5 months of NROLW and I'm frustrated - JP Fitness Forums

BobbieK · 04-30-2008, 09:32 AM

Hi there,

I am 5mos. into NROLW and yes I am stronger which is great but I am also larger, plain and simple. My pants which were loose when I started are now skin tight especially around the hips and thighs.The scale is also up. I've read the Hussman article but how long are you supposed to wait???(5+ mos. seem more than enough time to see results).

I have been doing the nutrition part and calories as described and even decreased them(as described) to no avail. Personally ,for me, the amount of calories has caused a gain and I am now back to cutting calories down to Weight Watchers level....I am going to continue with the workouts which I love.

Just thought I would share my results and I guess vent a little. Bobbie

copwife · 04-30-2008, 09:35 AM

Hi Bobbie,

No words of wisdom, sorry. But, I have the same results so far, frustrating I know.

Michelle

LaraT · 04-30-2008, 10:17 AM

Have you been doing cardio in addition to the workouts? I need to do cardio or I don't lose weight plain and simple. I do 2 HIITS and 2 regular cardio workouts per week (usually a combo of intervals and steady state)

I also found I had to drop the calories down by about 200-300 calories from the calculation in the book.

Have you been weighing/measuring your food and keeping track or just guesstimating? It is really easy to underestimate the amount of calories you are eating unless you write down everything.

BobbieK · 04-30-2008, 11:45 AM

I need to do cardio or I don't lose weight plain and simple. I do 2 HIITS and 2 regular cardio workouts per week (usually a combo of intervals and steady state)

I also found I had to drop the calories down by about 200-300 calories from the calculation in the book.

Well, I guess I'm right there with you Lara. I think the calories in the book are way too much for me.......Lesson learned I guess. (I kept waiting for the magic swoosh!) Thanks! Bobbie

GinaKina · 04-30-2008, 12:15 PM

I've been gaining weight also, but I've pretty much decided it's because I'm not doing any other cardio besides maybe a run once a week. I'm not worried about it however ::shrugs::

werhardt · 04-30-2008, 12:29 PM

I am just starting this program and this is what I am afraid of.

missjane · 04-30-2008, 12:31 PM

I can't say it enough....diet is KEY. That's where you need to look and really see what's going in. You can't just guess.

What's your past history? Have you been a chronic undereater for years? Are you skinny fat? Do you have substantial fat to lose?

BobbieK · 04-30-2008, 12:53 PM

Hi there,

Yes, diet is key! ....you are absolutely right and the fact is after eating the calories and macros as listed in the book they are just too much for me. No I am not skinny fat!(just fatfat and now muscley fat,ha!)....I was a loose size 14 and now a skin tight 14 and I do see some muscle developing but I can't keep increasing these legs and thighs.I've lost weight before on 1200-1300 cals before and that's where I need to be I guess. I haven't been guessing but logging amount into Calorie King.

The bottom line I've concluded is diet is the absolute most important part and there is no way ,no how I can eat the amount in the book. And I know this is not a fat loss program but I sure didn't want to gain.I guess reality has set in for me about what I personally need to do.......Bobbie

missjane · 04-30-2008, 12:55 PM

Sounds like you've been a chronic under-eater. 1200 calories! Way too low for your size! You've probably got your metabolism down to a crawl by not eating enough. Now, your job is to rev up that metabolism and the only way to do that is to eat!

energy in minus energy out == fat loss or gain

Once your metabolism is in check, it's that simple.

BobbieK · 04-30-2008, 01:02 PM

Hi Miss Jane,

Ok....at what time frame do you throw in the towel???It's been 5 months,.....when does one's metabolism speed up? I think I've given it a good go . The 1200-1300 is to lose , I can maintain on more. I feel if I continue on I will only become larger.

I'm actually so frustrated about the whole thing I feel like crying but at this point I just need to take some action...Bobbie

beach_plums · 04-30-2008, 01:03 PM

I have to agree with MissJane on this one. 1200-1300 calories is way too low! You really do need to rev up your metabolism. Otherwise, I don't think you'll see the results you want. Extremely low calories will result in weight loss; however, it's unlikely that you'll be able to maintain that loss.

kfisherx · 04-30-2008, 01:13 PM

Hey... Check out my training log and see how I overcame my 1400 cal a day diet and kicked up my metabolism into 2370 cal a day average.

I too was an undereater for years and years. I have some questions for ya

1. Do you measure your food with a food scale?
2. Do you often get cold? Are you always wearing a coat when everyone else is in shorts?

3. What are your macro ranges that you are trying to eat?

Ruthie · 04-30-2008, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by missjane

Sounds like you've been a chronic under-eater. 1200 calories! Way too low for your size! You've probably got your metabolism down to a crawl by not eating enough. Now, your job is to rev up that metabolism and the only way to do that is to eat!

energy in minus energy out == fat loss or gain

Once your metabolism is in check, it's that simple.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Bobbie, but are you not saying that you have been eating the calories calculated in the book for 5months. Jane and beach_plums, would you not expect her metabolism to have recovered by now even if she has been down to 1200 calories in the past?

