Likely water gain from things like increased sodium consumption that makes you retain more water, making you weigh more.



Your weight on any given day isn't a good indication of where you are. It's the trend over a longer term that matters. Obsessing about every up and down, when a person can fluctuate 5 or more pounds from day to day and within a day is only gonna make you crazy.



If you weigh yourself with any real regularity, the important thing is to write down the number to look at how they all relate to each other. Traineo doesn't give you a good way to track something like weighted average and trends, so it's scarier than a good excel spreadsheet would be.



Just remember, people poop many pounds, so a bit of a gain in a short period of time is usually something you will either pee or poop out in short order once your diet returns to normal for a few days.

There's a difference between someone who sees you on the street and someone who sees you in the gym. The person in the gym is there to improve him/her self.

A couple are totally insecure about how weak they are.

A couple are insecure about the fact that they're women.

A couple are insecure about how fat they are.

A couple are insecure about how skinny they are.

A couple are insecure about how they look doing this totally weird workout.

A couple don't know what they're doing and hope noone notices them trying to figure out all this stuff in this gym.

A couple think they're ffikkin gods and pay no attention to anything or anyone other than their pecs and biceps... they even neglect their own body parts they can't see in the mirror... like their back and legs.

Someone is dealing with a prior injury that limits the things they want to do.

Someone looks fine but is totally unfit.

Someone can't run a mile.

Someone hates cardio but is doing it anyway.

Someone is learning from a trainer how to do stuff.

Someone is actually unable to easily get up from the floor without assistance.

Someone in there can't tie their shoes without sitting down and having something to put their feet on.

Someone is over 60.

Someone just had a baby.

Someone is fitting in a quick workout because it's important even if they "don't have the time."

Someone is doing the exercises wrong.

Someone is hungry.

Someone is thinking about their work/home/kids/whatever.

Someone is reading on the treadmill.

Everyone has on headphones.

Someone is walking out not having worked out because they're too insecure about whatever it is they're insecure about.

Someone is walking out feeling better about themselves than they ever have in a long time.





And none of them are paying attention to you.



And yes, I know the anxiety does make it more difficult than just simply being embarrased, but maybe having the good experience of going and finding it's not as bad as you're making it out to be will help. If you're worried that people are thinking badly of you, one of the best places to go is prolly where noone is paying attention to you. The gym.



At the grocery store you're around food. If you're getting anything other than spinach and brocolli there will be someone that thinks unkind things about you when you're big. Some are so insecure about their own issues they need to say something about it.



Of course they have flaws. They're at least stupid and insensitive and lacking the ability to keep their idiotic mouths shut, right? Don't forget that for all you know they're convicted sex offenders and child abusers. Just like for all they know you're down a bunch of pounds and taking positive steps to change your life and body.



My MIL is similar to you and does like Curves, so hopefully you'd like them too. Depending on size I have heard that some of the machines may not be usable, but you could just skip any you can't use until you can. You'll get there as long as you don't let fears and excuses get in your way.



And don't use the ankle weights.



Target here has some of the walking dvds, though not tons. Look around here and there... anywhere that sells dvds... you'd be surprised where it might pop up.

If by "beer" you mean an alcoholic beverage, it'd be far better to skip it.

Being sick burns calories, as your body is trying to heal itself. Being injured, etc... any time your body is trying to repair itself, just as it does after a weight lifting session, it uses more calories than normal. Couple that with not enough food, and that's what you get. lower weight.



Hope you feel better soon, being sick sucks.

A better idea is to eat something and do a little bit of a workout, rather than try and rely on the highly debated idea of the thermogenic effect of warming cold water and if it even makes a difference.



A quick workout of even a few minutes of cardio or some basic calisthenics coupled with a good breakfast will jumpstart your metabolism.

They're awesome when you use them for a sandwich... either a breakfast or lunch one... mmmmm.... and about the same number of calories as 2 slices of bread. (But much funner, of course...)

Daily weighted average. I find that's the best way to track weight. A nice long excel spreadsheet does the trick, although my husband finds that after a couple years, excel DRAGS when making the calculations for the trend number.



My weight fluctuates 5 pounds within any given day/week/whatever. Until I lose more than 5 pounds I don't really consider myself as having lost any weight... I'm just having a low day.



Plus, you're not gonna always lose weight every week anyway. All you can do is perform all the behaviors that lead to weight-loss and hope your body cooperates.

