[Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by theEZV

Diets or counting calories doesn't work for me, I'm just not disciplined enough to commit fully, plus I am really picky about what I eat. Being active (walking/hiking, working out, swimming is my favorite tho) 6 days a week and being smarter about what I eat - cut back as much as possible on the stuff you know is bad, like bread, sugar, soda, fast food, etc). I drink less than I did in my 20's, that's also a plus.

Background:

I'm 32. In the past 10 years I've dropped ~100 lbs twice. First time, around 9-10 years ago. Went from over 300 down to 215 in one year. Kept it off for a few years, but got back into my lazy habits again and between 26-30 most of it came back again. Over the last 2+ years I've again dropped around 100, now I am at ~185. Went from pant waist size 42/44 to 34.

Honestly I will be happy to be around 180 and just focus more on muscle tone.

Damn, that is quite the transformation x2!!

Kentucky Hot Chicken did not do well for my diet... we will call it a cheat week as I don't even know how to count those macros (or want to know).

[radiofrequency]

Originally Posted by stifendozon

Weight: 183 lbs
Age: 28
Body Fat: 26%
Height: 5'9"

Here is my diet plan

MEAL- 1 (7.30am)
4 Egg white
2 whole egg
1 cup oatmeal

M-2 (10.30am)
1 chicken breast
1cup potato + rice

M-3 (1.30pm)
1 chick breast
½ cup rice + veg

M-4 (7.30pm)
1 cup oatmeal + banana + 1 scoop whey

M-5 (9.30pm)
1 chick breast
1/2 cup rice & others veg

Do yourself a favor, ditch the sugars, grains, rice and oats. Go NSNG (Google it). I have been full keto for a year now, no weight problems, but NSNG is similar and is just as good. Eat real food, don't buy anything in a box, no processed foods, that includes protein powder/s. Everything you've been told by a dietician or your physician is untrue, examine the science behind nutrition and it will change your life. If you've read this far, down the road attempt to give intermittent fasting a shot. Good luck on your journey!

[nycplumber]

I just stumbled on this thread. Fitness fanatic here and if anyone has questions I'd love to help. Doesn't matter if it's nutrition or you're learning 1 arm pull ups, I can help

[stifendozon]

Originally Posted by radiofrequency

Do yourself a favor, ditch the sugars, grains, rice and oats. Go NSNG (Google it). I have been full keto for a year now, no weight problems, but NSNG is similar and is just as good. Eat real food, don't buy anything in a box, no processed foods, that includes protein powder/s. Everything you've been told by a dietician or your physician is untrue, examine the science behind nutrition and it will change your life. If you've read this far, down the road attempt to give intermittent fasting a shot. Good luck on your journey!

Ok, Mate and thanks for your suggestion.
I'll try later (NSNG) and let you know the results.

[RS DAVE]

Stay off the scales, your cloths and the mirror tell you all you need to know.. if it comes in a packet from a factory don't eat it.

[Zamorskii]

Originally Posted by uniqueMR

Hello ALL,

I am trying to lose weight from past 18 months. With no luck

Weight: 195lbs
Age: 33
Body Fat: 30%
Height: 5'9"
Fat Deposits: lower belly, lower back, love handles, face/chin


So from 2 weeks, I have been aggressive and started the following routine:

Treadmill: Morning and Evening (total of 800 calories burn/day) for 5 days/week. So total I am burning about 3500-4000 calories a week on treadmill.
Weight-lifting: once a week, burning 500 calories.
Give and take: I am burning around 4000 calories per week combined.

Breakfast: oatmeal/milk/nuts/peanut butter/honey, about 350 calories.
Lunch: pretty heavy lunch mix of meat or poultry, rice or bread, about 400-700 calories.
Dinner: snacking, about 200-300 calories.


I really want to get lean, fit, healthy, athletic body and be around 170lbs with body fat of 20-23%.

Please advice, comment. I am really struggling in losing 20 lbs.
THANKS!!!

20-23% body fat is not lean, fit and healthy. If you want to see your muscles, you need to be at 10-13%.

I've started my gym regiment a little over 2 months ago. Go in 3 days doing weights and mix in 2 days of steady cardio and HIIT. Keep track of everything I eat using MyNetDiarPro app. Weigh my meals, then log them, makes things really easy when you can just scan the bar code and all the data is already in the app.

