General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Balancing nutrition and weight loss Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
2016-03-29 4:39 PM


26
25
Subject: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
This question is specific to nutrition during training. I'm trying to sort my way through optimizing nutrition during training to ensure I'm getting the most out of my sessions while maximizing the calorie burn to lose lbs. historically I've been awful at nutrition (and hydration for that matter) during training but have just recently started adding in some Infinit and guy during longer workouts 1hr+. Hoping I'll get more out of my workouts as I'll be able to go stronger. So stronger work will somewhat offset the additional cals consumed. Anyone have any experience successfully finding that balance between fueling a good training session while optimizing weight loss?


2016-03-30 3:57 AM
in reply to: #5174460


136
10025
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Hi, I'm doing a 6 week course with a nutritionist, it is based on whole natural foods and includes 'fats' which for years people have reduced for fat free options- there is increasing research in this area and evidence that this knowledge was around the time fat loss was introduced. Since this diet I have gained lean muscle mass and lost weight- I have never been hungry and the recipies are easy and taste great, I have a bespoke menu plan geared for triathletes and my home made energy bars provide better lasting energy than energy gels and take a few minutes to make, my energy levels are consistently good - have you thought about seeing a nutritionist?
2016-03-30 9:53 AM
in reply to: PRHTri

User image


1502
1000500
Katy, Texas
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
I have lost about 8 lbs of winter weight over the past 8 weeks during a pretty heavy bike focus. It's also the "last 8 pounds" which are notoriously hard to drop. I think what you do outside of training time has more effect.

To keep it simple:

-Start a food diary (myfitnesspal is a good one)
-Be HONEST when you're keeping it up
-Be HONEST when you're keeping it up...I'm putting this one twice because it's easy to say "that didn't count" if you eat it...it counts
-It's going to tell you what you don't want to hear...you're eating more calories than you burn, if it doesn't then you aren't doing it right
-Adjust your intake until you see 1 lb/week or so drop consistently (weigh yourself at the same time every day, preferably right when you wake up, after you go to the bathroom)
-Ignore day to day weight changes (your weight will fluctuate a couple of pounds, so look for trends over weeks
-Stop eating processed foods as much as possible. Anything that has been modified (energy bars, chips, crackers, etc)
-Stay away from anything refined (white bread, white rice, etc)
-Eat a Sh*t ton of fruit
-Stay away from gimmicks...

Do this and you won't have to worry about nutrition when training, but keep it under 300 cal/hr while working out.
2016-03-30 1:27 PM
in reply to: 3mar

User image

Extreme Veteran
3025
2000100025
Maryland
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss

if I tried to sustain a 500 cal per day deficit I wouldn't be able to train.

 

High carb, low fat, low protein vegan.  whole foods, none of that processed crap.  you'll drop to a healthy fit weight without barely thinking about calories.  calorie restriction isn't necessary.

2016-03-30 1:46 PM
in reply to: 0

User image


1502
1000500
Katy, Texas
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Originally posted by dmiller5

 

calorie restriction isn't necessary.




in - out = accumulation

You have to burn more than you process. That could be reducing calories in, or changing the type of calories you take in, but you have to create a deficit of energy from outside sources. That's a restriction one way or another.

Edited by 3mar 2016-03-30 1:46 PM
2016-03-30 2:11 PM
in reply to: 3mar

User image

Extreme Veteran
3025
2000100025
Maryland
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by dmiller5

 

 

calorie restriction isn't necessary.

in - out = accumulation You have to burn more than you process. That could be reducing calories in, or changing the type of calories you take in, but you have to create a deficit of energy from outside sources. That's a restriction one way or another.

you will never accurately calculate what you put out or what you take in.  What you take in is not equal to what you absorb.  What you put out as heat is not always the same, and can be impacted by what you put in.

Grossly yes, in-out=accumulation, but this is a poor method.

take a look at studies that show the % of excess calories that are stored when you eat fat as apposed to when you eat whole carbohydrates.



2016-03-30 2:18 PM
in reply to: 3mar

User image

Expert
2373
20001001001002525
Floriduh
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Originally posted by 3mar

Originally posted by dmiller5

 

calorie restriction isn't necessary.




in - out = accumulation

You have to burn more than you process. That could be reducing calories in, or changing the type of calories you take in, but you have to create a deficit of energy from outside sources. That's a restriction one way or another.


