Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    That sounds terribly inaccurate.
    That's what I thought...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    Don't have the money for a gym right now tbh, but I'll be joining the one at uni in sept.
    Ok, makes sense. When you get there just try for a month or so doing a decent resistance program for a month or so. Maybe do cardio once a week then 2 resistance sessions of like

    Monday: Squat, Deadlift, Bench press
    wed: cardio etc
    Fri: Squat, OH press, Pendlay Rows.

    You'll see a change in your body. Athletic is the best body that girls can have (IMO atleast), to get it you need muscle.

    Before you ask, no, you will not get big or muscly from it and yes girls can do that.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    Maintenance as in what I can eat to stay the same weight? My bmr is like 1200...
    It isn't, it's at least 1420 (wasn't sure if you meant 9.2 or 9st 2lbs). That makes your calorie needs ~1,700 when not exercising but you're exercising every day for an hour. You're looking at in excess of 2,000Kcal, which means 1,500-1,600Kcal is the minimum you should be eating, more depending on the intensity of the exercise.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    That sounds terribly inaccurate.
    Admittedly the figures came from a calorie calculator, which will not be 100% accurate, though I've put the details into 4 different calculators, and all gave the same sort of number.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Brotherhood)
    You're looking at in excess of 2,000Kcal.
    Doesn't that mean I would be losing weight?

    I apologise to everyone for being so frustratingly ignorant!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    Doesn't that mean I would be losing weight?

    I apologise to everyone for being so frustratingly ignorant!
    Not always. Your undercutting your requirement by so much that your body thinks (quite rightly too) that your starving. So it conserves as much energy as it can, if you eat a few hundred more kcal then your more likely to see a loss of fat..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick.J)
    1000 calories per day will put your body into starvation mode, so your body will cling onto the fat. Based on the figures you put in the OP, your maintenance is 2168 calories per day, so try taking a couple hundred calories from that and see how that works for you.

    Edit: beaten to it by Oh_adele
    Not too sure where this figure came from.
    OP's maintainance is more like 1850, so would need to be around 1400-1500cals per day for effective but healthy fat loss.

    OP, try to spread you meals out through the day, try to eat 5-6 smaller meals spread every 3 hours rather than 3 main meals and snacks.

    Also are you sure thats all the calories your burning? I can get people to burn 150cal in 10 mins on the X-trainer with HIIT. Regardless you need to vary your cardio work, get outside and run, go swim and join a gym so you can add resistence work.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 10Trix)

    Also are you sure thats all the calories your burning?
    Thats what it says on the cross trainer.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    Doesn't that mean I would be losing weight?

    I apologise to everyone for being so frustratingly ignorant!
    What Brotherhood was saying is that your BMR is 1420. That figure is used for what your body needs when you do absolutely nothing all day - like laying down not moving.

    So what you need to do is multiply that by your levels of activity, I believe most here would use the figure of 1.55 which gives the results of about 2100 cals. You subtract 500 for weight loss, leaving you with a minimum of around 1600 cals per day.

    You can make a deficit of 1000 as a max, but as you've been doing this it sounds as though your body has plateaued and so you must eat more. About 500 cals more.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    Thats what it says on the cross trainer.
    I wouldnt believe it....

    Unless your doing really really little rpm, you more likely burning in the region of 700+ calories per hour.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    I've been eating really healthily for about a month (I usually do, but slipped during exams) and I've been doing between half an hour and an hour on the cross trainer every day for the past 2 weeks (i gradually increased by time from 15mins upwards over the last month)

    My daily intake is about 1000-1200 (Porridge for breakfast, a chicken salad for lunch (no dressing) and another salad or roast vegetables with rice and chicken for dinner. All snacks are fruit.)

    With the exercise I'm burning around 150-300 calories a day, usually 200 though.

    So my question is, how long does it take to make a difference? Or could there be something wrong with me?

    I'm 19, 5'3 and weigh 9.2 stone.
    I've lost no weight and my measurements haven't changed. I expected at least a couple of pounds, (especially with this amount of time!)but theres been nothing. It makes it so frustrating and I get upset because it all seems worthless.
    Jesus christ 9.2 stone is fine!

    What is it with this ridiculous constant whinging about weight? grow a pair and enjoy eating, dont starve yourself just to be thinner, thats retarded

    and 1000-1200 calories is ridiculous, it should be at least 2000
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 10Trix)
    I wouldnt believe it....

    Unless your doing really really little rpm, you more likely burning in the region of 700+ calories per hour.

    I'm doing 21 rpm at the slowest and 28 at the highest - if I'm reading the right thing lol. So then how is it possible that I'm not losing weight?

    And the whole 'starvation mode' thing doesn't really make sense to me. Anorexics are in starvation mode but lose weight.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DVDA)
    Jesus christ 9.2 stone is fine!

