stevejones
Member
Cutting sucks
Couldn't help it. I had to succumb to running and cross country skiing, the two best exercises for burning fat AND, unfortunately, muscle. I've been working on cutting for almost 6 weeks, and my waistline has been bouncing between 34.5" and 36 inches for the entire period. Everytime I think I've lost fat, my next measurement will be greater or the same. Same way with the weight scale. I only measure myself once per week and weigh myself once per week. I've been very strict with my calories, using the Berardi caloric scale--- BMR = 66 + (13.7 x weight in kg) + (5 x height in cm) - (6.8 x age) multiplied by 1.6 (activity level).
That works out to----
my maintenance with my activity level @ 260 lbs is: 3625 cals
Minus a 20% cut in cals because I'm cutting is: 2900cals
I keep my cals between 2800 and 2900 cals every day.
When I cut in the past, I did very well (much better than I'm doing now), and I think the main difference is that back then I was running and doing a nordic trak cross country ski machine. So, I just started doing those again instead of incredibly boring long 60 minute walks @ 3.4 mph on the treadmill and 30 minutes on elliptical machine. The higher heart rate with running & nordic trak burns more calories, so I hope this works without sacrificing too much muscle (as it did in the past).
Does anyone think that this caloric scale is crap and shouldn't be used ? Does 2900 calories sound like a lot for someone who is cutting @ 260 lbs ? If you're strongly opinionated about it and think it sucks, then what do you use ? I'm not keeping track of fats and carbs, I only keep track of protein and calories, making sure I get at least 1 gram per lb of bodyweight while I cut. My body is very stubborn below 36" waist.
Couldn't help it. I had to succumb to running and cross country skiing, the two best exercises for burning fat AND, unfortunately, muscle. I've been working on cutting for almost 6 weeks, and my waistline has been bouncing between 34.5" and 36 inches for the entire period. Everytime I think I've lost fat, my next measurement will be greater or the same. Same way with the weight scale. I only measure myself once per week and weigh myself once per week. I've been very strict with my calories, using the Berardi caloric scale--- BMR = 66 + (13.7 x weight in kg) + (5 x height in cm) - (6.8 x age) multiplied by 1.6 (activity level).
That works out to----
my maintenance with my activity level @ 260 lbs is: 3625 cals
Minus a 20% cut in cals because I'm cutting is: 2900cals
I keep my cals between 2800 and 2900 cals every day.
When I cut in the past, I did very well (much better than I'm doing now), and I think the main difference is that back then I was running and doing a nordic trak cross country ski machine. So, I just started doing those again instead of incredibly boring long 60 minute walks @ 3.4 mph on the treadmill and 30 minutes on elliptical machine. The higher heart rate with running & nordic trak burns more calories, so I hope this works without sacrificing too much muscle (as it did in the past).
Does anyone think that this caloric scale is crap and shouldn't be used ? Does 2900 calories sound like a lot for someone who is cutting @ 260 lbs ? If you're strongly opinionated about it and think it sucks, then what do you use ? I'm not keeping track of fats and carbs, I only keep track of protein and calories, making sure I get at least 1 gram per lb of bodyweight while I cut. My body is very stubborn below 36" waist.