+1, weight loss can only occur when you calorie restrict. There are many ways to do this, but this simple fact cannot be avoided.
2016-03-30 2:20 PM
in reply to: 0

User image


1502
1000500
Katy, Texas
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Originally posted by dmiller5

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by dmiller5

 

 

calorie restriction isn't necessary.

in - out = accumulation You have to burn more than you process. That could be reducing calories in, or changing the type of calories you take in, but you have to create a deficit of energy from outside sources. That's a restriction one way or another.

you will never accurately calculate what you put out or what you take in.  What you take in is not equal to what you absorb.  What you put out as heat is not always the same, and can be impacted by what you put in.

Grossly yes, in-out=accumulation, but this is a poor method.

take a look at studies that show the % of excess calories that are stored when you eat fat as apposed to when you eat whole carbohydrates.




Agreed, that is why I said "process" not take in. You say absorb, I say process, but we mean the same thing. The point is, you have to reduce the amount of energy from outside sources. That is why I had the; "stay away from processed food" line above. Processed food is already, in essence, digested partially, so you absorb more calories out of it. That's also why I suggested eating a lot of fruit; the fiber reduces the calories absorbed from the sugar. We're saying the same thing I think. However, once you switch over to a specific diet, you can track overall calories and calibrate it accurately. If you reduce what you think should have you losing 1 lb/week but you end up losing 2, you adjust your BMR and continue...same for the opposite. So you can make it accurate. I know how many calories of the foods I eat I can take in and lose, gain or stay steady. I've worked on it over time. I use the BMR to calibrate even though it's just as much to do with the types of calories ingested, but that doesn't matter.

Edited by 3mar 2016-03-30 2:20 PM
2016-03-30 3:00 PM
in reply to: 3mar

User image

Extreme Veteran
3025
2000100025
Maryland
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by dmiller5

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by dmiller5

 

 

calorie restriction isn't necessary.

in - out = accumulation You have to burn more than you process. That could be reducing calories in, or changing the type of calories you take in, but you have to create a deficit of energy from outside sources. That's a restriction one way or another.

you will never accurately calculate what you put out or what you take in.  What you take in is not equal to what you absorb.  What you put out as heat is not always the same, and can be impacted by what you put in.

Grossly yes, in-out=accumulation, but this is a poor method.

take a look at studies that show the % of excess calories that are stored when you eat fat as apposed to when you eat whole carbohydrates.

Agreed, that is why I said "process" not take in. You say absorb, I say process, but we mean the same thing. The point is, you have to reduce the amount of energy from outside sources. That is why I had the; "stay away from processed food" line above. Processed food is already, in essence, digested partially, so you absorb more calories out of it. That's also why I suggested eating a lot of fruit; the fiber reduces the calories absorbed from the sugar. We're saying the same thing I think. However, once you switch over to a specific diet, you can track overall calories and calibrate it accurately. If you reduce what you think should have you losing 1 lb/week but you end up losing 2, you adjust your BMR and continue...same for the opposite. So you can make it accurate. I know how many calories of the foods I eat I can take in and lose, gain or stay steady. I've worked on it over time. I use the BMR to calibrate even though it's just as much to do with the types of calories ingested, but that doesn't matter.

I'm with you until the counting calories part.  you can eat as many bananas or strawberries as you want, you won't gain weight .  Just keeping the oils out too.  I challenge you to eat enough potatoes without all the junky dairy and oil and gain weight...you can't.

2016-03-30 3:06 PM
in reply to: 3mar

User image

Master
2429
200010010010010025
Falls Church, Virginia
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
I was at a 500 deficit up until two weeks ago, and I lost over 40 pounds. Only now that I'm trying to get the last 25 have I switched to a 250 deficit. Some people are very anti-calorie-counting...I am not one of those people. The only site I'm on more than reddit or BT is MFP. It isn't hard, it is boring, and for me it works. That means logging everything, including every tab of nuun, every gu, etc.
That all being said, the last couple weeks when my volume went over 6 hours a week I was getting pretty tired, and made the decision to try to lose at half the speed.
2016-03-30 3:09 PM
in reply to: dmiller5

User image

Master
2429
200010010010010025
Falls Church, Virginia
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Originally posted by dmiller5
I challenge you to eat enough potatoes without all the junky dairy and oil and gain weight...you can't.




I did! I'm 5'4 and ate myself to nearly 200 pounds, and most of it was b/c I was hugely depressed and parking myself in front of the television eating fruit from sunup to sundown was a problem. I told myself it was fruit so it was healthy....but at the end of the day, I ate more than I needed to.


