Health, Fatness and Training

[Crankarm]

When you eat during the day might affect your weight - if little exercise is taken; but it has been scientifically shown, that exercise does 'speed up' the metabolism for many hours afterwards.

I can't see how anyone who exercises on a regular basis, is going to be adversely affected by eating after 7pm. As stated already, the body doesn't know what time it is, but metabolic rate can be increased, simply by doing exercise . . . . . . . at any time of the day. Those who go to the gym soon after work in the early evening, need have no worries about eating long after 7pm.

The point that I'm trying to make, is that it is perfectly possible to increase metabolic rate at any time of the day or night.

Indeed, a mid-night spin or run.

 

[pubrunner]

Indeed, a mid-night spin or run.

There really is no need to run at midnight.

I quote from an article on metabolic rate & exercise :

Most studies that have found an elevated resting metabolic rate have made their measurements within 24 hours of the exercise session. One investigation found that any post-exercise increase in RMR faded between 24 and 39 hours. Looking at the information available at present, it seems that to SIGNIFICANTLY boost energy expenditure after exercise, the activity needs to be intense (over 70% VO2max) and prolonged (over 90 minutes); the effect will be most pronounced in the first 12 hours post-exercise.

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0120.htm

and another :

. . .Anyway, getting (finally) to the point: exercise boosted metabolism for the next 14 hours . . .

http://sweatscience.com/metabolism-rises-for-14-hours-after-hard-exercise/

 

[MattHB]

Jeez, this was a really useful thread until recently.

 

[Crankarm]

There really is no need to run at midnight.

I quote from an article on metabolic rate & exercise :

Most studies that have found an elevated resting metabolic rate have made their measurements within 24 hours of the exercise session. One investigation found that any post-exercise increase in RMR faded between 24 and 39 hours. Looking at the information available at present, it seems that to SIGNIFICANTLY boost energy expenditure after exercise, the activity needs to be intense (over 70% VO2max) and prolonged (over 90 minutes); the effect will be most pronounced in the first 12 hours post-exercise.

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0120.htm

and another :

. . .Anyway, getting (finally) to the point: exercise boosted metabolism for the next 14 hours . . .

http://sweatscience.com/metabolism-rises-for-14-hours-after-hard-exercise/

So you contradict yourself.

 

[tadpole]

Tadpole - I notice your font has changed over the last few posts - is that because you are copying & pasting this stuff from google..?

No, it's because I am using two different versions of word, one on my laptop and the other is on an xp machine. and I am looking up stuff on Google, as I have struggled to find a way of posting the information in a simple enough form that even Crankarm can understand.


quote="Crankarm, post: 2053162, member: 4995"
If you want to stuff your face late at night with pizza, crisps and cake because they have the calories you require because you have not had breakfast, neither lunch thus starving yourself all day, then be my guest, but you will become an over weight slob.

quote="Crankarm, post: 2053198, member: 4995
, but at least I'm not a glutton who binge eats to excess late into the night who has unhealthy amounts of fat surrounding their vital organs and a huge belly. Euugh!!

Calling you a troll is minor to what you have called me. And at least I am posting the truth, you on the other hand are just posting insults because you know you have failed to get a rise out of me.
This is my last post on this, as you are unable to answer the simplest of my my points, and I feel it is pointless to continue. I didn’t set out to win the argument or even educate people, I posted my opinion and you posted insults. I think anyone with even a modicum of intellect can see the difference.[/quote][/quote]

 

[GrumpyGregry]

jebus guys get a room or start your own thread to argue on

 

[Crankarm]

No, it's because I am using two different versions of word, one on my laptop and the other is on an xp machine. and I am looking up stuff on Google, as I have struggled to find a way of posting the information in a simple enough form that even Crankarm can understand.





Calling you a troll is minor to what you have called me. And at least I am posting the truth, you on the other hand are just posting insults because you know you have failed to get a rise out of me.
This is my last post on this, as you are unable to answer the simplest of my my points, and I feel it is pointless to continue. I didn’t set out to win the argument or even educate people, I posted my opinion and you posted insults. I think anyone with even a modicum of intellect can see the difference.

Errr ........ please when did I insult you? And just what are you implying I have called you? Nothing is the answer. It is all in your mind. But have you posted your opinion? All you seem to have done is copied and pasted from others.

 

[Marshmallow_Fluff]

What's a sensible calorie intake count then? 1500 a day?

Have started a food diary/exercise log and am heading back to the gym, after the summer break, this evening.... will contemplate complete abstinence from hooch for a period, say until Xtmas, I've past experience to suggest this can be a big factor (hic!) and see if I feel able to commit to such a thing.

