The Real "Secret" To Weight Loss Success
One of the most important things you can do to change your body
composition — the amount of fat and muscle you have — is to alter your energy intake.
If you want to lose
weight, you need to burn more calories than you take in. To gain
weight, you need to consume more calories than you burn.
The problem comes when deciding exactly how many
calories you need in the first place. There are many different
methods to help you do this. They range from simple formulas,
such as multiplying your bodyweight by a fixed number, to more
complicated equations that take into account your height, weight,
age, resting metabolic rate and so forth.
Which is the best one to use?
Personally, I’m a big fan of keeping things as simple as
possible. The approach I recommend (and the one I use myself) is
to multiply your bodyweight by a fixed number that varies slightly
depending on a few factors, such as your goal (whether you want
to lose or gain weight), how often you’re
exercising, and your current rate of progress.
However, I've had e-mails from people who question whether
this method is particularly effective.
“When calculating the calories required for losing weight,” wrote
one reader, “I have always thought that multiplying by total
bodyweight seems strange since somebody with more fat will burn
fewer calories than someone at the same weight but with more muscle.”
This is a good point. So, I thought it would be a good idea
to explain a little more about why I recommend this simple approach
over what might appear to be more complex and accurate methods.
It’s true that the amount of muscle you have does have an
influence on your metabolic rate, though the impact isn't as great
as you might think (see The Myth about Muscle
and Your Metabolic Rate for more
information). However, fat has a metabolic rate too.
Contrary to popular belief, fat is not simply a "dead" tissue.
In fact, some researchers now think of fat as an endocrine gland – an “organ” that
responds to signals from hormones and the central
nervous system, as well as secreting a number of bioactive peptides,
such as leptin and interleukin-6 [1].
According to some estimates, fat has a daily metabolic rate of
two calories per pound per day, with muscle clocking in at just
six calories per pound [3].
To be completely accurate, a formula would need to take into account
total fat stores (the location of those fat stores, whether visceral
or subcutaneous, would also have an influence), energy flux, water
intake, the relative proportion of protein and carbohydrate in
your diet, the dominant type of fat in your diet, the type of exercise
you do, and probably a whole bunch
of other things that I haven't thought of.
Most formulas also ignore the fact that prolonged dieting lowers
your metabolic rate, thus reducing the number of calories your
body burns every day.
However, the extent to which this happens
varies widely from person to person. For example, a study of
Pima Indians lasting several years shows large differences in daily
energy expenditure — even in subjects
who lost the same amount of weight [4].
In one Indian who lost around 20 pounds in weight, the number
of calories burned each day dropped by 400 calories. However, in
another subject who lost the same 20 pounds, daily energy expenditure
did not change at all.
This means that the accuracy of any formula will diminish over
time. Most formulas tend to overestimate the calorie needs of people
who have lost weight — in some cases by over 20%.
Weight loss is a highly unpredictable process. No study has shown
that if you deprive people of the same number of calories, they
will all lose the same amount of weight.
And what about people who want to gain weight?
Again, there are individual differences from person to person
that make it very difficult to predict exactly how many calories
you’ll need.
A good example comes from a Mayo Clinic study, where researchers
found large variations in weight gain, even in subjects fed the
same number of calories [2].
For eight weeks, participants were fed an extra 1000
calories (equivalent to two Big Mac hamburgers) daily. As you can
imagine, this led to a gain in weight. In fact, the 16 volunteers
gained an average of 10 pounds during the two-month study.
However, weight gain varied from two pounds to almost 16 pounds.
The researchers found that the key factor in predicting fat gain
was the change in calories burned during the normal activities
of daily living — such as fidgeting, moving around, or changing
posture. They called this NEAT (short for non-exercise activity
thermogenesis).
Those with the greatest increase in NEAT (the most was 692 calories
per day) gained the least amount of fat.
So, any formula that doesn’t attempt to take NEAT into account
(and I haven’t seen any that claim to) won’t give you
an accurate picture of your true calorie requirements.
Any formula, whether it's simple or complex, gives you a starting
point. Then, you monitor your progress, and decide whether you
need to change your training and nutrition plan based on the results
you're getting.
In other words, your
results should dictate the strategy.
Let's say that you set a goal of losing one pound of fat per week.
As one of the strategies you use to reach that goal, you follow
a diet that provides 12 calories per pound of bodyweight.
If, after a week, you haven't lost any fat (assuming that you've
followed your exercise program to the letter), you can try dropping
down to 11 calories per pound of bodyweight. Then, you continue
to make slight adjustments to your diet and exercise program depending
on the results you get.
I’ve known people stick with the same diet and exercise
program for months and months, despite the fact it was delivering
little or nothing in the way of results.
If what you’re doing now hasn’t worked
for the last four weeks, four months — or even four years,
it’s
probably not going to start working tomorrow. You need to try
something different.
"There exists a virtually unlimited number of exercise and
nutritional strategies you can experiment with if your initial
plan doesn't produce the results you want," writes Tom Venuto
in his e-book Burn
the Fat Feed the Muscle.
"Don't be too dogmatic or rigid in your approach. Be flexible.
It's good to have a plan, but don't get married to your plan. The
more options you have at your disposal, the greater your chances
will be for success. Leave yourself room to improvise."
Tom covers this subject in a lot more depth in chapter four of
Burn the
Fat Feed the Muscle.
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if you use a simple formula
or a more complicated
method to set your starting point. What's most important is that
you avoid continuing with a diet and exercise program that
isn't delivering the results you want. Although you need to stay committed to
your goal if you ever want to reach it, you'll also need to remain flexible in
the approach you use to get there.
About The Author
Christian
Finn holds a masters degree in exercise science, is a certified
personal trainer and a regular contributor to Men's Health, Men's
Fitness and other popular fitness magazines. If you're stuck
in a rut with your current exercise and diet plan... fed up with
only losing a pound here and there... or still skinny after months
(or even years) of trying to build muscle and gain weight... Christian
can help you achieve your goals once and for all. Click
here now to find out how Christian can help you
|
Related Articles
References
1. Kershaw, E. E., & Flier, J.S. (2004). Adipose tissue
as an endocrine organ. Journal
of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 89, 2548-2556
2. Levine,
J.A., Eberhardt, N.L., & Jensen, M.D.
(1999). Role of nonexercise activity thermogenesis in resistance
to fat gain in humans. Science,
8, 212-214
3. Wang, Z., Heshka, S., Zhang, K., Boozer, C.N., & Heymsfield,
S.B. (2001). Resting energy expenditure: systematic organization
and critique of prediction methods. Obesity
Research, 9, 331-336
4. Weyer, C., Pratley, R.E., Salbe, A.D.,
Bogardus, C., Ravussin, E., & Tataranni, P.A. (2000). Energy
expenditure, fat oxidation, and body weight regulation: a study of
metabolic adaptation to long-term weight change. Journal
of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 85, 1087-1094
|