2016-03-30 3:12 PM
in reply to: Atlantia

User image

Extreme Veteran
3025
2000100025
Maryland
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss

Originally posted by Atlantia
Originally posted by dmiller5 I challenge you to eat enough potatoes without all the junky dairy and oil and gain weight...you can't.
I did! I'm 5'4 and ate myself to nearly 200 pounds, and most of it was b/c I was hugely depressed and parking myself in front of the television eating fruit from sunup to sundown was a problem. I told myself it was fruit so it was healthy....but at the end of the day, I ate more than I needed to.

you gained 200 lbs on a high carbohydrate low fat low protein whole foods plant based diet?  or were you eating this fruit in addition to other things?

2016-03-30 3:14 PM
in reply to: dmiller5

User image

Master
2429
200010010010010025
Falls Church, Virginia
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Originally posted by dmiller5

Originally posted by Atlantia
Originally posted by dmiller5 I challenge you to eat enough potatoes without all the junky dairy and oil and gain weight...you can't.
I did! I'm 5'4 and ate myself to nearly 200 pounds, and most of it was b/c I was hugely depressed and parking myself in front of the television eating fruit from sunup to sundown was a problem. I told myself it was fruit so it was healthy....but at the end of the day, I ate more than I needed to.

you gained 200 lbs on a high carbohydrate low fat low protein whole foods plant based diet?  or were you eating this fruit in addition to other things?




No, I gained 70 pounds to be a total 200 pound person. I ate bananas and sweet potatoes. I was also incredibly depressed and barely moved, so it was quite the dark time.
2016-03-30 3:19 PM
in reply to: dmiller5

User image


1502
1000500
Katy, Texas
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Originally posted by dmiller5

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by dmiller5

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by dmiller5

 

 

calorie restriction isn't necessary.

in - out = accumulation You have to burn more than you process. That could be reducing calories in, or changing the type of calories you take in, but you have to create a deficit of energy from outside sources. That's a restriction one way or another.

you will never accurately calculate what you put out or what you take in.  What you take in is not equal to what you absorb.  What you put out as heat is not always the same, and can be impacted by what you put in.

Grossly yes, in-out=accumulation, but this is a poor method.

take a look at studies that show the % of excess calories that are stored when you eat fat as apposed to when you eat whole carbohydrates.

Agreed, that is why I said "process" not take in. You say absorb, I say process, but we mean the same thing. The point is, you have to reduce the amount of energy from outside sources. That is why I had the; "stay away from processed food" line above. Processed food is already, in essence, digested partially, so you absorb more calories out of it. That's also why I suggested eating a lot of fruit; the fiber reduces the calories absorbed from the sugar. We're saying the same thing I think. However, once you switch over to a specific diet, you can track overall calories and calibrate it accurately. If you reduce what you think should have you losing 1 lb/week but you end up losing 2, you adjust your BMR and continue...same for the opposite. So you can make it accurate. I know how many calories of the foods I eat I can take in and lose, gain or stay steady. I've worked on it over time. I use the BMR to calibrate even though it's just as much to do with the types of calories ingested, but that doesn't matter.

I'm with you until the counting calories part.  you can eat as many bananas or strawberries as you want, you won't gain weight .  Just keeping the oils out too.  I challenge you to eat enough potatoes without all the junky dairy and oil and gain weight...you can't.




IF you can stay strictly to that diet. I can't/don't want to....I like my rum. And meats. So I have to count. If I only ate plants, yeah, I agree.
2016-03-30 3:21 PM
in reply to: 3mar

User image

Expert
2355
20001001001002525
Madison, Wisconsin
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Originally posted by 3mar

Originally posted by dmiller5

 

calorie restriction isn't necessary.




in - out = accumulation

You have to burn more than you process. That could be reducing calories in, or changing the type of calories you take in, but you have to create a deficit of energy from outside sources. That's a restriction one way or another.


