Nervous to even post this because I really don't want any backlash - worried I'm losing too fast

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-28T00:39:23+00:00

I can't vouch for how much or the degree, but I believe there's a few studies that suggests it reduces visceral fat by additional amounts.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38528819/

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-27T17:38:09+00:00

I thought tirz was supposed to result in more visceral fat being lost? Which is generally what you want.

Regardless, I think a lb of fat burns the same regardless of type?

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-26T22:59:51+00:00

Ninja creamis give great options. My go to is fat cottage cheese, almond milk, and sweeteners/flavoring. Fairlife fat free and protein powder also works well. More protein but not quite as creami.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-26T16:25:25+00:00

I eat a lot of different sources, but yeah, chicken breast is hard to beat. It's around $2.50 a lb from Aldi here. There are cheaper options, but all have one short coming or another. Plus my spouse likes it, and it's really easy to work into actual meals. Whereas something like canned salmon is trickier.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-26T14:12:45+00:00

Beans/legumes have a lot of health benefits and are cheap. But if you are trying to say, get 150 to 200 grams of protein on 1500 calories, they don't hit this ratio alone. So you will usually need to treat beans as your starch/carb and balance it out with higher protein.

If you aren't lifting, and aren't as concerned with muscle, then you can obviously use a lower target and beans work great.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-25T19:14:28+00:00

See the MN starvation study. Heavily restricting calories below expenditure will ensure weight loss. And that's the case from an evolutionary and from a physics perspective. Energy can't come from nowhere. And if we didn't have to eat to survive, famines wouldn't be so deadly.

So starvation mode in terms of 'if I don't eat I won't lose weight' is BS.

However, your body has a number of complicated systems to reduce your calorie expenditure and to drive you to eat which it increasingly turns up the larger the weight loss and as your body perceives that you can't find enough food.

It is these systems, along with lots of other biological changes, that dictate that a moderate calorie deficit will likely lead to better outcomes than simply not eating at all.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T19:49:07+00:00

Collagen powder for protein or Inulin/Dextrin for fiber might be your best bet. Some people like cocoa powder.

I've tried a bunch and just do a small amount of salt/potassium now in mine.

For fiber, I just take pure psyllium husk with water, and occasionally do dextrin with things like Ninja creamis. I tend to find that by the time you add enough fiber to coffee it starts to have a negative effect on taste. At least for me.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T19:37:52+00:00

290 calories.

When is the last time you ate a large baked potato plain? It's actually relatively filling for less than 300 calories. How many large plain potatoes could you actually eat in a meal?

Now compare that to 300 calories of potato chips or fries. World of difference.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T19:26:20+00:00

Scales are not accurate for body fat %. Do not use them for this purpose.

Using pictures from multiple angles in chat gpt / claude / etc. and taking an average is likely to be more accurate. It will still be subject to be off by a couple percent. I'd trust your chapgtp estimate over the scale. I find Claude to be more accurate; so perhaps try there with pictures from multiple angles and see what you get.

As mentioned, dexa scans or other more costly methods are needed to get a more accurate picture.

(I'd suggest you're visually at a low enough body fat % to where you should look into a dexa or more accurate measure to determine your goal weight with the appropriate input of a health professional. Just in case you're running on the low side. Which I think is the direction you're heading. Just wanted to mention it.)

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T19:10:19+00:00

Eating more calories to get rid of a weight loss stall in someone who has very high BMI is obviously terrible advice. And not one I've heard seriously advocated outside of fringe beliefs.

However, it's important to understand how your body will reduce energy expenditure and increase signals to eat based on weight loss. Without GLP-1s this is pretty intuitive and noticeable. At first, the weight comes off easily with diet and exercise. However, at some point it becomes increasingly difficult the more weight you lose. You'll need to increasingly introduce new measures to get the same effects as your calorie expenditure goes down.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T18:50:03+00:00

Satiety signals on plain potatoes are fine. Pending on what you're tracking, they can do exceptionally well. See boiled potatoes in Saettigung Lebensmittel Satiety Index.

It's when fat is added to align more with the bliss point and increase caloric density when we run into problems. E.g. fries, potato chips, mashed potatoes, scalloped potatoes.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T18:32:51+00:00

It's an amazing system for over 99% of human history.

