@Stratos
Well, RDA for sugar is about 100g/day. But that includes ALL sugar, including milk-sugar and fructose consumed in fruit/veggies.
But as long as your diet includes all the nutritients you need, is balanced and matched with a bit of exercise, your sugar cubes aren't that bad.
There's no such thing as bad food. There's only an imbalanced diet. Going to the nearest fast-food parlour eating the XXL menu isn't bad once a month. Not even if matched with soda. Doing it one a week is.
Having a bit of candy (you should consider your surared coffee like candy) a day isn't bad.

Thanks, wasn't too overly concerned, but since you people seem to have read-up about it and all, no harm in getting informed.

But back to the main point of this tangent, why would someone in the right mind want to lose healthy muscle?

*cough* being someone who's a overweight, my main concern isn't fat, nor is it weight. Mostly it's body shape. As someone already mentioned, calves of fat people are pretty big. If I ever started losing weight and getting in shape I would want to lose those too.

 

[borrofburi]

There's no such thing as bad food.

There is such a thing as bad ingestible substances though... Or "food like products" that are necessarily bad to ingest... The rule for food is if your great grandmother would recognize it as food then it's probably close enough. Basically, I'm saying that heavily processed edible substances have to be considered to be not-food if the above statement is to be considered true.

 

[scalyblue]

And one thing you absolutely must stop is caloric drinks. You could drink 2000 calories of liquid and you will still be hungry, just no longer thirsty. And it's not as hard to drink 2000 calories of liquid as you think, most starbucks lattes put you at least 1/4 of the way there.

 

[Salv]

But back to the main point of this tangent, why would someone in the right mind want to lose healthy muscle?

The only reason I can see for someone wanting to lose healthy muscle is just that they have too much of it.
In order to maintain the muscle they'd probably have to do a fair amount of working out.

<tangent>
Most body builders that I know of will spend their time in the off season gaining as much weight as possible, muscle or otherwise. Then around a month before the season starts they'll go on a crazy diet, bonk train and what not, to lose all the fat gains and with that goes some of the muscle gains. I used to know a amature bodybuilder who competed in the under 80kgs category and usually weighed around 90 odd kgs. In a month just before the season he would generally lose about 12kgs so he could compete in his weight group. But anyway, to maintain muscle, the muscle needs to be worked out or the body will generally just see it as excess and dump it for the sake of efficiency and its excess energy consumption?
</tangent>

Edit: *its ffs.

 

[FCAAP_Dan]

Well considering muscle is more dense than fat, as far as body shape losing fat is going to change the appearance more. As the fat comes off it will change the way the body looks. I don't know of any overweight people that go, "Man, I would look so good if I could only get rid of all this muscle UNDER the fat."

Plus, being muscular looks healthy even if there's more of it.

I can't see this really being someone in their right mind other than a severe body image issue which makes them want to lose both fat and muscle to get skinny.

<tangent>
Most body builders that I know of will spend their time in the off season gaining as much weight as possible, muscle or otherwise.
</tangent>

Edit: *its ffs.

As a weightlifter and a fan of bodybuilding, smart bodybuilders try to put on as much muscle with as little fat gain before dieting down. It's the crazies that go nuts and put on too much fat during the offseason which is actually counter productive.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I can't see this really being someone in their right mind other than a severe body image issue which makes them want to lose both fat and muscle to get skinny.

Or people who are too damned big for their own comfort. Do you think everyone wants to be a bodybuilder? I'm losing weight, and I know I'm going to have to burn off some of the muscle to get down to where I want to be, which is still going to be "huge" for my height. It all depends on your build. I'm pretty short, 5'7", so I don't want any extra muscle on me at all, because it just doesn't look as good IMO.

I'm with you on it as far as someone wanting to just be "skinny" but I'm sure there are lots of guys who would prefer to be a little less muscular.

 

[Salv]

<tangent>
Most body builders that I know of will spend their time in the off season gaining as much weight as possible, muscle or otherwise.
</tangent>

Edit: *its ffs.

As a weightlifter and a fan of bodybuilding, smart bodybuilders try to put on as much muscle with as little fat gain before dieting down. It's the crazies that go nuts and put on too much fat during the offseason which is actually counter productive.

Aye aye, I agree, in terms of diet and overtraining, it's probably better to either eat a little more or train a little less to avoid overtraining. I guess the newbies are the ones who are scared of overtraining and tend to over eat as training less would also seem counter productive.

 

[Giliell]

Considering that muscle is one of the primary things that burns calories, losing muscle mass is counterproductive to losing fat.

And yet someone who weighs 400 pounds might actually want to lose some muscle mass. Shocking, but true.

