There are enough exercise exertion calculators out there that he would probably best served using one of them to determine specific caloric expenditure due to exercise, if he's going to really get into the nitty gritty of counting calories.
Sport The Starvation diet...
- Thread starter FusterCluck0311
- Start date
Sport Fitness
There are enough exercise exertion calculators out there that he would probably best served using one of them to determine specific caloric expenditure due to exercise, if he's going to really get into the nitty gritty of counting calories.
Actually, with respect to the portion of my post you were responding to, I was referring to a fixed amount of time ( i.e all other things being equal ) and only within in a steady state context....and I was not really comparing steady state to interval cardio.
That said, within the context of your 1 hour example, the point I was trying to make is that if you could run steady state for 1 hour and your goal is to ' optimize ' fat loss overall then running harder ( aerobically ) would burn more calories and likely more volume of fat than if you ran at a less intense aerobic pace for 1 hour.
So from a more general standpoint, if you want to employ 1 hour of steady state cardio week and after week as your sole cardio tactic for fat loss, then it is more ideal ( from a fat loss perspective ) to go as hard as you can for that hour. In my view, it is less important to focus on how much fat is burned , but rather how many total calories you burn over a number of weeks. So, if you have a choice of running an 8 minute mile in 1 hour vs. running a 12 minute mile pace in 1 hour, then you should run at a 8 minute mile as it burns more calories. Generally speaking, the more calories you burn week after week, the more fat you'll lose.
I agree.
I missed a word, I should have said ......." In the case of HIIT, HIIT tends to have the greater benefit of a post workout burn of calories "
After all, it is the post workout burn of calories - due to EPOC - that is responsible for HIIT being touted as such an effective fat loss tool in the first place.
I'd agree that the level of intensity in a steady state aerobic cardio session has a positive correlation to EPOC. As the intensity goes up in steady state aerobic sessions, the magnitude and time frame of EPOC would correspondingly increase as well. So low intensity steady state ( all other thing being equal ) cardio elicits a lesser EPOC response than moderate intensity steady state cardio.
As far as HIIT vs. steady state aerobic cardio, my understanding is that if, for example, you did some moderate steady state cardio ( i.e 70% VO2 max or so ) versus HIIT interval cardio ( i.e 1 minute work / hard intervals at 100%+ VO2 max ) over a relatively same time period of exercise, that you're going to get a much greater EPOC response from HIIT in terms of the number of liters of oxygen being consumed afterwards.
Last edited:
Further to that, I've seen the following estimates being used ....
- 8 calories per minute of aerobic training ( i.e run, bike, sports )
- 5 calories per minute of strength training
- 5 calories per minute of strength training
....to ballpark exercise related calorie demands.
Fluster, to be honest with you, I wanted to change the atmosphere of this thread, to have it be more productive for you, and my posting method has changed as compared to the norm, for this reason.
My purpose was to open up some mutual dialogue (communication), and have you soften your stance (a bit) on your 900 calorie intake per day, and attempt to put it in proper perspective.
In other words, you can take your current calorie intake of 900 calories, and compare this to your BASE CALORIE NEED (and see how far below your current calorie intake is compared to this), and then compare your current 900 calorie intake and compare it to what you actually need (MAINTENANCE LINE-MT) and get a general idea on how far below you really are in comparison.
Some of the negative feed back you were getting was doing nothing more than putting you on the defensive (it was belittling, and counterproductive), and nothing anyone said was going to get through this defense mechanism you had put up in response.
And, I thought if I approached you in a more personally effective manner, I would get you to respond and have you take "tentative" look at your current calorie ingestion as compared to what your body approximately needed, you would open up (soften up) your personal stance and thus improve you fitness and goal path future.
Thus far you have responded in a favorable manner. My intention is genuine and true. I didn’t want to give up on you, nor continue the negativity as this "wasn't helping you".
The "purpose" of displaying the "Benedict formula" was to have you work with it a little bit to have you a get a "general" feel for it, as using other types calorie approximate calculators can be fairly close to it (dependent on multiplier used in Benedict) +/- a few calories.
While its true, there are other calorie approximation formulas one can use, we are using the "Benedict Formula" as the base tool---just to get you started and put things in proper (ground work) perspective.. Once you get a good grasp (in general) how these work, you then can move on to another formula (of course) if you choose. I am well educated in the other estimators, but I want to stick with ONE for our objective and purpose.