    What is it with this ridiculous constant whinging about weight? grow a pair and enjoy eating, dont starve yourself just to be thinner, thats retarded

    and 1000-1200 calories is ridiculous, it should be at least 2000
    Well i'm not happy with it. At 5'3 it's too much for me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    I'm doing 21 rpm at the slowest and 28 at the highest - if I'm reading the right thing lol. So then how is it possible that I'm not losing weight?

    And the whole 'starvation mode' thing doesn't really make sense to me. Anorexics are in starvation mode but lose weight.
    Anorexics are even more extreme than you. They lose muscle then fat. It also puts a huge strain on their organs, so definitely not the way to go.

    It doesn't make sense I know but its what happens. Eat more, try it for a few weeks and see what difference it makes! Though ideally those extra kcal should be proteins and carbs and dietary fats, not trans fats etc.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    Doesn't that mean I would be losing weight?

    I apologise to everyone for being so frustratingly ignorant!
    The starvation mode thing's a bit of a myth. Too few calories can significantly reduce your metabolic rate and women's bodies tend to shut down harder and faster than men's. However the resultant decrease still means a caloric deficit ergo you will start to lose weight eventually. You don't just slip into true starvation mode with the flip of a switch.

    This ISN'T a license to do what you're doing however. You will lose lean tissue very quickly, you will experience negative effects similar to those that anorexics experience.

    http://www.possibility.com/wiki/inde...SemiStarvation

    http://www.unu.edu/unupress/food2/UID07E/uid07e11.htm

    Lean individuals lost great amounts of fat-free, lean tissue during starvation, but obese individuals lost much more fat tissue. Obese individuals have a mechanism that conserves lean mass and burns fat instead. In the study, an example of a lean subject studied after death from starvation: it can be deduced that loss of body fat accounted for 28-36% of the weight loss and fat-free mass 64-72%. In obese individuals, the proportion of energy derived from protein (Pcal%) is only 6% compared to 21% in the lean individual. More than half the weight loss in the obese is fat, whereas most of the weight loss in the lean individual is fat-free mass.
    It is dangerous for these smaller individuals to go on a starvation diet because the lean mass that is lost may come from organs such as the heart. In the 1970`s there were several deaths resulting from starvation-type diets. Death is a rare side effect, though.

    The more common problem resulting from starvation-type diets is the resultant weight regain. Weight is typically regained because there has not been a change in the lifestyle that led to the original weight gain. When the starvation diet is ended, the individual returns to the same old habits. The scale will indicate the weight regain, but it will not identify the composition of the added weight. When weight is regained, it is fat. When fat replaces the muscle mass that was lost during starvation, the metabolic rate (the number of calories needed to maintain the current weight) is decreased. The frustrated individual typically initiates another starvation-type diet only to continue this cycle.
    I realise your calorie intake isn't quite as bad as anorexics but you're still significantly undercutting your calories. Bottom line is don't do it. Increase your calories, do it healthily and see better results.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    Well i'm not happy with it. At 5'3 it's too much for me.
    yeah. but 1100 (assuming the middle value) is far too little, and as im sure someone else has put, puts you in starvation mode

    I mean its not particularly healthy to deprive yourself of food, in addition to the fact it actually makes it one hell of a lot worse for you etc

    So if your really that determined on losing weight (even though 9.2 is fine) just eat a good amount and do different types of exercise
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Breadboy)
    Anorexics are even more extreme than you. They lose muscle then fat. It also puts a huge strain on their organs, so definitely not the way to go.

    It doesn't make sense I know but its what happens. Eat more, try it for a few weeks and see what difference it makes! Though ideally those extra kcal should be proteins and carbs and dietary fats, not trans fats etc.

    I didn't mean I was going to go as extreme as that. I just meant that by their example, the whole 'you wont lose weight because your body is in starvation mode' doesn't make sense.

    That said, I will try and add more.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    I didn't mean I was going to go as extreme as that. I just meant that by their example, the whole 'you wont lose weight because your body is in starvation mode' doesn't make sense.

    That said, I will try and add more.
    Anorexics are in the reigon of like 0-500 kcal/day and do exercise. The exercise probably uses up ALL the energy they eat, then you still have to stay alive...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DVDA)
    yeah. but 1100 (assuming the middle value) is far too little, and as im sure someone else has put, puts you in starvation mode

    and are you a vegetarian btw?

    Edit: didnt see the chicken bit :facepalm:
    No I am vegetarian - the chicken is quorn chicken. I'm mostly vegan, although i do sometimes have dairy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by emma8702)
    No I am vegetarian - the chicken is quorn chicken. I'm mostly vegan, although i do sometimes have dairy.
    oh that was my original one, i edited it lol

    and being a vegeterian without other sources of good vitamins can be quite unhealthy; maybe its a dietary thing?

    but as i rather tactlessly put it, your fine. seriously

    after living in a house of 4 women who constantly ***** on about EVERY calorie intake they have while being perfectly fine, its made me kinda skeptical about this whole weight loss thing

    and besides, what was your target weight you're aiming for anyway?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.