big boy phil

I have been working on my weight loss since July and I have been steadily dropping some poundage. I am proud of myself, and am completely motivated to continue on. But when I talk to some people at my office, they ask if I have gotten to the point where it gets harder to lose the weight. Honestly, I don't think I have, and I was just wondering if there was really such a point in the weight loss process. The proverbial wall as it were. I have a set diet that I stick to monday - friday and I ride my bike 5-6 days of the week for an average of 25 miles each. As of Friday (my last weigh in) I have lost a total of 44 lbs, and gained a lot of muscle in my legs.

My "in a nutshell" thoughts on weight loss are, your going to lose weight as long as you burn more calories than you consume. Would that about sum it up? Or am I missing something?

Thoughts? Comments? Information? Anything? Are always welcome, and I look forward to what others have to say.

jcm

Yes, I've hit The Wall at about 225-230. Been there for 6 months. Mainly because I refuse to diet to any signifigant degree. I figure since I'm down from 270 since July 2005, I'm doing good. Heartrate is healthy and my bp is down. Can't really complain.

Part of it is , as you say, conditioning. It has greatly improved to the point that a 'mere' 150 miles/week just doesn't do it anymore. And I don't have time for more.

Keith99

That sums it up. But you still may be missing something. As you work out the engine becomes more efficient. Actually the same goes even for just cutting calorie intake. So after a while same intake, same excercise, but yuo are no longer taking in less than you burn.

shakeNbake

Not really a wall. But I would say it's "plateu-ing" right now.

I'm 5'11". I was close to 290 last christmas. I got to 240 by April, it's been there since.

I would credit that to me not sticking to the diet, which is kinda hard because I haven't got the time anymore to cook my own food (a BIG factor in my diet). I picked up the pace this week though. Hope to get closer to 210-220 by the end of this year.

bdinger

There is definitely a "wall" unless you want to get scrawny. The lowest I've been in recent memory is about 220, and I was a freaking wall of muscle. A beast, if you will. That's waaay back in high school.

Nowadays I'm in uber-clyde range, but a trip to the doctor today shows that my internals are in astoundingly good shape. Heart is strong and lazy - I took a 5 minute jog on the treadmill, the heart rate went well into the fat-burn range, then 90 seconds after stopping was almost back to resting. And I've experimented with excercise and food. If I want to eat whatever I want one week and not lose any weight, I know what I have to do. If I want to lose very well, I know what I have to do.

I know others in the same boat. Basically it's all about where YOU want to be. I don't encourage the whole "excercise then eat whatever you want" ideal to anyone because if you remove the former... then you are in trouble fast.

But yes, there is definitely a wall. I've hit it a couple times in my journey down from the top..

Mike_Morrow

As a person drops weight the number of calories a person needs drops as well. I think this is a "trap" many fall into, depending on how much they originally reduced their caloric intake it may no longer be enough to stimulate weight loss after they have lost a substantial amount of weight. When I was 400 pounds, I could have lost weight on a 3500 calorie a day diet, as the weight came off there it would have become impossible to continue losing weight unless I adjusted my intake.

In my case I ate an average of 1650 - 1850 calories a day for a weekly average the whole time I was losing. I lost 230 pounds over 17 months, the loss was faster in the beginning, but it never fell below 10 lbs ('ish) a month.

I suspect most men eating in the neighborhood of 2000 calories a day with moderate activity will continue to lose weight until they achieve their goal weight without any a plateau, the rate of loss may slow but likely won't stop.

Hope this helps

jimisnowhere

Good point! I didn't think of that and I'm in the midst of a plataeu. I'm down to 218 from 245, but I'm also hitting the weights as well so more fat may have been replaced by muscle.

jim

Tom Stormcrowe

To break past a certain point, you have to start cannibalizing muscle mass. Don't look so much at cumulative weight, rather look at the % of lean body mass to fat! Depending on your bone structure, the ideal weight, medically speaking, varies a to asignificant degree. If you base your weight on Life insurance charts, for example, a lg framed big boned Germanic descent person will look like an Ethiopian in a famine!

