# Overnight Diet?



## KCI (Apr 9, 2013)

Just heard about this new diet...drinks shakes only 1 day, eat lots of protein for 6 days and repeat...anyone know anything pro or con re:  overnight diet?


----------



## Gophesjo (Apr 9, 2013)

It sounds really stupid.

I would encourage you to watch the episode of 'The Weight of the Nation' 2012 documentary series from HBO (available as a free download on netflix, itunes, et. al.) entitled Choices.  It gives great advice about dieting - to be effective long term dieting has to be about intentional lifestyle changes and also paced relatively slowly - so that the lost weight stays off.

I lost seventy five pounds over the past three and a half years and have kept it off.  My eating and exercise habits have all changed dramatically, which had to happen so that I never go back to where I was.

Good luck with your weight loss.


----------



## Janette (Apr 9, 2013)

Best diet around is to burn more calories than you eat.  My brain knows this and I still put too much food in my mouth!


----------



## Ridewithme38 (Apr 9, 2013)

Diet's are overrated, the majority of our body shape and health is defined by Genetics, you can fight genetics only so long before it catches up to you and some of it you can't fight at all

Our lives are reletively short when compared to the scope of the rest of the universe, if living off of grass and rice is going to make you miserable yet extend your life 6 months....It's not worth it, a miserable life is no life at all!


----------



## Luanne (Apr 9, 2013)

My motto is "don't do anything to lose weight that you're not willing to do to keep it off".  Sure you might lose weight, but I doubt you'll keep it off.

Proudly maintaining a 60 pound weight loss for 10+ years.


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Apr 9, 2013)

I'm starting the 5 day eat normal and 2 day limited fast (600 calories per day) that is the latest. This is suitable to me because I can fast like a champ from my wrestling days and do like the feeling it gives me when I cleanse my system.

I've done fasts from time to time and always like them so I'm going to be doing them on a regular basis. 

What I've been doing is one egg and slice of ham in the am, 1/2 greek yogurt mid day, getting a weight-training session in with a nice sauna to really get a good sweat going and then dinner is small chicken breast with good portion of veggies. Night snack of diet jello.  I must say for me this is sustainable if its just 2 days and in fact I'm actually enjoining it. 

The success will be in the results so we'll see if I lose weight with this diet. Initial signs are encouraging. I know the author of the diet lost alot in a 3 month period.


----------



## Luanne (Apr 9, 2013)

MOXJO7282 said:


> The success will be in the results so we'll see if I lose weight with this diet. Initial signs are encouraging. I know the author of the diet lost alot in a 3 month period.



What I want to know is, did the author keep the weight off?


----------



## Joyce (Apr 9, 2013)

Any kind of fad diet does not work. Lifestyle changes are the only way. Went on the atkins diet before a trip to CA. Lost 15 pounds and gained it all back before I got home 10 days later. The loss is usually only water and comes back real fast. Went on a lifestyle diet a few years later, lost 50 pounds and have kept it off for 15 years. After dieting, one has to allow the metabolism to change and usually takes a full year of being careful before cheating is O K. Losing weight is having a calorie counter in your head at all times. I love to walk so I can eat.


----------



## Passepartout (Apr 9, 2013)

I cannot imagine that an 'overnight diet' can be healthy. Without a lifestyle change, weight loss by diet alone- then a return to the way one ate before the 'diet' is doomed to failure.

On a semi-related theme. I watched a program on PBS about a fasting diet where one eats 'normally' 5 days a week and does a modified 'fast' ingesting roughly 1/4 of their normal intake 2 non-consecutive days. So for men, about 500 calories and for women about 400. Results for the doctor who made the study after 5 months had lost 15 lbs, gotten pre-diabetic blood sugar under control, got cholesterol under 100 and with HDL in the  proper ratio with LDL, and said that the diet was not all that difficult to live with long term. I have thought about trying it, but probably would need an accomplice and the DW doesn't seem too excited about the prospect.

Oh, since retiring 4 years ago, I lost 35# right away without much drama or work. About 10 has come back. So it goes.


----------



## Gophesjo (Apr 9, 2013)

Joyce said:


> Any kind of fad diet does not work. Lifestyle changes are the only way. Went on the atkins diet before a trip to CA. Lost 15 pounds and gained it all back before I got home 10 days later. The loss is usually only water and comes back real fast. Went on a lifestyle diet a few years later, lost 50 pounds and have kept it off for 15 years. After dieting, one has to allow the metabolism to change and usually takes a full year of being careful before cheating is O K. Losing weight is having a calorie counter in your head at all times. I love to walk so I can eat.



I use an app called myfitnesspal to track my food and exercise.  It is amazingly simple to use, and has been very, very effective in helping me maintain my discipline.  Prior to begiining to use it I had plateaued at a 60 pound loss, and despite wanting to, could not make any traction in losing the last 15 pounds.  After starting myfitnesspal it came right off.  The reason is that I finally saw what I was really doing with food, and was able to identify the necessary adjustments that would get me to my goal.  I recommend the app for anyone who wants to live healthier than they have been.


