Thank you for the analysis! I am that same weight, although our age and height are probably a little different (6” and 42 in my case). When I used this calculator, it shows BMR of 1686 calories for me, so very close.
If I take the “little to no exercise” (i.e. we will add in the bike workouts separately), it shows 2,024 calories/day.
“Light exercise 1-3 times per week” comes out to be the 2319 calories which is pretty close to your number. Are you choosing that category due to strength or other “off bike” workouts?
My strength sessions usually record somewhere in the range of 300 calories each, which I do 2x per week, and then the 1 hour walk would be about the same.
The flaw in that analysis may be presuming that “light exercise 1-3 times per week” would require burning that 300 calories each day, but I think that may be overstating it..
Another thing to keep in mind is that Strava/Garmin include BMR calories in their totals to make us feel good..for example I did a 1:45 recovery ride which it said was 154 “Resting” calories and 843 “Active” calories. So only the “Active” calories should be added in?
Memory test…has TR done a podcast that discusses the challenges on making lifestyle changes and habit forming to stick to the nutrition plans we make?
It’s easy to calculate macros, but I’d love to hear and read forum threads on what others have done to really dial in sustained changes. That daily chocolate snack with the afternoon coffee, eating the same amount of calories on a rest day as a big training day and overeating because the food tastes nice are tougher to tackle than VO2 workouts.
Checkout pods with/by Eric Trexler about energy expenditure. Has been eye-opening for me. I won’t link anything just because I don’t want to step on TR’s toes on this post, but if anyone (like me) struggles with weight loss even on high volume, learning about how efficient our bodies become and what they’ll just “shut off” to stay the same weight is kinda wild.
Yes, we are pretty close: I am 5’-11”, 36 yo male. BMR is 1721 for me. I had somewhat arbitrarily set the +800 calories for my activity level (outside of workouts). This was based on me chasing my 3 kids around, active outdoor lifestyle (frequent walks, some running, gardening, house projects, bike rides with kids, etc.) Looking at this, maybe that is actually a bit high. If I go with “Light exercise 1-3 times per week” Cronometer gives a 0.375 multiplier and comes up with +645 calories or 2366 calories total. That would be before any training.
Very good point about Strava/Garmin overstating calories burned on a ride! Probably best to look at the “active” calories only.
I feel this way every single time Kyle is in the podcast. He’s incredibly smart and obviously knows his stuff but I don’t get anything from these episodes. I’d rather Alex Larson got this much time to expand on her thoughts.
Sometimes I feel like they are talking to the racer that needs to lose a few kilos to make race weight.
I’ve come across other researchers and doctors with similar approaches that are more straight forward to follow.
I - The PE Diet book - Ted Naiman. You can watch the author on YT or listen to him on podcasts and he lays it out pretty clearly. Start with daily caloric allowance to run a deficit (can use calculations or any app out there). Hit the protein target (similar to dr kyle) and fat target and one is allowed 100g of carbohydrate. This would be low carb for most people. From there you can add carbohydrates based on activity level. The emphasis is on lower carb (energy) and may be challenging for athletes but the overall concept sounds similar.
II - Dr Donald Layman (professor emeritus and researcher). He advocates a similar protein target, and 125g of carbohydrate. I can’t remember the fat target or if there is one. Add carbs based on activity level. (He’s all over Youtube or you can search pubmed for his research.)
Yes, and it isn’t just Tressler saying this. There has been a significant groundswell in commentary on this. It would be great if the TR podcast could cover this more. REDs, LEA, are, of course now widely discussed in sport, but this goes beyond undereating athletes.
It’s easy to even interpret that on an N+1 personal level. Life has been chaos the last couple of weeks with some huge stressors. I have lost my appetite somewhat and, despite forcing food in for fuel, my body is going into conservation mode. I don’t have the energy to train, and, tbh, I don’t really want to get off the sofa. I have viral symptoms now probably as my immune system is struggling. Have I lost weight? Not significantly. Would I have lost weight if I could have maintained my normal training? Definitely. But there is no way my body is going to support my ego in thinking that’s a good idea
Its the simply-not-simple calories in vs calories out equation. People concentrate on calories in, but rarely truly assess the calories out. The body has a stronger influence to control our metabolism than most give it credit for. It can autonomically shut off/turn down key systems to conserve energy, particularly in people who have a history of hunger, AND, when the generations before them have a history of hunger (if I get time later I will see if I can find some references)
I’d also like it if the podcast could investigate the research and see if there are any studies out there supporting the theory that every body has a preferred minimum genetic set point for weight/fat percentage so, if you modify that, you will always be fighting a battle with your body.
Exactly. I’m listening along and I think, “huh, interesting. A bit too much science, but ok. WOW, we’re down a rabbit hole and I forget what the original question was or what we’re even trying to discuss.” Next thing I know an hour plus has passed, then the podcast is over. I think back about it and say to myself, “I got absolutely nothing actionable out of that, and potential more confused than before.”
I remember him saying a while back 30g protein and 60g carbs in a recovery drink, which is quite a bit different than the 4:1 ratio Jonathon always mentions.
This is why I would like the question asked, so he can tell about it and give all the details. I often skimp on the recovery drink. And I would like to know how important it is and exactly what’s in it. And maybe if it differs depending on the workout? etc
Based on the work I’ve done with a spots nutritionist is that the recovery shake is replenishment of glycogen depleted during the workout and a little protein to help slow any catabolic effects in the window.
I’ve found that eating [edited] 100 calories for every 200 kJ burned [/edited] during my workout keeps me from being ravenously & recklessly hungry.
It’s snacking during the day that always sets me back
