Can real muscle growth be achieved when on a post-op 650 calorie diet? I am just over three months post-op, have lost 74 lbs, 94 lbs total. I do strength training with a trainer three times a week and cardio five times a week. Because my target weight loss was 225 lbs, I am still on a diet of 600-650 calories, 100-125 grams of protein,15-20 grams of carbs and 15-20 grams of fat per day. During my weight loss, I have lost over 17 total inches but almost 40% of that is muscle loss. I am prone to stalls that last for two weeks. I work out extremely hard but am completely frustrated that I have no muscle growth to show for it. Any thoughts or suggestions are most welcome.

Great thread. Is this why we see some people losing 20 lbs a month and others losing 8-10 lbs a month?

There a lot of variables to consider. But if two people with the same starting weight/body composition, same surgery date, roughly the same age, same metabolism, same calorie/protein intake but these different weight loss amounts........my bet would be that one is exercising and retaining muscle, the other is not and is losing muscle. But for the most part, I'd say yes, you are correct.

I've been keeping track of my fat and muscle percentages from the begining but am struggling to make sense of the numbers.

I don’t quite know how to figure it out accurately. According to my scale, I’ve lost 32 lbs in total. But based on percentages and calculating total fat lbs and muscle lbs, it also shows that 29 lbs of that is fat and 12 lbs of that is muscle, which is clearly 42 lbs, not the 32 lbs I’ve lost.

Not sure how to reconcile this. Thoughts?

I've been keeping track of my fat and muscle percentages from the begining but am struggling to make sense of the numbers.

I don’t quite know how to figure it out accurately. According to my scale' date=' I’ve lost 32 lbs in total. But based on percentages and calculating total fat lbs and muscle lbs, it also shows that 29 lbs of that is fat and 12 lbs of that is muscle, which is clearly 42 lbs, not the 32 lbs I’ve lost.

Not sure how to reconcile this. Thoughts?[/quote']

I think it's just a math issue. If you want to share the percentages please post them. If not, the correct way to calculate them is shown below. (when I use the term muscle below, I really mean lean body mass)

Assume a starting weight of 230 and a starting bodyfat percentage of 50%. Assume a current weight of 200 and a current bodyfat of 45% This means that you started out with 230 x .50 =115 pounds of fat and 115 pounds of lean body mass. Now you have 200 x .45 = 90 pounds of fat and 200 x .55 = 110 pounds of muscle. That would mean that you lost 115 - 90 = 25 pounds of fat and 115 - 110 = 5 pounds of muscle.

Body fat measurements are really tricky. I went to the local university back in the winter/spring and paid $25 to have mine done. They used several calliper measurements from all over my body, some hand held device and I did the water test...which was quite interesting. They varied from 14% to 16% I think, but the water one was in between at around 15% or so, which they say is more accurate. So I approach it as just a way to see or measure progess....or lack of progress. When I go next time, if they are between 16-18%, I know I've added fat. If it's 14-16%, I'll know I'm about the same. But if they are between say 12-14%, I'll be pretty happy with that. Bottom line, body fat measurement is tricky, but I think that most relaible measurements are all fairly close to each other within 1-3 percentage points.

I think it's just a math issue. If you want to share the percentages please post them. If not, the correct way to calculate them is shown below. (when I use the term muscle below, I really mean lean body mass)

Okay this was very helpful. Once the lightbulb went on about anything that is not fat lbs = lean mass, then I did 1-fat lbs and re-did my calcs and I feel great! you know why?

Because of my 32 lbs of loss? only 4 lbs was lean mass, rest was fat. Woo hoo!!

Okay this was very helpful. Once the lightbulb went on about anything that is not fat lbs = lean mass' date=' then I did 1-fat lbs and re-did my calcs and I feel great! you know why?

Because of my 32 lbs of loss? only 4 lbs was lean mass, rest was fat. Woo hoo!![/quote']

That's awesome!!!