----------



## heathpack (Apr 9, 2013)

Personally I would not do the shake thing, but I think there could be some logic in the diet. The "eat lots of protein for 6 days" part is very reasonable. ,protein is the most satiating of the macronutrients, so eating lots of it is a good diet strategy as long as the rest of what you're eating is healthy too.  I don't know what's in the "shakes" but if the idea is that the shake day is a very calorie-restricted day, then the diet concept is called "intermittent fasting.". It works well for some people, especially smaller people who can't eat 3 normal meals per day and stay within their calorie budget (for example a 115 pound woman might require so few calories to stay slim that she might never be able to eat a satisfying meal without intermittent fasting).

Some people practice intermittent fasting by not eating during certain hours of the day.  I do this on most day, not consuming any calories between 7pm and 9:30am.  Not an absolute rule, but in general I don't eat at all for 14-15 hours of each day. It helps me stay within my daily calorie allotment.

H


----------



## dioxide45 (Apr 9, 2013)

KCI said:


> Just heard about this new diet...drinks shakes only 1 day, eat lots of protein for 6 days and repeat...anyone know anything pro or con re:  overnight diet?



I would agree with others. Short term diets generally don't work for the long term. You might have some short term weight loss, much of it probably being water weight. The only true way to lose weight is to burn more calories than you consume. If you don't make a perminant change in diet, weight will only come back after you start eating the way you did before you started the diet.



Ridewithme38 said:


> Diet's are overrated, the majority of our body shape and health is defined by Genetics, you can fight genetics only so long before it catches up to you and some of it you can't fight at all
> 
> Our lives are reletively short when compared to the scope of the rest of the universe, if living off of grass and rice is going to make you miserable yet extend your life 6 months....It's not worth it, a miserable life is no life at all!



While life is short, is it not better to live a healthy lifestyle and enjoy the things you most want without huffing and puffing from place to place. I was there, weighing over 325lbs. It isn't fun. I have since lost over 130lbs and feel much better, much easier to get around.

While genetics does effect a lot of how long we will live, genetics have little to do with weight. I think genetics can make people more prone to weight gain and also a food addiction. Just like alcoholism can be genetic, IMO food addition can be the same. And I truly believe that one can be addicted to food.



Gophesjo said:


> I use an app called myfitnesspal to track my food and exercise.  It is amazingly simple to use, and has been very, very effective in helping me maintain my discipline.  Prior to begiining to use it I had plateaued at a 60 pound loss, and despite wanting to, could not make any traction in losing the last 15 pounds.  After starting myfitnesspal it came right off.  The reason is that I finally saw what I was really doing with food, and was able to identify the necessary adjustments that would get me to my goal.  I recommend the app for anyone who wants to live healthier than they have been.



I too have been using MyFitnessPal. Though I have bee using it through their website and not their app. I do agree that it truly is great!


----------



## BevL (Apr 9, 2013)

While long term lifestyle changes are required to maintain weight loss, I think "fad" diets can be useful, as long as they're not harmful, to motivate you.

I lost 50 pounds from July 2011 to March of 2012 doing three "rounds" of a fad diet, losting about 15 to 18 pounds each round.  In between rounds I seriously changed my eating and exercise habits to maintain the loss.

Hit a bump in the fall of 2012, gained about 12 pounds and have taken it back off with another short "round."  I'm smarter this time, never realized how much of an emotional eater I am, and I fully expect to be able to post a year from now that I'm within a few pounds of my current weight.

Again, you can't do a quick weight loss plan, then go back to your old habits and expect not to gain the weight back.  But I do believe they have their place.

Sorry, can't comment on this particular diet.  And I am not advocating what I did to anybody, but it sure worked for me.


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Apr 10, 2013)

From what I see people aren't active enough. I have a weight problem that started in elementary school and continues to this day.  My parents didn't monitor me enough and genetically I was prone to being heavy so I was overweight. 

However my saving grace is I love being active and was always a sports nut. So instead of getting really overweight I stayed the heavyset athlete.

Now I love to weight-train so I've maintained my muscle and converted alot of fat to muscle but still consider myself 20 lbs over my ideal weight so I'm trying to take that off.

To me exercise is the key. I know if one night I'm going to indulge I'll work out before and the next day and that one transgression won't pack on the pounds.


----------



## hypnotiq (Apr 10, 2013)

Whoever is doing under 600 calories, it is not nearly enough nor healthy. 

Your body goes into storage mode and starts to feed off of its muscle.

You need to find out your basic metabolic needs and should not be under it by more than 500cals.


----------



## Gophesjo (Apr 10, 2013)

hypnotiq said:


> Whoever is doing under 600 calories, it is not nearly enough nor healthy.
> 
> Your body goes into storage mode and starts to feed off of its muscle.
> 
> You need to find out your basic metabolic needs and should not be under it by more than 500cals.



Yes that!  My dear, tiny, 81 year old mother has a base metabolic rate (calories needed daily) of 1280, and so even she couldn't survive on 600 or fewer calories per day.  I would even say to go 500 under your BMR is not healthy, and that 250 under is more realistic for most folks looking to lose weight.


