Hunger while whooshing

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

So, JC is half right: EAT LESS

I have to admit I have been doing some exercise

Let's see. Eating less and exercising more than you used to.

Only half right? Heh.

Cubit wrote:
|| At times I like to cut calories until it hurts, but I find that
|| during mini-stalls my hunger overwhelms me. I would plan for a 1200
|| calorie day and end up with 1600 or 1700. Then in weeks like this
|| week, where I'm whooshing, I can do some 600 calorie days and not be
|| overwhelmed by hunger. Something about whooshing changes my calorie
|| thermostat downward. Could it be that the fat cells are releasing
|| fat faster during a whoosh and the my brain is satisfied by the fat
|| in my blood? This is my current best guess. If this works for
|| others, the lesson would be to eat normal low carb until a whoosh
|| starts and then cut way back on calories until the whoosh ends.
||
|| IMHO the effects of "starvation mode" are exaggerated. I think some
|| folks are looking for an excuse to eat, so they obsess with avoiding
|| starvation mode.
||
|| Using FitDay, an average of my calories for the last 8 days came to
|| 1007 per day. My high day was 1911 and my low day was 523. I just
|| checked my temperature. It is 97.6 on the digital, and between 97.6
|| and 97.7 on my old mercury type thermometer. If there is a
|| starvation mode, I should be in it. During the last 12 days of
|| whooshing I lost 7.8 pounds.
||
|| My point is starvation mode calorie levels enhance whooshes, and
|| does not kill the whoosh. Also, I feel folks who respond to stalls
|| by increasing calories are deluding themselves.
||
|| link to chart: http://techmart.com/~cubit/Chart38.gif
||
|| Pulling a statistic out of my wazzu, I would say that my caloric
|| burn rate must be within 5% of what a non-starvation mode rate would
|| be.
||
|| So, JC is half right: EAT LESS
||
|| I have to admit I have been doing some exercise, but only about 10
|| minutes on a Nautilus machine, twice a week. I was surprised to
|| find that over a month I went from two weights to seven weights on
|| the machine settings. The weights are not labeled for how heavy
|| they are. Growing muscles should be making apparent progress on my
|| bathroom scale go slower, right?

If you're losing 8 lbs in 12 days (and you're not a noob to low carb), you
aren't growing any muscle. The absolute best you can do is to not lose any,
and I doubt you are simply because of your rate of weight loss (your 20
minutes of workout per week likely aren't helping much - but you never
know - something is better than nothing). Eating at an average of 4.5x
bodyweight is not going to be conducive for mucsle gain, and it is doubtful
that you won't lose any.

I agree with your points about starvation mode, for most people, anyway.

JC's advice on eating less, exercise more was obviously not intended for
someone who wishes to lose weight at any cost. The notion is to eat less
and exercise more until you get weight loss started - then hold it. He
never said anything about getting there at breakneck speed.

I hope you don't hurt yourself too badly, Cubit.

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I hope you don't hurt yourself too badly, Cubit.

Agreed. It's perfectly possible to whoosh away muscle tissue as well as fat
which is what will happen if you lose too rapidly and don't eat enough. It
happens ALL the time to bodybuilders and athletes...you can see it clearly.

--
Peace,
Pen
--
Pawbreakers - The Candy for Cats!
http://www.pawbreakers.com

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cubit wrote:
|| At times I like to cut calories until it hurts, but I find that
|| during mini-stalls my hunger overwhelms me. I would plan for a 1200
|| calorie day and end up with 1600 or 1700. Then in weeks like this
|| week, where I'm whooshing, I can do some 600 calorie days and not be
|| overwhelmed by hunger. Something about whooshing changes my calorie
|| thermostat downward. Could it be that the fat cells are releasing
|| fat faster during a whoosh and the my brain is satisfied by the fat
|| in my blood? This is my current best guess. If this works for
|| others, the lesson would be to eat normal low carb until a whoosh
|| starts and then cut way back on calories until the whoosh ends.
||
|| IMHO the effects of "starvation mode" are exaggerated. I think some
|| folks are looking for an excuse to eat, so they obsess with avoiding
|| starvation mode.
||
|| Using FitDay, an average of my calories for the last 8 days came to
|| 1007 per day. My high day was 1911 and my low day was 523. I just
|| checked my temperature. It is 97.6 on the digital, and between 97.6
|| and 97.7 on my old mercury type thermometer. If there is a
|| starvation mode, I should be in it. During the last 12 days of
|| whooshing I lost 7.8 pounds.
||
|| My point is starvation mode calorie levels enhance whooshes, and
|| does not kill the whoosh. Also, I feel folks who respond to stalls
|| by increasing calories are deluding themselves.
||
|| link to chart: http://techmart.com/~cubit/Chart38.gif
||
|| Pulling a statistic out of my wazzu, I would say that my caloric
|| burn rate must be within 5% of what a non-starvation mode rate would
|| be.
||
|| So, JC is half right: EAT LESS
||
|| I have to admit I have been doing some exercise, but only about 10
|| minutes on a Nautilus machine, twice a week. I was surprised to
|| find that over a month I went from two weights to seven weights on
|| the machine settings. The weights are not labeled for how heavy
|| they are. Growing muscles should be making apparent progress on my
|| bathroom scale go slower, right?

If you're losing 8 lbs in 12 days (and you're not a noob to low carb), you
aren't growing any muscle. The absolute best you can do is to not lose

any,

Quoted message said:

and I doubt you are simply because of your rate of weight loss (your 20
minutes of workout per week likely aren't helping much - but you never
know - something is better than nothing). Eating at an average of 4.5x
bodyweight is not going to be conducive for mucsle gain, and it is

doubtful

Quoted message said:

that you won't lose any.

I agree with your points about starvation mode, for most people, anyway.

JC's advice on eating less, exercise more was obviously not intended for
someone who wishes to lose weight at any cost. The notion is to eat less
and exercise more until you get weight loss started - then hold it. He
never said anything about getting there at breakneck speed.

I hope you don't hurt yourself too badly, Cubit.

You are correct.

It took me 12 months to lose 60 pounds, and I believe I still lost a little
muscle.

JC Der Koenig wrote:
|| "Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
|| news:[email hidden]...
||| Cubit wrote:
||||| At times I like to cut calories until it hurts, but I find that
||||| during mini-stalls my hunger overwhelms me. I would plan for a
||||| 1200 calorie day and end up with 1600 or 1700. Then in weeks
||||| like this week, where I'm whooshing, I can do some 600 calorie
||||| days and not be overwhelmed by hunger. Something about whooshing
||||| changes my calorie thermostat downward. Could it be that the fat
||||| cells are releasing
||||| fat faster during a whoosh and the my brain is satisfied by the
||||| fat
||||| in my blood? This is my current best guess. If this works for
||||| others, the lesson would be to eat normal low carb until a whoosh
||||| starts and then cut way back on calories until the whoosh ends.
|||||
||||| IMHO the effects of "starvation mode" are exaggerated. I think
||||| some folks are looking for an excuse to eat, so they obsess with
||||| avoiding starvation mode.
|||||
||||| Using FitDay, an average of my calories for the last 8 days came
||||| to 1007 per day. My high day was 1911 and my low day was 523. I
||||| just checked my temperature. It is 97.6 on the digital, and
||||| between 97.6 and 97.7 on my old mercury type thermometer. If
||||| there is a
||||| starvation mode, I should be in it. During the last 12 days of
||||| whooshing I lost 7.8 pounds.
|||||
||||| My point is starvation mode calorie levels enhance whooshes, and
||||| does not kill the whoosh. Also, I feel folks who respond to
||||| stalls
||||| by increasing calories are deluding themselves.
|||||
||||| link to chart: http://techmart.com/~cubit/Chart38.gif
|||||
||||| Pulling a statistic out of my wazzu, I would say that my caloric
||||| burn rate must be within 5% of what a non-starvation mode rate
||||| would be.
|||||
||||| So, JC is half right: EAT LESS
|||||
||||| I have to admit I have been doing some exercise, but only about 10
||||| minutes on a Nautilus machine, twice a week. I was surprised to
||||| find that over a month I went from two weights to seven weights on
||||| the machine settings. The weights are not labeled for how heavy
||||| they are. Growing muscles should be making apparent progress on
||||| my bathroom scale go slower, right?
|||
||| If you're losing 8 lbs in 12 days (and you're not a noob to low
||| carb), you aren't growing any muscle. The absolute best you can do
||| is to not lose any, and I doubt you are simply because of your rate
||| of weight loss (your 20 minutes of workout per week likely aren't
||| helping much - but you never know - something is better than
||| nothing). Eating at an average of 4.5x bodyweight is not going to
||| be conducive for mucsle gain, and it is doubtful that you won't
||| lose any.
|||
||| I agree with your points about starvation mode, for most people,
||| anyway.
|||
||| JC's advice on eating less, exercise more was obviously not
||| intended for someone who wishes to lose weight at any cost. The
||| notion is to eat less and exercise more until you get weight loss
||| started - then hold it. He never said anything about getting there
||| at breakneck speed.
|||
||| I hope you don't hurt yourself too badly, Cubit.
|||
|||
||
|| You are correct.
||
|| It took me 12 months to lose 60 pounds, and I believe I still lost a
|| little muscle.

But I bet you lost as little as possible. I hope such is the case for
Cubit. I'm not sure why he's in such a hurry, as his loss has been rather
steady.

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

JC Der Koenig wrote:
|| "Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
|| news:[email hidden]...
||| Cubit wrote:
||||| At times I like to cut calories until it hurts, but I find that
||||| during mini-stalls my hunger overwhelms me. I would plan for a
||||| 1200 calorie day and end up with 1600 or 1700. Then in weeks
||||| like this week, where I'm whooshing, I can do some 600 calorie
||||| days and not be overwhelmed by hunger. Something about whooshing
||||| changes my calorie thermostat downward. Could it be that the fat
||||| cells are releasing
||||| fat faster during a whoosh and the my brain is satisfied by the
||||| fat
||||| in my blood? This is my current best guess. If this works for
||||| others, the lesson would be to eat normal low carb until a whoosh
||||| starts and then cut way back on calories until the whoosh ends.
|||||
||||| IMHO the effects of "starvation mode" are exaggerated. I think
||||| some folks are looking for an excuse to eat, so they obsess with
||||| avoiding starvation mode.
|||||
||||| Using FitDay, an average of my calories for the last 8 days came
||||| to 1007 per day. My high day was 1911 and my low day was 523. I
||||| just checked my temperature. It is 97.6 on the digital, and
||||| between 97.6 and 97.7 on my old mercury type thermometer. If
||||| there is a
||||| starvation mode, I should be in it. During the last 12 days of
||||| whooshing I lost 7.8 pounds.
|||||
||||| My point is starvation mode calorie levels enhance whooshes, and
||||| does not kill the whoosh. Also, I feel folks who respond to
||||| stalls
||||| by increasing calories are deluding themselves.
|||||
||||| link to chart: http://techmart.com/~cubit/Chart38.gif
|||||
||||| Pulling a statistic out of my wazzu, I would say that my caloric
||||| burn rate must be within 5% of what a non-starvation mode rate
||||| would be.
|||||
||||| So, JC is half right: EAT LESS
|||||
||||| I have to admit I have been doing some exercise, but only about 10
||||| minutes on a Nautilus machine, twice a week. I was surprised to
||||| find that over a month I went from two weights to seven weights on
||||| the machine settings. The weights are not labeled for how heavy
||||| they are. Growing muscles should be making apparent progress on
||||| my bathroom scale go slower, right?
|||
||| If you're losing 8 lbs in 12 days (and you're not a noob to low
||| carb), you aren't growing any muscle. The absolute best you can do
||| is to not lose any, and I doubt you are simply because of your rate
||| of weight loss (your 20 minutes of workout per week likely aren't
||| helping much - but you never know - something is better than
||| nothing). Eating at an average of 4.5x bodyweight is not going to
||| be conducive for mucsle gain, and it is doubtful that you won't
||| lose any.
|||
||| I agree with your points about starvation mode, for most people,
||| anyway.
|||
||| JC's advice on eating less, exercise more was obviously not
||| intended for someone who wishes to lose weight at any cost. The
||| notion is to eat less and exercise more until you get weight loss
||| started - then hold it. He never said anything about getting there
||| at breakneck speed.
|||
||| I hope you don't hurt yourself too badly, Cubit.
|||
|||
||
|| You are correct.
||
|| It took me 12 months to lose 60 pounds, and I believe I still lost a
|| little muscle.

But I bet you lost as little as possible. I hope such is the case for
Cubit. I'm not sure why he's in such a hurry, as his loss has been

rather

Quoted message said:

steady.

I do believe I minimized muscle loss as much as possible with a consistent
exercise program. I also believe that aerobic exercise has to be kept to
less than 30 minutes a pop. There a plenty of studies done that show
endurance events causing muscle loss.

I perhaps understand why Cubit wants to lose weight quickly all of a
sudden... I get that way too with projects sometimes after I'm part way in
to them and I see that it's going to take a while. I suppose some things can
only be learned from experience. I agree that he stands a good chance of
screwing up his long term goals by chasing them too quickly in the short
term.

In article said:

At times I like to cut calories until it hurts, but I find that during
mini-stalls my hunger overwhelms me. I would plan for a 1200 calorie day
and end up with 1600 or 1700. Then in weeks like this week, where I'm
whooshing, I can do some 600 calorie days and not be overwhelmed by hunger.
Something about whooshing changes my calorie thermostat downward. Could it
be that the fat cells are releasing fat faster during a whoosh and the my
brain is satisfied by the fat in my blood? This is my current best guess.
If this works for others, the lesson would be to eat normal low carb until a
whoosh starts and then cut way back on calories until the whoosh ends.

Sounds like your dieting honeymoon is ending, welcome to the real
world.

Quoted message said:

IMHO the effects of "starvation mode" are exaggerated. I think some folks
are looking for an excuse to eat, so they obsess with avoiding starvation
mode.

Yep, but, not eating enough has its own disadvantages that are real,
unlike starvation mode [censored].

Quoted message said:

Using FitDay, an average of my calories for the last 8 days came to
1007 per day. My high day was 1911 and my low day was 523. I just
checked my temperature. It is 97.6 on the digital, and between 97.6
and 97.7 on my old mercury type thermometer. If there is a
starvation mode, I should be in it. During the last 12 days of
whooshing I lost 7.8 pounds.

My point is starvation mode calorie levels enhance whooshes, and does not
kill the whoosh. Also, I feel folks who respond to stalls by increasing
calories are deluding themselves.

Yes, they are. But, I heard from many people who lose weight too
quickly, that they find themselves being basically unable to maintain
weight. Something about rapid weight loss that screws up hunger
patterns, not sure what it is.

So, I am not sure how it works, but certainly, negative effect of
rapid weight loss are real.

Quoted message said:

link to chart: http://techmart.com/~cubit/Chart38.gif

Pulling a statistic out of my wazzu, I would say that my caloric burn rate
must be within 5% of what a non-starvation mode rate would be.

So, JC is half right: EAT LESS

I have to admit I have been doing some exercise, but only about 10 minutes
on a Nautilus machine, twice a week. I was surprised to find that over a
month I went from two weights to seven weights on the machine settings. The
weights are not labeled for how heavy they are. Growing muscles should be
making apparent progress on my bathroom scale go slower, right?

For your numbers, a slowdown by one or two weeks does not matter. You
are not in a race to lose weight and will have to diet for the rest of
your life anyway, eating pretty close to how you eat now, just
slightly more (or maybe not more). You obviously know that a world of
sinful desserts and krispy kremes is not awating you upon weight loww.

One nice effects of a lot of exercise is that your carb allowance would
be bigger. Reference: Atkins for life.

i

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

At times I like to cut calories until it hurts, but I find that during
mini-stalls my hunger overwhelms me. I would plan for a 1200 calorie day
and end up with 1600 or 1700. Then in weeks like this week, where I'm
whooshing, I can do some 600 calorie days and not be overwhelmed by hunger.

That's too low. You'd probably be better off doing 1500 a day and
making up the rest of the deficit via exercise.

Quoted message said:

Something about whooshing

WTF is whooshing?

Quoted message said:

IMHO the effects of "starvation mode" are exaggerated. I think some folks
are looking for an excuse to eat, so they obsess with avoiding starvation
mode.

'Starvation mode' is never good. Starving yourself does nothing to
help long-term weight loss, only short-term muscle decay.

Quoted message said:

Using FitDay, an average of my calories for the last 8 days came to 1007 per
day.

That's too low.

Quoted message said:

My high day was 1911 and my low day was 523. I just checked my
temperature. It is 97.6 on the digital, and between 97.6 and 97.7 on my old
mercury type thermometer. If there is a starvation mode, I should be in it.
During the last 12 days of whooshing I lost 7.8 pounds.

I doubt that too much of it is fat. How much water and muscle did you
lose?

Quoted message said:

I have to admit I have been doing some exercise, but only about 10 minutes
on a Nautilus machine, twice a week. I was surprised to find that over a
month I went from two weights to seven weights on the machine settings. The
weights are not labeled for how heavy they are. Growing muscles should be
making apparent progress on my bathroom scale go slower, right?

Machines are a waste of time, use free weights instead. If the weights
aren't even labelled that's even worse. Growing muscles won't hinder
your fat-loss in fact it will increase it. Weight-lifting is the most
important exercise you need to do to lose fat.

Quoted message said:

WTF is whooshing?

Whooshing is low-carber jargon for a sudden drop in weight, especialy if it
follows a period of no progress.

After all the responses, I'm planning to raise my protein level on low
calorie days in the hope of reducing muscle loss.

Thanks to everyone for the input.

I don't have access to "free weights" unless I improvise with household
objects, or something.

Cubit

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

WTF is whooshing?

Whooshing is low-carber jargon for a sudden drop in weight, especialy if

it

Quoted message said:

follows a period of no progress.

After all the responses, I'm planning to raise my protein level on low
calorie days in the hope of reducing muscle loss.

Thanks to everyone for the input.

I don't have access to "free weights" unless I improvise with household
objects, or something.

Cubit

At your level of conditioning, pushups and pullups will do just as much for
you. When you can lift your own body for several reps, then it's time to
start thinking about weights.

From: "Cubit"

Quoted message said:

IMHO the effects of "starvation mode" are exaggerated. I think some folks
are looking for an excuse to eat, so they obsess with avoiding starvation
mode.

Speak for yourself. I know, IMHO.

"JC Der Koenig" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't have access to "free weights" unless I improvise with household
objects, or something.

A set of dumbells isn't expensive.

Quoted message said:

At your level of conditioning, pushups and pullups will do just as much for
you. When you can lift your own body for several reps, then it's time to
start thinking about weights.

That doesn't really do much for the legs though.

JC Der Koenig wrote:
|| "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
|| news:[email hidden]...
|||| WTF is whooshing?
|||
||| Whooshing is low-carber jargon for a sudden drop in weight,
||| especialy if it follows a period of no progress.
|||
||| After all the responses, I'm planning to raise my protein level on
||| low calorie days in the hope of reducing muscle loss.
|||
||| Thanks to everyone for the input.
|||
||| I don't have access to "free weights" unless I improvise with
||| household objects, or something.
|||
||| Cubit
|||
|||
|||
|||
|| At your level of conditioning, pushups and pullups will do just as
|| much for you. When you can lift your own body for several reps, then
|| it's time to start thinking about weights.

Don't forget bodyweight squats!! All the way to tthe floor!

Sunshyne wrote:
|| From: "Cubit"
||
||| IMHO the effects of "starvation mode" are exaggerated. I think
||| some folks are looking for an excuse to eat, so they obsess with
||| avoiding starvation mode.
||
|| Speak for yourself. I know, IMHO.

He did say "some folks", not everyone.

In article <[email hidden]>, JC Der
Koenig <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I also believe that aerobic exercise has to be kept to
less than 30 minutes a pop. There a plenty of studies done that show
endurance events causing muscle loss.

Even if it's muscle-building, like running uphill? Is this v. heavy
activity, btw, or moderate?

Interestingly I now do 3 40-minute but high-intensity aerobic workouts
rather than a long long run.

--
Jane Lumley

"The Voice of Reason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"JC Der Koenig" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't have access to "free weights" unless I improvise with

household

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

objects, or something.

A set of dumbells isn't expensive.

Quoted message said:

At your level of conditioning, pushups and pullups will do just as much

for

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

you. When you can lift your own body for several reps, then it's time to
start thinking about weights.

That doesn't really do much for the legs though.

That's true. Bodyweight or Hindu squats would rectify the situation. For a
lot of people, walking would be a good start.

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

JC Der Koenig wrote:
|| "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
|| news:[email hidden]...
|||| WTF is whooshing?
|||
||| Whooshing is low-carber jargon for a sudden drop in weight,
||| especialy if it follows a period of no progress.
|||
||| After all the responses, I'm planning to raise my protein level on
||| low calorie days in the hope of reducing muscle loss.
|||
||| Thanks to everyone for the input.
|||
||| I don't have access to "free weights" unless I improvise with
||| household objects, or something.
|||
||| Cubit
|||
|||
|||
|||
|| At your level of conditioning, pushups and pullups will do just as
|| much for you. When you can lift your own body for several reps, then
|| it's time to start thinking about weights.

Don't forget bodyweight squats!! All the way to tthe floor!

Yes, I should have included them.

"Jane Lumley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, JC Der
Koenig <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I also believe that aerobic exercise has to be kept to
less than 30 minutes a pop. There a plenty of studies done that show
endurance events causing muscle loss.

Even if it's muscle-building, like running uphill? Is this v. heavy
activity, btw, or moderate?

Interestingly I now do 3 40-minute but high-intensity aerobic workouts
rather than a long long run.

Lance Armstrong rides a bike uphill. He has to ingest several thousand
calories per day so that his muscle tissue doesn't used for fuel.

It's all on a continuum though, with aerobic, anaerobic, and caloric levels
being weighed against each other for the overall effect.

If you feel that you need to take in extra carbs to be able to keep up with
your workouts, you might be doing too much on the aerobic/endurance side of
things.

"JC Der Koenig" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Jane Lumley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, JC Der
Koenig <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I also believe that aerobic exercise has to be kept to
less than 30 minutes a pop. There a plenty of studies done that show
endurance events causing muscle loss.

Even if it's muscle-building, like running uphill? Is this v. heavy
activity, btw, or moderate?

Interestingly I now do 3 40-minute but high-intensity aerobic workouts
rather than a long long run.

Lance Armstrong rides a bike uphill. He has to ingest several thousand
calories per day so that his muscle tissue doesn't used for fuel.

Errata: Change doesn't to isn't.