Luckily very little in the way of backsliding has been involved. After last winters big push to get prepped for lonjog I only weighed about 4lbs less than I did at the start and I'm still weight that now. My body form changed, lost inches off my waist and a bit of my chest, and loads off my legs arms and face but my bmi stayed stable, i.e. I changed shape but stayed roughly the same weight, where I've more or less been since I got down from 17st + a few years back. Make of that what you will.

Lots of great suggestions and motivating stories so far peeps, keep em coming.

From professional experience I would suggest not to reduce your caloric intake, but rather burn the excess (or maybe a combination of both for some days of the week). In other words, calculate the daily calories that you need in order to maintain your weight, and find ways to burn 500-700 calories/day. If it looks too fussy, let me know and I will do the calculations for you.. In regards to your nutrition, different ratios work for different people and you will need to be assessed in order to define the best for you, but as a general rule, if you can switch to healthier choices and minimize the usual suspects (white processed flour, sugar and alcohol), it shouldn't be a problem.. As I said, if you think a more strict regime can work better for you give me a shout and I will try something out (as "popping in" doesn't look like an option to me.. ) via the net.. Cheers!

 

[GrumpyGregry]

This week I'm house-sitting in Wales, looking after the Aged P. This is interesting from an exercise/diet perspective. He, at 92, is very much a breakfast - lunch - dinner kind of guy who can't have his routine disrupted. His main meal is lunch. This is a completely different regime to mine, and as one might expcet in the care of an elderly parent, a emotional roller-coaster.

No commutes and tbh I can't leave him for too long to go on any long rides and combined with the weather so far this week, I've only managed 6 miles!

So this week I'm just watching the calorie intake like a hawk and doing some body weight core exercises. Thus far I've succeeded on staying off the booze, avoiding the cheese and the white flour and sugar.

Fingers crossed.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

From professional experience I would suggest not to reduce your caloric intake, but rather burn the excess (or maybe a combination of both for some days of the week). In other words, calculate the daily calories that you need in order to maintain your weight, and find ways to burn 500-700 calories/day. If it looks too fussy, let me know and I will do the calculations for you.. In regards to your nutrition, different ratios work for different people and you will need to be assessed in order to define the best for you, but as a general rule, if you can switch to healthier choices and minimize the usual suspects (white processed flour, sugar and alcohol), it shouldn't be a problem.. As I said, if you think a more strict regime can work better for you give me a shout and I will try something out (as "popping in" doesn't look like an option to me.. ) via the net.. Cheers!

Has to be a calorie cut back in the main, I think...

My normal working week consists of three or four days commutting 20km to/from work. I've stepped this up to five a week since the diet started. September - March I try to run three times a week and go to the gym twice a week too.

But obvs historically I've been taking in more than I've been putting out.

 

[Sittingduck]

Greg - You're on the right track, I reckon

I didn't get real results until the calorie intake thing was addressed. You can cycle all the miles you like but if you don't watch what you eat and cut the booze down, you can't lose over a long period, imho. Stepping up exercise alone may work for those who do little or none, in the first place but won't work as well for those already quite active.

It's a war that should be fought on two fronts equally. Increased Exercise and Reduced intake!

 

[martint235]

I'm going to have to look at my diet. According to the scales, I put on a stone during my week off work. And I cycled the Olympic Road Race route during that time. I also swam quite a bit so I could just be building muscle but I think it's my diet needs looking at.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I'm going to have to look at my diet. According to the scales, I put on a stone during my week off work. And I cycled the Olympic Road Race route during that time. I also swam quite a bit so I could just be building muscle but I think it's my diet needs looking at.

Pretty much what I'm worried about this week, get back home and find I've put back on everything I lost.

 

[Sittingduck]

Having slacked off slightly in recent weeks, I stepped on the scale on Monday morning and was gutted to see 86Kg. Had 2 good days (back to the old skool regime) and this morning I weigh 83, lol. Water retention is to blame, mefinks - because there is no way I have legitimally lost 3Kg in 2 days. These fluctuations can be misleading and the only thing that really matters are results, over a long period. I was down to around 80Kg in mid July and my ideal target is around 75.

I plan to knuckle down hard for the winter and consolidate at around 80 - 82. I'll push hard to reach goal, by late Spring. It's a long war and will be won, over time. The small battles are won and lost but I'll keep fighting

 

[rvw]

For me it has to be mainly the "eat less" bit of the equation too: I know from bitter experience that I don't burn up nearly as much as I think I do, even on the tours when S & I have been doing 60-80 miles per day for a week.

Still, I managed to shed a pound and a half last week, despite the visit with my sister to see my mum - so things are beginning to move in the right direction.