Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjay
Oh kjay, I'm so sorry to hear you're injured! Take good care of yourself - best to rest up for a few days, rather than try to get out there before your body is ready. On the bright side - would this be a good excuse to pamper yourself with a massage? Might work wonders on both your back and your spirits. :)
Susan
Susan, its been so exciting hearing about your weight loss. Its been great watching your progress here (and everyones!). Why don't you post some pictures. You must be so proud of yourself. I am just curious, are you a Medium now, or even fitting into some Smalls?
One reason I am curious, is that I did notice a big difference in my body shape when I lost weight on WW vs a high protein/low carb diet. In my case, it may be because I have impaired glucose tolerance so did much better on low carb, but on the high protein/low carb diet I noticed that I preserved more lean body mass as I lost than I did on WW, so now I am the same clothing size (small, 4-6) at 140 lb as I was at 120 lb years ago on weight watchers (correcting for size inflation, etc.). Both times I started at ~170, which I noticed is also near your starting weight.
Trisk,
I don't have any recent pictures of myself. I'm planning to take one the day of the Shamrock Run, to use as a comparison to the "before" weight. I'll post the before and after then. :) It's definitely a noticeable change, even now. Many people that I haven't seen in a while (who didn't know I was trying to shed weight) have told me I look thinner. Yay!
Sizing is a very interesting thing. As far as cycling clothing goes - At 5'4" and 165 pounds, I was in an XL in just about everything. I can still wear all the jerseys, though they are noticeably roomier, especially in the waist/hip. I'm busty (I've dropped a cup size, from DD to D) so I still have a 38-39 inch bust circumference. A goodly number of my XL jerseys still don't look overly large in the bust. I should say, though, that I am not a super-form-fitting-jersey kind of girl. I prefer a semi-fit cut, so the fact that my XLs have gotten roomy is OK with me. But, undoubtedly, by the summer most of them should be simply too big (I'm hoping to be 130 by summer).
In shorts - just about all my shorts were XL, and I can wear L now. I could probably even wear some mediums, though I haven't actually tried any Ms on yet. I haven't given a whole lot of thought to which new pieces I want to acquire for the coming season, so I've not spent much time in the bathroom trying on bottoms. I *have* tried on a bunch of the new spring jerseys, though. I'm wavering between M & L in most of them. The Ls are roomy at the waist but are mostly good in the bust. I can wear some Ms if the fabrics have more give. But I'm still more comfortable in the Ls.
At 130, I'll probably be a solid medium in most things (I'm hoping to get my bust measurement down to a 34C. That would be heaven.) When I was 25, I was 133 pounds and wore M in pretty much all my cycling clothing. On the other hand, that was 15 years ago. With vanity sizing being as crazy as it is, who knows!
I have very little clothing labeled 6-8-10 etc so I probably can't really answer your sizing question. I buy my jeans from Chico's and they use a different scale (I am now a 1.5). Almost everything else I own is labeled s-m-l etc. I have no idea where I'll end up in "dress" sizes, though at 133 I was a size 8. But that was 15 years ago - with the shift in sizing, I'll likely be a 6 now.
It's interesting to me that you feel that the different weight loss methods had different effects on your body composition. Did you have the same exercise regimen each time? I wonder if a change in the type or frequency of exercise you did during your weight loss is responsible for some of that.
As for me, I've not been counting my fat/carb/protein ratios during my time on WW. I think I have a pretty good balance. Because carb-rich foods are calorie dense, I tend to eat them only in moderation. I haven't had pasta in 2months or so and only rarely have any potato. I eat wild rice 1-2 a week. Breakfast is usually carb-based (oatmeal, 10-grain cereal, muesli), but most of the rest of my meals are more reliant on veggies and lean proteins.
Susan
When I was younger I ballooned up to 165 following my pregnancies. I am 5 ft 4.5" tall. I lost 50 lb on weight watchers, but felt really hungry all the time, and got down to clothes that were labeled small then and still fit me now (we can't compare the numbered clothes I know). When I look back at records of my body fat percent though, what I noticed was especially as those last 20 lb came off, it was mostly muscle. At 115 lb my bodyfat percent was 22, so that means my LBM was only 90lb. My exercise at the time was marathon training, and when that ended even though I continued running the weight slowly but surely crept back on. I also found the WW diet tough, felt like I was constantly fighting hunger and my body.