BillMC2

You will cannibalize muscle mass almost the entire time you drop weight....it is inevitable. Your goal is to minimize it at best....despite what most of the supplement companies say.

In order to lose weight you need to use more calories than you consume.

In order to gain muscle you need to consume more calories than you use to repair tissue.

It's a catch 22.

Tom Stormcrowe

Agreed, to be more accurate in what I was trying to say, rather than more simoplistic:
I should have said you sacrifice MORE muscle mass than you want to.

milt

I also hit a plateau around 230-235 range. I'm now down to 228 (from 275 in June) and have started losing weight again. I don't know if this made a difference or not, but for a week I decided to eat exactly what I figured I was burning. It seemed like a lot of food... After a week I started back on my 1500 Cal/day program and started losing weight again.

As to be expected, my loss rate has slowed a bit as my weight went down. Which is fine with me since I know I will get to my goal eventually and slow is good IMO. BTW, my target is around 180. I'm 5'11". My Monday-Friday routine is several days in the gym with at least 4 days riding for an hour a day. Not too intense but with some moderate hills and keeping my HR around 80-85%. When I ride on the weekend, usually 20-50 miles I don't try to use those rides for weight loss, but rather eat to recover and balance the expenditure.

It's not a very scientific approach, but it's working fine for me and I'm feeling strong and making progress.

-Milt

Nightshade

Good info but still a catch .22 at best. How much you can lose is dependant on your age also.
Because we are still "cave man" in many ways the human body will want to store energy(food)
as we age and are less able to hunt or forage.

As best I know the only way to move "off the wall" is to increase levels of activity to CONVERT
STORED FAT TO MUSCLE. HARD WORK MUSCELS. Now don't run down to gym 'cause "pretty boy"
muscles are very different from hard work mucsels. Depending on how old you are, your physical
condition(check with your doctor) and your time find a work that needs done then do it. Hobby,
help others, work at your church or whatever you can do to work to convert that stored fat.

In the process you'll start to feel really great while you change your outlook and your body. Once
off the couch you'll now know how to stay off.

nukemm

Before I went on deployment in February, I was a hefty ~235lb. My low point was ~185lb., but that was almost purely due to horrible food (so I didn't eat much!), little to no sleep, and a 115F+ work environment, so I was sweating as much as I could drink. Now I'm hovering between 190-200lb (A "featherweight clyde" so to speak) while maintaining a reasonable diet. I'm at my wall right now, I exercise 3ish days per week, but starting tomorrow I'll be commuting 13 miles RT, with a couple of sizeable climbs. Hopefully adding the commuting will allow me to drop permanently out of clyde status, because I've been an on again/off again clyde for about 5 years.

smokeystrodtman

I think there is a wall and mine is 220#. I've been up as high as 245 and can go down pretty fast if I ride my bike a lot and watch my eating, especially cutting back on junk food. But once I hit 220, it seems like the needle on the scale is frozen. When I was in my late 20s, I was a rail-thin 165# at 6'4". Back then I was a runner and motocross racer, plus I had that young man's metabolism. Wish I had been into cycling back then, I might have been a pretty good climber. My long range goal is 200#, but I don't know if I'll ever make it.

Tom Stormcrowe

Nukemm, the only bad point to the navy is you can't do much cycling on board ship when you have sea duty! I'm presuming they have at least a spinner bike in the gym on ship? Is there a gym? I rather imagine the mountain biking and road cycling pretty much suck on board ship! though

gear

You burn a lot more calories (more enerju expended) for an unmuscled, unconditioned body to move 270 lbs than it does for a conditioned, muscled body to move 225 lbs. So you would burn more calories in the beginning, as you begin to change your body and are moving less weight the calorie burn would be less. You could increase the amount of time you burn calories or reduce the amount of calories you take in to keep getting the same results.

