What am I doing wrong? Please help!!

[wannabeskinny45]

I need some advice, I've lost 93 lbs. so far and still have about 100 more to go. My problem is I'm stuck, I'm staying bewteen 295-305 and I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong. I'm eating 1500 calories a day and I am walking 30 mins. 3 times a week. I'm also drinking my 8 glasses of water aday. Thanks in advance for any advice or help.

 

[ForeverFit]

First of all congratulations on loosing 95 lbs. That is simply amazing! You should be *very* proud of yourself!!

Plateaus are a part of working out and weight loss. One technique used by people to break past these bumps in the road is to change your strategy. There is a saying by Albert Einstien that is quite appropriate - "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result." The point being what you've done to loose 95 lbs has probably been the same. It is now time to change things.

Because of the situation you find yourself in...not to mention this is the Internet after all - the best advice anyone could give you is to seek out professional help. Hire a trainer who specializes in obese people - it will be worth every penny. They can recommend a new exercise strategy and diet that can make you loose that last 100 lbs. Not only will you loose the 100 lbs quickly, it will be done safely - that is something you cannot put a price on.

If I were you, I would increase the number of walks from 3 times per week to 4 or 5 times per week. But again, keep in mind that you're getting free advice - you are the master of your own ship and have to make the decisions on your health yourself.

Good luck and congrats again! Keep on keeping on, you're doing great!

 

[stuco]

mt biker 2002 pretty much sums it up in the above post. I second that advice.

 

[wannabeskinny45]

Hey,thanks guys.
As for a personal trainer--I don't know anything about them, I thought they were just to help you tone everything up once you got to your goal, not to help lose weight and what questions would I need to ask to to find out if they would be right for me?
As far as the walking, I can increase that to 5 days aweek, I was thinking about that anyway and maybe going hour instead of 30 mins.
I was also wondering about the calories--I'm eating 1500 a day now, should I decrease them to 1000? I'm 5'2' and 305 right now.

Let me know what you all think? THANKS

 

[meonadiet]

Hey,thanks guys.
As for a personal trainer--I don't know anything about them, I thought they were just to help you tone everything up once you got to your goal, not to help lose weight and what questions would I need to ask to to find out if they would be right for me?
As far as the walking, I can increase that to 5 days aweek, I was thinking about that anyway and maybe going hour instead of 30 mins.
I was also wondering about the calories--I'm eating 1500 a day now, should I decrease them to 1000? I'm 5'2' and 305 right now.

Let me know what you all think? THANKS

Congrats on the weight loss. I can't wait until I can say I've lost 95 pounds!

The biggest thing is don't get discouraged. The second thing is don't cut your calorie intake to 1000 calories. That's bad for you.

Things you can do is increase your walking, consider a bodybuilding routine: the best one I can recommend is Joyce Vedral's 12 minute workout - it's great even if you haven't exercised in a hundred years, it's easy (ish), you can do it at home with a set of 3 pound weights and her book. You can get the book thru amazon.com or her website - joycevedral.com

Consider getting an exercise bicycle: if you can't afford one, do a little research online, and in stores, then get on a local freecycle.org list and see if anyone is giving one away - you might end up with a whole home gym if you're not careful.

But don't get discouraged. Plateaus are normal.

 

[DeepGreen]

What kind of intensity are you walking at?

During my workouts...I treat it exactly what it is, a workout. Perhaps try to increase the intensity a little bit.

What is your average heart rate? What is your maximum heart rate? How many calories are you burning in 30 min?

If you don't know these questions, chances are, you probably aren't pushing yourself. I hate it when people focus on quanity because, in my opinion, its the quality that counts.

Perhaps, try power walking. Your body is a very adaptive machine, and it probably got adapted at you only eating 1500 calories and walking. If you keep pushing yourself, you will lose weight. I gaurantee it. No pain, no gain.

However, as the other posters mention, seeing a specialist is not a bad idea. And a doctor...you don't want to work yourself to the point of getting sick, or anything like that. My doctor basically said to "knock myself out" that I was a young guy, but I don't know if the same applies to you.

Also, maybe you should consider starting a strength training program.

 

[Liquid1]

Be careful about using mostly calorie restriction as a weight loss strategy. It tends to work at the start but gets harder with time because you are changing your metabolism if you are consuming less than the average recommended amount. A slower metabolism makes it harder to lose as your body retains more of what it consumes.

I would focus on adding more exercise going forward. Try walking seven times a week, then building up the pace. I worked out with this guy who was 320 and by exercise alone he went down to 180 in 9 months.

 

[Trevor M.]

