• Upgrades have been completed! Including conversations, 😁😎🏀⚾⚽ Emojis and more.. Read more



Exeecise calories

Caz

Slimming down the aisle
#2
Well no, you don't have to. But you should be making sure that your net calories (what you've eaten minus your exercise calories burnt) is 1200 or above. The more you exercise, the more you can eat! I usually eat back most of my exercise calories, I'll allow myself a little treat of something. But I think as long as you're usually hitting 1200 NET or there abouts, you'll be fine. Any less than that and your body will still go into starvation mode if you do that regularly.
 
#4
I've just been reading all this information and I was wondering if anyone knows how come the people on the VLCD board all seem to lose weight yet are eating like 600-700 cals /day. To top it off they seem to be losing super fast.
 

Caz

Slimming down the aisle
#5
If it's a planned one like Cambridge Diet it's because it's well planned out to give you all the vitamins and minerals that you need. If it's only they do themselves, they may be losing but it won't be in a healthy way and it won't be maintained. They'll be losing muscle mass as well as fat. I did Cambridge Diet and yes I lost 3-4lbs a week, about a stone a month, but it wasn't worth it. It didn't sort my attitude and habits with food. And it wasn't good health wise. It effects peoples hair and nails which become brittle and break, to extreme amounts. You can't exercise. You're losing weight but you're not healthy.
 

The Moog

Silver Member
#6
**deleted post***
Not helpful to discussion.
 

Fattack

Likes to eat
#7
The reason they lose so much on those diets is because they are losing mostly muscle. Not good long term, and partially responsible why most people gain at least some of their Cambridge weight back - loss of lean muscle tissue means loss of metabolic rate ;)

Eat back your exercise calories, if you can't manage them all, at least aim for half.
 
#8
Thanks for explaining that. It's just so tempting to so it for a quick fix but loss of metabolism is definitely one thing I need to stay away from!
 

Fattack

Likes to eat
#9
Yep! I also did Cambridge, and my body fat percentage when I stopped Cambridge was still shocking, even though I'd lost about 3 stone and gone to 10 stone, because I'd lost mostly muscle - which was really frustrating because when I was 10 stone several years ago, my body fat percentage was actually pretty low ! I also gained half a stone back in a WEEK after I came off Cambridge the last time (although admittedly I had been poorly and therefore wasn't very restrained - recovery through ice cream!).
 
#10
I've just switched to CC and it's a revelation eating back my burned calories! It feels almost naughty...but it seems to be paying off so far. Climbed a mountain the other day (ate sausages, eggs and cereal bars throughout the climb), and came home to proper egg fried rice, doritos and dip - and still couldn't eat back enough calories! But I still lost my predicted amount this week!
 

Big H

Silver Member
#11
What you say about losing Muscle on CD is simply not true. The chemical process that is Ketosis protects Muscle mass, it uses Fat stores to fuel the body. It will only start to use muscle if there is not fat to use, hence not being able to do an VLCD with a BMI of less than 25. I have a little bit of experience in this field ;)

That said, if anybody can lose weight without resorting to a VLCD I would certainly advise it.
 

Caz

Slimming down the aisle
#12
What you say about losing Muscle on CD is simply not true. The chemical process that is Ketosis protects Muscle mass, it uses Fat stores to fuel the body. It will only start to use muscle if there is not fat to use, hence not being able to do an VLCD with a BMI of less than 25. I have a little bit of experience in this field ;)

That said, if anybody can lose weight without resorting to a VLCD I would certainly advise it.
Well I disagree. It is true and my experience showed that it is true. Like fatattack, even after losing 3 stone, my body fat percentage had not changed as much as it should have done considering those losses. I've had better results with calorie counting when it comes to that. Even when you are in ketosis, you are losing mean muscle mass. Ketosis has very little to do with your muscle, that's protein not ketones. Being in ketosis just means that your body deals with fat more effectively, it doesn't mean that you won't still be losing muscle mass.
 