Fast-forward to a couple years ago when I discovered I had impaired glucose tolerance and had to eat a low carb high protein diet. At that point I was an avid cyclist, and at 175 fairly muscular. I was a solid L in most things, an occasional M. Sized items were a 10-12, but again with vanity sizing hard to interpret. While I am not a body builder, I visited boards where women discussed bodybuilding. In body building lingo, I viewed my weight gain as an 'intentional bulk' that is when you gain fat you also gain muscle to carry it around with. So when body builders want to gain muscle and lose fat, first they gain weight (like I did but on purpose), and then by dieting down on a high protein diet, try to selectively remove the fat. As long as you are eating enough protein, you shouldn't need to catabolize your body protein. This made sense to me as a biochemist, and since I had to eat a high protein low carb diet due to my insulin problem, I wondered if it would work that way. To my surprise. I got to that magic body fat percent of 22%, but this time at 140 lb instead of 120. That means now at 140 lb I have a LBM of 110 and can wear many of the same size S clothing items I purchased when I was 120 lb (so I am comparing the same garments, not a number that has varied over time)! I think that is why even though 140 is still on the high end of normal for a person of my height, I can now wear mostly smalls, with the occasional XS on the bottom, and am a 6 on top and 4 on the bottom (which even with vanity sizing seems small to me!). What was also different about it for me this time, is the weight loss felt very natural. I didn't feel like I was dieting as in feeling hungry or deprived. As long as I ate to normalize my blood sugars, I felt like my body weight was normalizing too. I was eating more calories than when I had gained my weight (although that is due to my insulin problem) but the weight just fell off me. The other thing that is different is how easy its been to maintain. While eating less doesn't get me below that magic 22 percent body fat (I've always been that way as a minimum) if I just listen to my body and feed it what it asks, and don't eat foods that ever let my blood sugar go higher than 120 (i.e. I eat mostly lean proteins and non-starchy veggies, but am not afraid of fat) my weight has been really stable for almost 2 years now. You did make a lot of money on me though, as I replaced stuff when I was a M, thinking I'd never be a S, and then had to buy everything all over again in S (although if you remember you let me return the still tagged unworn M apparel)!
I throw this out, cuz I think one thing I learned is how important it was for me to keep my protein high enough (~110g per day) to preserve lean body mass while slimming down. Even without weight lifting, it let me selectively lose fat, and be leaner at a higher body weight than I was when I lost weight on a more balanced diet. I don't know how much of this are my issues with carbs, but I also think that many women that struggle with their weight, even if they don't meet the medical definition of impaired glucose tolerance, may be more carb sensitivie than their leaner counterparts. But clearly you are doing well on a balanced WW plan, but I just wanted to throw out that as you continue to lose, be sure to eat enough protein to protect your LBM!
Oops, I forgot to post for Friday.. I am stuck at 152. Don't know what my deal is right now but I think I have been taking in too many carbs due to my increased running mileage. This week I'm going to really work on cutting that down.
This made me think to add that if you are going to exercise on a low carb diet, be sure to still drink a protein rich drink with electrolytes on the bike.
That works out to about 440 calories per day. Do you have any idea what this is as a % of your total daily caloric intake?Quote:
Originally Posted by Triskeliongirl
Susan
When I lost my weight (20 lbs) a few years ago, in addition to cutting out my 1000 calorie breakfast at Starbucks, I also increased my protein significantly. I had been almost a vegetarian since my then-husband was a vegetarian. When we split up, I started eating fish, chicken, and meat again. I had more energy and lost the weight in a few months, without trying. I didn't do any math or anything, and there were alot of factors that contributed to the weight loss (stress over the split, no more starbucks, more protein, more fresh fruit). I actually cut my exercise because when I moved, I ended up much closer to my office and lost my 28-mile RT bike commute (not that I recommend cutting exercise, that was just my situation).
Just thought I'd throw that out as an anecdote.
147. DH did say yesterday I looked like I was getting lean in my bike clothes. I will take a slight weight gain, I feel damn good about my appearance.
This is the typical breakdown of my food while dieting (and even during maintenance, I basically reached a percent body fat for which my body doesn't like to go below).
~1400 calories per day
110 g protein x 4= 440 cal
30 g CHO x 4= 120 cal
93 g fat x 9 = 837 cal
But Susan, don't think of the 110 g as a percentage of your total calories, the idea was to try to eat ~1 g of protein per lb of LBM. You can calculate your LBM from your body fat percentage. Subtract your body fat percentage from 100, and multiple that times your body weight to get your LBM.
It may sound like a lot of fat, but I do use mostly monounsaturated fats, i.e. olive oil, but I do use full fat milk products like yogurt as they have less lactose, again due to my impaired glucose tolerance. Also, my triglycerides are very low, and all my blood lipids went down eating this way. Fat is only bad for you when combined with carbohydrates (gary taube's good calories bad calories is a great read).
