BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General diet questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Unread 03-05-2014, 04:49 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 23,178
Default

Except that the second abstract clearly says this

"These data are consistent with the concepts that triglycerides but not cholesterol or tocopherol are mobilized from the fat cell during up to 6 months of weight reduction and that independent mechanisms control the efflux of these adipocyte constituents."

Which is not consistent with the empirically observed whoosh phenomenon in the least.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Unread 03-05-2014, 06:51 PM
edd91 edd91 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
Except that the second abstract clearly says this

"These data are consistent with the concepts that triglycerides but not cholesterol or tocopherol are mobilized from the fat cell during up to 6 months of weight reduction and that independent mechanisms control the efflux of these adipocyte constituents."

Which is not consistent with the empirically observed whoosh phenomenon in the least.
Yes it is, because that study did not have refeeds. They're saying a 6 month diet without refeeds did not see mobilisation of cholesterol or tocopherol.

Perhaps you should get the full-text of the article, because the discussion is quite interesting:

"It is possible that after weight reduction is completed and a new steady state is achieved with regard to food intake, bodily metabolism, and weight, the cholesterol content per fat cell in subjects will decrease" (p. 754). Just throwing it out there there that this is another possible pathway to manipulate for weight loss, and could be involved in the refeed experience.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Unread 03-10-2014, 09:30 PM
michail71 michail71 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 33
Default

Fascinating thread. Recently I had stalled out on weight loss and started chasing the calories lower and lower. I knew better but I just wanted to get the cut over with. Being in a deficit can make you not think so well I suppose.

I decided to take a break and do a small carb load and free range eat for a week, I suspect I was at a good surplus.

Anyway, I was putting my shorts on and they started to fall off. I decided to check the scale again and was shocked to see about an 8 lbs weight drop. Two nights before I had also done some heavy drinking (a rare thing for me).

Now I worry I may have done some damage by going too fast but I still seem to have my strength. I calculated out the deficit against my TDEE and it rough matched the weight loss.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Unread 03-12-2014, 02:03 PM
Kossunen's Avatar
Kossunen Kossunen is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 359
Default

Same here been stalling for 3 weeks at 90kg, while preservering strength. On my refeed I see a small scale drop but the day after it increases. I'm doing RFL so majority of the foods have huge amounts of salt: 1,5g/100g is pretty typical. I'm expecting to see (at least) 10lb drop or even more when I go to maintenance and eat more carbs and veggies for potassium so that the cholesterol levels would drop.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Unread 04-10-2014, 10:06 AM
jkm jkm is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1
Default

I have been hesitating to post a reply on this thread because its been 20 years since I've taken cell biology. However, here is the theory that I would suggest.

Assumptions:

1. There are structures in cells that require a water solution -> Nucleus, Mitochondria, ribosomes, etc. The stored lipids form a mycelle (lipids have one non-polar side and one polar side) that will vary in size based on storage level.

2. Cell Membranes are for the most part static structures. In order for them to grow, you must add lipids to the lipid bilayer (more to the outside, than the inside) as well as protein anchors.

3. Adipose cells do not generally trigger mitosis as they reach a certain size.

Given these general assumptions, my guess is that as fat is removed, water is used to keep the cell structurally sound. At a certain trigger point, one of 3 things happen: The cell canibalizes the cell membrane and shrinks, the cell becomes similar to a phagocyte (meaning it drops volume but retains surface area), or it dies decreasing the number of adipose cells. This study suggests it could be any of them.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...302341/?page=3
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Unread 01-04-2015, 07:44 AM
LisaShea LisaShea is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFlyingDutchman View Post
... To wit: Ever seen starving children in Africa? Their stomachs are bloated, yet they are starving. The reason for this is that their blood has an a very low osmolarity (low concentration of particles) since they aren't eating. However, their tissues have high osmolarity compared to their blood. Since water travels in and out of cells infinitely more easily than proteins, water is drawn into the tissues to lower the osmolarity of the cells and raise osmolarity of the blood, thereby balancing the difference in osmotic pressure. This water retention causes the bloating you see.
Just to clarify, I don't believe the water goes into the tissues. I believe it goes into for example the peritoneal cavity, which is different -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascites

It's not that they aren't eating - many of these children eat ample meals a day. The issue is they aren't eating any protein; they're eating only starches. The protein is critical for maintaining the colloid osmotic pressure.

Lisa
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Unread 05-05-2015, 05:18 AM
dammas dammas is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 6
Default

Due water retention is it then possible that while cutting my absolute weight remains the same, the circumference of my stomach remains the same (has actually increased a centimeter), but the skinfolds measured by a caliper in mm are still decreasing?

I went on vacation for two weeks. And drank quite a bit of alchohol and ate with very little restriction, and afterwards my strength had declined, but my weight and circumference were exactly the same, but my skinfolds had increased in mm. So I had definitely gotten fatter, but only my skinfolds measurements revealed that, and maybe the mirror a little bit.

I sincerely hope the former question is true, because if not i am at a loss how to measure my progress. And how to adjust my calories. Since the mirror only reveals my progress after a 'whoosh'. And these 'whooshes dont come at a predicable rate. (I feel because of the caffeine+tyrosine/fat burners i use)

Last edited by dammas : 05-05-2015 at 05:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.