|
2003/04/30, 09:43 AM
Hi again all. Im getting really confused about calorie content. Though I guess it should be straight forward. Anyways its 930 in the am in Connecticut and ive already consumed 915 calories. Im reading the way to lose weight is to consume less calories so your body will begin to burn fat (striving for that 6pack), and if you eat more calories you gain fat. I don't eat junk (sometimes coffee). But i have been working out for 2 months now, and have had some muscle growth, and due to that i am hungary 70% of the time-which means i eat alot. I also read somewhere that if you starve yourself, or don't eat when you are hungary, your body also stores fat. Granted 2 months isn't long to be working out for, just i guess i want drastic results quick but i am willing to wait it out. Im wicked (my boston is coming out) into working out, just confused about food/diet which is almost all of getting the abs. Thanks guys for any info.
|
|
|
|
2003/04/30, 10:26 AM
How about some crude calorie math? One pound is around 3,500 calories. To lose that pound you need to run a deficit 3,500 calories. Depending upon your intensity, that's around 10 hours of cardio.
Now you use calories just being alive. Working out uses many more and resulting muscle more calories yet. You know what you consume, figure out your "hold steady" level, then target calorie deficits.
About starvation: For the last 65 million years or so, humans have lived a little below the starvation level - survival has been the goal and food has been scarce - this continues for most of the world, even today. The body has adapted to storing fat when faced with famine. The body will begin to shut down "non-essential activities" to preserve life. So if you stop eating - simulating famine - you're body will try to sleep more, not think too much, slow down in general to preserve fat reserves. So you need to adapt your eating and exercise so the body doesn't perceive famine, just reasonable changes in demand for calories (exercise) and variation in calories available.
We're incredible lucky to live where the availability and reliability of more than adequate nutrition is certain. Now we have to adapt our eating and exercise to the starvation-based machine our bodies are. Change in eating habits - careful feeding, not starvation - is the means to lowering our survival fat reserves. There's a whole lot of evolution to overcome here. You have to change your life, how often you each how much of what food. 5-6 small meals and lots more water is recommended. "Diet" products mask consumption - better to change the kinds of food and drink to nutritionally beneficial ones.
You're on your way to controlling your weight and health. The real crisis is that majority of people in the US and the exploding overweight problem. (off my soap box now)
|
|
2003/04/30, 10:58 AM
Just 1 question. What is a "hold steady" level? Is that just what i consume in a day in calories? Then figure out ways and where to cut calories? YOur response is very informative and useful thank you.You are very knowledgable.
|
|
2003/04/30, 11:41 AM
I'd describe it as the amount of calories where your weight doesn't change - within a tolerance of a few pounds - given your exercise level. I plan my food intake and keep an eye on my weight, so I have a rough idea of how much "cheating" I can get away with. You can then lower your calories or increase the exercise to reduce weight, which will work for a while until you reach another equilibrium. But we're talking months not days.
I'm on a fat reducing effort myself. I've targetted 1/2 pound per week by increasing my cardio and holding everything else steady. I'm in week 3 and the results look a little ahead of target - but I'm still within the overall tolerance of weight change - so I'm planning to evaluate after 4 weeks, then 8 weeks. Increased muscle mass - a really good thing - does confuse pure weight results and also increases your resting calorie consumption. Of course I'll brag if those abs show up sooner.
|