On a day I do a long club ride, I would eat more in the form of protein shakes (Jay Robb Protein Powder, sweetened w stevia so no carbs, but protein and electrolytes). But if you don't have impaired glucose tolerance like me you might want to try a drink that is a blend of protein and carbs and electrolytes. My husband likes Cytomax I think its called.
I don't mean to push my low carb lifestyle on you guys. I have good medical reasons for needing to eat this way. But, I do think that for even a person with a normal metabolism, that keeping protein up while dieting is really important for selectively losing fat over muscle, which after all is the real goal. What bothered me about weight watchers, is they paid more attention to scale weight than body fat percentage. I did become a lifetime member, and while the diet did work for me when I was younger, I found maintenance tough if I wasn't marathon training too, and it didn't work anymore as my impaired glucose tolerance got worse. Now, while exercise is great, its not essential for maintenance. I just got back from a long trip to europe where all I did for exercise was walk, and even found I lost a few pounds.
My weight on Sat was 170.3 - so a slight gain. Not bad considering that I haven't been recording my intake at all (because I'm rebelling).
I'm working out some mental issues while I'm also working on increasing my activity. Ultimately, I'm changing the way I'm going about this as WW doesn't seem to be doing it for me. It's time to use what I know and lose weight the way I know it works for me.
Susan and Trisk - Your conversation of late is very interesting to me. Trisk - I know we've talked about this before. I am also 5'4", but I'm built very differently from both of you. At 170 lbs, I still wear smalls and mediums on top (not much chest here!) and a size 12 (vanity) jean. My bike shorts are still mediums, but I have relatively narrow hips and carry most of my weight in my legs. When I'm about 15 lbs lighter - I'm wearing smalls, so it's relative.
Anyway, I 100% agree with the protien concept that Trisk mentions. When I was at my thinnest (adult weight - about 4 years ago), I was 138 and wearing all 4's. I had a 19% BF. I was lifting HEAVY weights and using running and step aerobics as my primary cardio. This was right before I started biking - it's been all GAIN since then! Anyway, I was also eating a high protien diet. But, I was not low carb - for me, my carb ratio was more moderate and predominantly veggie/fruit related (with 1 whole grain serving per day). Overall, I was aiming for a 40% protien, 40% carb and 20% fat ratio at every meal, or at the very least, for my day totals. The weight just FELL off me. It's this ratio that I am going back to - I just have a hard time with my current lifestyle because we eat very little meat now. Additionally, I will not buy the large packs of 'industrial' chicken breasts that was a big staple of my diet back then. I will figure something out, though.
My point is that I totally agree that sufficient protien in your diet while losing weight defintely helps your body preserve the muscle and lose the fat. How else could I have been a 19% BF at 138 lbs?! I had a beautiful 6-pack and well defined arms and legs, then, too. 1 gram per lb of body weight is a good estimate. I like using my calories and figuring out 40% so that I ensure that I'm also getting the carbs I need for my cardio and the good fats my body needs for repair efforts.
Anyway, that's my 0.02...
I agree with everything you have said Catherine. I think dropping carbs really low is only necessary for those with impaired glucose tolerance. However I think having adequate protein, and more fibrous sources of carbs is good for all.
I just hope what I posted is helpful for those of you that are even borderline carb intolerant. I have tested lots of people with my glucose meter, and see a real range, even amongst people who still test in the normal range. Catherine, perhaps you are one of those that while normal, would do better to somewhat restrict carbs, not as much as me, but focussing on the higher fiber less processed sources. But, if you are following WW and not losing, perhaps you do have some impaired glucose tolerance.
In terms of protein being boring, no I do not buy bags of frozen chicken breasts. We eat lots of fish (if you are a smart shopper you can try different cheaper varieties and find ones you like that are 'underappreciated'). I also like ground turkey (85% lean is tastiest) which we add seasonings to and make sausages, chili, burgers from. My favorite pre-ride breakfast is a couple of turkey sausages.
154lbs.
I also find the discussion very interesting. When I start cycling (about 150miles per week at least - on a fixie) I was recommended to eat before long rides carbs but they just made me tired, sleepy and left me hungry.
Since being little, I hate taste of sugar, cannot stand chocolate and the only carbs I like are potatoes. Any form of sugar makes me feel really bad. I found that the best breakfast for me is egg, cheese and ham sandwich. It lasts me for a long time and gives me a lot of energy.
Lately I signed up for 30 days of Bikram yoga and half way through I was tired, stiff and totally exhausted. I read this thread and started to count the protein in my diet and realized that I am barely on 70g per day. I upped the protein (mainly Quinoa salads) and I am great again.