My instructor usually warms up on a cardio machine before class.

There are several people in my class that take the pilates class right before our yoga class, and there are people that take the bodypump class before that, then relax with some light cardio, then take the yoga class.



Try it. You body will tell you if it's too much.

I find that I can't do elliptical before yoga because it makes my hips really hurt. I find I can lift the day of, but if I lift the day before I'm in trouble if I wind up with DOMS.



So, try and see.

IIRC, the H-B formula actually includes modifiers for recovery from trauma, limb loss, etc. The simpler formula with only the exercise modifier is just one portion of it... since if you're healthy and looking for normal weight/composition modification you don't need all the other modifiers, and therefore that's what people normally think of as the formula.



As for if it's accurate, many times the H-B formula isn't accurate for people who are severely overweight. I think this means over 100 pounds overfat or something. The Mifflin formula is better for some people at higher weights, it comes out a little lower for calorie expenditure. In the end, all the formulas are just a guideline based on averages, and of course all may need to be tweaked if they're not working for an individual.



*shrug*



There's also other factors, like how your body responds to certain carbs and such that can also skew the results, hence why one does need to tweak based on the way that they're eating. I know people that have to go severely lower than H-B to lose if they include too many sugars and starches, but if they cut those out, the H-B is much closer to correct for them.





ETA: I think traineo's may take into account your timeline and amount you want to lose. Aka... if you want to lose 5 pounds in 3 weeks it'll give you one number, but if you want to lose 10 pounds it'll give you another. I haven't fully investigated it, but my initial signing on changed when I changed my goals.... hmmm

Sure, when it comes to regular joes the answer to "when to workout" is whenever you can/will/want. And sure, there are advantages and disadvantages to any time of day, especially depending on who you talk to (ex... morning's increased injury risk).... but for those of us more focused on performance, I thought this was interesting. And certainly coincides with my own personal experience.



http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-circa dian5mar05,1,3917479.story?coll=la-headlines-healt h&ctrack=1&cset=true

If you were fine, and then you increased your weekly activity without increasing your daily calories, you do run the risk of eating too little. See how many actual calories you're eating and compare that with how much you should be eating (search for the Harris-Benedict formula, the first few hits on google give you good calculators to figure out what you should be eating... it's a formula based on height/weight/age with an activity modifier, and unless you're extremely overweight, it's usually pretty accurate for people).



Do that checklist given above and remember one very important thing... you didn't put on the extra fat overnight, it's not coming off that way either. You've had months and years of relatively bad eating and lack of activity, it's gonna take a while to change.



You can do everything "right" and still not lose as fast as you want, as much as you want. You don't actually have control of how much fat you lose; you only have control of the behaviors that hopefully lead to fat loss.

One time, at band camp....

and some of us are just freekishly low.



Yeah, basically so long as you're in the range and eveything else looks good, a doc isn't really gonna say anything.



There's a good deal of info I've been reading that says that while a low rhr is good, what's a much better indicator of fitness level is your recovery rate, not your rhr. If you can recover fast from an mad dash it means your heart can jump into action and back off again quite well.

I LIKE this one. I'm totally voting for this one. It doesn't work as well for the boys, but sheesh, who cares about them?









Give me time... I'm just warming up.

That's the case for any high intensity interval training (HIIT). the sprint/rest length varies, but overall it's short sprints of less than 30 seconds because you're targeting a zone that is tough for most people to maintain for more than 30 seconds, and you usually top out at around 20 minutes of exercise total because again, if you're going at the right intensity, you can't maintain much more than that.

Presumably it's talking about milk mainly for the calcium it contains. So, calcium supps are probably your best bet if you can't/won't do dairy. Do research to make sure you get a good quality, absorbable, supplement.

Totally.

Research is important. People will take advice from whatever is "in" to take advice from. They'll spend forever researching cars, houses, and schools, but think nothing of eating nothing but cabbage for a month because some stoopid magazine said so.



I'm reminded of the episode of South Park with Cheech and Chong. They were mexican, pretending to be Native American so people would take their "natural" advice as gospel... (And the punch-line of that episode is awesome.)



I think in the end it's best we take each other as we are. People with ideas, knowledge, experience, and opinions. Opinions differ even among experts for plenty of things, people have different values and perspectives and those inform their opinions.



In the end, the equation is best described as:

weight(fat)loss= quality foods at a level lower than activity burns + well rounded activity including a variety of ways to "mix it up" now and then + plenty of water and sleep. Everything else is tweaking.