For "simplicity's sake" lets stay with the Benedict formula.
Are you "currently" running 12 to 14 miles per day (honestly), and working out 7 days per week 4 to 5 hours per day? Does the workout include the 600 to 700 pushups? This current workout structure I assume would be on work days as well?
If this isn't your current workout structure--what is it? When you say you workout 7 days a week, 4 to 5 hours per day, what are you doing as far as weight training?
If it is your current workout structure, I do understand, why you selected the 1.75 multiplier. This structure would go beyond working out 2x per day (especially factoring in your physically demands of your employment). IF what you are expressing is in fact true.
However, to get a better grasp on whether you have selected the proper multiplier, could you "clearly detail" your current workout routine? I mean what do you do "specifically" per day when you workout.
You see Fluster, with a BASE NEED of 2,117 calories, this approximated calorie figure is what is needed just for your bodily "function" (organ function, breathing, etc), and does not include ANY additional activity. Therefore, 2117-900=1217. And this puts you "approximately" 1,217 calories "short" of what is needed just for the body to maintain itself and basically function. Logically then your body was resorting to internal biological measures to ensure it received its nutrient/calories by way of feeding on itself, was in a state of catabolism, the state in which the body had the "ability" to recover was extremely sub par (less then optimal), and your performance was also less then what it could have been. Additionally, if you were "brand new" to working out/running etc, it is possible that the new training could have been such a shock, you could have experienced new to fitness gains; however, even then the progress you could have achieved was marred by your calorie intake of 900c (or 1,217 short of "just" your BASE NEED of calories).
Okay, now we have "about" 1,217 calories short of your BASE NEED.
Let's move on to including your approximated activities.
If within the above quote is true, and this had been your activity (and including your demands of work, which seems very demanding-by the way "what do you do for work?), then this multiplier is good to work with--"as an idea base generator" to give the "feel" of how calorie approximation "works". And, "this" is the purpose.
Your approximate Base Line: 2,117 calories.
Approximate deficit from base: -1,217 calories
Your Maintenance Line (MT Line which includes all approximated activity) is 3,653 calories. (with a multiplier of 1.75, if this isn't correct with your "current" fitness activity, this can be "adjusted"--thus revealing the beauty of what I am trying to get across to you)
Understanding their may be some variances, your approximate deficits per day were running somewhere around: 2,753 calories. (3,653-900=2,753, assuming your activities in the quote).
There is an "approximated" 3,500 calories in one pound of fat.
Fluster I want you to fully absorb this "tentative" information for a moment. Take it in and really "think about this".
The body is an extraordinary bodily adjusting mechanic that operates per its design intention. Logically it follows then that one ought to design calories around this understanding, while trying/attempting to work within these parameters to maximize ones--"potential", minimizing functional drawbacks, while trying to optimize their personal goal path.
You want your metabolism to ROCK!
Do ya?! He, he! Then stroke the calories baby! Put "appropriate" fuel in the furnace, and then fire up the engine (exercise), and you take off like a strong locomotive, baby! If you remember anything as we continue this conversation, remember that more than ANTHING else (within a healthy person) calorie manipulation (and knowing yourself as one influences these personally defined calories), and exercise manipulation (and adapting to bodily feedback) stokes the metabolism more than anything else.
IT IS NOT frequent meals--that fires up the metabolism (IMO). Frequent meals play an important "role" and "function" within ones personal goal path, and along with manipulating calories, can be used to deal affectively with bodily feedback (like hunger pangs, low energy, increasing blood sugar when appropriate, etc), but frequent meals play a very minor role in increasing metabolism.
Therefore, eat often, but don’t get all depressed that you had to miss a meal because of life responsibilities. Be more concerned with "what" you eat, and how much of what you eat (total calories ingested for the 24 hour day).
When trying to reduce body fat where a calorie deficit is required, IMO, one should attempt to build/reserve as much muscle as possible in an environment that is less than optimal (for recovery, building muscle, etc), and continually attempt to improve/optimize these less than appealing conditions through diet and fitness knowledge, and most importantly, knowing yourself and watching the feedback received when applying diet and fitness knowledge.
