The New Year brings with it another opportunity to resolve to lose weight and get back the body image of past years or maybe even get into the best shape of one’s life. Conceptually, the possibility exists – roughly 40% of outcome is genetic dependent, while the rest is shear desire, effort, commitment and some knowledge of what to do. Therefore, with a new year and a reasonable gene pool it is not unreasonable to think those weight loss goals can become a reality this time. The real challenge is what is necessary to actually shed stored energy and the time it takes when one acts sensibly. Sure low carb diets can deplete glycogen stores releasing metabolic water making it look like one is losing fat weight and significant caloric restriction can certainly stimulate catabolism as the body’s starvation defense kicks the adrenal glands on to spare sugar, but why go down those paths again?
If one particular “diet” strategy
actually worked there would exist no other, and all the self- proclaimed
fitness gurus, celebrity personal trainers, and diet of the week
books would go away. What this means to
the annually motivated, is the commitment to New Year weight loss goals
will require swallowing the reality pill and analyzing proven
methodology for long-term weight loss.
Ironically, we once again return to the words no one wants to hear –
caloric control, moderation, fruits and vegetables, and of course
exercise.
Clinical trials have demonstrated
moderately paced adjustments in commitment to the aforementioned equates
to long-term goal attainment.
The word pace suggests taking appropriate
steps at a reasonably progressive rate so one can accommodate the
change physiologically, psychologically, and socially, and actually
adopt
new behavior patterns, hopefully for a
lifetime. The fat-club shows on television take this concept and put it
on steroids, engulfing volunteers with stringent daily behaviors under
the close eye of scrutinizers,
antagonizers, and of course America – sure it’s motivational, but
completely unrealistic for the rest of the country that has to go to
work, tend to
their children and who do not have the
resources for a live-in trainer, nutritionist, and behavior counselor.
Therefore we’re back to the same place, reducing calories while
exercising
to keep the metabolic flame burning. The
evidence is strong, reliable, and factual so the ultimate decision is
actual commitment to weight loss or another acute effort with no real
care
for the eventual outcome.
- A negative caloric balance is necessary for weight loss regardless of the type of calories
- Dramatic change in caloric intake often causes loss of protein sparing mechanism leading to reduced metabolic activity and stimulates dysfunction in neurochemical activity often leading to increased appetite
- Dietary change without physical activity has less than a 2% success rate for long term weight loss
- Aggressive change rarely can be maintained as a lifestyle habit
- The total calories and intensity of the exercise are the most important emphasis for negative caloric balance
- Weight loss without resistance training does not yield optimal body composition changes
- Fruits, vegetables and fiber rich whole grains are all carbohydrates and key elements to weight loss and the maintenance of a healthy diet, not protein content
- High protein intake causes an acute metabolic adjustment and weight loss is more associated with controlled caloric intake rather than preferential lipolysis are not healthy
- Long-term high protein diets will damage the kidneys and are unrealistic
- Building up to 300 kcal a day of physical activity yields the greatest health benefits
The above facts certainly create the
foundation for weight management strategies but again reality must be
considered. Most Americans are not physically active and present
physical capabilities that can not tolerate 300 kcal of exercise
most days of the week. Additionally, the
average American diet is low in fruits and vegetables, high in processed
sugars and grains, high in saturated fat and total fat and well above
the daily needs of the body based on voluntary caloric
expenditure and resting metabolic rate.
It is the job of the fitness professional to premeditate a plan that
allows for improvements, at again a reasonable rate, while managing the
perception of tolerable change on one’s quality of life.
A person who feels the change is making
them less happy than they were before they started a new program will
most likely give up. The building block approach warrants balancing
exercise and behavior change tolerance and identifying the
most easily controllable factors to start
the process.
Consider this example: a middle-aged
female who weighs 150 lbs burns, during the first four hours at her desk
job, about 428 calories assuming she reaches an average MET intensity
of 1.5. Now if she goes to Subway as her dietary restraint
strategy for lunch and consumes a turkey
wrap, small berry smoothie, and chocolate chip cookie she will consume
760 kcal for lunch (most people exceed 1000 kcal). Assuming she did not
eat breakfast (obviously not recommended) and was at
work 2 hours after waking up she is still
in a slight positive caloric balance (MET intensity for morning
activities accounted for). This suggests that even the right steps may
not be enough because sedentary living yields very little energy
demands.
Now assume the same woman is new to
working out but commits to exercise as part of her New Year’s weight
loss strategy. The South Beach Diet book suggests walking is a good
weight loss activity. With a starting VO2max of 35 ml kg min this
previously sedentary individual would
likely tolerate up to 60% intensity. Exercising at an intensity of 6
METs would yield her a caloric expenditure of 214 calories for her 30
minute walk. People who are not fit, but participate in exercise,
do not burn large amounts of calories
because they train at such low intensities. Certainly the low exercise
intensity puts her in the “Fat-burning Zone”, but again a high
percentage of a low number is an even lower number and weight loss is a
number’s game.
The benefit though is significant.
Compare the caloric expenditure of working at a desk for 4 hours (428
kcal or 1.78 kcal/min) with something as trivial as walking for ½ hour
(214 kcal or 7 kcal/min) and the difference is obvious. To attain weight
loss,
activity must be a regular part of one’s
life. Likewise, calorie control must also be a constant. Someone who
consumes 2400 kcals but burns 1879, or even 2000, kcal per day through
all metabolic processes will not lose weight.
The aforementioned suggests a reverse
approach can be used to establish goal attainment. The intended weight
loss goal, as one would expect, comes first and should be based on
individual factors including current body mass, the ratio of mass,
relative desires and realistic
achievements. Once this value is identified, attainable short-term goals
and resultant objectives can be established. For instance if the weight
loss goal is 20 lbs. (-70,000 kcals or about 25 marathons) and the
client is deconditioned it is reasonable
to assume they will not be losing this weight in three weeks. Most
people can expect to burn 150-250 calories a day from physical activity
and assuming they can reduce their caloric intake to a negative 250-350
kcals,
the weight loss goal of 20 lbs can be
accomplished in approximately 20 weeks. Therefore each week’s goal is a
negative 3500 kcal and each daily objective is a negative 500 kcal from
diet and exercise adjustments. If the person cannot comply with the
daily objective,
than the short-term goal can not be
reached and without the short-term goal a long-term goal is trivial.
Obviously other sub-strategies can be
used to help with these objectives. A person who is willing to commit to
smaller meals throughout the day will better regulate their blood
glucose and hunger-appetite conversion – a culprit in overeating. Many
people believe
increasing meal frequency increases
metabolism via the thermic effect of food, but this is false. The
calories still need to be accounted for each day. Another sub-strategy
is to use resistance training as part of the weekly physical activity
objectives.
In doing so, body composition is better
managed and cellular proteins are maintained. Although it is possible to
add some muscle mass with appropriate volume and resistance, lower
level resistance training often used for initial weight loss objectives
has
minimal impact on hypertrophy. If muscle
is added from chronic adaptations, the metabolism is further charged by
approximately 11-15 kcal a day. It may not sound like much, but multiply
that by 365 days and you’ll get over a pound of fat, calorically.
The reality is for long-term weight loss a
person must commit to a healthier lifestyle overall and over a
lifespan. For most people this is not a reasonable expectation, but any
effort toward weight management and physical activity is better than
none.
A valuable point to make is exercise,
even if one is fat, is a positive stress that yields positive outcomes
such as reduced risk for disease and an increased quality of life. Once a
person gets beyond the fantasy and illusion created by television, and
becomes educated to these facts they can
make an informed and accountability-based decision to do these things or
not.
.jpg)