I lost 15lb so far and definitely see more muscle. I eat clean, include fat, carbs and high amounts of protein, but avoid carbs after 7pm. On most days I can stick to caloric deficit of about 900. Your deficit will depend on how quickly you want to lose weight, mine is just a goal of 28lb in 4 months.

Good luck, don't give up, it's not a quick process if you want a visible transformation.

[Zamorskii]

Originally Posted by uniqueMR

Hello ALL,
Breakfast: oatmeal/milk/nuts/peanut butter/honey, about 350 calories.
Lunch: pretty heavy lunch mix of meat or poultry, rice or bread, about 400-700 calories.
Dinner: snacking, about 200-300 calories.

Another thing, I think you're really misjudging your calorie intake if you think your breakfast is only 350 calories.
For example a glass of milk is 110 calories, 1.5 oz of almonds/walnuts/pistachios is 250, a cup of plain oatmeal 225-250. One banana is 110. Say you make yourself oatmeal (225), sprinkle some walnuts (200), blueberries (50), add a spoon of avocado oil (110), eat a banana (110) and you end up with about 700 calorie breakfast.

Now come lunch time, imagine eating just a Chipotle chicken burrito bowl with brown rice, black beans, fajitas and cheese (no tortilla (320cal), or a bag of chips (850cal). That's 650 and pretty light at least for me. Most likely you're ending up with 1000cal for lunch.

Dinner of 300 calories is really a bowl of salad with one tiny 3oz chicken thing.

Is this your meal plan?

[JP10]

Originally Posted by Zamorskii

20-23% body fat is not lean, fit and healthy. If you want to see your muscles, you need to be at 10-13%.

You don't have to be 10-13% to see muscle definition. You may have a misconception of what 10-13% actually looks like. It's quite lean, unless you're a string bean then i dont want to hear it haha

[cvstar9M3]

Originally Posted by JP10

You don't have to be 10-13% to see muscle definition. You may have a misconception of what 10-13% actually looks like. It's quite lean, unless you're a string bean then i dont want to hear it haha

10-13% abs lifestyle though

[Zamorskii]

Originally Posted by JP10

You don't have to be 10-13% to see muscle definition. You may have a misconception of what 10-13% actually looks like. It's quite lean, unless you're a string bean then i dont want to hear it haha

Everybody's concept is different. When I think of lean, I'm envisioning muscle fibers and clear definition between muscle groups. Chiseled or athlete look, so to speak. At 23% BF you may see some of it, but most likely everything blends in (can't see your abs, back looks one piece, can't see where deltoids stop and triceps/biceps start, etc).

[robmx]

For me the best way to lose weight is to exercise for 8-10 hrs a week and eat reasonably well. I guess a lot of people can't invest that much time into exercise, but it's what worked for me. I'd find serious dieting far too miserable!

I dropped from 115kg to round about 100kg mainly from a combination of road cycling (commuting + leisure) and gym work. Now I've got more serious about competitive cycling, the high intensity exercise that goes with seasonal training means I'll fluctuate from 90-95kg throughout the year, carrying sub 10% body fat for most of the year. Heavy for a competitive cyclist I know, but I am 6'6" tall.

[Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by JP10

You don't have to be 10-13% to see muscle definition. You may have a misconception of what 10-13% actually looks like. It's quite lean, unless you're a string bean then i dont want to hear it haha

I agree with him... to see the muscles that count (abs) you need sub 15% at the very least and 10%-13% is generally a sustainable range to be in and still see abs.

[MPBK]

I didn't read the entire thread.
Lifting weights is a good exercise, but not for losing weight.
You replace fat with muscle mass, and muscle is heavier than fat. Think about it.

Has anyone mentioned biking? I have found it the best exercise for losing weight.
I don't mean casual biking. Get a decent road bike and hit the hills.
I can eat anything I want. I actually can't eat enough.

[robmx]

Originally Posted by MPBK

I didn't read the entire thread.
Has anyone mentioned biking? I have found it the best exercise for losing weight.
I don't mean casual biking. Get a decent road bike and hit the hills.
I can eat anything I want. I actually can't eat enough.

I just did a few posts ago

I'm in the same boat, I have to use bulk up shakes etc through the spring & summer to stop myself wasting away or losing performance when I'm training!

[JP10]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

I agree with him... to see the muscles that count (abs) you need sub 15% at the very least and 10%-13% is generally a sustainable range to be in and still see abs.