But, again...

I vote for non-loaded titles.



I guess one of the problems is that everything before this guru one is "traineo ____" It makes the fitness guru seem above just "traineo label" and in another realm.

That I'm totally not sure of. I think Lou Schuler is one of those "other degrees" so I'm leaning towards that assessment myself.



But, again, at least you have the knowledge to pass the test. I've heard it's no cake-walk so... *shrug*



Eh, I always make sure my trainers have "real" certs, not the "I took a 2 hour class and got certified over the interweb" types. *shudder* I've seen the "certified" ones work. HOLY COW some of them should be stopped.

Oooooo... those are good.

I officially request my new title to be "Fitness Dumbass" until I lose my regained weight, then I'd like it changed to "Geek in Fitness and Dragons and Art and Games and OtherFunStuff." There, that'd make me totally happy.







And, I now re-read my post and hope noone thought I was talking about anyone else, because I'm not. I'm talking solely about me, and the fact that the post count label should be something else.

Ok, so I just noticed I seem to have this "fitness guru" label after my name. So far as I can tell, I got it because I have a high enough post count, and nothing else.



Isn't this a problem?



I mean, not that I don't know a thing or two, but seriously... I don't work in the field, I don't take classes, I'm not certified in anything... I read a lot, I've seen what's worked for me and people I know, I'm smart enough to put 2 and 2 together, I know how to filter information, etc... but I am no where near a GURU.



I mean, everyone is used to the idea of titles relating to post count or time on a board, but really... shouldn't this be a different title? It's really misleading. I came here assuming that the people who had a guru title knew something, since the only ones seemed to be the people who run the site and so I figured that they knew stuff. Now I see that really any old post whore gets the title. (me)



I'd like mine removed. I'm fine with helping people, but I don't want to have some person think I'm some degree holder with oodles of experience under my belt. Surely there's a better title, like "senior member" or something like that that expresses what the title means... a long-time or prolific poster, and nothing more.



Thanks.

Uh, from what I understand, you DO need a degree to take the CSCS exam.

http://www.nsca-cc.org/cscs/about.html



Just as an aside... as this thread is so off topic now and all...



*shrug*

You're assuming it's actually using that information, which it may or may not, to calculate calories.



Most of the "basic" or "average" calculations on machines, if i recall correctly, are based on a 5'7" 135# female... I think that's what I read. This was a few years ago, they may use a different model.



But even knowing your heart-rate, weight, and height doesn't mean too much. It's better than an average guess, but it's still not accurate.



A vo2max test measures oxygen usage and therefore your actual burn rate and the actual rate of sugar/fat burn. Anything else is guessing to an extent.



And your vo2max is different for different activities, because of muscle adaptation/efficiency, weight-bearing or no, etc. So it's not odd that your heart rate will differ for the same level of intensity of different exercises.

Ignore the whole "negative calories" thing. It's mainly bogus, and even if it weren't it's like the "thermal effect" of drinking freezing water... so few calories are "burnt" that it doesn't matter. People argue it does, I argue that all your estimates of your metabolic rate, calories consumed (the labels aren't spot on), etc are so general and average that the amount burned by either of these processes is still smaller than the margin of error of your total calorie consumption anyway.



However, leafy or crunchy veggies have very few calories, are either very good for you or nothing more than water, and it's never a bad time to eat them. So have at it, and don't worry about counting them.



One of the cheapest calorie meals I've ever had is 2 cups of lettuce and spinach and other mixed greens... 20 cals... plus a couple tablespoons of salsa... 30 cals... for a whopping 50 calories.

Not what I thought you were talking about... sorry.

I was looking at something else I thought was your link, and thinking you were basically talking about foam-rolling the pecs, which many people don't have success with and have better success with the ball between them and a wall.



So chalk that one up to me NOT paying attention.

d'oh!

So, what can happen during pregnancy (or long term fat retention in the stomach area, potentially) is that the abdominals can pull away from the abdominal wall some. I don't know if this is your problem... but if it is, you'd need it stitched back (tummy tuck) or just deal with a rounder belly than before the babies.



However...

You've had the baby 4 months ago, you've just started working out again, and you expect the fat (of which you will have some, even if your normal heavy accumulation is elsewhere) to just poof because you do a coupla sit-ups?



