Muscle / Fat Question (cut me slack, I'm a noob!)

Hey everyone! So, I'm sure this is a really stupid question... but I need some real answers here.

Two days I ago, I purchased the New Rules of Lifting for Women book and have been reading it to really get a feel for everything that entails a woman's weight lifting workout.

Now, here's where the dumb question comes into play (please try not to flame me! I'm VERY new at all of this!). Okay, so... I have a significant amount of weight (fat) to lose. Is it a smart idea to start right into a weight-lifting routine? Or should I try to shed some lbs first? In the book, Lou gives examples of women who start the problem @ 130lbs, with X amt of those lbs being fat, then they finish the program @ 130lbs, with Y amt of those lbs being fat (usually a significant drop!). I am not 130 lbs. I am not in good shape. According to a BF test, I'm about 40% body fat. I'm 5'0" and 175 lbs. Severely obese.

So, my question is: should I lose weight before going into a weight lifting routine? If I don't need to lose weight before hand, are the benefits going to be "less" beneficial? I quote "less" because I don't mean it to sound that the benefits of working out would be minor... but that .. well, I think you get what I'm saying.

Any and all (knowledgable) advice is welcome!

Thanks,
Amanda

I definitely think you can start now with NROLFW. However, you probably will want to not eat quite as many calories as Lou et al. recommend, and go for the 300 less number they give.  The diet information in the book isn't meant for weight loss, and I think they are careful to not promise that. And I think especially at first, when you get the water retention from using your muscles in a new way, you'll be frustrated that you aren't losing (even if you are losing fat, it might not show as weight loss on the scale).

But I think that it'll end up being worth it in the long run - your weight loss will have less of the negative side effects (muscle loss, for instance) than what most dieters experience, and you'll come out smaller AND stronger.

Hope that helps. And don't forget, there is a NROL group on CC - come join!

I see no reason why you need to drop weight first.  The situation described for that 130 lb. woman in the book assumes that she's eating as many calories as she's burning.  You'll want to maintain a deficit (eat less calories than you burn) so that you can lose fat while maintaining muscle mass.

I was 5'3.5 and 179 pounds at the beginning of last July and my %bodyfat was in the high 30s.  I started an intro. strength training program while eating less calories than I was burning and, over the next four months, lost about 25 pounds of fat - and gained maybe 1-2 pounds of muscle (the gains were only in the first month since my body was very new to exercise).  At that point, I was averaging ~1700 cals/day.

That took me to the beginning of November - which is when I started the NROLFW program.  I'm now eating what the book tells me are maintenance calories (but obviously aren't quite for me) and I've lost another 7 pounds of fat since then; still got all my lean mass.  More exciting than that, my waist is 6.5" smaller than it was last July and most of my other measurements have dropped by about 15% (with my %bodyfat now either 24ish or 28ish, depending what calculator I use; I lean toward 28ish based on how I look).

The key is that, to lose weight, you'll have to maintain a deficit - and NROLFW *will* make you hungry so you have to be committed to the program.  I walk a lot (to work, to the store, etc.) instead of driving and, when the weather gets nicer, I'll ride my bike too.  That increases my overall activity level so that I can still lose weight while eating relatively high calories for someone my size (148 pounds, averaging about 2000-2100 cals/day since I started NROLFW).  It has been *so* worth it for me.  I feel strong, energized and I never imagined I could lose that much weight (still got about 10 pounds to go).  Plus, I get to eat!  I could never be happy on 1200 cals/day.

Original Post by susiecue:

 I could never be happy on 1200 cals/day.

 I AM NOT HAPPY ON 1200/day!!!!!!!!!!!! I try SO hard to keep it at 1200 to lose as much weight as possible, and you know what has happened? Come on... guess!

NOTHING!

Nothing has happened. I've been eating LESS and still weigh the SAME. What is wrong with that scenario, people?! Susiecue - being 148 and getting to eat roughly 2000/day is amazing! I'm trying right now at my fat weight of 175 to eat 1200. I either am able to do it (and miserable, mind you), or I just completely blow it and end up eating at maintenance. So see? 1200 really isn't enough. Bless those people that can say "omgosh, I was SOOOOO full after my 500 cal/day allotment", but trust-you-me. I am NOT one of those people! Even my poor poor poor husband sometimes just says "EAT SOMETHING" b/c I'm basically Oscar the Grouch's twin sister! AHhh!

Thanks amethystgirl and susiecue :)

Pfft anyone who is full on less than 1200 calories is not eating correctly. I wanna smack those posters. Unless you're sick or something, it's very easy to eat at least that and more with healthy meals without worrying about getting enough calories

Original Post by fatanr11:

Original Post by susiecue:

 I could never be happy on 1200 cals/day.