I've been keeping track of my fat and muscle percentages from the begining but am struggling to make sense of the numbers.

I don’t quite know how to figure it out accurately. According to my scale, I’ve lost 32 lbs in total. But based on percentages and calculating total fat lbs and muscle lbs, it also shows that 29 lbs of that is fat and 12 lbs of that is muscle, which is clearly 42 lbs, not the 32 lbs I’ve lost.

Not sure how to reconcile this. Thoughts?

It's the new math

Thanks for mentioning that. That is one of the most fundamental truths that many people don't realize. Muscle contains about 450 calories per pound, and fat contains about 3500 calories per pound. That means that if you are burning 7000 calories per week than you are taking in, that can show up as a two pound fat loss, or a 15 pound muscle loss, or something in between. Unfortunately your scales only tell you how many pounds you lost, not what type of loss. The big issue is that muscle is so easy to lose, and so difficult to regain. Overall, the lower your percentage bodyfat, the healthier you will be, and the easier it will be to keep weight off.

I get very concerned for some posters when I see them having these high rates of weight loss after the first week or two after surgery and they are also talking about their low Protein intake because I know their loss is probably mostly muscle. I realize that some people just can't meet their protein needs due to nausea, and post-surgical swelling, but I've also seen many posts where people just pay lip service to getting enough protein.

I met my protein goals on the third day after surgery, and I'm always at the high end of my allowed protein intake. I realize that this has made my weight loss slower than for some people, but I'm still very satisfied with that tradeoff.

Thanks again "ItsMe"! The whole muscle vs fat thing can be really tricky and confusing. For me, based on my experiences, this is what I've found......

FAT, quickly gained, slow to lose

MUSCLE, slowly gained, quickly lost

So losing at a big calorie deficit/low protein for me (as my first 2-3 months post op showed) meant some fat loss and lots of muscle loss. This equaled fast weight loss.

But me losing at a 200-400 calorie deficit with around 90-120 grams of protein a day (3-20 months post op) meant some fat loss and no muscle/strength loss and even just a little muscle gain starting around 6 months post op. This equaled a slow weight loss, but my prefered method.

Currently, I'm at about a 200 calorie surplus since I met my goal weight of 215 a month ago (which was too light for my liking). Now with this current calorie surplus, I'm getting in lots of lean protein still, but back to adding some good complex carbs and gaining strength/muscle slowly for the next few months until I'm around the mid-220's.....then I plan to maintain for a while.

This is a really great conversation here, and timely for me as I just started working out with weight training 2x a week. Before being sleeved I worked out at Curves for 6 years, then I was sleeved in Oct. 2010 and stayed with Curves another almost 3 years until this past May when I finally quit because I was going to a regular gym (in addition to Curves) and honestly (please no need to bash Curves, it CAN be a good workout) I was getting more out of my gym workouts than Curves so I decided to put my money into challenging myself more at the gym.

With all that being said, I am curious as to what combining weight training + cardio and doing a sporadic low-calorie diet (like the 5:2 eating plan) will do for someone who has been sleeved a while (almost 3 years for me.) Does anyone have any thoughts or experience on something like this? I've only just begun the intense weight lifting (2 weeks ago) so I'm wondering how long it will take me to lose some extra lbs...

For anyone curious about some FAQ's about the 5:2 plan here is some common ?'s...

http://www.52fastdie...t-faq-t246.html

I have some thoughts, but not any experience with this, so if someone later in the thread says they have experience with it, and what I've said contradicts what they say then you should presume that what they say is correct.

So the overall result is that the 5:2 eating plan should help you lose weight and the cardio should help you lose weight. The effects from this should begin right away. The weight lifting will help make sure that most of what you lose will be fat and not muscle. Since you have just started working out, you are probably not yet working out with an optimal level of weights in order to reduce the risk of injury. I fully support that goal. It will take you a few months of lifting before you are lifting enough weight to maximize the fat loss vs muscle loss. To get the optimal benefit, once you have been working out for a few months, you should be doing any given exercise at 8 - 12 reps to failure, with one or more sets, or something like that. Don't settle for anything that just involves toning, which is what I assume Curves does.