Congrats on the weight loss. I can't wait until I can say I've lost 95 pounds!

The biggest thing is don't get discouraged. The second thing is don't cut your calorie intake to 1000 calories. That's bad for you.

Things you can do is increase your walking, consider a bodybuilding routine: the best one I can recommend is Joyce Vedral's 12 minute workout - it's great even if you haven't exercised in a hundred years, it's easy (ish), you can do it at home with a set of 3 pound weights and her book. You can get the book thru amazon.com or her website - joycevedral.com

Yeah, a 12 minute work out using 3pound weights is about as affective as swatting at a fly with a toothpick. I looked around her site and found she is still spouting of the myth of toning, among other things, don't waste your money there, to the OP.

Hey,thanks guys.
As for a personal trainer--I don't know anything about them, I thought they were just to help you tone everything up once you got to your goal, not to help lose weight and what questions would I need to ask to to find out if they would be right for me?
As far as the walking, I can increase that to 5 days aweek, I was thinking about that anyway and maybe going hour instead of 30 mins.
I was also wondering about the calories--I'm eating 1500 a day now, should I decrease them to 1000? I'm 5'2' and 305 right now.

Let me know what you all think? THANKS

Let me, yet again, explain the definition of "toned". Toned - To lower bodyfat to such an extent muscle becomes highly visible. For maximum affect muscle mass needs to be increased through reistance training.

Walking one mile burns about 100 calories at a decent pace. Each walk after the first lowers the bodys caloric needs to complete the one mile walk. Soon it becomes obsolete and the intensity, not the duration or number of times you do it, needs to be increased.

No, do NOT lower your calories any further. Make the deficient through the workout as much as you can. Do not deprive youself of food thinking it will make up for the lack of intensity through physical activity.

 

[meonadiet]

Yeah, a 12 minute work out using 3pound weights is about as affective as swatting at a fly with a toothpick. I looked around her site and found she is still spouting of the myth of toning, among other things, don't waste your money there, to the OP.

*I* found it to be extremely effective. I lost 80 pounds in the 90's, and got into the best shape of my life by following her books. I started with the 12 minute workout, and as I lost weight, I went on to other books, and higher weights, because of boredom and switched between workouts.

I did no extra cardio: I was on my feet a minimum of 8 hours a day as a waitress and didn't see the need.

 

[Wrangell]

Let me, yet again, explain the definition of "toned". Toned - To lower bodyfat to such an extent muscle becomes highly visible. For maximum affect muscle mass needs to be increased through reistance training.

I disagree.

" To lower bodyfat to such an extent muscle becomes highly visible " is usually associated with trying to achieve some form of " definition " or getting " cut " IMO.

The definition of developing muscle " tone " actually has to do with the degree to which your muscles stay contracted while at rest - i.e you often see good muscle tone in many athletes vs generally poor muscle tone in very sedentary people.

 

[Trevor M.]

I disagree.

" To lower bodyfat to such an extent muscle becomes highly visible " is usually associated with trying to achieve some form of " definition " or getting " cut " IMO.

The definition of developing muscle " tone " actually has to do with the degree to which your muscles stay contracted while at rest - i.e you often see good muscle tone in many athletes vs generally poor muscle tone in very sedentary people.

Aren't you some type of coach? You should know basic physiological property's and know that muscles do not stay contracted while at rest.
Their "muscle tone" is thanks to a very low body fat.

Secondly, being "toned" as many N00bs like to call it. Is the same as being "cut" or "defined". They are all completely the same thing.

What you said makes no sense...

 

[Trevor M.]

*I* found it to be extremely effective. I lost 80 pounds in the 90's, and got into the best shape of my life by following her books. I started with the 12 minute workout, and as I lost weight, I went on to other books, and higher weights, because of boredom and switched between workouts.

I did no extra cardio: I was on my feet a minimum of 8 hours a day as a waitress and didn't see the need.

3 pounds in a 12 minute workout = completely pointless. I don't think you disputed that fact . The amount of calories one would burn in such a situation would be near negligible.

Congrats on your weight loss btw! As for your weightless on the 12minute working using 3 pound weights. Did you have a calorie restriction in place? Even unknowingly just eating less would be the root of the reason for the weight loss thanks in part to your already increased caloric needs through your job at the time. And as you made clear, You didn't stick to the routine with little dinky weights the entire time.

 

[meonadiet]

3 pounds in a 12 minute workout = completely pointless. I don't think you disputed that fact . The amount of calories one would burn in such a situation would be near negligible.