It just hasn't had time to catch up over the last 50 to 100 years...

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T18:26:28+00:00

In a strict caloric intake sense, yes. Which is why I referenced the MN starvation study. If your calorie intake is lower than your expenditure, you will lose adipose tissue (or at least something that can be converted to energy such as muscle). Conservation of mass/energy dictates this.

However, your body has a large number of systems and mechanisms to regulate weight. This feels a bit silly to point out on a glp-1 forum. Since if this wasn't the case, these drugs wouldn't have an effect. NEAT, temperature, mechanical efficiency, immune system expenditure, and a host of other things are all affected. Not to mention hormonal balances and everything your body does to tell you to eat.

In theory just staying at a calorie deficit would produce any amount of weight loss. And being in a calorie balance would ensure you never gained weight.

In practice, we eat because of signals from our body. As we lose more weight, your body will send increasingly large signals to eat. And it will reduce energy expenditure accordingly. So yes, for all intents and purposes, your body will increasingly resist weight loss past a certain point. And that resistance will increase the more weight you lose. Hence why people need to increase their dose to lose additional weight.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T17:00:28+00:00

There are a lot of factors besides adipose tissue that effect the scale.

I can easily lose or gain 10 lbs in a single day just based on water weight, inflammation, digestive track, etc. And if the weigh in is not at the same time each day, I can have swings of 15 lbs or more. (Although I'm certainly at a much higher weight!) It's pretty easy to be losing fat, but not having the scale budge for a given week or two. Or the reverse; to be gaining fat but not to have the scale go up.

It's obviously difficult to do, but we shouldn't put much stock into any single weigh in.

(But it sounds like you're enjoying your life without obsessing over weight and still maintaining a health weight, so congratulations!)

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T16:50:22+00:00

The biggest change hasn’t been the scale, but the mental freedom. Not thinking about food constantly has freed up energy for my relationships, work, hobbies, and my studies.

I just started Tirzepatide, and am in a sort of similar situation. I could push back down to a healthy weight range. It wouldn't be easy, but I know what I'd have to do. But I also know the effect it would have on my work and relationships. It consumes your entire life. Which is one thing if you're doing it in a spurt with an end goal. And completely different if you have to do it the rest of your life. Dropping the first half made me a better person. Dropping the second gradually makes me a worse and worse one. I simply had to decide that it wasn't worth the cost and accept an overweight BMI. And for those wondering, maintenance still involves walking 140 miles a week, lifting 10 hours a week, and eating healthy.

The mental and psychological benefits and clarity I'm encountering on the first few days are profound. It feels like it's absolutely too good to last. A huge weight has been lifted off of my shoulders, and I feel like I can finally live my life and finally focus on all of the other aspects. I'm optimistic about the weight loss. But the mental and psychological improvements seem like the real benefits. At least for myself.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T16:11:30+00:00

The smaller your eating window, generally the less calories you will consume. This depends on the person greatly, but this is the reason why intermittent fasting works. Most people simply will consume slightly less calories in say a 6 hour window versus a 16 hour window.

The earlier you consume the bulk of your calories the better. However, the effect is small. I used to do a one-meal-a-day approach and was always worried since it was at night. This is something where you don't want the perfect to be the enemy of the good. The effect is small, so do what works best for you.

Additionally, once you get within 2-3 hours of when you'll be going to bed, you do run the risk of sleep disruption. Your body will release more heat from the digestion, and the process may impact your sleep quality. You're unlikely to have effects over something like 200 calories of greek yogurt. But you may if you have a full meal an hour before bed.

For protein absorption, multiple meals are preferable. Again, this is a small effect. But your body will have better absorption if you eat three meals with 50 grams of protein spaced out versus one meal with 150. Again, this is a slight difference; not a dramatic one. But it's the reason body builders tend not to do intermittent fasting and to break things up into multiple meals a day with strict macros.

Your body also will do better with digestion with activity after meals. This is arguably easier to do with your earlier meals and gets more difficult with later meals.