----------



## Ridewithme38 (Apr 10, 2013)

how do you find out your bmr?  the mention of 325lbs above gave me a goal to work towards!  i'd love to be that size!


----------



## dioxide45 (Apr 10, 2013)

Ridewithme38 said:


> how do you find out your bmr?  the mention of 325lbs above gave me a goal to work towards!  i'd love to be that size!



Your BMR is your Basal Metabolic Rate. It is the number of calories that you would burn just to survive in a comatose state. Your TDEE (Total Daily Enercgy Expenditure) also takes in to account any activity during the day. Your TDEE is what really matters the most. Consume fewer calories than TDEE and you will lose weight.

There are many websites out there with BMR and TDEE calculators on them. A Google search will bring up lots of options.

My TDEE right now as a 37 year old male at about 195lbs with a sedentary activity level is 2250 calories per day. If I consume that each day or average that over a period of time, my weight would stay the same. Eat more I gain weight, eat less I would lose weight.


----------



## Gophesjo (Apr 10, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> Your BMR is your Basal Metabolic Rate. It is the number of calories that you would burn just to survive in a comatose state. Your TDEE (Total Daily Enercgy Expenditure) also takes in to account any activity during the day. Your TDEE is what really matters the most. Consume fewer calories than TDEE and you will lose weight.
> 
> There are many websites out there with BMR and TDEE calculators on them. A Google search will bring up lots of options.
> 
> My TDEE right now as a 37 year old male at about 195lbs with a sedentary activity level is 2250 calories per day. If I consume that each day or average that over a period of time, my weight would stay the same. Eat more I gain weight, eat less I would lose weight.



I am 59 and weigh just one more pound than you do, but because of a high activity level (my Tanita scale readout says that my metabolic age is 44), my TDEE is almost exactly the same as your's (2240) despite our age difference.

If you don't know where to begin with any of this, start plugging your numbers in on myfitnesspal.com and it will help you with some estimates.


----------



## dioxide45 (Apr 10, 2013)

Gophesjo said:


> I am 59 and weigh just one more pound than you do, but because of a high activity level (my Tanita scale readout says that my metabolic age is 44), my TDEE is almost exactly the same as your's (2240) despite our age difference.
> 
> If you don't know where to begin with any of this, start plugging your numbers in on myfitnesspal.com and it will help you with some estimates.



MyFitnessPal does have a good calculator for TDEE. Though you have to create an account (which is free). Other sites have easy access calculators that are easier to play around with than MFP.


----------



## Ridewithme38 (Apr 10, 2013)

I've never understood the whole metro-sexual thing with men....Getting your nails done, slim cut clothing, skin care products, hair products, fake tans, diets....it just seems to me that there are now several generations of men that are trying to be women

Men are supposed to be big, tough, grimy looking creatures....Lumberjacks, construction workers, firefighters, cowboys, etc. these were our idles growing up, not 'the artist formally known as price.' but now, even some of my friends that work construction are worried about messing up their hair or breaking a nail.  

I say forget the products and diets and man up, if you need a haircut don't go to a salon go to a barber, if you want to lose fat, man up and pump iron.  Weight is just a number and muscle weighs more then fat, so don't worry about how high that number is, the only weight you should be worrying about is printed on the side of the steel plates that you should be lifting.


----------



## dioxide45 (Apr 10, 2013)

Ridewithme38 said:


> I've never understood the whole metro-sexual thing with men....Getting your nails done, slim cut clothing, skin care products, hair products, fake tans, diets....it just seems to me that there are now several generations of men that are trying to be women
> 
> Men are supposed to be big, tough, grimy looking creatures....Lumberjacks, construction workers, firefighters, cowboys, etc. these were our idles growing up, not 'the artist formally known as price.' but now, even some of my friends that work construction are worried about messing up their hair or breaking a nail.
> 
> I say forget the products and diets and man up, if you need a haircut don't go to a salon go to a barber, if you want to lose fat, man up and pump iron.  Weight is just a number and muscle weighs more then fat, so don't worry about how high that number is, the only weight you should be worrying about is printed on the side of the steel plates that you should be lifting.



Lifting weights will do very little to help you lose fat. To do that you have to eat less than than what you burn. Lifting weights is great for a healthy lifestyle along with a healthy diet and other exercise.

Keeping a manageable weight is about 50% mental, 40% diet and about 10% exercise. It is very hard to exercise your way though a poor diet.


----------



## Ridewithme38 (Apr 10, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> To do that you have to eat less than than what you burn. Lifting weights is great for a healthy lifestyle along with a healthy diet and other exercise.



I think your focus is on the wrong end, professional body builders actually have trouble taking in enough calories to keep up with what they burn, I'm not saying you need to live at the gym, you burn a lot of calories even from a light workout. Just that It's not about eating less then you burn, it's about burning more then you eat.

Sure a balanced meal is nice, I'll give you that, variety IS the spice of life, but heavy heavy protein and carbs are what it takes to get the real size you need to look and feel like a man and no 'south beach' or other weight loss oriented diet is going to give you that.