 I AM NOT HAPPY ON 1200/day!!!!!!!!!!!! I try SO hard to keep it at 1200 to lose as much weight as possible, and you know what has happened? Come on... guess!

NOTHING!

Nothing has happened. I've been eating LESS and still weigh the SAME. What is wrong with that scenario, people?!

What's wrong with the scenario is that, if I'm remembering correctly, a woman who weighs ~175 needs to eat a bare minimum of 1500 cals/day to convince their body that it's not starving and doesn't need to enter conservation mode.  Even if you weren't exercising, I would still recommend increasing your calories to 1500/day in order to convince your body that it's okay to lose weight.

Thank you for this thread :)  I'm also severely obese and have been fascinated by all the discussion on NROLFW.  I'm a stumptuous fan and have been doing bodyweight squats, lunges, etc. for a while now and having great progress.  I just got some actual weights the other day and will be starting to deadlift and whatnot and was thinking about buying the book.

I did see some people say the program isn't for someone looking to lose a serious amount of weight.  Well, I weigh 212 (down from 236 5 months ago) and am 5'5 so I have a serious amount to lose.  That kind of discouraged me from buying the book but I think I'm going to get it anyway.  If it's easy to modify the program to include a 500 cal deficit instead of surplus, I'm game.

I think my only problem is that it's really hard for me to wrap around the idea of eating 2500 calories per day, since I'm not only large, but I'm also nursing a 6 month old so that's another 300 calories or so.

I would go with starting the weight lifting routine. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think every pound of muscle you have burns an extra 35-50 calories a day so lifting could help greatly with the fat loss.

My opinion from experience and reading material is that it is never to early to start weight lifting.  My understanding is that muscle burns more calories than fat.  So worst case scenario if you start lifting immediately is that you'll notice a loss of fat in inches and not in pounds.  So along with a healthy diet and cardio, weightlifting should help your fat loss while toning your body.  If you do choose to start weight lifting it might be a good idea to invest in a body tape to measure your progress in inches so that you aren't discouraged by weight.  Best of luck! 

Original Post by workaholic1:

I would go with starting the weight lifting routine. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think every pound of muscle you have burns an extra 35-50 calories a day so lifting could help greatly with the fat loss.

That's an exaggeration.  If I recall my numbers correctly, each pound of muscle burns about 5 calories/day BUT each pound of trained muscle burns about 7 calories/day.  (A pound of fat burns only 2 calories/day.) 

So, the real benefit of strength training is that, even if you don't add any muscle mass, you're burning an extra 2 cals/day per pound of the existing muscle.  So, if you had 50 pounds of muscle to start with, your metabolism would quickly increase to burn an extra 100 cals/day.  And that's not counting the calories you burn doing the exercise itself (which can be substantial if you're lifting enough to really challenge you and including exercises like step-ups which get your whole body - but especially the big muscles in your thighs/butt).

Original Post by susiecue:

 And that's not counting the calories you burn doing the exercise itself (which can be substantial if you're lifting enough to really challenge you and including exercises like step-ups which get your whole body - but especially the big muscles in your thighs/butt).

And the calories your burn in the 24-hrs after exercise.

Hi everyone;  i think this is a great question.  I read in Women's Fitness, that in order to up your resting metabolic rate; one needs to start early on with the weights; targeting major muscle groups; specifically the glutes which is one of the largest muscle groups in the body. 

I tend to switch cardio first, weights second; then weights first then second cardio in order to not put your body in a "learned routine mode" so it constantly is working overtime.  Also; I read that 15 minutes of intense cardio followed by lunges w/ weights, squats with weights will increase not only your calorie burn; but keeps the muscles engaged with keeping your heart rate up.  I'm aiming at waling lunges with wieghts, frog jumps with weights so you're doing both weights AND cardio at the same time. 

I believe that anything you can do to get your heart AND muscles working at the same time will have a positive impact on weight loss just as long as you're eating the RIGHT foods.  1200 cals per day is very low I think.  But if you're constantly eating lean proteins with whole carbs and high fiber content; with proper hydration; you're sure to see a change in your inches.

Although I weigh myself once a week; I do tend to also go by inches dropped and how my clothes fit.  I think that's one of the best motivators to keep going.

Just have fun-  move your body-  stretch-  release the toxins and stress-  keep it fun and challenging and just know that you are doing something to not only improve your figure but overall health.  Keep at it!

long, detailed, scientific article on the "hierarchy of fat loss". To summarize, weight training is the most effective way to lose fat, by far (in addition to eating well). Go for it.

I started NROWL 15 months ago at a wieght of 278 lbs. I am down 73 pounds but it looks like I have lost much more. I am strong, getting stronger and I EAT alot, never under 1750, (usually closer to 2000 on lifting days) I have had to adjust this amount lower as I lose weight.

SO yes you can lift at your weight it will be well worth it.