Yes and no. Yes you need to have more energy output then input. However, if you do this formula daily over a long duration of time you will simply break down. The goal over a long period of time is in
Also, are we taking weight loss, or fat loss? Those are two far different concepts that seem to get thrown together.
2016-03-30 3:22 PM
in reply to: bcagle25

User image

Extreme Veteran
3025
2000100025
Maryland
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss

Originally posted by bcagle25
Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by dmiller5

 

 

calorie restriction isn't necessary.

in - out = accumulation You have to burn more than you process. That could be reducing calories in, or changing the type of calories you take in, but you have to create a deficit of energy from outside sources. That's a restriction one way or another.
Yes and no. Yes you need to have more energy output then input. However, if you do this formula daily over a long duration of time you will simply break down. The goal over a long period of time is in<out, however day to day that can fluctuate. Also, are we taking weight loss, or fat loss? Those are two far different concepts that seem to get thrown together.

 

two good points.  I was talking about fat loss.  if I stop eating like that I'd start losing muscle and strength too.



2016-03-30 3:47 PM
in reply to: loops

User image

Expert
1183
1000100252525
Fort Wayne, IN
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
I went from 194 to 200 lbs from 10/19/15 to 1/11/16. I started counting calories and primarily started eating less for breakfast and lunch and left room for more calories for dinner. This is probably not the best approach, but I like to have a good dinner. For calories I've been shooting for 1.5 lbs per week based on calorie intake (I use Myfitnesspal), but I cheat a lot. I'm down to 189 as of today. I generally weigh myself once a week at the same time of day (when I get to work and have had breakfast) I'm shooting for 180 lbs. I was working pretty hard on the bike and running, but it was getting to be too much. I've been focusing more on just the bike lately.

I am looking forward to hitting my target and having more for breakfast and lunch again.
2016-03-30 7:04 PM
in reply to: #5174460

User image


370
1001001002525
, North Carolina
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Lots of good advice here. Calorie counting works. It's a PIA. But, it does work. Big supporter of MFP as well.

Don't underestimate the importance of sleep on weight and fitness. Make sure you're getting enough.
2016-03-30 9:13 PM
in reply to: dmiller5

User image

Expert
2355
20001001001002525
Madison, Wisconsin
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Originally posted by dmiller5

Originally posted by bcagle25
Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by dmiller5

 

 

calorie restriction isn't necessary.

in - out = accumulation You have to burn more than you process. That could be reducing calories in, or changing the type of calories you take in, but you have to create a deficit of energy from outside sources. That's a restriction one way or another.
Yes and no. Yes you need to have more energy output then input. However, if you do this formula daily over a long duration of time you will simply break down. The goal over a long period of time is in

 

two good points.  I was talking about fat loss.  if I stop eating like that I'd start losing muscle and strength too.




And when it coms to fat loss, you need to find the best possible way to lose that fat. In terms of exercise, energy expenditure is a great way to measure this. Aerobic exercise (Triathlon like activities) will burn more calories DURING exercise. Anaerobic exercise (such as strength training) will burn more calories AFTER exercise. Of course this is all subject to intensity and time of said activities, but the point I am just trying to get a general point across that caloric expenditure is heightened post exercise as well with anaerobic activities.

This is one of the biggest misses when it comes to the endurance world and fat loss/weight loss and how strength training can benefit them to reach their goals.
2016-03-31 1:29 PM
in reply to: nickster

User image

Veteran
495
100100100100252525
Calgary
Subject: RE: Balancing nutrition and weight loss
Originally posted by nickster

I went from 194 to 200 lbs from 10/19/15 to 1/11/16. I started counting calories and primarily started eating less for breakfast and lunch and left room for more calories for dinner. This is probably not the best approach, but I like to have a good dinner. For calories I've been shooting for 1.5 lbs per week based on calorie intake (I use Myfitnesspal), but I cheat a lot. I'm down to 189 as of today. I generally weigh myself once a week at the same time of day (when I get to work and have had breakfast) I'm shooting for 180 lbs. I was working pretty hard on the bike and running, but it was getting to be too much. I've been focusing more on just the bike lately.

I am looking forward to hitting my target and having more for breakfast and lunch again.


Everyone's different.

I went from about 175 lb to 155 lb over about 5 years. After that I have stayed around 155 for the last 5 years. My weight sometimes gets down around 150 if I'm in a heavy training cycle. I don't think I could gain 5 lb in three months if tried. I have never consciously restricted calories - I lost weight as I progressed from occasionally active, to regularly active, to training for races.

I'm 5'9", age 53 and I think that any attempt to lose more weight in order to increase my competitiveness would be pretty tough. (I'm not interested in finding out.) It's a good thing I have reasonably healthy habits that work for me. If I had to rely on willpower or self-deprivation I would be in trouble.
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Balancing nutrition and weight loss Rss Feed