My question is - where and how do you get tested for impaired glucose tolerance?
Thanks,
Martina
So, just for giggles I went and calculated all my ratios for yesterday and Thursday (I had a meal out both Friday and Saturday, so skipped those days because they are too hard to estimate with any accuracy.)
Yesterday:
1032 calories. 17g fat, 176g carb, 47.5g protein. (14.6%-67.2%-18.1%)
Thursday:
899 calories. 14.5g fat, 150g carb, 35.5 protein (13.8% fat, 63.7%, 22.5%)
Before anyone goes and beats me up on how few calories I'm eating...
I only get 19 WW points, which works out to around 950 calories. In fact, most days I end up eating more*, either because I'm hungry or because I'm exercising and need more fuel. Yesterday I ran for an hour, but I made surprisingly filling meals and wasn't really hungry until late in the evening. But as I say, normally on a running day I'll get closer to 25-27 points. On Thursday I didn't get any exercise, so I tried to stick to my points budget.
Anyway, I was surprised that my protein % was as low as it was on those 2 days. A few things pop into my mind: Yesterday was a completely vegetarian day for me. I had tempeh & beans and cottage cheese as my main protein sources. Cottage cheese and some feta were my only animal products. On Thursday, the only animal protein I had was 2 oz turkey breast @ lunch. No dairy. The rest of my protein came from black beans and oatmeal.
Tonight I'll probably go back and do a few other days, because I'm not really sure these two days are really representative. As I review them, I realize that both of these days are lower in animal products than is typical for me. For example, I often (most days) have yogurt for a snack. I eat 3-4 eggs per week. I also have animal protein (lean beef, lean pork or, fish) 4-5 nights per week (I was a non-meat eater for 10 years, but went back to it gradually about 6 months ago).
Nonetheless, what this tells me is I need to work on making a conscious effort to incorporate some more protein into my diet daily. I should probably be getting 1.5-2x what I'm getting now.
Susan
*(My last 7 days calories have worked out to roughly 1650, 1000, 1450, 900, 1500, 1400, 1000)
One of the gals in my office teaches classes in nutrition at one of the local colleges. After I did all those calcs, I had a conversation with her about protein, etc. Here's an email she sent me on the subject.
"One thing to consider in increasing protein intake -
Pacific foods makes an "Ultra" soy milk - fortified with extra soy protein, calcium, and vitamin D.
Each serving is an extra 5 grams or so of protein compared to "regular" soymilk.
It tastes/feels a fair bit richer than regular-strength soymilk, too.
I've found it to be a very easy way to increase my calcium intake - important because osteoporosis is rampant in my mom's family.
At 145# and 25% bodyfat (I'd estimate 22-26%) you'd have a LBM of about 110#, and as an active person you'd want to have about 90 grams of protein per day.
Interestingly, the WHO would recommend a lower protein intake - 0.8 kcal per kg of bodyweight, which comes out to be about 55 g/day (i.e. about what you're taking in now). This is the figure that they believe to be barely adequate to maintain a person at rest or light activity, without compromising their immune system.
When you're in caloric deficit, you are going to burn protein as fuel. Any ship in a storm! Your body is EXTREMELY smart about protein, since it's the most expensive stuff to make. The metabolic pathways that make protein try to not compete with the pathways that break it down - in other words, if you're breaking down protein as fuel, your body will eventually figure out that it's pretty senseless to be building so much body protein, so the protein-building pathways will shrink to just cover your minimum needs for digestive enzymes, blood, immune proteins, etc. If you provide more protein in your diet, you're doing two things: First, you're limiting the amount of body protein that's going to be broken down - breaking down protein for fuel is a SLOW process relative to fat or carbs, and if there's a dietary source it will be used first. Second, abundant protein entering your system will make more protein synthesis happen by a phenomenon known as "mass action" - if you swamp the available protein-building enzymes with proteins, more protein gets synthesized.
Going too far overboard with protein intake will not help, but WILL stress your kidneys. And going to too high of a protein intake on a restricted calorie diet means that it's hard to get everything you need.
On a 1300-kcal diet, you'd be looking at 25-30% protein as a good target. Allowing 20% fat, that means your carbs would be 50-55% of your intake. 160 g/d of carbs is going to be barely sufficient when you're working out, and may not be enough to insure topped-off glycogen stores - in other words, in the last week or so before the Shamrock, you may perform better if you bring your energy intake up a bit - more like a maintenance, rather than weight-loss, diet. "
Obviously, I have some work to do to more appropriately balance my diet.
As always, thanks for the fantastic conversation, ladies!
Susan