Stop bothering with the crunches. You won't burn fat from your belly because you work the belly muscle. You burn fat by expending more energy than you get from the food you eat. Eat less than you expend (still plenty to live, be happy, and feed the babe assuming you're doing that), lift a few heavy weights to tighten up your muscles and help rev your metabolism, and if you want, jog/run/cycle/elliptical/row/whatever to burn some extra calories.



You will also burn that fat from all over your body. You don't get to tell your body to leave it in the boobs while taking it away from the belly... don't work like that. Comes from all over and the places with the most fat are the last to go away.



You can prolly get a free consult with a plastic surgeon to see if it's gonna require abdominalplasty (and then you can decide if you care or not... if it's not required, they just suggest lipo)... your personal doc may be able to help also, but maybe not.

I doubt you can be freekishly strong AND freekishly fast in a marathon. It won't happen, because there is such a difference in what is required by your body, muscle adaptation and efficiency, etc.



But to be competitive in both with other amateurs, sure.



If your problem has been that you've been training one thing while nearly neglecting the other, no wonder you suck at what you don't train at.



You could probably use to separate your training types more. You give yourself maybe 8 hours between a glycogen-depleting run and then want to lift? Presumably a better way to go about it would be lift, some short, "power cardio" one day, your long cardios on non-lift days.



If you want that balance in your ability, you have to have that balance in your workout, and at the moment you don't have it... you're focusing on the cardio.



Your other issue is when. When do you want to compete in strength stuff? When do you want to compete in endurance stuff? You train for the marathon leading up to the marathon, then you train for strength before the bb comp. You de-emphasize what you're not training for when you're not training for that event.



*shrug*



Other than that, it takes time. It'll take longer to build both your endurance/running/rowing capability and your brute strength at the same time, versus focusing on one and then just maintaining while you work at the other. You lose focus when you do more than one thing at a time, so it takes a bit longer.



It can be beneficial, though, so I don't necessarily see it as a problem.

Well, I could see 5'9" and about 160... maybe even 170... large frame, lots of muscle... hell my mom was something like 5'4" and 150 and jacked for a bit. So.... eh.







Some are good, some know what they're doing in the nutrition/fitness arena... we have a sports med doc, and he's pretty damned good, esp for a doctor.



But yeah, most docs at best are spouting 20 year old information about aerobics, running, walking, and low fat diets.

And in the days of shows like the Biggest Loser, where 1200 calories is the norm, I don't think I'm surprised.



People forget that 1200 calories is A) absolute quality, B) lots of veggies, c) these people are monitored by docs constantly, D) they're at this ranch and do nothing but eat, sleep, and work out. They don't have their actual lives... no work, no kids, no workouts not prescribed, etc.



I've noticed that the people who look the best on that show are the people who went home, getting sent away. They eat reasonably, don't just do tonnes of cardio for their exercise, and otherwise have lives. The people that stay till the end always seem emaciated, skinny-fat, or otherwise not as ripped up as the people from home. I think that says something very important most people don't realize.

The Core Performance book(s) / videos are great. They're actually whole workouts, balanced, strengthens the core, has cardio routines, weight workouts, rehab, prehab, and active rest work, plyometrics, etc. I'd totally suggest the paperback from amazon, pretty cheap... Just the Core Performance book itself would easily take care of your entire workout regimen for months.



Kinda brutal though, but very good results.

I've seen suggestions that a tennis ball against the wall tends to hit the pecs better than the foam roller, being smaller and all. So... basically tennis balls are cheaper, so you can always just do that.

Protein. You're severely lacking protein until dinner. Eat some protein. All carb will mean that you're energy levels will fluctuate more, carbs go through your system rather quickly, take less time to break down.



Since you lack protein and you're a salty snacker... Jerky.



I'd honestly recommend that rather than snacks you just pace out your calories into about 5ish meals a day, eating every three hours, making sure to get some kind of protein into each meal. It's not the kind of thing that will keep you "full," but it will likely keep you from being hungry (as in real hunger).



How do you know if you have enough water? Usually your urine is clearish when you're fully hydrated barring morning and if you're eating something that colors it a distinct colour. It means it's diluted enough because you're basically pissing water.



Since eating salt makes you retain water, that's why people suggest the water issue, it's a way for your body to get more water (keep more water)... make you crave salty.



However, some people are salty snackers, some sweet, some crunchy, some creamy/smooth... so there's other factors as well.



Try those changes to your eating pattern, it should help some.