nukemm

I'm on an aircraft carrier, so we have a little bit of space to spare. We've got 4 gyms, and a couple of alcoves that have workout equipment. Several bikes, probably ~50 total, with reasonable simulated terrain maps. Fortunately we are a large ship, so it takes some rough seas to get us to rock noticably.

mihlbach

I gradually dropped from 232 to 208 over the past year. I just rode a lot, but didn't really change my diet too severely. I've been at the 208 wall for months now. This past month however, I kicked it up a notch and started adding extra distance on my commute to work. Its working. I'm slipping slightly past my wall...but I'm not sure if I'll ever make it below 200 without making some major lifestyle changes in addition to adding mileage. I eat reasonably...but I'm not interested in starving myself. If I can get to 200 and stick there, I'll be completely satisfied. I can ride double centuries and hang with fast roadie groups...so I'm pretty satisified with my present physical condition.

livewirerc

I've dropped from 256 (January) to 207 (August) and I'm now around 210-215. I'm riding about 20-30 miles a day almost every day and am eating decently, my body just doesn't want to see the underside of 200lbs. I guess I'm destined to be a Clydesdale forever.

masi61

I've tried to use cycling with some light dieting for the past year and I've been plateau'd at about #232 for most of that time. I think I am just now getting into the 220's and busting below that plateau? What do I attribute the newfound weight decrease to?: Riding more hours. You see, all summer on my day off I would stay home with my kids and when my wife got home from work, I'd only have about 2 hours of daylight to ride. I thought that was enough. I also thought 3 days a week was enough. Well, now I think more like 3 to 4 hours of riding at least 4 days a week is better. I've been heading out late in the morning and getting back by about 3 pm riding in the area of 40 to 50 miles a pop. I'm spinning as fast as ever but now I'm also pushing a bigger gear, approaching the 18.0 mph mark on some of my rides. My hill climbing is coming along and I'm not straying away from the challenging courses. Right now I suspect I'm at around #229 in my work clothes (I work at a hospital and weigh myself on a doctor's scale). I've noticed that as my endurance and strength have increased, my posture has become more upright, my "core" feels flatter and stronger which permits bigger gear pushing and also allows increased periods of being able to tolerate riding on the drops. This makes you more aero, which in turn pays dividends in average speed. I think I'll continue this same regimen for a while and I'll report back on this forum about how its working out.

Bikepacker67

Yes, but is it inevitable if you don't drop weight, but rather build muscle and lose fat?
For me anyway, I never hit plateaus if I am working out regularly as well as riding.

big boy phil

lots of good comments here. Thank you for the information. So far I have not hit a plateau, and I hope I don't anytime soon, but in case I do, what are the thoughts on using some sort of weight loss suplement to drop some weight again? One of those Hydroxy cut, or whatever you see in fitness magazines.

Tom Stormcrowe

Most of them are scams that rely on the placebo effect. Some are expensive laxatives, as well! Better to go with justr enough carbs to replace minimum glycogen and high protein with plenty if water. Protein levels about 1-1.5 grams/kg body mass to prevent lean muscle mass cannibalization as much as possible, that way, you are burnign fat to sustain energy during the ride. On longer rides, take in enough calories and carbs to stave off the "Bonk". The only reason you really need to take in some sugars on the ride is that your brain can ONLY metabolize glucose, unlike the rest of your body, which can produce glycogen/glucose from fats and proteins. The "Bonk" isn't being tired, it's a deterioration of mental function due to glucose and glycogen depletion.

ScrubJ

I started my weight loss at about 247 pounds(March of this year). I was stuck at 212 for so long that I thought my scale was broken and made my wife get on to to see if it worked. I'm now down to 194+/- a couple and it seems as though I'll never see the underside of 190.

ken cummings

My weight has gone up and down enough times over the years that I know I have two "walls". When I have light office duties and have the energy to do club rides on the weekends I normally drop to 180-185 pounds. When I am doing heavy industrial work (like now) I drop to 190-195. The fat burns off but the work added hard muscle. I also lose in aerobic riding on weekends. The wife prefers the buff look.