Excercising but no weight loss.

My brother

Is obese and has resting heart rate is at the same rate as the BpM for
the weight loss zone.

For the last 5 weeks, 3three times a week he has been going to the gym
excercising 20-30mins.

He has experiance little or no weight loss. Why?

He has cut high calorie products from his diet.

regards

G

wrote in message
...
My brother

Is obese and has resting heart rate is at the same rate as the BpM for
the weight loss zone.

For the last 5 weeks, 3three times a week he has been going to the gym
excercising 20-30mins.

He has experiance little or no weight loss. Why?

He has cut high calorie products from his diet.

regards

G

Has he cut his total intake of food by enough to switch from weight gain
to weight loss? To a person accustomed to a diet that leads to weight
gain, the transition to a diet that will lead to weight loss can be quite
a shock. Just giving up cookies isn't enough.

He needs to measure what he eats for a week and add up the calories to
get a baseline.

On Mar 14, 5:02*pm, wrote:
My brother

Is obese and has resting heart rate is at the same rate as the BpM for
the weight loss zone.

For the last 5 weeks, 3three times a week he has been going to the gym
excercising 20-30mins.

He has experiance little or no weight loss. Why?

He has cut high calorie products from his diet.

regards

G

That should do the trick. If he's measuring calories accurately and
really not losing wt. on that routine, then he'll need to eat less. I
would say the problem is that he is still eating too much. Calories do
count...always. I think I would give it a while longer if you like the
system you're trying. Otherwise, I would start counting calories more
precisely and reduce them a reasonable amount to lose the weight. 5
weeks of eating 200 fewer calories/day should equate to about 2 pounds
of wt. loss. The rough estimate is that there are 3500 calories in
each pound. dkw

On Mar 14, 5:02 pm, wrote:
My brother

Is obese and has resting heart rate is at the same rate as the BpM for
the weight loss zone.

For the last 5 weeks, 3three times a week he has been going to the gym
excercising 20-30mins.

He has experiance little or no weight loss. Why?

20-30 minutes of exercise, three times a week, may not be much.

Someone well-trained /can/ get a significant benefit from a properly
intense 20-30 minute session. E.g. a four mile tempo run at close to
race pace for that distance.

Without either volume, or intensity, or both, exercise doesn't do much
beyond burning a small number of calories.

He has cut high calorie products from his diet.

That is not logically equivalent ot cutting calories from the diet!
You can cut high calorie items, yet compensate by eating more other
stuff, ending up with the same intake.

Also, simply reducing calories won't necessarily lead to fat loss.

Overeating leads to fat gain, but overeating less, or just ceasing to
overeat, will not reverse the fat gain.

There is a wide caloric range over which the body will maintain fat.
You have to reduce calories to all the way to the low end of that
range, and then some.

If you're eating at the upper end of that range (or beyond), that may
be a long way down. If you just reduce within that range, there will
be no results, or poor results.

On Mar 14, 10:28 pm, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On Mar 14, 5:02 pm, wrote:

My brother

Is obese and has resting heart rate is at the same rate as the BpM for
the weight loss zone.

For the last 5 weeks, 3three times a week he has been going to the gym
excercising 20-30mins.

He has experiance little or no weight loss. Why?

20-30 minutes of exercise, three times a week, may not be much.

Someone well-trained /can/ get a significant benefit from a properly
intense 20-30 minute session. E.g. a four mile tempo run at close to
race pace for that distance.

Without either volume, or intensity, or both, exercise doesn't do much
beyond burning a small number of calories.

He has cut high calorie products from his diet.

That is not logically equivalent ot cutting calories from the diet!
You can cut high calorie items, yet compensate by eating more other
stuff, ending up with the same intake.

Also, simply reducing calories won't necessarily lead to fat loss.

Overeating leads to fat gain, but overeating less, or just ceasing to
overeat, will not reverse the fat gain.

There is a wide caloric range over which the body will maintain fat.
You have to reduce calories to all the way to the low end of that
range, and then some.

If you're eating at the upper end of that range (or beyond), that may
be a long way down. If you just reduce within that range, there will
be no results, or poor results.

Personally, I find that when I exercise, I may have tendencies to
become hungrier and eat more. Granted, the majority of the exercise
I've had in the past 3 or 4 years was long-distance running, about 5
miles a day minimum, 5 days a week, usually about 90 minutes of
exercise total. Most common exercises, however, may only burn a
modest amount of calories per hour. I think running is something like
300 or 400 calories an hour. If you find yourself getting hungrier
like me (I suppose maybe the reason I was hungry was an unbalanced
diet; not enough runner-food or something), you might eat your
exercise benefit away entirely, and even have excess left over.

The bottom line is that you lose weight when you take in LESS than
what you burn naturally and expel through the less conservation-
appropriate processes.

It doesn't sound like your brother is really taking a calorie-by-
calorie look at his daily nutrition. I recommend he tries and pegs
down his metabolic rate (or at least a good estimate from charts based
on height and activity) and his daily intake. Then, he can truly see
where this problem might be.

You also have to consider that the body doesn't start burning fat for
quite a while into a diet. It's not unusual for a diet to last a
couple of days before the body resorts to metabolizing fat, depending
on the intensity of the calorie cutback. If he's cutting back and
getting frustrated in 2 days and giving up for a day, he might be
missing that critical diet-engaging period.

In fact, most people find that their body has natural stable "plateau"
weights, where the body can adjust to a relatively wide range of
nutrition without gaining or losing a significant amount of weight.
Your brother might just be stuck on one of these plateaus. If that's
the case, he might need to bear the calorie shortfall for up to a week
(not much fun!)!!

Anyway, it sounds like he might just be approximating his diet;
"winging it" if you will. Have him really peg things down and
quantify all his nutrition, and then he'll be able to plan his weight
loss.

20 minutes of exercise 3 times a week is not likely enough to get his
metabolism going - that's actually a pretty tiny amount of physical
activity. Even a moderate amount is about 30 minutes a day most days
of the week.

He may have cut high fat foods, but that doesn't mean he has reduced
overall calories. If he was actively gaining weight before (even a
pound a month), the cutting back he has done may not even have reduced
his intake to the point where his weight is steady, let alone to the
point where he will lose weight.

He needs to get a set of kitchen scales and start a food diary so he
can find out exactly what he is actually taking in in terms of daily
calories. Then he needs to figure out how much he has to cut back to
start losing weight, and also figure exercise into the equation.

It isn't mysterious. To lose weight you need to be putting out more
calories than you take in.

M.

wrote:
For the last 5 weeks, 3three times a week he has been going to the gym
excercising 20-30mins.

He has experiance little or no weight loss. Why?

He has cut high calorie products from his diet.

He is still eating too much. How many calories
is he taking in?

-- Anita --