Its Not About Losing WEIGHT Its About Losing FAT!!!

HAHA This body doesn't run yet.    My goal to lose 2 lbs a week is to keep my calorie deficiency at about 8000, if my deficiency is too large I stall out, if it's too low I don't lose.

I agree and disagree. From a whole body nutritional perspective yes, it's better to eat whole, clean foods with a complex variety of  nutrients. However, a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. If I eat 600 calories of junk or 1,500 calories of healthy nuts and other foods, I will lose more weight, including fat, on the 600 calories of junk. People who encourage higher calories to improve nutritional intake are missing the mark.

I think the best idea is to try and include nutritionally dense foods within a very low calorie range, like the tried and true 600-800 calorie diet. There is no reason one can't get in 65+ grams of protein in that caloric range. 

Bottom Line:

Yes muscle weighs more than fat. But, don't kid yourself. How many times have we all heard an overweight person use this justification?

A calorie is a calorie. It doesn't matter where it came from. If I ate 2000 calories of chicken breast, it's still 2000 calories. Period. If you want to lose more fat you shouldn't give yourself a pass to consume more calories just because they're "healthy" calories. 

Know your own body and how it responds to Calories. 

For ME a 600 calorie diet of Junk or carbs WILL NOT get the same results as a 600 calorie diet of lean protein (with the same physical activity for each diet).

That's not what I said. I said one shouldn't INCREASE their calories with the assumption that because they're derived from healthy foods that it's okay. 

I believe I said something about one striving for a nutritionally complex diet within the 600-800 calorie range. No?

My numbers:

October 2011 (about 2 weeks before the Sleeve surgery)

Height: 63"

Weight: 218

Lean Body Mass (LBM): 111

Fat Mass (FM): 107

Fat %: 49

October 2012 - one year later

Height: 62.75"

Weight: 158

LBM: 98

FM: 58

Fat %: 38

The difference in my LBM from 2011 to 2012 is 11,7%, The difference in my FM from 2011 to 2012 is 45.8%.

I'll take an 11.7% decrease in my muscle LBM any day of the week if it means I get to lose 45+% of my fat mass along with it.

Weights and protein do help, but the fact is, you will lose some muscle mass.

JMO.

But those stats make me wonder if your caloric in take was more protein than it was, could you have had an LBM increase of 20% and a Fat Loss of 75%.

With a drop of 72 pounds does the new body need less muscle mass to support it's own weight?

I do want to lose fat. I was told if I am to lose 100+ pounds will I also have to lose muscle (some) and fat (mostly). I was told that strength training will get harder and I will eventually have to do lighter weights as I decrease in size to accommodate for reduction in muscle mass. I was told that the 118 lb. version of me won't be able to bench or squat with as much weight as the 269 lb. version of me could. I probably should ask my trainer how many WLS patients he's trained or how many people he's helped lose over 100+ lbs. I only know of 1 whom I've met and whom he still trains, and I am unsure if she's had surgery.

I started with 5 lbs. Now I weight train with reps and I use 20 lb free weights. I started with 2lb weights for my triceps - now I am up to 5 lbs with reps.

I don't know who told you that you will get weaker.

I started doing 10 knee pushups. Now I do 30 boy (not on my knees) pushups. I started doing 15 squats, 3 different types (45 total). Now I do 3 sets of those squats.

I do workout a lot and I workout hard. I think that has contributed to only losing 11.7% of my LBM.

 

This is my last post on this topic because it's nauseatingly boring and there are so many factors involved that no one will be more right or more wrong.

10-30% loss in LBM is norm for people who have a large amount of weight to lose. Look it up. I don't feel like it.

The fact is, our body doesn't always work the way we want it to. One thing I didn't post was that my BMR was 1814 in October 2011. Yes, you read that right. I know there are people out there who are jealous by that number because it SHOULD mean that I could easily consume 2200 calories and be able to lose a 1lb a week at the very least.  In October 2012, my BMR was 1555 still above normal when compared to my weight of 158 at that time. That meant that I should have been able to eat 2000 calories and still loss weight.

In reality, I fight for 1-3 lbs a month loss. If I go over 1000 calories, my weight loss stalls.

The other thing you have to ask yourself is what kind of damage the continuous high amount of protein you would have to consume to keep and increase your LBM is doing to your kidneys, etc. Is it really that important to keep that LBM if is means eating so much protein that your kidneys have issues? I don't think so.

IMO, the best thing we can do is figure out what are the healthiest foods for our bodies, then feed our bodies those foods. It will be different for everyone.

You know I recently decided the same thing. I believe the difference is those that can lose all their excess weight in one year or less vs those who have several years out. The starvation trick only last so long & you need more fuel to shock the body and for the increased workouts & intensity. Those who are not very active or do not workout probably do not need this advice.
Like anything else, the trick is what you are eating and how much you increase the calories. Every body is different and we all must learn what will work for ours. Thanks for the post! I hope my new plan will be what I need.