I would recommend only cardio for the fast days, no weight lifting, and then only a limited amount of cardio on those days. I think their recommended Protein levels are way too low. .8 gram / kg is far too low in my opinion. I think that any woman who is working out should get at least 80 - 100 grams of protein per day, and any man who is working out should get at least 100 -120 grams per day. I haven't done any medical journal research on this type of fast, so It may be that their plan works by causing excess muscle loss, I'm really not sure. I strongly believe that if you follow the 30 grams of protein recommendation on fast days that you will be at risk for substantial muscle loss, which will give you substantial weight loss, but it's the wrong kind of weight.

I think the real question comes down to this. If you asked some people if they would rather lose 8 pounds of fat and 2 pounds of muscle over the next 6 months for a total weight loss of 10 pounds, or lose 18 pounds of muscle and 2 pound of fat over the next 6 months for a total weight loss of 20 pounds, a lot of people would choose the 20 pound weight loss. What would you choose?

I'm not in any way suggesting that you not try the plan, but I am suggesting that if you try the plan that you raise your protein consumption above the levels they suggest, while still staying within the plan calorie restrictions. As an example, consider getting 60 grams of protein on fast days and 100 grams of protein on non-fast days. At least try that and see how it works. And be patient. When you are working out properly you will see much slower weight loss because you are losing a much higher percentage of fat.

It's thank you for your response!

Just a couple of things...weight "lifting" for an hour a day 2x a week is "new" to me, but lifting weights regularly is not. 9 years at Curves on a consistent basis is admittedly not the same as intense weight lifting for an hour at the gym. But it is weight resistance and I've also done a class once a week for the last 2 years that incorporates 20 minutes of the same weight routine that I'm now doing for an hour. I guess I'm just clarifying, that working out in general is NOT new to me at all. That being said, I'm working with a PT for my weight class (there are 6 of us in the class so she is keeping an eye on our form/helping reduce injury risk, etc.) but she is also pushing me physically, which is good. I'm quite sore but not injured if that makes sense.

Right now I'm doing a combination day of weights for an hour and then cardio (intense both of them) for an hour, 2x per week, and I will NOT fast on those workout days. Right now the only workout I include on a fast day might be light cardio (walking/running on a treadmill) but not lifting. So I think that is probably a safer plan than trying to workout intensely AND fast.

On Fast days my personal goal is 50-60 grams of Protein a day. It is hard but also quite doable to get that much protein in a small amount of calories. It forces me to make really good choices on fast days that have the most amount of protein while keep the calories to a minimum.

I will check in here after another week or two on the weight lifting combined with and let you all know how it's going...

Sheila (M2G).....I think some lifting background is going to be better than none. Shocking the muscles a bit with something new like a more intense routine, varying types of lifts, etc is a good thing. The real concern is form and technique. Like "ItsMe" stated, injury, or preventing injury is your #1 priority throughout, so anytime you start something new, it's more of a risk, just ease into it, learn the lift and build up from there. I'm guessing the years at Curves will help some with this. But I don't know much about Curves or what it has to offer or their approach.