Understand, that when all the smoke clears, and when you are done sweating and laboring in the gym (assuming healthy person), the almighty calorie is the "champ" in determining whether you grow muscle and/or lose fat tissue, along with proper progression in the gym, and "total" body recovery (not to leave out personal genetics, etc).
Absorb this post, and I will be posting again, soon. When I get some more time, young man.
I will not be responding to the debates on the other estimators, as this "currently" defeats my purpose "with you"
I will be posting some more, soon, young man
Best wishes to you,
Chillen
Last edited:
FusterCluck0311 : can you tells us.....
- how many minutes ' per week ' do you dedicate to resistance training ?
- how many minutes ' per week ' you do dedicate to cardio / sports ?
- how many minutes ' per week ' you do dedicate to cardio / sports ?
Fluster, I am going to wait for your response before I respond any further. We have alot of new members that post, and do not return, and I want to ensure you are still interested in this conversation (as well as staying a member of the forum) before I invest some more time in helping you as much as I feasibly can.
I will check this thread from time to time, to see if you have posted to it.
I hope that you do, young man.
Best regards,
Chillen
I will check this thread from time to time, to see if you have posted to it.
I hope that you do, young man.
Best regards,
Chillen
By simple logic your right. But that isnt the case, HIIT will still burn much more fat. Simple aerobic exercise doesnt alter the amount of catecholamines which is a potent fat burner, HIIT does. I have a world known study that shows that just 20minutes of HIIT burns 3 times more fat! then 45minutes of cardio. Its also less boring and less time which is very important.
Thanks alot man...
Currently I walk about 5-6 miles a day fast paced pushing fertilizer acrossed about 20-22 lawns a day,
I try and go to the gym Monday-Friday, but sometimes I'll miss a Wednesday or Thursday. I do mostly full body-workouts (squats, pull-ups, deadlifts) 3 times a week, isolated tri's/bi's chest 2 times a week, kind of "plug n play" abs and obliques.
As far as reps/sets and weight I just go by what I can do. I try and keep tri's and bi's at even weight so theres no uneven growth.
Chest:
Bench, 135 - 3x10
Incline bench , 135 - 3x10
Freeweight Bench, Two 55's - 3x10
Inclined Pushups - 3x10
Arms:
Curls, 35 - 2x10, 40 - 2x8
Preacher curls, 85 - 4x8
Skull Crushers, 65 - 4x16
Squat, 135 - 4x10
Deadlift, 155 - 4x10
Pull ups, 3 sets underhand, 3 sets overhand..til failure
Inclined situps w/16lb medicine ball, 3x20
Obliques, 65 - 2x25 each side
Leg raises, 3x10
Lat pulldowns, 145 3x10
Rows, 135 - 3x10
These are scattered through the week, but each of these exercises are completed..My calories now are roughly 1500-1800 a day,
My workout regiment is a little sketchy, but I think I'll get by. My stomach is gettin smaller and my shoulders are getting bigger. Oh yeah I try and run once or twice a week around my block about 4-5 times. It's probably a little over 2 miles and it includes a hill, so I consider that my HIIT, since I sprint up the hill.
Thanks for the help bro-ha,
Sean
Currently I walk about 5-6 miles a day fast paced pushing fertilizer acrossed about 20-22 lawns a day,
I try and go to the gym Monday-Friday, but sometimes I'll miss a Wednesday or Thursday. I do mostly full body-workouts (squats, pull-ups, deadlifts) 3 times a week, isolated tri's/bi's chest 2 times a week, kind of "plug n play" abs and obliques.
As far as reps/sets and weight I just go by what I can do. I try and keep tri's and bi's at even weight so theres no uneven growth.
Chest:
Bench, 135 - 3x10
Incline bench , 135 - 3x10
Freeweight Bench, Two 55's - 3x10
Inclined Pushups - 3x10
Arms:
Curls, 35 - 2x10, 40 - 2x8
Preacher curls, 85 - 4x8
Skull Crushers, 65 - 4x16
Squat, 135 - 4x10
Deadlift, 155 - 4x10
Pull ups, 3 sets underhand, 3 sets overhand..til failure
Inclined situps w/16lb medicine ball, 3x20
Obliques, 65 - 2x25 each side
Leg raises, 3x10
Lat pulldowns, 145 3x10
Rows, 135 - 3x10
These are scattered through the week, but each of these exercises are completed..My calories now are roughly 1500-1800 a day,
My workout regiment is a little sketchy, but I think I'll get by. My stomach is gettin smaller and my shoulders are getting bigger. Oh yeah I try and run once or twice a week around my block about 4-5 times. It's probably a little over 2 miles and it includes a hill, so I consider that my HIIT, since I sprint up the hill.