As a matter of fact, I didn't find it pointless. I started her program having no exercise (except for work) since 1978. So, in thinking that oh, 3 lbs isn't much, I did the whole Monday workout effortlessly (well almost...).

And could barely move on Tuesday.

So, as I continued that oh so painful Tuesday, I started with one set, and increased the sets as I got stronger.

Congrats on your weight loss btw! As for your weightless on the 12minute working using 3 pound weights. Did you have a calorie restriction in place? Even unknowingly just eating less would be the root of the reason for the weight loss thanks in part to your already increased caloric needs through your job at the time. And as you made clear, You didn't stick to the routine with little dinky weights the entire time.

I had started a low fat diet two days before I started her workout. My calorie intake spanned anywhere from 1500 calories a day to 2500 calories a day. Fat I kept between 15% and 20%. Sometimes more. I'm a very hungry woman.

My weights never went over 8 lbs, even though I had plans to eventually. Sometimes I used 3's, sometimes 5's, sometimes 8's, sometimes all 3. I learned to keep my body guessing - I found that I became bored and wanted to quit.

 

[Trevor M.]

As a matter of fact, I didn't find it pointless. I started her program having no exercise (except for work) since 1978. So, in thinking that oh, 3 lbs isn't much, I did the whole Monday workout effortlessly (well almost...).

And could barely move on Tuesday.

So, as I continued that oh so painful Tuesday, I started with one set, and increased the sets as I got stronger.



I had started a low fat diet two days before I started her workout. My calorie intake spanned anywhere from 1500 calories a day to 2500 calories a day. Fat I kept between 15% and 20%. Sometimes more. I'm a very hungry woman.

My weights never went over 8 lbs, even though I had plans to eventually. Sometimes I used 3's, sometimes 5's, sometimes 8's, sometimes all 3. I learned to keep my body guessing - I found that I became bored and wanted to quit.

I could continue and say a few things about the above. However, I'm not in the mood to argue/debate. Again, congrats on your weight loss!

 

[RhoRho]

Hey wannabeskinny,

Fantastic job on losing close to 100lbs all on your own. That's a fantastic job and much to be envied.

I was a little concerned at your total calories. Eating 1500 calories for your weight is simply too low. I've read enough from the experts on this site to know that not eating enough can actually inhibit weight loss.

Before you try out random suggestions, I'd suggest 2 steps:

1.) Check out this thread: http://weight-loss.fitness.com/hars...down-last-30-im-worried-about.html#post184158

It's applicable to you because the original poster had also lost a lot of weight and had more to lose. They had also plateaued, and were taking in a similar amount of calories to you. Read the response from Leigh, who's a personal trainer and nutritionist.

2.) Post this on the Harsh Truth section again, this time marked for the attention of experts like Leigh P. The responses will be from the experts, and will be more tailored to you.

It's a shame you've got more controversy and disagreement on your thread than an actual response to your query, but I'm sure you can get the help you need, using one of the above 2 suggestions.

In the meantime, good luck. I'm rooting for you. You've done a great job already..

 

[Wrangell]

Aren't you some type of coach?

You should know basic physiological property's and know that muscles do not stay contracted while at rest.

Their "muscle tone" is thanks to a very low body fat.

I suspect the problem is that the term ' being toned ' means different things to different people.

Most skeletal muscles stay contracted while at rest - at least to some degree. Even when you're at rest, your muscles are in a constant state of some form of ' partial contraction '. Within that context, nerve impulses always stimulate muscle fibres to contract - keeping your muscles " toned " So, whenever I've seen definitions of the " tonicity ( " tonus " ) of the muscles ', it has always been in the context of the level of muscle contraction " at rest ". I don't recall seeing fat levels as being associated within that definition of " tone ".

Secondly, being "toned" as many N00bs like to call it. Is the same as being "cut" or "defined". They are all completely the same thing.

Actually, I agree.

What Noobs would call a " toned look " has more to do with muscular definition and cutting down to a low body fat rather than any changes in the muscle itself as it pertains to tone / level of contraction at rest. I don't associate " toning " strictly with losing fat to look ' cut '.

What you said makes no sense...

Again, I suppose it depends on how one wants to strictly define " tone ".

In my view, if you are involved in exercise or athletics of any kind, over time, your muscles are being conditioned to adapt to some form of progressive overload. And one of the consequences of the many primary adaptations to overload is one in which your muscles have improved " tone " at rest. An improvement than say they would if you hadn't exercised and remained sedentary over that same period of time. I'd concede that a generally accepted understanding of improved ' tone ' may reflect some cellular / structural changes in your muscle.

 

[Trevor M.]

I suspect the problem is that the term ' being toned ' means different things to different people.

Most skeletal muscles stay contracted while at rest - at least to some degree. Even when you're at rest, your muscles are in a constant state of some form of ' partial contraction '. Within that context, nerve impulses always stimulate muscle fibres to contract - keeping your muscles " toned " So, whenever I've seen definitions of the " tonicity ( " tonus " ) of the muscles ', it has always been in the context of the level of muscle contraction " at rest ". I don't recall seeing fat levels as being associated within that definition of " tone ".

Actually, I agree.

What Noobs would call a " toned look " has more to do with muscular definition and cutting down to a low body fat rather than any changes in the muscle itself as it pertains to tone / level of contraction at rest. I don't associate " toning " strictly with losing fat to look ' cut '.

Again, I suppose it depends on how one wants to strictly define " tone ".

In my view, if you are involved in exercise or athletics of any kind, over time, your muscles are being conditioned to adapt to some form of progressive overload. And one of the consequences of the many primary adaptations to overload is one in which your muscles have improved " tone " at rest. An improvement than say they would if you hadn't exercised and remained sedentary over that same period of time. I'd concede that a generally accepted understanding of improved ' tone ' may reflect some cellular / structural changes in your muscle.

As you agreed with me, The average person takes the word "toned" and places it in the same boat as "cut" or "defined".

Your point at about muscles contraction while at rest is a moot point. We are talking about full on contraction as when ones looking at their bicep. Of course your muscles are in some form of contraction most if not all the time. However, If you are saying that some peoples muscles are rock solid all the time 24/7 I would have to disagree with you and claim it impossible.

Now, the "improved" tone is again from a drop in body fat with an increase in muscle mass. So obviously a trained athletes"tone" as you call it, is better then someone who sits on their ass all day.

The person who used the word "toned" above was talking in the same context as someone saying "cut". So, remember I'm talking specifically in that context.

 

[Wrangell]

As you agreed with me, The average person takes the word "toned" and places it in the same boat as "cut" or "defined".

.


I agree with you - that's correct. And all I'm saying is - technically - they're wrong. Because the definition of ' tone ' has nothing to do with being "cut" or "defined". That's all.

Your point at about muscles contraction while at rest is a moot point. We are talking about full on contraction as when ones looking at their bicep. Of course your muscles are in some form of contraction most if not all the time. However, If you are saying that some peoples muscles are rock solid all the time 24/7 I would have to disagree with you and claim it impossible.

.

First of all, I never insinuated people's muscles are " rock solid all the time 24/7 " In fact, I wasn't talking about full contraction at all, but partial contraction - while at rest. You had said " that muscles do not stay contracted while at rest " - I simply wanted to point put that there is in fact some level of contraction at rest and this ( level of contraction ) is the relevant issue when speaking of what is meant by the proper use of the word " tone ".

Now, the "improved" tone is again from a drop in body fat with an increase in muscle mass. So obviously a trained athletes"tone" as you call it, is better then someone who sits on their ass all day.

I agree with you on the improved tone of an athlete. That was was my point - you would have better tone in someone who has exercised for some time versus someone is sedentary who hasn't.

So again, to me, " improved " tone is less a consequence of fat on top of the muscle and more a consequence of your muscle adapting to some form of progressive overload. So, in theory, if you hold body fat % constant, you would nonetheless find some improvement in " tone " in individuals who has exercised for extended period of time versus sedentary individuals. Exercise would have caused their muscles to have adapted to some improvements in either muscle speed, endurance, or strength ( size ), with improved tone simply being a secondary consequence of these primary adaptations.

The person who used the word "toned" above was talking in the same context as someone saying "cut". So, remember I'm talking specifically in that context.

Fair enough.

Again, I agree with you.

I understand the " context " in which it was used. I simply am pointing out that " tone " has to do with muscle contraction at rest and is not synonymous with a measure for one's comparative level of fat - though that appears to be the mistaken context in which " tone " is used by most gym rats.

 

[wannabeskinny45]

Hey, thanks everybody for all your comments!!
I'm thinking about starting a weight loss dairy on here, could somebody tell me how to do this? I'm still new here and have'nt learn everything yet, but I do love to read all the advice and comments and the way that you all have the same goal in mind---A HEALTHIER BODY AND MIND---I just love it!! So I think I'll stick around awhile, If that's OK

 

[slimby43]

hi, just go to the main forum page - Weight Loss Diary (i dont know how to link)- new thread - give it a title and away you go. its your diary so you can write what you want i guess thoughts, feelings, foods eaten,exercise etc. slim