Bobbie I would guess your clothes fitting tighter is more to do with you gaining muscle but not losing fat, rather than just gaining fat. It is frustrating though. Are you just working out the three days a week? Like others I find I need to add in a couple of days cardio also.

LaraT · 04-30-2008, 01:43 PM

I agree, 1200-1300 is way too low!

I am 5'2 and started NROLW at about 124 lbs in early January which was up from 112-115 I had been maintaining the last year due to holidays/getting off track with eating. However, maintaining that weight meant eating about 1300-1400 which did not satisy nor fuel me. I had been a chronic undereater for years. When I started the program my goal was to lose fat/inches, build some muscle, and rev up the metabolism because I was stalling eating around 1400/day. I don't care about number on the scale but want to see fat/inches lost.

The book had me at 1890/1690 workout/non workout days. I started with the calorie recommendations and after 2 months hadn't lost on scale or inches, but hadn't gained either. I reduced the calories to approx 1700 cals on workout days and 1400-1500 non workout days and have been losing slowly both on the scale and measurements. I am not far from my bodies ideal weigth so things change very slowly.

If the book would have come out in the fall I would have been more inclined to do a "bulk" and really build up some muscle. But after having just gained a good 10 lbs (which is a lot on my frame) I couldn't go there "mentally", especially so close to Spring/summer!

Ruthie · 04-30-2008, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BobbieK

And I know this is not a fat loss program but I sure didn't want to gain.I guess reality has set in for me about what I personally need to do.......Bobbie

This is an aside but I'm getting frustrated with this. Recently I have been reading quite a bit on this forum that this is not a fat loss program. To me it is presented very much as one in the book and I think most of us believed it was at the beginning. I am not saying that this is its only aim, but there is plenty of discussion about weight loss in the book and an implication that weight loss will result. I think Lou even says somewhere that he will be surprised if you don't lose at least 10lbs. I appreciate that everyone is different and no-one can guarantee any sort of results, but it does seem that since quite a few people who have been following both the diet and the exercise component of the program have not really seen the results they wanted and since then the excuse that it is not really a fat loss program has been appearing. Okay rant over and sorry Bobbie that wasn't aimed at you at all, just general frustration.

BobbieK · 04-30-2008, 02:03 PM

I appreciate that everyone is different and no-one can guarantee any sort of results, but it does seem that since quite a few people who have been following both the diet and the exercise component of the program have not really seen the results they wanted and since then the excuse that it is not really a fat loss program has been appearing. Okay rant over and sorry Bobbie that wasn't aimed at you at all, just general frustration. __________________

Hi Ruthie,

I understand what you are saying ,I was just trying to signal that I have read the "this is not a fat loss program" posts. I agree with what you have said and I got the same impression as you did from the book.AND at the very least I sure don't want to gain!!
And maybe it is muscle but geez Louise, I don't want to go into a 16.

To everyone,

Thank you for your help and thoughts ! As far as measuring food I've been logging for a long time so I thought that was ok.And I guess I 'm frustrated since there are some who are eating more and losing!As far as the questions from Kfisherx:

1) I do log but don't weigh food,2)I am usually hot not cold (it must be the fat,ha! 3) as far as macros I try to hit the ones in the book.

Yes, 1200-1300 is low but again that is to lose not maintenance. Maybe I'll try 1400 and see what happens. Thanks everyone!
Bobbie

LaraT · 04-30-2008, 02:13 PM

I found weighing food to be very enlightening--sometimes giving me more calories, sometimes less then the amount on the label.

The issue about the program being a fat loss program or not--
what I think is that this is not a FAST fat or weight loss program if you follow the calorie levels in the book but it will happen. Lou also talks a lot about body recomposition. This takes time. The 7 stages will take a good 5-6 months. During that time you are hopefully building muscle, which rev's up the metabolism and burns fat. However it very well could take the full 6 months plus for this to happen so you are not going to see the results for a long time.

LWilson212 · 04-30-2008, 02:27 PM

Hi Bobbie-

My dad gave me the new rules original about a year ago and I started the program with the hopes of getting rid of the ten or so pounds I had regained after weight watchers. I too had been stalled arond 1500 cals a day. I'm 5'10", 160 lbs. I started the program and drank the protein shakes and ate and ate more protein and my weight did start to creep up. The last five months or so, I really focused on diet and I am around 7 pounds less than a year ago. I still have to be uncomfortably hungry to lose weight, but that happens for me around 2000 cals per day now instead of 1400 like when I was on Weight Watchers.

Also, my personal experience - when I bought a food scale and started weighing things, I was eating a lot more than I thought I was.