----------



## MOXJO7282 (Apr 10, 2013)

hypnotiq said:


> Whoever is doing under 600 calories, it is not nearly enough nor healthy.
> 
> Your body goes into storage mode and starts to feed off of its muscle.
> 
> You need to find out your basic metabolic needs and should not be under it by more than 500cals.



Well this new diet refutes the storage mode theory. You only do 600 calories 2 days and not consecutive days. Yes your body does burn muscle but much more fat is another one of his positions. He is a doctor and I found his research pretty compelling.  

And there has always been evidence that a balanced but calorie restrictive diet can help extend life. 

I'm going to try it for a few months and see what happens.


----------



## dioxide45 (Apr 10, 2013)

Ridewithme38 said:


> I think your focus is on the wrong end, professional body builders actually have trouble taking in enough calories to keep up with what they burn, I'm not saying you need to live at the gym, you burn a lot of calories even from a light workout. Just that It's not about eating less then you burn, it's about burning more then you eat.
> 
> Sure a balanced meal is nice, I'll give you that, variety IS the spice of life, but heavy heavy protein and carbs are what it takes to get the real size you need to look and feel like a man and no 'south beach' or other women's oriented diet is going to give you that.



I agree that burning calories is important, but unless you are spending hours in a gym, it just isn't going to cut it. A one hour workout might burn 500 calories. That isn't a lot if you are consuming 1000 more calories in a day than your TDEE.  Most people have day jobs. A professional body builder or athletes job is to be in the gym. This is far different than the average Joe that works a 9-5 job.


----------



## Gophesjo (Apr 10, 2013)

Ridewithme38 said:


> I've never understood the whole metro-sexual thing with men....Getting your nails done, slim cut clothing, skin care products, hair products, fake tans, diets....it just seems to me that there are now several generations of men that are trying to be women
> 
> Men are supposed to be big, tough, grimy looking creatures....Lumberjacks, construction workers, firefighters, cowboys, etc. these were our idles growing up, not 'the artist formally known as price.' but now, even some of my friends that work construction are worried about messing up their hair or breaking a nail.
> 
> I say forget the products and diets and man up, if you need a haircut don't go to a salon go to a barber, if you want to lose fat, man up and pump iron.  Weight is just a number and muscle weighs more then fat, so don't worry about how high that number is, the only weight you should be worrying about is printed on the side of the steel plates that you should be lifting.



I care about hypertension, high cholesterol, type 2 diabetes, cancer and unnecessary pre-mature death.  I care about having to pay for the health care of those of folks who are unwilling to consider the seriousness of the obesity crisis in America.


----------



## dioxide45 (Apr 10, 2013)

Another thing to note. Professional body builders are eating an extremely clean diet. No processed junk.


----------



## Ridewithme38 (Apr 10, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> Another thing to note. Professional body builders are eating an extremely clean diet. No processed junk.



+1, this is a VERY important point, if you're living off pepsi, Dunkin Donuts, fast food and potato chips and unwilling to change your diet to something like my method(build muscle to burn fat) Omelets, Roast beef/turkey sandwiches(i'd avoid mayo) and pastas and steak or Dioxides method(take in less calories to Shrink down)low calories(and salt) soups, salads and fruit salads(not all the time, some fruit is high sugar content=high calorie)...then you really aren't going to accomplish anything


----------



## Ridewithme38 (Apr 10, 2013)

Gophesjo said:


> I care about hypertension, high cholesterol, type 2 diabetes, cancer and unnecessary pre-mature death.  I care about having to pay for the health care of those of folks who are unwilling to consider the seriousness of the obesity crisis in America.



But obesity isn't just a number, the way i've always seen it, it's closer to a Body Fat percentage.....I'm a little taller then most at around 6'3", i would LOVE to break 300lbs(i'm between 225-230 right now), but when i say that to people that only look at weight as fat they look at me with disgust....."Why would you want to weigh so much"  they don't understand that i'm not talking about gaining fat...When you break it down, the body is just basicly one big muscle, training and working that muscle is one of the best things you can do, not only for your health, but it has huge mental health benefits also...


----------



## Gophesjo (Apr 10, 2013)

Obesity is not just one number to me it is many numbers - most of which are increasing; the percentage of American kids who are overweight today as opposed to those who were 30 years ago - the percentage of American adults who have type 2 diabetes today as opposed to thirty years ago, etc. ad nauseum.

I do cardio and strength training work six days a week - my workout calorie burn today was close to 1000 calories.  I lead adult fitness classes and daily interact with men and women who weigh over 400 pounds.  I also unfortunately encounter 16 year olds who can't leave steroids alone, because they want to look more ripped than the next guy.  And I also encounter anorexic waifs who have lost the food (and 'beauty') battles as well.

We have allowed the processed food manufacturers to hijack not only our wallets, but our health and the health of our children and grandchildren as well.  And for many, the response is unfortunately to be found in the crazy, unfounded, also-profit-driven urban myth world of American dieting.  

The basic premise of burn more than you ingest is true - but that simple knowledge is not enough.  What fuels should I be burning, when should I be fueling up, and what should I be shunning are all also important.  