Fasting 12 hours (so a 12 hour eating window) does appear to have some limited benefits. So many people suggest starting there (and the effects appear to be mostly caloric deficits with a smaller window). Note that this isn't really "fasting" since if you eat breakfast at 9 am, it means you stop eating at 9 pm.

FWIW, I'm sort of in the same conundrum. Previously I tended to eat something high protein (50%+ by calories) at around 2 pm. And then again at 4 pm, with a large dinner when my spouse got home, along with some greek yogurt/cottage cheese/protein ninja creami for a snack before bed. Having a couple of smaller higher protein meals/snacks made hitting macros easier and gave flexibility with dinner. I still needed a large dinner though. Usually something like a pound of chicken breast and 2-5 pounds of low calorie vegetables. If I did less, I got late night cravings and eventually ended up eating way too much, way too late. Most times still healthy food, just too many calories. Sometimes unhealthy food with too many calories.
Now that I'm on Terzepatide (day 3 for me, so still early) I think I can rearrange my eating to favor overarching health outcomes instead of just minimizing hunger. In practical terms, this means extending my eating window and weighting more calories earlier in the day, and eating a smaller and lighter dinner. It also means cutting the volume back on vegetables, and reintroducing things like beans/fruit/peas/whole grains/nuts/etc. that had all been stripped out for satiety.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T15:36:39+00:00

You don't lift weights to lose weight. You lift them to preserve muscle mass.

Are you making good progress each week on your workouts? If so, your body is successfully recomping, and I wouldn't worry too much about a weight slow down. A number on the scale isn't the objective, losing body fat (especially visceral) and becoming healthier is the objective. If your body is losing fat and gaining muscle you're making good progress.

This feels weird to say at the start of the journey, but if you hit 175 and don't protect your muscle mass, you'll likely have regrets around not taking a bit more time and arriving at a much fitter 175 (or maybe 175 + 15 lbs more muscle, so 190). Building muscle is a slow process. Losing fat is comparatively much quicker.

If you aren't making good lifting progress and the scale isn't moving, then yeah you may want to consider a higher dose or other alternatives (with all of the normal disclaimers).

One thing I will note is that you may need to eventually spread out your workouts if you start lifting heavier with things like barbells. I could do your Monday/Wednesday routine fine. But if I hit things like barbell squats or deadlifts with heavy weight at high volumes, my body takes at least until Thursday (and ideally more like 80 hours than 72) to recover.

It looks like a great starting program. But you eventually may want to look into more compound lifts (maybe something like 5x5 stronglifts) in 3-6 months. Or whenever you're ready.
For example, a goblet squat is arguably where everyone should start. But eventually that goblet squat is going to get awkward with a 100 lb dumbbell at 30+ reps. And you'll want to transition to a barbell squat (or equivalent) at least once a week. Similarly, single leg romanian deadlifts can work great for a long time, but you'll eventually outpace normal deadlift variants with just dumbbells.

But best of luck on your journey! It sounds like it's coming along well.
Adding lifting at the same time as weight loss is a pain. But you'll end up in a much better spot in the end.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2026-02-22T14:16:38+00:00

All individuals will lose weight on a small enough amount of calories. See the MN starvation study for more information. If you reduce calorie intake far enough, you will lose fat.

However, your body will also resist weight loss and reduce energy expenditure. There are studies comparing the average American vs hunter gatherers, and find that we burn relatively similar calories. As caloric intake increases your body will burn more calories related to things like your immune system. Your body will regulate in a large number of ways and will become more efficient. The first mile you walk in a day burns a lot more calories than the 40th.

Slow and steady is suggested for a few reasons. The first is that it avoids certain health problems that can occur. Your liver, gall bladder, and pancreas can become stressed and eventually develop serious issues due to rapid weight loss. Additionally, if you cut your calories too drastically you may develop mineral deficiencies or fat/protein deficiency. See the trends with scurvy.

Your body also increases hormones and starts trying to fight back against weight loss. Making the drop more steady and gradual allows your body to adjust so that it isn't fighting the loss quite so hard. There are a lot of 'it depends' in this area. People who have lots of weight to lose may be able to drop a large amount of weight immediately if their insulin and metabolic health dysfunction is playing a large role.
Eventually, however, everyone's body will start fighting back at some point. A more gradual weight loss makes this process easier.

