Page 20 of 104 FirstFirst ... 1018192021223070 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 1036

Thread: EAT MOAR FAT! I'm finally GETTING it. page 20

  1. #191
    gopintos's Avatar
    gopintos is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,787
    Primal Fuel
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    Yes. I was just trying to figure out how to switch it from total to net. How do you do that? Of course I will have to re-enter some of my favories that I have only entered TC not NC data for.
    Couple different ways but you want to end up on the nutrition set up page. One way is on your nutrition tracking page, under the Date, is Tracker Options. Then select change diet settings. Then "add another nutrient to track", you should see Carbs (for Low-carb diet) option there.

    When you entered your own foods, if you entered the fiber, it will do it's magic for you.
    65lbs gone and counting!!

    Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

  2. #192
    gempdx44's Avatar
    gempdx44 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by Lawyerchick12 View Post
    Exactly Gempdix! I always thought this ideal weight never took into consideration the composition of people. I am 5 feet and I kid you not will look extremely skinny at 125 pounds. I wear size 2/4 and size 4/6 pants when I weigh 135. I am pretty big boned and naturally have muscles but also hourglassy with HUGE boobs (32DD) and A$$. BUt at 125 I will have like rock solid flat abs and small legs and arms but will still have the boobs and butt. I am fine with that. I am not sure what was the standard for the weight assumptions but it definitely did not take into consideration diversity.
    I believe you, because I have always been one of those people who looks 10-20 lighter than I weigh.

    At 150, I am currently sitting at 116 pounds of lean body mass, as last measured by my trainer a few weeks ago. So ya figure, add 20% of that for a decently lean female physique and that works out to 139.2 pounds - squarely at my 140 pound goal.

    What I don't understand is, how at this size I can fit in size 4 at many clothing stores? What do all these petite little chicks who are 5'4" and say, 115-120 pounds do? Shop in the children's section? I think the vanity sizing is ridiculous here in the US - when I buy clothing in Europe it equates to a size 8, which I think is more like the old 8 used to be over here.
    "For the great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie—deliberate, contrived, and dishonest—but the myth—persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic ... we enjoy the comfort of opinions without the discomfort of thought."
    ---John F. Kennedy

  3. #193
    sbhikes's Avatar
    sbhikes is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    9,947
    Dr. Eades on Protein Power always recommended net carbs so that's what I've always gone with. I think Mark figured it was too confusing for people to look at the carb breakdown on food labels so he went with gross carbs. Which means his carb curve is even more strict than it appears if you have a net carb point of view by default.

    Wow, trying to figure out my ideal weight is very confusing. If I use my height in cm (160) - 110, I get 50 kilos. If I use 160 -100, I get 60 kilos. The difference in pounds is 110 for the first one and 132 for the second one. That's quite an ENORMOUS range. Plus I'm 133 right now. Definitely not HSIS. Okay S, but not Hot S.
    Female, 5'3", 49, Starting weight: 163lbs. Current weight: 135 (more or less).
    Starting squat: 45lbs. Heaviest squat: 180 x 2. Heaviest Deadlift: 230 x 2

  4. #194
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by gopintos View Post
    Couple different ways but you want to end up on the nutrition set up page. One way is on your nutrition tracking page, under the Date, is Tracker Options. Then select change diet settings. Then "add another nutrient to track", you should see Carbs (for Low-carb diet) option there.

    When you entered your own foods, if you entered the fiber, it will do it's magic for you.
    Thanks! Now I just have to enter the fiber. Oh well, more numbers to geek out with.

    Quote Originally Posted by gempdx44 View Post
    What I don't understand is, how at this size I can fit in size 4 at many clothing stores? What do all these petite little chicks who are 5'4" and say, 115-120 pounds do? Shop in the children's section? I think the vanity sizing is ridiculous here in the US - when I buy clothing in Europe it equates to a size 8, which I think is more like the old 8 used to be over here.
    The one brand that I find to be consistent is Levi Strauss. I wore a size six at 145 lbs back in high school (that was a loooooong time ago) and I'm back to same weight and size now.

    Quote Originally Posted by sbhikes View Post
    Dr. Eades on Protein Power always recommended net carbs so that's what I've always gone with. I think Mark figured it was too confusing for people to look at the carb breakdown on food labels so he went with gross carbs. Which means his carb curve is even more strict than it appears if you have a net carb point of view by default.

    Wow, trying to figure out my ideal weight is very confusing. If I use my height in cm (160) - 110, I get 50 kilos. If I use 160 -100, I get 60 kilos. The difference in pounds is 110 for the first one and 132 for the second one. That's quite an ENORMOUS range. Plus I'm 133 right now. Definitely not HSIS. Okay S, but not Hot S.
    Yeah, I think the net carbs are looking like the better choice. More avocados allowed.
    For you at 5'3", I would split the difference between the 110 and 132 and go with the old 100 lbs plus five for each of your 3 inches above 5' so you would be shooting for 115 which is 52 point some odd kilos so you could figure HSIS as 53.

  5. #195
    sakura_girl's Avatar
    sakura_girl is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    3,687
    Quote Originally Posted by gempdx44 View Post
    I believe you, because I have always been one of those people who looks 10-20 lighter than I weigh.

    At 150, I am currently sitting at 116 pounds of lean body mass, as last measured by my trainer a few weeks ago. So ya figure, add 20% of that for a decently lean female physique and that works out to 139.2 pounds - squarely at my 140 pound goal.