Thanks for the help bro-ha,
Sean
Is it safe to say you average about 1 hour of weight training ....5 X a week then ?
Or is it more ?
Isn't 1500-1800 rather low ? Are you trying to slash fat on 1500-1800 a day. ......or add some muscle mass ?
At 210 lbs., your RMR ( Resting Metabolic Rate ) is only about 2,200 calories as it is ( i.e calories just to keep you be ridden ) and doesn't even account for your active lifestyle ( i.e walk about 5-6 miles a day fast pace ) or your weight training or your cardio.
How long does that take you ?
Last edited:
I think thats fine for now. remember just a week ago he was eating a 1000 calorie increase, and he already made a 500-800 calorie increase. If he jumps any higher, good change he'll store some fat. Would be a good idea to stay at this calorie intake for a little bit, get his metabolism to catch up, then slowly raise.
Fuster, don't be scared by the initial fat gain either.
I'd say just about 1 hour of weight training. And I keep moving. I've found that some people go to the gym for 2-3 hours, but half the time they're just walking around, going through the motions, etc. My hour is completely business, and I try and keep it intense. My last rep of my last set is usually black-out pants-crapping...
On 1500-1800 calories I'm trying to shed fat.
As for working out 7 days a week, 4-5 hours, 700 pushups a day and all that jazz; that was my routinely workout when I wrestled in high school, no more of that. 1500-1800 calories/day and my aforementioned workout schedule is what I'm following now. I've lost about 10 pounds in my little 900 cal/day diet that I worked on for 2-3 weeks. Now I'm boosting my calories since I need the energy to get by for work, and eating is more fun than not eating.
I'd say 2 miles 5x around my block is pretty close. I've never timed myself, but it takes me about 17 minutes at a good speed...but the up-hill sprints kind of hinders my pace and brings me closer to 20 minutes. In the military we have whats called a PFT (Physical fitness test), 20 pullups, 100 crunches, 3.0 mile run. 18 minute 3 mile run gets you the full points, I ran it at 19.37, just to give you my level of cardio fitness. It aint bad, but it could be better.
I've actually lost about 2 pounds since I boosted my calories up to around 1600, and I didnt really see a visual gain of fat.
He's only taking in 1,500 - 1,800 calories a day....and he weighs 210 lbs.
If his BMR ( at 210 lbs ). is about 2,200 calories- and this BMR calorie estimate does not include calorie needs for " walking 5-6 miles a day fast paced " , " working out 7 days a week " etc. etc. - why would he store fat if he jumps higher in calories ?
Generally speaking, it's excess calories - beyond what your body needs - that get stored as fat aren't they ?
Based on his rather robust weekly activity level , I think he could handle a lot more calories and still not add any fat IMO.
Last edited:
Thanks for the info.
I was curious to see how your weight training and cardio minutes reconciled to a maintenance calorie calc formula I've seen used ( see below )....I put your data / estimates in bold.....
A - Your weight in pounds ...210 lbs.
B - Take A X 11 = RMR calories....2,310 calories
C - Take B X 1.6 for your daily activities calories....3,696 calories
D - Number of minutes you weight lift per week X 5....1,200 calories
E - Number of minutes you do aerobic cardio, sports etc. per week X 8....160 calories
F - Add D & E....divide by 7.....195 calories
G - Add C & F to get an estimate of your daily maintenance calories.....3,890 calories
B - Take A X 11 = RMR calories....2,310 calories
C - Take B X 1.6 for your daily activities calories....3,696 calories
D - Number of minutes you weight lift per week X 5....1,200 calories
E - Number of minutes you do aerobic cardio, sports etc. per week X 8....160 calories
F - Add D & E....divide by 7.....195 calories
G - Add C & F to get an estimate of your daily maintenance calories.....3,890 calories
.....so, if we assume that 3,800 is close to your maintenance level, a cut of 20% is about 3,000. If you cut it by 40% - a whopping 1,500 calorie deficit - you're still only at 2,300.
