Paleo-Diet - anyone here on it?

Here's how you lose weight.

Eat fewer calories than you burn.

Scott, this made so much sense that I printed it out in big letters so I would remember to stick to it. I'm trying 1500 calories per day also. I want to lose 12 pounds.

Post 41

Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 8:04pm

Lance, I have just 2 questions for you ...

1) Will you--while limiting yourself to 1500 kcals--be eating proportionately more protein?

2) Do you seek merely a temporary weight loss, say, for a wedding or some such event--or do you seek a more permanent fat loss, say, for the rest of your natural life?

p.s. I'm also curious as to what your present body weight is at--if you wouldn't mind sharing such information.

Ed

Post 42

Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 8:40pm

1) Will you--while limiting yourself to 1500 kcals--be eating proportionately more protein?

Hey Ed, I'm a carb fiend. Bread, bread and more bread. And I'm actually a little allergic to something in bread. But I eat a ton of it. But I get a fair amount of protein. The 1500 is just a rough guide for me. I might blow it out of the water one day with 3500 cals but 1500 is good number for me to shoot for. As Scott said, most fad diets don't touch on the basic calories in/calories burned ratio. And your point about calories being different in kind is certainly true. Nevertheless, Scott's advice is generally true and a fine habit to get into.

2) Do you seek merely a temporary weight loss, say, for a wedding or some such event--or do you seek a more permanent fat loss, say, for the rest of your natural life?

I weigh 167 and I'm 5'7" 1/2. The mid 150s are a good weight for me. About 5 years ago a lifted weights a lot and was in the best shape of my life. I probably weighed 170+ but there was a lot of muscle goin' on. Since then the muscle has turned to the chubby stuff.

I only drink water, cranberry juice and wine. I'm a musician working nights so one problem for me is that I usually need to eat something late in the evening. That can't be good.

Post 43

Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 9:01pm

Ed,

I guess I'm too new to know how to become a member of the fitness group you suggested. It says I'm not a member.

Pauliwog

Post 44

Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 9:43pm

Lance, I went to:
http://www.bcm.edu/cnrc/caloriesneed.htm
(link now available on SOLO Fitness Links page)

... and punched in your height, weight, and "29" for your age. Assuming I'm not far off regarding your age, your estimated caloric intake for weight MAINTENANCE would be around 2509 kcals. This puts your target of 1500 kcals a full 1000 kcals below maintenance levels.

This 1000-calorie deficit may trigger a "starvation response" in your body (reactive hormone levels and enzyme levels and activity may work overtime to thwart your efforts). A better deficit from diet alone (one less likely to trigger counter-productive metabolic response) would be 500 kcals per day--and additional 500 kcal deficit could then be achieved by increased activity levels.

Lance, I'm not sure that you were really interested in all that detail, but I thought I'd write it anyway--if, for nothing else--for the silent readers here.

Ed

Post 45

Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 9:46pm

Paul, folks have to sign-up for SOLO Fitness (did you try signing up?)--though you may indeed be too new to sign-up for groups here. I'm not quite sure of those particulars.

Ed

Post 46

Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 9:14pm

Lance,

What kind of axe do you have? Do you play every night? I play too. Music has been such a close friend through good times and not so good times.

Pauliwog

Post 47

Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 10:06pm

... and punched in your height, weight, and "29" for your age. Assuming I'm not far off regarding your age, your estimated caloric intake for weight MAINTENANCE would be around 2509 kcals. This puts your target of 1500 kcals a full 1000 kcals below maintenance levels.

Life just keeps getting better! I went to the site and put in the numbers (I'm 35) and it said 2982 cals/day. I exercise about an hour/day. Hiking in the canyon or skating (getting ready for ice hockey season!). So I'm thinking 12 pounds should be pretty easy to shed.

I appreciate and am interested in the details, Ed. Does time of day have an effect on your body burning off the cals?

Post 48

Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 10:14pm

Lance,

What kind of axe do you have? Do you play every night? I play too. Music has been such a close friend through good times and not so good times.

Hey Paul, that's a Fender Jazz bass in the pic. I have a Strat and a Carvin Fatboy and a Tak and...a few others lying around. I play every chance I get. I'm in the middle of producing 3 CD projects right now and it's a little crazy. Played quite a few shows in Austin, Houston, Dallas and San Antone from Sept.-March. Right now, I'm doing my best to get these CDs finished off.

Glad you have discovered the power of music. Music is better than a Calgone bath - if you're alone, that is.

Post 49

Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 10:22pm

And Ed, I have been feeling a bit lethargic of late. I bet the diet has something to do with that.

Post 50

Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 9:00am

Lance, from the tone of that post of yours--which I used in order to get your "numbers"--I assumed you were sedentary. THAT (ascribing false activity level)--and not "age"--is the main cause of our caloric differences here.

You asked if time of day matters--yes. Whether it was diet or exercise that you were referring to, they both seem to matter. There is some evidence that taking calories from the morning and shifting them into the evening--EVEN WITHOUT CHANGING THE TOTAL AMOUNT--can fatten you.

Also, there is some indirect evidence that morning workouts may be 25-50% more efficient--equivalent to 25-50% more time, if they were to be compared to workouts done in the evening. This is no cause for panic. If your schedule only allows for evening workouts, then simply add 25-50% more time to them and Voila--you're just as lean as you would've been with morning workouts.

Ed

Post 51

Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 11:21am

Byron,

I'm not going to offer citations or anything, but just an anecdotal observation concerning your estimate of hunting advantage in modern man versus early homo sapiens.

You say that you and friends will go out hunting and spend all day killing enough game to feed you for the day.

Okay, I can buy that -- if you are hunting squirrel, rabbit or pheasant. But if you and your buddies were hunting deer, then even if only one person got his shot right, you must have had a hell of a large group to feed if a deer was only enough for a day.

Remember that there was a time -- and I'm not romanticizing it, I know it was brutal -- when the human community was relatively small and game was not rare. The plains tribes might have spent several days following the buffalo herd, but when they got into position, did their thing and the hunt was over, they weren't going back to the teepee with three squirrels in a sack, they were going back with literally hundreds of pounds of meat per animal. They learned how to cure and smoke it so that it lasted longer without spoiling ... and they used it all. Most of us these days aren't big on tripe, tongue, brain, chitlins ...

Presumably an Iroquois brave circa 1600 might go out hunting in the morning and find nothing all day. But the next day he might get his deer ... and that deer might feed his family for a week or a month.

I can see how primitive man might, in many environments, have had lots of time for leisure between hunts. This should explain those pre-Columbian dumps full of worn out large-screen TVs, threadbare recliners and empty Rolling Rock bottles.

Regards,
Tom Knapp

Post 52

Sunday, May 15, 2005 - 2:23pm