More than anything, I think we owe it to ourselves, our kids and grandkids to take all of this very, very seriously.


----------



## Ridewithme38 (Apr 10, 2013)

Here's s fun facts...

For every pound of muscle you gain you burn, AT REST, between 5-10 more calories a day, now, this may not sound like much, but don't forget, that is AT REST and you have to look at it as 'compound interest', this is extra calories on top of your normal day.  If you add 2 hours at the gym 4 times a week you are multiplying that number each time you leave the gym, gaining a pound of muscle a week is not unlikely. Again, it doesn't sound like much, but expand that over a year, or two.  It definately adds up, the more muscle you gain the more fat you lose

Gaining muscle instead of losing weigh has so many benefits, i could write all day about it, but this thread isn't really about that, so i'll pretty much leave it here


----------



## easyrider (Apr 10, 2013)

I agree with ride on the above post. The easiest way to lose weight is to build muscle. I don't agree with the entire diet thing as its the calorie intake that is important. I like a glass of chocolate milk after I lift weights. I like mayo on my sandwich. I like eggs. I like chocolate. I like crown. I consume all of this in moderation for the most part. 

Bill


----------



## dioxide45 (Apr 11, 2013)

Ridewithme38 said:


> Here's s fun facts...
> 
> For every pound of muscle you gain you burn, AT REST, between 5-10 more calories a day, now, this may not sound like much, but don't forget, that is AT REST and you have to look at it as 'compound interest', this is extra calories on top of your normal day.  If you add 2 hours at the gym 4 times a week you are multiplying that number each time you leave the gym, gaining a pound of muscle a week is not unlikely. Again, it doesn't sound like much, but expand that over a year, or two.  It definately adds up, the more muscle you gain the more fat you lose
> 
> Gaining muscle instead of losing weigh has so many benefits, i could write all day about it, but this thread isn't really about that, so i'll pretty much leave it here





easyrider said:


> I agree with ride on the above post. The easiest way to lose weight is to build muscle. I don't agree with the entire diet thing as its the calorie intake that is important. I like a glass of chocolate milk after I lift weights. I like mayo on my sandwich. I like eggs. I like chocolate. I like crown. I consume all of this in moderation for the most part.
> 
> Bill



I don't disagree that adding muscle is a good thing. However for a 325lb person with a body fat percentage through the roof, the foundation of their problem is not just their lack of exercise but more so what and how much they eat. You can't get from 325lbs with a high BF% to a sleek muscular physique on weight training along.


----------



## hypnotiq (Apr 11, 2013)

dioxide45 said:


> . A one hour workout might burn 500 calories.



That's a pretty light workout if you are only burning 500 calories in an hour.

Regardless, if people truly ate 'clean' they would understand how much you actually have to eat to hit your BMR. I'm eating close to every 2 hours throughout the day so I can satisfy my calorie requirement.

I'm tired of the nonsense of "eating good/clean food doesn't fill me up". That's complete crap. They just aren't getting the neuro response from the food that they get from the 'crap' they eat. That's the problem they have, not that they aren't full.

And Ride is spot on. Muscle is a very effective tool in burning fat.


----------



## heathpack (Apr 11, 2013)

hypnotiq said:


> That's a pretty light workout if you are only burning 500 calories in an hour.
> 
> Regardless, if people truly ate 'clean' they would understand how much you actually have to eat to hit your BMR. I'm eating close to every 2 hours throughout the day so I can satisfy my calorie requirement.
> 
> ...



What kind of workout are you doing that you believe is burning  much more than 500 cal/hr?  Maybe you are a highly trained athlete?  I am no exercise physiologist, but as I understand it, getting to the point where you can burn cal at the intensity of >10 cal/min takes a good amt of training, it is more realistic for your run of the mill person to burn something like 7-8 cal/min with what seems to them like pretty intense exercise.

Sure it is great to build muscle.  Maybe an untrained, undermuscled young male in peak testosterone-producing age can pack on 1 pound of muscle per week with pretty intense weight training.  But is that realistically going to happen for a 50 year old man, an already well-muscled man, a woman, a man of naturally slender physique or anyone that does not lift weights as his/her predominant form of exercise?  I seriously doubt it.  Again, Im not an exercise physiologist, but I would speculate (from a reasonably educated position) that losing fat by building muscle is not going to work well for a large percentage of the population.

The reason there are so many different things that people swear by to lose or manage weight is because there are so many different paradigms of physiology, life constraint, age, concurrent illness, education, finances, access to food, appetite, etc.  The answer probably is indeed a little different for each person.  Generally speaking, the smartest approach is probably multi-pronged.  

H


----------



## hypnotiq (Apr 11, 2013)

For example a 6', 180lb male, walking on a flat surface, for 60mins burns 360cals. Bicycling, leisure pace, about 550. I define those as a "light" workout.

For me, I'm 34 male, 6'2, 225. Almost everyone of my 1hr workouts is at least 1000 calories that I burn (and typically my cycling workouts are closer 2-3hrs)

60mins cycling - 1100
60mins MTB race - 1400
60mins swimming - 1000

I'm training for my first triathlon right now, so most of my workouts are two'ish hours and trying to eat 4k plus clean calories a day sucks.  