No matter whether you want it or not, you're going to lose some.
About 10 years ago I was very overweight and started slimming. I changed eating habits, I started taking the neighbours' dog for long walks (since it was a kind but badly trained boxer, it would work out my arms as well), riding a bike. But still, when I'd lost 20 kg, lifting 10 was more difficult than before...

There is such a thing as bad ingestible substances though... Or "food like products" that are necessarily bad to ingest... The rule for food is if your great grandmother would recognize it as food then it's probably close enough. Basically, I'm saying that heavily processed edible substances have to be considered to be not-food if the above statement is to be considered true.

There's no such thing as bad food.

There is such a thing as bad ingestible substances though... Or "food like products" that are necessarily bad to ingest... The rule for food is if your great grandmother would recognize it as food then it's probably close enough. Basically, I'm saying that heavily processed edible substances have to be considered to be not-food if the above statement is to be considered true.

Agreed. With the exemption that I still like foreign food my great-grandmother wouldn't have considered food. And accounting for the fact that she lived in wartimes when crows were considered food I'm not talking about the ingerdients of a mad scientist's chemistry lab in terms of food.

*cough* being someone who's a overweight, my main concern isn't fat, nor is it weight. Mostly it's body shape.

But please stay sensible. There's a good shape for everybody and for most people it's not what is shown in the magazines. People come in different sizes and proportions. They also come with different tendencies where to store their extra lbs.
For me, a good size 12 is the minimum (although I wished I was anywhere near 12 at the moment). Anything less than that and I start looking like badly put together, because then my boobs and my hips wouldn't fit the rest of my body.

 

[QuanSai]

Does anyone know where I can get advice on a good diet... I'm not talking crappy pop diet BS but actual good diet information... or anyone that can give some advice here.

Why do I ask... because I need to lose weight and I know I have a horrendous diet that I need to change soon. I weigh 400+lbs and depending on who you ask that is about 100-200lbs over healthy. I am limited in my exorcising ability so that only really leaves food to handle losing the weight... and that's bad new for me cuz I just plain suck with food. I can't plan around it and I'm uncreative with food selections and cooking... So even though I know pasta = high carbs and I shouldn't eat it and fruit = something that i should I eat I always end up eating pasta because the fruit runs out and I can't get more or eating fruit and eating fruits and veggies is meh to me...dunno why.... plus I just don't think when buy the food so I need help.

So yeah, any help would be appreciated...

I lost over 80lbs within less than a year without any of those stupid commercial diets.

Here's what you do:

1) Drink 1 gallon of water within 1 hour per day for 1 whole week (at least 5 days straight.)
2) Drink 1 gallon of water per day, but not so fast. Just make sure you reach 1 gallon per day after the first step.
3) As you do steps 1 and 2, run and jog everywhere you can. I don't care if it's to the TV. You need to burn energy, and the body stores energy as fat. You do the math. And I mean RUN OR JOG EVERYWHERE!
4) Stay AWAY from high-fat cal foods.
5) Eat at least 6 times a day, but VERY small portions. Eat only to stay alive without that gas feeling in your stomach. If you don't feel gas in your stomach, don't fucking eat. The second you just want to taste something, drink some of your water. The feeling will leave very quickly.
6) Repeat steps 1 - 5 as you continue to be active in your pursuit. Try to do some push ups here and there too.

This is all I can tell you from experience. I was a high school athlete at 286lbs, but I had to lose the weight after my senior football season before college. It's stupid to keep the weight when you don't need it to be a wall for a skinny guy on a football field -- know what I mean? =]

 

[stratos]

*cough* being someone who's a overweight, my main concern isn't fat, nor is it weight. Mostly it's body shape. As someone already mentioned, calves of fat people are pretty big. If I ever started losing weight and getting in shape I would want to lose those too.

Well considering muscle is more dense than fat, as far as body shape losing fat is going to change the appearance more. As the fat comes off it will change the way the body looks. I don't know of any overweight people that go, "Man, I would look so good if I could only get rid of all this muscle UNDER the fat."

Plus, being muscular looks healthy even if there's more of it.

I can't see this really being someone in their right mind other than a severe body image issue which makes them want to lose both fat and muscle to get skinny.

My point wasn't "get rid of all this muscle under the fat", my point is "I don't care if it's fat, muscle, bone, water, dust, glass, granite, hair or marshmallows" It's got to go.

But please stay sensible. There's a good shape for everybody and for most people it's not what is shown in the magazines. People come in different sizes and proportions.

Yes of course. To say more then I actually would like to divulge, a large part of it would be practicality. Currently I'm one or two sizes too large in terms of jeans to buy confection wares in your average store here. They only go till size 38 and I need 40 - 42. (sizes go per 2 here, don't ask me why)