I think it depends how much muscle you have in any case. I'm above 15% an I can see my abs in the morning, but theyre probably the last muscle that "counts" in my book. I work them daily along with my cardio, but never really a main focus of my workout if you catch my drift.

In any case I keep my opinion that you don't need to be 10-13% to see muscle, just need bigger muscles haha

[Hawkeye]

It doesn't really have anything to do with how big your muscles are, the fat takes away the definition. People do carry their fat differently so maybe you are a lucky one that can see abs above 15%, I sure as hell can't unless I am flexing. My stomach is the last place I lose fat so I have to be the leanest to see abs at rest (I start seeing ab definition at rest right around 14%)

[Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by MPBK

I didn't read the entire thread.
Lifting weights is a good exercise, but not for losing weight.
You replace fat with muscle mass, and muscle is heavier than fat. Think about it.

Has anyone mentioned biking? I have found it the best exercise for losing weight.
I don't mean casual biking. Get a decent road bike and hit the hills.
I can eat anything I want. I actually can't eat enough.

Originally Posted by robmx

I just did a few posts ago

I'm in the same boat, I have to use bulk up shakes etc through the spring & summer to stop myself wasting away or losing performance when I'm training!

I prefer to keep my biking as a leisure activity. I like to combine drinking and eating with biking otherwise it gets too repetitive for me. For example, RAGBRAI is one of the rides I try and do every year (along with ~10,000 of my closest friends).

[MPBK]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

I prefer to keep my biking as a leisure activity. I like to combine drinking and eating with biking otherwise it gets too repetitive for me. For example, RAGBRAI is one of the rides I try and do every year (along with ~10,000 of my closest friends).

That's fine and dandy.
Everybody needs a few activities that they enjoy doing. Congratulations and keep up the fun.
Incidentally, I also enjoy photography (and have spent more than I want to admit in equipment). But I wouldn't recommend photography as a weight losing activity. The National Geographic folks would likely disagree with me, seeing the amount of energy they spend just carrying their equipment to the shoot location.

[JP10]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

It doesn't really have anything to do with how big your muscles are, the fat takes away the definition. People do carry their fat differently so maybe you are a lucky one that can see abs above 15%, I sure as hell can't unless I am flexing. My stomach is the last place I lose fat so I have to be the leanest to see abs at rest (I start seeing ab definition at rest right around 14%)

I mean you can't say it has nothing to do with the size of your muscles, but I agree that people carry it in different places. Regardless, my point was that you don't have to be shreaded to be in solid shape. People who have a goal of getting down to 20% shouldn't be told that it isn't good enough and they need to get down to 10% to be satisfied. Someone going from 30% to 20% is an accomplishment that they should feel good about.

[Hawkeye]

Originally Posted by JP10

I mean you can't say it has nothing to do with the size of your muscles, but I agree that people carry it in different places. Regardless, my point was that you don't have to be shreaded to be in solid shape. People who have a goal of getting down to 20% shouldn't be told that it isn't good enough and they need to get down to 10% to be satisfied. Someone going from 30% to 20% is an accomplishment that they should feel good about.

We aren't trying to make anyone feel bad about progress, but 20%+ body fat really isn't "fit" unless you are going for power without looks (i.e. linebacker).

Sure you can tell there is muscle, but it is not defined. The definition has almost nothing to do with muscle size, it is about the fat around it. Smaller muscles with less body fat will look more defined than more muscles with more body fat, there really is not two ways about it.

Some people may be happy with the participation trophy, but some of us actually like to push a little more and get to a better place. Again, that does not mean that progress itself is not worth anything, it just isn't the best you can do.

[overcoil]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye

We aren't trying to make anyone feel bad about progress, but 20%+ body fat really isn't "fit" unless you are going for power without looks (i.e. linebacker).

Sure you can tell there is muscle, but it is not defined. The definition has almost nothing to do with muscle size, it is about the fat around it. Smaller muscles with less body fat will look more defined than more muscles with more body fat, there really is not two ways about it.

Some people may be happy with the participation trophy, but some of us actually like to push a little more and get to a better place. Again, that does not mean that progress itself is not worth anything, it just isn't the best you can do.

What do you think lee priest %’s are while training but off season if he were to compete ?

[Mingwan]

Lee Priest now or back when he competed? Back in the 90’s he’d get pretty fat. Probably over 30%. I don’t think he bulks as hard, so his bf% would be lower.