Fattack

Likes to eat
#14
What you say about losing Muscle on CD is simply not true. The chemical process that is Ketosis protects Muscle mass, it uses Fat stores to fuel the body. It will only start to use muscle if there is not fat to use, hence not being able to do an VLCD with a BMI of less than 25. I have a little bit of experience in this field ;)

That said, if anybody can lose weight without resorting to a VLCD I would certainly advise it.
Well, as somebody who is studying nutrition and has done Cambridge, I have to disagree ;) Caroline has explained it really nicely too. You burn muscle as well as fat on Cambridge. Ketogenic diets do work to burn fat stores, however you can only maintain muscle mass on a high amount of protein in conjunction with a nutritionally sound amount of calories and fat. There are several studies on this by credible sources that aren't sponsored by Cambridge or written by hacks. Yes, you are in ketosis, but yes, you are also in starvation mode and your body burns muscle as well as fat.
And as an aside, it's not BMI 25 for a VLCD, at least not for Cambridge, it's a stone over BMI 25. And body fat / muscle tone has nothing to do with BMI, many professional athletes have overweight and even obese BMIs because of their weights, but they're about 15% or less fat!
 
Last edited:
#15
What you say about losing Muscle on CD is simply not true. The chemical process that is Ketosis protects Muscle mass, it uses Fat stores to fuel the body. It will only start to use muscle if there is not fat to use, hence not being able to do an VLCD with a BMI of less than 25. I have a little bit of experience in this field ;)

That said, if anybody can lose weight without resorting to a VLCD I would certainly advise it.

That's the first time I heard that you can't do a VLCD with a less than 25BMI. That's probably why when I tried it once in the past it didn't work... Also my body fat percentage was, last time i measured, 21.7% so I won't be trying a VLCD. Just the good ol' calorie counting
 
#16
That's the first time I heard that you can't do a VLCD with a less than 25BMI. That's probably why when I tried it once in the past it didn't work... Also my body fat percentage was, last time i measured, 21.7% so I won't be trying a VLCD. Just the good ol' calorie counting
Haha this made me laugh out loud, because it's something that I would say! Good ol' calorie counting - the diet of champions hehehe :D :D :D
 

Big H

Silver Member
#17
Well, as somebody who is studying nutrition and has done Cambridge, I have to disagree ;) Caroline has explained it really nicely too. You burn muscle as well as fat on Cambridge. Ketogenic diets do work to burn fat stores, however you can only maintain muscle mass on a high amount of protein in conjunction with a nutritionally sound amount of calories and fat. There are several studies on this by credible sources that aren't sponsored by Cambridge or written by hacks. Yes, you are in ketosis, but yes, you are also in starvation mode and your body burns muscle as well as fat.
And as an aside, it's not BMI 25 for a VLCD, at least not for Cambridge, it's a stone over BMI 25. And body fat / muscle tone has nothing to do with BMI, many professional athletes have overweight and even obese BMIs because of their weights, but they're about 15% or less fat!
Thanks for the lesson :D
 

Fattack

Likes to eat
#18
You're welcome ;) I just want people to be correctly informed, because I sure as heck wasn't when I *picked* Cambridge over other, better options.
 
#19
You're welcome ;) I just want people to be correctly informed, because I sure as heck wasn't when I *picked* Cambridge over other, better options.
I spoke up against CD last week on a thread. I started by saying that I respected that the diet worked for a lot of people, but I personally felt that there was better options, and any doctor worth their salt would confirm that. I was bombarded by CD'ers saying that it was outrageous to say such a thing, but I stuck to my guns and maintained my point. I think I'm on some CD black list now...
 

Big H

Silver Member
#20
Yeh, I even said in my post that IF people can do another diet then I would definitely advise them to, but in my case, I was 22 and a half stone and rising and on my way to diabetes and probably a heart attack. I tried every diet in the world, spent 8 months with a shrink, did hypnosis and I just couldn't break the cycle. Without Cambridge Diet I would not be where I am now. If everybody could just calorie count and it was that simply to just say 'this is the best way' then people wouldn't have got to the weights they are now so desperately trying to chnage. I couldn't do a conventional diet (probably could now) food is/was like heroin, some people cannot just have a little bit, it's all or nothing. Obviously you cannot fast for ever and if you don't address the underlying problems you will gain it all back, but if somebody is 30 stone and cannot lose weight, then a VLCD, however unhealthy is still a helluva lot more healthy than continuing for years at 30 stone.
 


Similar threads