Like you said, it depends on the persons body composition, etc to dictate cals burned.

I still feel my generalization (I didn't say was absolute) of 500cals/hr is a light workout. 

Muscle building doesn't only happen through weightlifting. There are plenty of ways to build muscle using resistance and other types of training that don't require impact, such as weightlifting.

Note: I never said someone had to pack on 1lb/muscle a week.


----------



## Ridewithme38 (Apr 11, 2013)

hypnotiq said:


> Note: I never said someone had to pack on 1lb/muscle a week.



Would be a nice benefit though!  Don't forget health, the majority of the dieting public has at one point or another gone of some type of 'starvation' diet.  When you do this, depending the on the person, the first thing you lose is muscle.  

I think if you put a line of heavy dieting people next to a group that has never dieted, you will find a significant different in muscle percentage....The dieting kills you muscle development soo much that it gives you just enough of an extra boost to make a real different when you start working out again...

I wouldn't discount 1lbs a week for someone who has been yo-yo dieting for along time


----------



## heathpack (Apr 11, 2013)

hypnotiq said:


> For example a 6', 180lb male, walking on a flat surface, for 60mins burns 360cals. Bicycling, leisure pace, about 550. I define those as a "light" workout.
> 
> For me, I'm 34 male, 6'2, 225. Almost everyone of my 1hr workouts is at least 1000 calories that I burn (and typically my cycling workouts are closer 2-3hrs)
> 
> ...



You sound like you are a highly trained individual and probably are in the 95th percentile as far as fitness level goes.  For example, you must be cycling at 19-20 mph to burn 1000 cal per hour, which makes sense for a competitive triathlete.  Most people who need to lose weight (the type of person considering trying the "overnight diet") simply aren't capable of that.  They are doing great if they can burn 500 cal per hour.  Even when they lose weight and are pretty fit, training at an intensity that will allow them to eventually burn 16 cal/hr is not realistic or even wise if the individual is older and more prone to injury.

The only point that I am making is that Dioxide's estimate of 500 cal/hr for an hour of exercise is probably pretty spot-on for the types of individuals who are seeking to diet and lose weight.  I disagree with him on the importance of exercise, but I think he's got the basic mathematics of it right.  Most people will be doing a very good job if they can exercise sufficiently to burn 500 cal a day for 5-6 days/week.

H


----------



## Gophesjo (Apr 11, 2013)

hypnotiq said:


> For example a 6', 180lb male, walking on a flat surface, for 60mins burns 360cals. Bicycling, leisure pace, about 550. I define those as a "light" workout.
> 
> For me, I'm 34 male, 6'2, 225. Almost everyone of my 1hr workouts is at least 1000 calories that I burn (and typically my cycling workouts are closer 2-3hrs)
> 
> ...



Where do you get your calorie burn numbers for your swimming?  I have been a lifelong competitive swimmer and my calorie burn for a pretty intense one hour swimming workout is 900.  I have just acquired the electronics to discover what my other workouts' calorie burns are - being quite interested to find these all out as well.

BTW - Best of luck in your first tri event.  Sounds like you are probably not going the easy route and doing a sprint event, but are rather doing one of the longer races.

Joe


----------



## laurac260 (Apr 11, 2013)

heathpack said:


> What kind of workout are you doing that you believe is burning  much more than 500 cal/hr?  Maybe you are a highly trained athlete?  I am no exercise physiologist, but as I understand it, getting to the point where you can burn cal at the intensity of >10 cal/min takes a good amt of training, it is more realistic for your run of the mill person to burn something like 7-8 cal/min with what seems to them like pretty intense exercise.
> 
> 
> H



I don't think that 7-8 cal/minute is what I would consider "pretty intense exercise".  I don't find that difficult to achieve at all at the gym on any given day.   10 cal/minute to maintain for an hour is not that difficult either, and that's coming from someone who isn't nearly in the physical shape I was in my 20's, or even could be now.   10 minute warmup on the treadmill, 20 minutes on an elliptical, 15 minutes on a rowing machine, and 15 minutes of stretching/working out on various machines gets me over 500 cal every time.  I'm still in the :working up to a decent workout" mode, as I've been out of the game for awhile.  It's easily doable.


----------



## hypnotiq (Apr 11, 2013)

Gophesjo said:


> Where do you get your calorie burn numbers for your swimming?  I have been a lifelong competitive swimmer and my calorie burn for a pretty intense one hour swimming workout is 900.  I have just acquired the electronics to discover what my other workouts' calorie burns are - being quite interested to find these all out as well.
> 
> BTW - Best of luck in your first tri event.  Sounds like you are probably not going the easy route and doing a sprint event, but are rather doing one of the longer races.
> 
> Joe




I'm just going off of what my Garmin tells me as far as swimming. I have the 910XT. 

Actually, I am doing a sprint tri for my 1st event (1/2mi swim, 3.2mi run, 15mi bike ride).  I wanted to try an easy one first, especially since I was working on dropping 25 or so lbs that I seem to have found. 

