[quote]Claudan wrote:
[quote]Powerpuff wrote:
[quote]Claudan wrote:
[quote]Powerpuff wrote:
I’m not a huge believer in the “metabolic damage” thing. At least for me, if I put myself in a deficit the pounds will start coming right off. I do hear more women in their 40’s say that they have to add more cardio in to stay as lean as they’d like.
[/quote]
Every single person who is healthy loses weight in deficit. That is the function of a healthy metabolism.
[/quote]
Agree. We don’t have enough information to assume that there is “metabolic damage”, or that something is broken. In other words, a lot more people think they have “metabolic damage”, than people who actually have “metabolic damage”.
Also, I mentioned a lot of women in their 40’s claiming that they need more cardio to maintain their weight now that their metabolism has started to slow. Just to clarify, that’s not where I’d go here, at least not right away. I’m definitely not saying, “Well, add a lot of running.”
Bring up protein to at least 80-100 grams per day right away. Work up from there. Even if she is afraid to bring up cals a lot because she is saying she’s comfortable eating only 1000 calories per day, and is fatter than she wants to be, her body will thank her for adding the protein, because she’ll be better able to maintain some lean mass. Even a couple of protein shakes would add only about 200 cals for the 40 grams of extra protein. A win, no matter what.
Just an aside, I know ballet dancers who regularly eat about 1000 calories a day. Women with small bones, very little muscle and extremely low body fat. A lot of discipline, or disordered eating, depending on how you want to look at that. Once people start eating a bit more, the healthy metabolism will chase intake. We’ve all see figure competitors complain that their very low contest prep diets “damaged their metabolism”. A lot of those people also did extreme cardio while prepping, then didn’t reverse diet their way back out of the deficit in a smart way. Gaining a lot of weight in that situation, no surprise.
[/quote]
I don’t feel like it’s necessary for me to say this, but I agreed with everything you said in your original post, with the exception of the last paragraph.
You seem to have been exposed to anecdotal evidence of ‘Metabolic Damage’ more in-depth than I have. I wasn’t even aware it was a “thing” to claim ‘Metabolic Damage’.
Even if the subject does not have ‘Metabolic Damage’ or does have ‘super mega duper uber good functioning metaboss’, the fact remains(we seem to agree on this) that the way to “fix whatever-you-wanna-call-it” is to SLOWLY increase her calories to a maintenance level, and eventually, into a surplus that will allow her to PROPERLY build muscle and lose body-fat. [/quote]
Cool. You don’t want to tangle with me, Claudan.
Yeah, I think we are basically saying the same thing.
BTW, I just watched the BioLayne video you put up. Awesome. And I agree with him. IF her calorie intake is really as low as she thinks it is, then slowly and gradually increase cals. Eating more is going to be counter intuitive, right? And don’t assume that you need to drastically cut or eliminate carbs, especially when there’s no evidence that there’s an insulin problem. He didn’t say this, but IMO, doing something like The Zone macros is perfect. No need to get all restrictive unless you have to.
The title “Metabolic Damage” and the OP’s comment about how it must be her metabolism gave me pause. Often people who claim “they can’t loose weight” would absolutely loose it if someone were following them around 24/7 slapping the crap out of their hand and keeping them really honest about what is going on. I’m not talking about people who are cycling in and out of competition season/ women who are dropping down to competition levels of body fat here. Just talking about your average American who wants to loose some fat.