Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32

Thread: Belly and love handles page 3

  1. #21
    ChristopherPlank's Avatar
    ChristopherPlank Guest

    1

    Primal Fuel


    I think everyone who's on board with the Primal Blueprint will agree that what you eat matters and can effect hormone levels, etc...


    That being said, I don't see how people can act like calories have absolutely *nothing* to do with fat loss.

    If you eat more calories than it takes to maintain your current mass, the excess calories will be converted into fat. If you eat less calories than it takes to maintain, you will burn fat to supply the required energy.


    Do you seriously believe it doesn't work that way?


    You've no doubt seen posts of people who gain weight on PB or follow PB for a long period of time without losing fat. It's not because PB isn't effective or helpful, it's because they're still eating too many calories!


    I'm not saying you have to meticulously count calories, but keep in mind that how much you consume *does* play a major roll in fat loss.


  2. #22
    SerialSinner's Avatar
    SerialSinner is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    286

    1



    A calories-in/calories-out approach is an extremely superficial and under-informed approach to weight loss.


    Weight gain and loss is regulated mainly by hormones which regulate BMR, appetite and many other variables that RESULT in us taking more or less of the calories we need.


    The same person can gain weight or not by eating the same calories and doing the same amount of exercise. This happens because the body can burn more or less energy with he same activity and calories depending on the QUALITY of the calories and how they affect many other physiological variables.


    A good quality diet allows the body to take care of its weight within healthy levels and in a seamless fashion and without the need to count calories. Calorie counting and inducing the body into starvation mode by artificially restricting its energy intake is a extremely less effective approach to weight loss.

    “Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future.” -Oscar Wilde
    "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." -George Bernard Shaw
    "The trouble with jogging is that the ice falls out of your glass." -Martin Mull

  3. #23
    GrockinOut's Avatar
    GrockinOut is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    South Jersey
    Posts
    118

    1



    Calories do, and do not matter. It just depends on your goals.

    Do you want to get ripped? For male lets say a single digit like 8%? than yes you are going to need to do calorie counting and so on and so forth. Sorry that part is true, if you want to get their you need about 50 percent of your calories from protein, and the rest should be fat, and minimal carbs.


    But lets just you are happy with a body fat percent that is 14-15 percent, than you do not need to count calories, as long as your carbs are low.


    This is from a guy named bear, who follows a carnivore diet, (he does have cheese, and heavy cream):


    "The diet is actually a high-fat diet. It usually is considered balanced at around 60-80% of calories from fat. I try to reduce the fat to around 50% (in order to force my body fat levels down below 10%), but it is still in the high-fat category. It is a ZERO-CARB diet, however, and you cannot drink milk, which is a high-carb food. Heavy cream is ok, as is butter and most cheeses. I mostly eat beef. with fresh fish when it is available. I must go to Cairns to get it, and the boats don't go out in bad weather. I also will eat lamb, I especially like the brains. Chooks are ok, too but not all the time. I never eat pork or turkey.


    A high fat diet will only support about 15% body fat MAX on a male. This means that you can gorge yourself on fat and lose weight like crazy until your fat level falls to about 15%, at which point you have to start watching the caloric level."


    any way that is my two cents!


  4. #24
    chocolatechip69's Avatar
    chocolatechip69 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6

    1



    Dear Plan, with all do respect, I am one of those people that gained weight eating primally. I've been eating according to PB laws for little over 8 months now. I am a female, 5'2" and currently weight 128lb. I started my journey at 124lb, went down to 118 in the first 3-4 weeks, and have been steadily gaining ever since. I've been in the same 127-128lb range for the past 3 months, give or take.

    You've no doubt seen posts of people who gain weight on PB or follow PB for a long period of time without losing fat. It's not because PB isn't effective or helpful, it's because they're still eating too many calories!