My point being, to ensure you aren't losing muscle as part of your weight loss, you could easily get away with eating more than 1500-1800 calories and still shred fat IMO.
Just something to think about.
I drink 2 nights a week...At about 14-16 beers a night, at 100 calories each Coors Light, I feel I'll be safer at keeping it at around 1600 calories/day. Not to mention if I keep steppin it up I might fall into a eating torrent and ruin everything.
I'm pretty comfortable at my current calorie intake, I'm losing weight, I have the energy, and with my alcohol intake I dont feel I really need to consume extra calories just to make it look good on paper. I take an anti-catabolic supplement, and I'm taking in enough protein to where muscle loss isnt (shouldnt be) that big of a problem for me...not to mention I'm leaving the gym less tired every time, and my weight is increasing nicely. (I dont like leaving the gym feeling like I can go back in and bust out more, so I add weight and boost the intensity. Fatigue after the gym makes me feel like I've accomplished my goal.) I'll just keep this up until my deployment in May
Thanks for the input...
I'm pretty comfortable at my current calorie intake, I'm losing weight, I have the energy, and with my alcohol intake I dont feel I really need to consume extra calories just to make it look good on paper. I take an anti-catabolic supplement, and I'm taking in enough protein to where muscle loss isnt (shouldnt be) that big of a problem for me...not to mention I'm leaving the gym less tired every time, and my weight is increasing nicely. (I dont like leaving the gym feeling like I can go back in and bust out more, so I add weight and boost the intensity. Fatigue after the gym makes me feel like I've accomplished my goal.) I'll just keep this up until my deployment in May
Thanks for the input...
From my experience, and from others i've noticed theres a good chance of some fat gains when you drastically increase calorie intake rather than slowly increasing it by 100 a week.
I suppose its because your body would have been accustomed to having such a low calorie intake that when it gets hit with so much more food than its used to, the metabolism is caught off guard and takes a while to catch up.
You seriously drink 28-32 beers a week?
2 nights @ " 14-16 beers a night " ?
How much protein do you take ?
" weight is increasing nicely " ?
Not sure I follow.......didn't you say above, that " I'm losing weight " ?
I suppose.
My point simply is, that when most of us give advice to people on safe and sensible fat loss, we usually cite a calorie deficit of 500 calories from maintenance, or sometimes a reduction of 15% - 20% from maintenance, etc.
It just seems to me that a calorie deficit of around almost 3 X that - a 1,400 +/- calorie deficit from maintenance is a bit extreme....a least IMO.
Then again, if FusterCluck0311 was able to drop 11lbs in 48 hours ( I still don't know how this was done
) then ' extreme ' is a relative term I suppose.I suppose.
My point simply is, that when most of us give advice to people on safe and sensible fat loss, we usually cite a calorie deficit of 500 calories from maintenance, or sometimes a reduction of 15% - 20% from maintenance, etc.
It just seems to me that a calorie deficit of around almost 3 X that - a 1,400 +/- calorie deficit from maintenance is a bit extreme....a least IMO.
Then again, if FusterCluck0311 was able to drop 11lbs in 48 hours ( I still don't know how this was done
Not hard. I've done it in 24 for sport meets.
Lots of water + intense exercise to flush out carbs + sauna = atleast 10lbs lost.
Yeah, drink a good amount of water, run in the boiler room with every piece of winter gear you have on for hours and you'll lose a ****load of weight.
Yeah, I drink on the weekends, and thats about my weekly beer intake (which is nothing compared to about 6 months ago). It's all about tolerance..and the fact it's Coors Light.
I take in 4 protein shakes (240g) on training days, 3 shakes (180g) on "off" days. I weight 210.
I meant "decreasing nicely".
Yeah, I drink on the weekends, and thats about my weekly beer intake (which is nothing compared to about 6 months ago). It's all about tolerance..and the fact it's Coors Light.
I take in 4 protein shakes (240g) on training days, 3 shakes (180g) on "off" days. I weight 210.
I meant "decreasing nicely".