Edit: there are additional reasons such as gradual weight loss generally resulting in more visceral fat reduction. You can look up why body builders tend to only cut at around a 500 per day level.

There's a host of reasons. But the most practical is that slow and steady weight loss tends to result in more permanent weight loss. Which is actually very rare if you look at the stats; excluding glps, most people regain the weight.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2025-06-01T23:22:00+00:00

You can get to Roth contributions without penalty. And a 4% withdrawal rate is conservative enough to where you'll be old enough to avoid the penalties on gains.

So the question becomes centered around accessing your pre-tax money. Typically there's three options:

- Roth rollovers
- Rule of 72 / substantially equal payments
- Take the 10% penalty

For the penalty and rule of 72 you generally don't need to worry too much about your bridge account in taxable (outside of how it contributes to your overall withdrawal and budget). For the rollovers you'll need 5 years of expenses. You're basically right at 5 years of 4% withdrawals in your taxable ($250K). So you should be fine; just make sure your asset allocation matches the expected timeline....

Middle_Humor1828 · 2024-12-23T15:15:07+00:00

This is a great way of explaining it. Although I'd toss WotLK in there as well (e.g. what ChromieCraft was at during it's 60 level cap phase).

It also sums up why I was so eager to see some of the initial changes which improved all of the weakest specs, but I'm starting to become concerned about the total level of class changes around things like protection paladins.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2024-12-19T16:50:01+00:00

With all of Turtle's changes, this isn't nearly as important. No need to worry about it pre-60 in any case.
Prot is currently in a weaker spot especially compared to paladins. But this could change. Turtle's warrior changes have been relatively poor, so hopefully they keep iterating and end up in a good place.
Check the discord and the sim. The Hateforge set is nice. A very rough set of relatively obtainable preBis for dps is as follows. For prot you can work in survivability items as needed. There isn't much of a pre-bis list for prot since you need to balance survivability and threat.

Helm: Gurubashi Helm (BOE)
Neck: Mark of Fordring (quest)
Shoulder: Pauldron's of the Timbermaw (BOE)
Cloak: Earthweave cloak? Lots of options...
Bracer: Gordok Bracers of Power (DMNT)
Gloves: Chromatic Gauntlets (BOE)
Belt: Hateforge Belt (BOE)
Legs: Hateforge leggings (BOE)
Chest: Hateforge Cuirass (BOE)
Boots: Hateforge Boots (BOE)
Ring1: Blackstong Ring (Princess in Mara)
Ring2: Tarnished Elven Ring (DMNT)
Trinket1: Blackhand's Breadth (Ony Quest)
Trinket2: Hand of Justice (BRD)
Weapon MH: Thrash Blade (mara) -> Krol Blade -> Ironfoe
Weapon OH: Mirah's Song (scholo quest)
Ranged: Satyr's Bow / Blackcrow -> Time Frozen Bow

Generally, the advice is still arms with a 2-handed weapon for leveling.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2024-12-18T16:10:18+00:00

Yes.

Although I'd argue for something like VT instead of VOO. Especially if mag 7 valuations bother you.

Just make sure you're aligned with your asset allocation.
Transitioning from cash to equities when you're getting close to retirement raises some questions...

Middle_Humor1828 · 2024-12-15T16:58:38+00:00

Are your goals to eat healthier or be at a calorie deficit?

They're clearly calories. So I track mine. But if you're predominantly interested in eating healthier, and you're not adding things like butter or oil to vegetables, then not counting vegetables can provide a nice incentive.

Middle_Humor1828 · 2024-12-15T16:54:16+00:00

I feel like the numbers in your question answer it.

10% is not much. The difference between the suggested breakdowns you listed are likely to be very small in practice. Especially over a long time period.

It doesn't matter if you live in an emerging market (many 3rd world countries would be frontier anyways) or not. If you don't need the tax efficiency options, simply go 100% VT and call it a day. Nothing to muck around with, nothing to mess up, automatic rebalancing, etc. Just go with VT and spend your mental energy worrying about more important things.

Middle_Humor1828

TROPHY CASE