Perhaps I'll try for the Ironman one day, though the 26.2mi run is completely unappealing to me. I get bored after 7mi. :-/


----------



## dioxide45 (Apr 11, 2013)

heathpack said:


> The only point that I am making is that Dioxide's estimate of 500 cal/hr for an hour of exercise is probably pretty spot-on for the types of individuals who are seeking to diet and lose weight.  *I disagree with him on the importance of exercise*, but I think he's got the basic mathematics of it right.  Most people will be doing a very good job if they can exercise sufficiently to burn 500 cal a day for 5-6 days/week.
> 
> H



Don't get me wrong. I do believe that cardio exercise is very good for one's health. It has great health benefits for your heart and overall health. However, from a pure fat loss perspective, cardio is not really necessary. You can lose fat and weight by simply carrying a caloric deficit.


----------



## Gophesjo (Apr 11, 2013)

I never competed tri, but did run one marathon (LA) back 25 years ago.  It was brutal, as I was not as prepared as I thought I was for it.

Would like to do tri now, but have a blown out knee, and so can only bike and swim.  The exercise classes I lead are all in the water (weight supported), but these include lots of muscle/strength building based on water resistance.  

I am about to lead a swim clinic for triathletes.  Seems swimming is the weakest link for most tri competitiors.

I know duathlons are available, but haven't seen any that really attracted me in this area.

Best of luck to you!


----------



## heathpack (Apr 11, 2013)

laurac260 said:


> I don't think that 7-8 cal/minute is what I would consider "pretty intense exercise".  I don't find that difficult to achieve at all at the gym on any given day.   10 cal/minute to maintain for an hour is not that difficult either, and that's coming from someone who isn't nearly in the physical shape I was in my 20's, or even could be now.   10 minute warmup on the treadmill, 20 minutes on an elliptical, 15 minutes on a rowing machine, and 15 minutes of stretching/working out on various machines gets me over 500 cal every time.  I'm still in the :working up to a decent workout" mode, as I've been out of the game for awhile.  It's easily doable.



What I actually said is that 7-8 cal/min might *feel* like pretty intense activity for an untrained person.  Say you take a lady who is 20 pounds overweight at 150 pounds.  She has been walking maybe 20-30 min at a slow pace after dinner every day and decides to start going to the gym.  Put her on a stationary bike and have her ride for 60 min at 11 mph.  That will probably feel pretty intense to her.  She will think she's probably burned 1000 calories.  But really its something more like 425ish or 7 cal/hr.

Once your average person like you and me works ourselves up to a sufficient degree of physical fitness that a 1 hour workout is routine, 9-10 cal/hr for moderate activity is a very reasonable expectation.  And, day and and day out, "moderate" activity is probably what that person will/should continue doing, as this is what is most sustainable.  Yes, that will seem "light" to a triathlete.  But for a regular person of some age, they will be doing very well to keep that up.

Of course we all also know that those exercise machines at the gym overestimate calories burned by 10-20 percent, right?   But seriously this part does not matter so much, if you're making progress thats all that matters.

H


----------



## laurac260 (Apr 11, 2013)

heathpack said:


> What I actually said is that 7-8 cal/min might *feel* like pretty intense activity for an untrained person.  Say you take a lady who is 20 pounds overweight at 150 pounds.  She has been walking maybe 20-30 min at a slow pace after dinner every day and decides to start going to the gym.  Put her on a stationary bike and have her ride for 60 min at 11 mph.  That will probably feel pretty intense to her.  She will think she's probably burned 1000 calories.  But really its something more like 425ish or 7 cal/hr.
> 
> Once your average person like you and me works ourselves up to a sufficient degree of physical fitness that a 1 hour workout is routine, 9-10 cal/hr for moderate activity is a very reasonable expectation.  And, day and and day out, "moderate" activity is probably what that person will/should continue doing, as this is what is most sustainable.  Yes, that will seem "light" to a triathlete.  But for a regular person of some age, they will be doing very well to keep that up.
> 
> ...



If I were 150 lbs, I sure wouldn't consider myself 20 lbs overweight.  I hope you are talking about a very short woman!  So yes, that would seem like quite a workout if you were 5 feet tall.  I'm 5'7", so 150 would be a perfect weight.  I've been away from the gym too long, so I'm not at 150 anymore, sadly, but I'm working on it!

And, I know what you are talking about, about the gym equipment, which is why I wear the nike watch and corresponding HRM.   Still, agreed, progress is all that matters in that situation.

What seems to be missing from the discussion is, the correlation between what has happened to our food supply, and the rise of obesity.  One can make an argument that we have become a sedentary culture, but most of us are atleast 2-3 generations away from a farming culture.  In the 70's obesity was limited to a handful of folks.  The further we have gotten away from natural foods, and into GMO's, HFCS, and the like, the fatter we've become.  It's time we stopped treating it like the proverbial elephant in the room.   We need to get rid of the "organic vs food", and change it to "food, vs mechanically engineered food products."  Once we start calling it what it is, then we can start heading in the right direction again.  