    Really? I allowed myself be a complete lab rat with this journey and the fact that I carry little bit of extra body weight no longer bothers me as I know my overall well-being has improved. Forgive me when I say this, but who are you to say people who gain weight simply do so because they eat too many calories? I've tried all kinds of different variations since going Primal. First, I excluded all the fruits and root vegetables for about a month (no other sugar or grains, of course). That didn't seem to help. Then kind pb'ers here advised to drop the seeds and nuts, so I did that too for about a month. Nothing changed. Then I eliminated dairy for the next month. Can you guess where this going? After I added dairy, nuts and fruit back into my diet, my weight neither went up nor did it go down. All the while I was eating on average 1,600 calories a day.

    Now comes the kicker. My next experiment started after reading Good Calories, Bad Calories and assuming calories really don't count. I opted my calories to about 2,800 a day for roughly 3 weeks. I also dropped carbs below 20 g a day and pretty much ate protein and fat during this period. You know what happened? Nothing!!!


    My final experiment was with the Warrior Diet. If you're not familiar with the concept, you basically IF during the entire day and then gorge on food in evening. As you can imagine, a girl who's 5'2" can only put down so much food in one sitting, so after tracking this experiment in a Fit Day, I knew I was eating about 1,300 - 1,400 calories a day. Meanwhile, during all 4 weeks on Warrior Diet, I was pushing myself to the limits during my workouts. I sprint once a week, I do slow walking (3 miles/day), and I lift weights 3 times a week. While I did build some muscle during the Warrior Diet, I did not loose the actual fat.

    So these days I eat very relaxed. I no longer track my carbs or calories and simply eat when I'm hungry. Most of the time, though, I'm pretty sure I'm at 2,000 calories a day and about 100-150 g of carbs. My weight is still the same. It doesn't go up or down. It just stays there.


  5. #25
    MalPaz's Avatar
    MalPaz is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    2,790

    1



    MIGHT you be at your body's homeostasis?? this proves the point that when you body is happy regardless of what you overeat or undereat you body's setpoint is regulated when you metabolism is healthy


  6. #26
    Prowler's Avatar
    Prowler Guest

    1



    The way I see it, just going primal/low-carb is enough for most people to achieve a healthier metabolism and a healthy body weight. But there comes a certain point where your body settles into homeostasis and if you want to get leaner than your body "wants" to, that's when you might have to make a conscious effort to restrict calories a bit.


    Remember, low bodyfat (10% and under) is not necessarily optimal for health. We just like the way it looks. It might not be what your body wants, so you have to force it a little.


  7. #27
    Grumpycakes's Avatar
    Grumpycakes is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    3,591

    1



    Maybe calorie restriction is important, but don't get stuck on the idea that your body has a calorie counter that it resets every 24 hours. Saying you need a deficit of so many calories PER DAY makes very little sense. I say this again and again: we are not machines. We have rhythms and cycles that ignore the spinning hands of the 24 hour clock.


    If a daily caloric restriction were necessary then weighing yourself every day would also accurately reflect your progress, but it doesn't.


    I think that if you're going to count calories, it's far more useful to do so over a span of a week than a day, which is also a useful interval to weigh yourself at. Maybe meeting monthly caloric requirements would be still more useful, I don't know.

    You lousy kids! Get off my savannah!

  8. #28
    chocolatechip69's Avatar
    chocolatechip69 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6

    1



    MalPaz, it very well might be Or maybe I have some hormonal imbalance. I don't know for sure because I refuse to go to a doctor. Either way, I'm OK with it because I know I tried a lot of things and my body isn't just that way because I'm an ignorant lazy bomb.


  9. #29
    MichaelA's Avatar
    MichaelA is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    281

    1



    @chocolatechip69: for your height (5'2) 128 lb is just right. 124 lb is underweight. Variation between 127-128 is water in/out. What is your body fat? ~22% ?


  10. #30
    Prowler's Avatar
    Prowler Guest

    1



    @Primalchild,


    I absolutely agree. It is calorie deficit over time that matters, not per 24-hour period. That is why I advocate IF as a good way to achieve this caloric deficit. One or two 24-hour fasts per week can make the difference in the long run.


Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •