Nutrition Diet, Muscle Mass, and Calorie Counting for Weight Loss (was: S&S for weight loss?)

[Kenny Croxdale]

I read something about the fact that increasing muscle mass helps with fat burning, because muscle "consumes" more energy?

"Muscle mass does burn calories, just not as much as I once thought."
Smile, Post #6

As Smile noted, increasing muscle minutely increase your metabolic rate. Based on research adding a pound of muscle increases caloric expenditure approximately 6 calories per hour. That means in a you'd end up burning around 144 calories per day (6 calories per hour X 24 hours).

That means is a "Perfect World", you'd burn around 1.24 lbs of body fat in a month (144 calories X 30 days, divided by 3500 kcal per pound of fat)

Body fat burns calories, as well. A pound of fat burns about 2 calories per hour. That means in a day, a pound of body fat burns right at 48 kcals.

If you add a pound of muscle (which is huge) and lose a pound of body fat, the increase in net caloric expenditure would be right at 96 kcals (144 -48).

"Diet really is primary, but muscle mass is a strong second."
Smile, Post #6

The 80/20 Rule applies to weight loss or weight gain; 80% of your results are due to your diet, a deficit or surplus of calories.

The remaining 20% of your weight loss is driven by exercise.

So, actually exercise is a distant second.

people overestimate the energy expenditure of activity, and underestimate the calories of food.

Overestimation of Caloric Expenditure

Caloric expenditure from devices such as Fit Bit, and Treadmills, Exercise Bikes, Elliptical, Rowers, Heart Rate Monitors, etc. grossly overestimate the amount of calories burned by as much as 25% plus.

That is the reason people get it wrong.

The second part is people want to believe they are burning 1,000 kcal an hour; they brag about it. The irony is that many of those individuals are overweight and it is not going to change for them.

Under Reporting

Research show that one of the main issue of individual on a weight/fat loss diet, is Under Reporting. It occurs for a variety of reason. The primary reason is the the majority don't count calories because it a pain in the a#@.

That is why researchers use mice. It allows them to completely control the mouse's environment; diet, exercise, etc.

Simplifying A Weight Loss Diet

1) Consume Vegetables of Color (Dr Jonny Bowden/PhD Nutrition): These are foods low in calories and higher in fiber.

2) Food Portions: Measure them with you hand.

1) Meats: The size of your hand opened.

2) Vegetables: The size of your hand closed.

3) Three (3) Meal Per Day.

Research (International Society of Sport Nutrition) demonstrated the dogma of consuming snacks in between mean increase insulin production; which block the fat burning process and promotes fat storage.

Consuming three (3) meals a day that are 4 - 6 hours a part allows the body to utilize body fats for energy.

The Benefits of Exercise

1) A Metabolic Exercise Program

Research shows that a High Intensity Interval Training Program can elevate your metabolism up to nine (9) time more than resting level, hour after your training session. Higher Metabolic Rate = More Calories/Fat burned.

2) Increased Insulin Sensitivity

"Insulin is a Fat Maker..." Jay Robb/Nutritionist). The greater your Insulin Sensitivity the less likely you are to store body fat.

Genetically Insulin Sensitivity can eat anything and not become over weight.

The higher your Insulin Resistance, the more body fat you store. Insulin Resistance is the underlying cause of a multitude of heath issues.

Insulin Resistant individual can walk by a loaf of bread and gain fat. Insulin Resistant individual do better by decreasing their carbohydrate intake.

3) Increased Muscle Mass

Increasing muscle mass will slightly increase your metabolism.

Also, as vegpedlr stated, it preserves muscle mass.

Now for one of my pet peeves that I constantly hear...

"Muscle Weighs More That Fat"

This is one of the illogical statement the continues to be perpetuated.

A pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat, as most of this board know.

Please correctly that when you hear it.



What individuals are trying to say is...

Muscle is Dense, Fat is Voluminous

A pound of muscle is much denser than fat.

Kenny Croxdale

 

[the hansenator]

Maybe someone knows more about this - I read that, even though muscle doesn't burn as many calories as people think, it also gives blood glucose somewhere to go besides fat stores and that helps you stay lean.

 

[Bret S.]

Thanks Kenny!

 

[watchnerd]

Maybe someone knows more about this - I read that, even though muscle doesn't burn as many calories as people think, it also gives blood glucose somewhere to go besides fat stores and that helps you stay lean.

Are you referring to creatine being replenished in the muscles after a work out?

Or the metabolic cost of tissue repair during recovery?

 

[watchnerd]

1) Consume Vegetables of Color (Dr Jonny Bowden/PhD Nutrition): These are foods low in calories and higher in fiber.

2) Food Portions: Measure them with you hand.

1) Meats: The size of your hand opened.

2) Vegetables: The size of your hand closed.

This vegetable recommendation seems overly simplistic.

A closed hand measure of a starchy tuber might make sense, but it's pretty ridiculous when it comes to leafy greens like spinach.

1 cup of raw spinach has 7 calories, so basically almost impossible to eat too much of it before you get full.

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

This vegetable recommendation seems overly simplistic.

Good Point

It is overly simplistic and dumbed down for the average individual who's unwilling to measure their food intake and count calories.

The average individual wants a simple Yes or No answer to a complex question or nothing more than a one sentence answer.

However, in dealing some individual on losing weight, I've found that even a sentence is too much. I then had to dumbed in down to, "Eat less."

You don't appear to fall into this category, nor do most of those on this board.

That is the primary reason for...

Under Reporting

Research shows that the majority of people on a diet Under Report the amount of calories they consume. That because they don't count calories.

They eye ball the food and guess how many calories per day they consume.

A PBS TV Documentary on Weight Loss followed one woman around. She reported that she was consuming 1800 kcal per day and not losing weight. PBS then went back and calculated her daily food intake to be close to 3200 kcal per day.

Crunching The Numbers

I am a proponent of "Counting"; gram of protein, fats, carbohydrates, calories, etc.

Success

As someone said, "Successful people are willing to do what unsuccessful people won't do.

Unsuccessful individual, "Don't have time". That translates to they don't have time for thing they don't like to do but always have time for thing they like to do. This group need dumbed down information.

Successful individuals, "Make time"; "Plan their work and work their plan". Their objective motivates them to do thing they may not want to do; like counting gram and calorie. They will pretty much do whatever it takes.

Kenny Croxdale

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

I read that, even though muscle doesn't burn as many calories as people think, it also gives blood glucose somewhere to go besides fat stores and that helps you stay lean.

Before answering your question, let's look at some things.

Strength Training Glucose Usage

Strength Training doesn't use that many calories nor that much glucose.

A hour training session isn't really an hour of non-stop exercise. The amount of time spent in performing exercise during an hour come up to something like 15 minutes of work.

The Truth About Your Fat-Burning Zone for Weight Loss

This is interesting article, that we can extrapolate information from.

As per the article on Running for 30 minutes...

1) Low Intensity Running

Burned 146 kcal. 50% coming from body fat and 50% from glucose. (73 kcal of glucose = 18.25 gram)

2) High Intensity Running

Burned 206 kcals. 39.85 from body fat meaning 60% was from glucose. (206 X 60% = 123.6 kcal/30.9 gram of glucose.

Glycogen Storage

1) Approximately 400 gram of glycogen is stored in around 650 muscles in the body. That means there's not as much glucose in individual muscles.

2) Around 100 gram of glycogen is stored in the liver.

3) About 50 gram is in the blood.

Site Specific Exercise Glycogen Usage

Exercise utilized glucose specifically from the working muscles. Thus, if your performing Squats, the glucose used will come primarily from the legs, not the arms.

The Take Away Message

1) Repletion: It doesn't take that much glucose to replenish muscle after training. Research has demonstrated that muscle glycogen restoration occurs within approximately 24 hours, even on a low carbohydrate diet.

The dogma that you need to consume a lot of carbohydrates for Strength Training untrue.

2) Site Specific: Glucose is used from the muscle being trained, which contain a limited amount of glucose. Muscle glucose is restored even on a low carbohydrate diet in 24 hours.

3) Storage: The muscle only holds a certain amount of glucose.

Thus, only a fraction of a post high carbohydrate meal or carbohydrate beverage restores glucose to the muscles.

The remaining amount of carbohydrates/glucose is stored as Body Fat.

Now to answer your question.

1) Yes, glucose is shuttled to a muscle that has been worked. However, the muscle don't use that much, so they don't need that much.

2) Exercise increases Insulin Sensitivity. This promotes muscle glycogen storage.

Insulin Resistance obstructs glycogen from being loaded into muscles, promoting fat storage.

Glycolytic Energy System

Sports and activities that fall into the Glycolytic Energy System require high carbohydrate/glucose intake.

Kenny Croxdale

 

[pet']

Hello,

@kennycro@@aol.com
Here is a link of an article on the blog (I guess you already know this article) which describes a program targeting fat loss, without aerobics - meaning steady state cardio:
“Dry Fighting Weight”: Fat Loss Through Strength | StrongFirst
What do you think of it ?

Kind regards,

Pet'

 

[watchnerd]

Crunching The Numbers

I am a proponent of "Counting"; gram of protein, fats, carbohydrates, calories, etc.

Yeah, counting calories is both necessary and a pain in the a#@.

Here's what works for me, and seems simple enough to work for my less-than-committed friends:

1. Calculate Your Macros

Gotta do it, no way around it.

2. Count The Empty Calories Meticulously

Track in detail the carbs, alcohol, and sugar. Religiously stay under your allocated macros.

3. Eat a Large Protein Every Meal

If you're actively training and eating natural foods, it's really hard to overdo the proteins without using protein shakes or being a total glutton. Most satisfying, meal-sized portions have 30-70 grams.

Three of these a day should be enough protein for most active, athletic people, although strength athletes might need a bit more (some calculations say I'm supposed to have 150-200 grams a day).

Athletes who are on the juice -- well, that's a different issue.

4. Natural Proteins Have Enough Fats

The natural fats in fish, meat, yogurt, cheese, etc, have enough fat to meet your needs if you eat 3 servings a day.

Just don't add any extra and don't eat garbage processed food.

Take fish oil supplements if you feel your skin drying out (elbows are my canary in the coal mine) or your joints don't feel as silky.

5. Non-Starchy Vegetables -- Pig Out, Don't Bother Counting

There is no point in calorie counting cucumbers, leafy greens, celery, etc, that are mostly water. Just eat buckets of them to get nutrients and fiber. And to fill you up.

 

[vegpedlr]

It’s a worthwhile project to actually measure and track food intake for awhile. Get a cheap digital kitchen scale and use CRON-O-Meter to do the math. Guaranteed you’ll learn a few things.

 

[pet']

Hello,

In addition to the excellent post of Kenny, I would also calculate my %bdf on a regular basis (for instance once a week) to track progression

Kind regards,

Pet'

 

[watchnerd]

Hello,

In addition to the excellent post of Kenny, I would also calculate my %bdf on a regular basis (for instance once a week) to track progression

Kind regards,

Pet'

I agree, but what tool do you use?

I have a scale that does electrical analysis, but that's not all that accurate ....all though if it's consistently inaccurate, that's okay.

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

I would also calculate my %bdf on a regular basis (for instance once a week) to track progression

BDF?

What is this? I can guess but guessing is never good.

Kenny Croxdale

 

[pet']

Hello,

@kennycro@@aol.com
This stands for Body Fat Index

Kind regards,

Pet'

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

CRON-O-Meter

This something new to me. I looked up but would like some more information on it.

Anything you can provide would be appreciated.

Kenny Croxdale

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

This stands for Body Fat Index

That what I thought.

I am not a proponent of any Body Fat Measurement Methods.

1) All of the method are flawed. There is a huge plus or minus factor, even when implemented by exerts.

a) Calipers: It takes a good Technician who has performed hundreds of measurements to obtain a good ball park figure. The average individual who lacks the knowledge and practical experience will consistently get incorrect measurements.

2) BIA (Bioelectrical Impedance Analyse) Scales: This are incredibly inaccurate, even when the protocol is followed: well hydrated, no exercise of food for about 3 hours, etc.

3) Infrared Body Fat Analysis: As with BIA, incredibly inaccurate

4) Hydrostatic Weighing: This method is less than the "Gold Standard" it has been proclaimed to be. It is based on the dissection of five (5) cadavers. That's not enough statistical data to substantiate reliability.

The accuracy of statistical data is based on the "Law of Large Numbers"; the more test subjects you have, the greater the reliability.

Also, if you don't have you "Residual Lung Capacity" measure prior to dunking, the test is invalid. The more you float the higher your Body Fat Percentage Reading.

Fat floats. Air in your lungs makes you float. If you don't know how much air is left in your lungs after blowing out on the scale, the test is even more inaccurate.

An interesting fact is...

Predicting Fat Percent by Skinfolds in Racial Groups: Durnin and Womersley Revisited

The 1974 DW equations did not predict %BFDXA uniformly in all races or ethnicities.

Comparison of existing skinfold equations for estimating body fat in African American and white women. - PubMed - NCBI

...the skinfold prediction equations evaluated in this study were more variable and produced more error when used in African American women.

What about other Body Fat Testing Methods? Great question!

The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”: Part 1

James Krieger, MS Nutrition, provides the analysis of the other Body Fat Testing Method and their imperfections.

Two Empirical Methods

1) The Mirror or Pictures: If you look fat, you are fat. Pro Bodybuilders, as a whole, don't measure their body fat percentages. What matters is how they look on stage.

2) Tape Measure or Clothes: Most men put fat on in the waist, women in the the thighs and butt. Where ever you put fat on, get a tape measure and measure it. It provides a good indication of if you are increasing or decreasing your body fat.

Essentially, your clothes are a tape measure. If you cannot button to your pant waist, your body fat increasing. If you fall into this category, here an interesting solution that I learned from a woman that I was working this.

Laying down on the bed and zipping your pants up work. Problem solved!

If your pants look like they were spayed on your thighs and a#@, you may have a problem.

Kenny Croxdale

 

[vegpedlr]

This something new to me. I looked up but would like some more information on it.

Anything you can provide would be appreciated.

Kenny Croxdale

On line nutrition tracker. Has a very extensive database for nutrition info. Customizable targets and displays. Free and premium versions. It takes a little getting used to, weighing and measuring, but you can save your own recipes, thereby decreasing work over time, especially if you stick to a limited range of dishes.

 

[Anna C]

It’s a worthwhile project to actually measure and track food intake for awhile. Get a cheap digital kitchen scale and use CRON-O-Meter to do the math. Guaranteed you’ll learn a few things.

Agreed. I've been tracking with MyFitnessPal for about 3 months and I've learned a lot about the macro content of food, and can easily see the choices that get me into trouble by providing more macros than I would guess. Example: my husband cooked a pack of Conecuh sausage this weekend, and I mindlessly ate a single serving of 2.2 oz which is just a few bites. Plugged it into the app and, yikes, there went 30% of my fat allotment for the day.

 

[North Coast Miller]

I hate counting calories on a regular basis, but every now and then it pays to crunch numbers for the foods you most commonly eat. This also allows better estimate of macros for foods you don't commonly eat.

And then based on this decide what to cut out or what to add. Most folks could just look at the numbers and food items, reduce portion sizes on anything that raises an eyebrow, and see results over time.

 

[WxHerk]

Example: my husband cooked a pack of Conecuh sausage this weekend, and I mindlessly ate a single serving of 2.2 oz which is just a few bites. Plugged it into the app and, yikes, there went 30% of my fat allotment for the day.

DALE!!