    What I don't understand is, how at this size I can fit in size 4 at many clothing stores? What do all these petite little chicks who are 5'4" and say, 115-120 pounds do? Shop in the children's section? I think the vanity sizing is ridiculous here in the US - when I buy clothing in Europe it equates to a size 8, which I think is more like the old 8 used to be over here.
    WHAT, seriously? I am 5'4", 150, and a size 10, kind of close to size 8. How much do you deadlift?

  6. #196
    BennettC's Avatar
    BennettC is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Beaufot, SC
    Posts
    528
    N
    Quote Originally Posted by sbhikes View Post
    Dr. Eades on Protein Power always recommended net carbs so that's what I've always gone with. I think Mark figured it was too confusing for people to look at the carb breakdown on food labels so he went with gross carbs. Which means his carb curve is even more strict than it appears if you have a net carb point of view by default.

    Wow, trying to figure out my ideal weight is very confusing. If I use my height in cm (160) - 110, I get 50 kilos. If I use 160 -100, I get 60 kilos. The difference in pounds is 110 for the first one and 132 for the second one. That's quite an ENORMOUS range. Plus I'm 133 right now. Definitely not HSIS. Okay S, but not Hot S.
    Net carbs are a scam. leads people to believe carbs just magically dont count, this simply just isnt true. if you are counting carbs by using net carbs you are eating much more carbohydrate than you think.
    check this video out
    The Net Carb Scam --- Don't be fooled by the bogus "Net Carbs" - YouTube

  7. #197
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by BennettC View Post
    Net carbs are a scam. leads people to believe carbs just magically dont count, this simply just isnt true. if you are counting carbs by using net carbs you are eating much more carbohydrate than you think.
    check this video out
    The Net Carb Scam --- Don't be fooled by the bogus "Net Carbs" - YouTube
    That youtube clip was just a promo for a book but it didn't say anything about WHY net carbs are not a good way to count. I agree with him that stuff like sugar alcohols should not get a free pass but fiber is not digested so why should it be counted? If you have read the advertised book and can explain the author's POV for us I would appreciate it.

  8. #198
    sbhikes's Avatar
    sbhikes is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    9,947
    Well if fiber is indigestible, I don't see where the scam is.

    115 is what I typically use for my glam weight, but damn, the only time I ever weighed that much I was on the track team in high school and I ate 500 calories a day.
    Female, 5'3", 49, Starting weight: 163lbs. Current weight: 135 (more or less).
    Starting squat: 45lbs. Heaviest squat: 180 x 2. Heaviest Deadlift: 230 x 2

  9. #199
    tomi's Avatar
    tomi is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Posts
    6,878
    I haven't been under 135 all of my adult life! And at that weight I was a petite size 6. Mind you that was when 14 years ago - so my todays sizes I'd guess a size 2/4. I'm shooting for that weight again! I don't use the formulas...... I use the mirror I just want to look good naked! and even better in a hot pair of jeans!
    Read post #2626
    my motivation

    I'm doing this because I'm worth it - because I'm worthy - because I love myself.

    Goals: Healthy mind, healthy body, happy soul.

  10. #200
    Iron Fireling's Avatar
    Iron Fireling is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    446
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by Leida View Post
    I can comment on that. I grew up in metric system, and that was a standard formula for calculating normal weight, only for women it was your Height minus 110; and for a ballerina/young lady it was your height minus 115

    So, my height is 169 cm (5'6 and 1/2") My normal weight with 110 formula was 60 kg which translates into something like 133 lbs, and the calculators here in Imperial normally peg my 'ideal' weight at 130-135 lbs range as well based on what size frame you put in (the formula of the 5 for every inch over 5 feet will peg me at 130-133 lbs as well if you count my half inch, LOL!).

    But I was always more comfortable with 54-56 lbs range (which is your 120-125 lbs), which is consistent with the '-115' rule, and the lower end of the healthy BMI spectrum (the cut-off is somewhere between 114 -118 lbs for my height in Imperial).

    My HOT STUFF! weight will be more around 50 -52 kg (110-115 lbs) providing I preserve muscular mass, obviously!

    Uhm, what I am trying to say, those numbers correspond well enough, and one probably needs to adjust them in front of the mirror
    Haha my height -110 would be 40kg and -115 would be 35kg!! According to my Tanita scales, I have close to 40kg of lean body weight (muscle) so I'd literally need to lose EVERYTHING but muscle to get even close to those weights! (Bye bye bones and internal organs!!). My daughter weighs 37 and people describe her as "skinny" and she's shorter than I am (naturally, as she's 10) she's probably 138cm tall.

    Anyway for me to be 45kg that's a BMI of 20, so being 40 would be 17.7 BMI (underweight), and being 35 would be 15.5 BMI (which surely is too skinny for anyone unless they've got an extremely small build).
    All that said, I think I'm pretty okay at 45kg, but one friend said I'd be "skinny and ugly" if I weighed that...(which is quite stupid as I used to weigh that and no one ever accused me of being "skinny").

    I guess I am saying that I don't think it will work for all heights. The shorter you get, the more difficult it would be, simply because you don't necessarily become so much narrower as you become shorter (well I don't mean people "become" shorter... just that shorter people tend to be proportionally wider than taller people). I don't think I have a large build for my height at all... but it would literally be impossible for me to weigh 35kg without severe muscle catabolism, just because I already have MORE than 35kg of muscle.

    Anyway, I'm thinking of eating for a goal of 50kg and then pushing it up a notch when I get there (and/or seeing how I look). I'm aiming for low enough body fat to get rid of that "pooch" of lower belly fat I've had ever since I had kids (the whole saggy, stretched skin look... I was under the impression that it'd take plastic surgery to fix, but there is the idea that if body fat goes low enough, the fat goes away and the skin tightens... ).

Page 20 of 104 FirstFirst ... 1018192021223070 ... 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
  •