As far as the fasting thing and working out goes....I don't really do that.....yet. Well, not fasting per se anyway. But I prefer to lift on an empty stomach. I've read stuff about fasted cardio and how it's good, but I don't really have experience with that. I guess it depends on how one defines fasted. With me, I'll eat just a little Breakfast around 7:00 a.m. and by the time I'm lifting at lunch, my stomach is good and empty (as I prefer), but I'm pretty sure I'm not in a fasted state at that time. Even though my stomach is empty, I think there are still some residual nourishing aspects left in my body from the breakfast I ate 5 hours before. I have no science to back that up. With me.........lifting on an empty stomach gives me tremendous focus and my best lifting sessions are when my stomach is empty. In the past, I would eat an hour before a workout and with varying type foods, but I still always had a less than steller lifting session and I was usually sluggish. My guess.....your body uses a lot of energy to process and digest food, and also sends a lot of blood to those organs to digest it...especially our stomachs. So if your body is concentrating on digesting the food you just ate, how can it give you what you need to get a good and complete workout? Just my idea, but I'm sticking with that. So, lifting/exercising in a fasted state, or at least on an empty stomach may not be a bad thing.......then get your Protein in about an hour after your workout. I guess it also depends on how you fast and what your schedule is for the fast and lifting.

As "ItsMe" stated, the 30 grams or so may not be a quite enough protein. If so, those days that you fast and have trouble getting the protein in may be the better days to use Protein shakes to follow up the fast and help supplement it. Again, I don't really know how the 5/2 works, but I will try to check out your link and read more about it.

Yes, check back in..........I'm curious as to how it goes and how you progress! Good luck!

....

FAT, quickly gained, slow to lose

MUSCLE, slowly gained, quickly lost

....

If there is one message that I think people need to hear it is this. Consider gamergirl's experience:

I worked out with a trainer 3 times a week, cardio and heavy weights, and ate clean for 6 straight months

....

Turns out I had put on 13 lbs of muscle in those 6 months.

6 months of hard work to gain 13 pounds of muscle, and it could be easily lost in two or three weeks of low Protein consumption and not exercising.

I think that preventing muscle loss is one of the key elements of success with this surgery. We all know these rules:

1) Get your fluids

2) Meet your protein targets

3) Meet your calorie goals

But right after that should come

4) Get your exercise

But I think many people don't give it the same emphasis that they give the first three items.

Thanks for mentioning that. That is one of the most fundamental truths that many people don't realize. Muscle contains about 450 calories per pound, and fat contains about 3500 calories per pound. That means that if you are burning 7000 calories per week than you are taking in, that can show up as a two pound fat loss, or a 15 pound muscle loss, or something in between. Unfortunately your scales only tell you how many pounds you lost, not what type of loss. The big issue is that muscle is so easy to lose, and so difficult to regain. Overall, the lower your percentage bodyfat, the healthier you will be, and the easier it will be to keep weight off.

I get very concerned for some posters when I see them having these high rates of weight loss after the first week or two after surgery and they are also talking about their low Protein intake because I know their loss is probably mostly muscle. I realize that some people just can't meet their protein needs due to nausea, and post-surgical swelling, but I've also seen many posts where people just pay lip service to getting enough protein.

I met my protein goals on the third day after surgery, and I'm always at the high end of my allowed protein intake. I realize that this has made my weight loss slower than for some people, but I'm still very satisfied with that tradeoff.

I love this, thank you. I had never heard this before, but it makes so much sense. I've been working on muscles, and although my weight loss is slow (or I should say slower?), I'm building muscles (3-4 yoga classes a week and 2 strength based - HIIT, cadio included type - classes), and going down in sizes and inches. What you're saying makes sense, and makes me feel good because I want the muscles!

Okay this was very helpful. Once the lightbulb went on about anything that is not fat lbs = lean mass, then I did 1-fat lbs and re-did my calcs and I feel great! you know why?

Because of my 32 lbs of loss? only 4 lbs was lean mass, rest was fat. Woo hoo!!

So you lost 32 pounds in all -- 4 pounds of muscle and 28 pounds of fat. That means that 88% of the pounds that you lost were from fat and that 12% of the pounds you lost was from muscle. The really impressive statistic is that you lost (burned) 28 * 3500 = 98000 calories from fat loss, and 4 * 450 = 1800 calories from muscle loss. Your total loss was 99800 calories, of which 98000 was from fat, so 98% of your loss comes from fat calories. Pretty damn good, I would say.