 Because back in the day, our forefathers didn't call it organic food.  They called it "food".


----------



## Gophesjo (Apr 11, 2013)

laurac260 said:


> If I were 150 lbs, I sure wouldn't consider myself 20 lbs overweight.  I hope you are talking about a very short woman!  So yes, that would seem like quite a workout if you were 5 feet tall.  I'm 5'7", so 150 would be a perfect weight.  I've been away from the gym too long, so I'm not at 150 anymore, sadly, but I'm working on it!
> 
> And, I know what you are talking about, about the gym equipment, which is why I wear the nike watch and corresponding HRM.   Still, agreed, progress is all that matters in that situation.
> 
> ...



Hear hear!  

I am actually not as concerned with 'genetically modified' as I am with 'processed' in general.

Once again I would encouarge any/all to watch last year's HBO series called "The Weight of the Nation."  It is remarkable - and so informative!


----------



## hypnotiq (Aug 27, 2013)

Gophesjo said:


> I never competed tri, but did run one marathon (LA) back 25 years ago.  It was brutal, as I was not as prepared as I thought I was for it.
> 
> Would like to do tri now, but have a blown out knee, and so can only bike and swim.  The exercise classes I lead are all in the water (weight supported), but these include lots of muscle/strength building based on water resistance.
> 
> ...



Thought I'd pop back in and report how things went. 

The good news is, I'm officially a triathlete now.  

Things could have gone better. Training really dropped off as I didn't realize how much time wedding plans were going to suck up of my summer.

And I guess you can say I'm hooked, because I'm training to do a 70.3 HIM race next year. 

Me and my coach (about 30 seconds after I crossed the finish line, so ignore how terrible I look lol).


----------



## MelBay (Aug 27, 2013)

> I'm starting the 5 day eat normal and 2 day limited fast (600 calories per day) that is the latest. This is suitable to me because I can fast like a champ from my wrestling days and do like the feeling it gives me when I cleanse my system.



I've been doing this since March.  I've lost almost 20 lbs., it's been slow but steady.  The first week or two were a little rough, but now I honestly feel really good on Mondays and Wednesdays (my fast days), and I sleep really, really well those nights.  It's made me realize I won't die if I get hunger pains, and it's also made me make FAR better food choices on the other 5 days.  I initially saw it on PBS: http://leangainsguide.com/diet/igf-1-and-fasting/ (pardon the ads, and scroll down to the embedded BBC documentary).  

I plan to lose a few more pounds, and my maintenance will be to "fast" 1 day a week for the rest of my life.  It gets me out of cooking for DH  and will be a lifestyle change I can manage and stick with.

Someone asked if the author kept it off - I've seen him on several shows lately, and he's still thin.  

And finally, yes I checked with my doc.  I am (was) pre-diabetic, and she had no issues with me doing this, particularly since I've started exercising more and eating cleaner and healthier.

I highly recommend it, obviously.


----------



## Rose Pink (Aug 27, 2013)

hypnotiq said:


> Thought I'd pop back in and report how things went.
> 
> The good news is, I'm officially a triathlete now.
> 
> ...


 Congratulations on becoming a triathlete.


----------



## Passepartout (Aug 27, 2013)

Congrats! DW and I have started the 5/2 fasting diet- actually it is a very modified 'fast'. We fast Mondays and Thursdays, and I'm restricted to 600 calories and DW to 500. Sorry girls.

We've been at this only about 3 weeks and are both down about 10 or so lbs each. It's sort of a see-saw but the trend is steadily downward.

I watched the NPR special about it. Watch it here: http://video.pbs.org/video/2363162206/ 

So far it seems to be working and since it doesn't take constant calorie counting and deprivation, I think I can maintain it long term.

Previously I (we) have been yo-yo diet poster children. It's good to think that may be in the past.

Time will tell

Jim


----------



## VacationForever (Aug 27, 2013)

laurac260 said:


> If I were 150 lbs, I sure wouldn't consider myself 20 lbs overweight.  I hope you are talking about a very short woman!  So yes, that would seem like quite a workout if you were 5 feet tall.  I'm 5'7", so 150 would be a perfect weight.  I've been away from the gym too long, so I'm not at 150 anymore, sadly, but I'm working on it!



It is actually more about one's health and fitness wrt to weight.  I am 5ft 7in and my doctor makes me feel guilty each time I see him.  I am at 135 lbs.  He wants me at 115 to 120lbs.  I work out and I am fitter than most people of my age.  Yet with my health problem, 115 lbs is ideal for me.


----------



## heathpack (Aug 27, 2013)

hypnotiq said:


> Thought I'd pop back in and report how things went.
> 
> The good news is, I'm officially a triathlete now.
> 
> ...



Hey just noticed this: Congratulations!

H


----------



## jlr10 (Aug 30, 2013)

hypnotiq said:


> Me and my coach (about 30 seconds after I crossed the finish line, so ignore how terrible I look lol).



Congratulations!  I am training for my first marathon and if I could look half as good as this at the finish I would be very happy.  Of course I am pretty short so I am hoping the half part is not based just on my height. 

Excellent accomplishment!


----------

