Build Muscle, Lose Weight?

PastorJay

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Posts
2,196
Location
California
I've been fighting my weight, and my genetic predisposition toward my grandfather's body shape, for 23 years, give or take a few months.
Ten or eleven years ago, at 51, I was in maybe the best shape of my life. I was technically overweight at 180, but probably stronger than I'd ever been.

Then my late wife got sick, and for the next six years the energy that had been going into getting and keeping me in shape went into keeping her alive. It didn't help that I eat when I'm stressed. Since she died I haven't been able to get on a regular sustainable exercise and diet plan that worked.

I was doing well last fall until I had in injury. And I've been doing ok the last few months. I'm down about 17 pounds from the 231 I weighed before I got serious last fall.

AT 62, though, I can't work out hard like I could at 45 or 50. Build muscle, lose weight, worked great in my 40s.

Now if I get enough protein to put on muscle, it seems like I'm getting too many calories to lose weight.

Do I have to choose? What do you think?

As a 62 year old who weights about 214 pounds, how much protein do I really need?

I'd appreciate your suggestions. Thanks.
 

FuzzWatt

Tele-Holic
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Posts
701
Age
33
Location
Canada
Hey friend. First of all, I'm sorry to hear of the loss of your wife and the troubles you both endured.

Second - I suppose I can help as I currently exercise 5 days a week and have sessions with a personal trainer. I can at least pass on a little of what I know.

I'm overweight, but much less overweight than I was two years ago. To lose weight you need to create a caloric deficit. One does this through exercise or eating less, ideally through both. Create a 500 calorie a day deficit and you will lose 1 lb a week.

When you lose weight you also lose muscle. It is inevitable. A weight lifting routine while losing fat can help minimize muscle loss, and even help you gain muscle if you're working hard.

You can do both, but be realistic for your goals, age, and the amount of time you spend doing it. Use a decent TDEE calculator, like this one, and figure out what you need to consume in a day. Then, eat about 400 or 500 calories a day less than that and exercise a few days a week as well. You will see results.

As for how much protein you need, there are a lot of opinions on that. My personal trainer told me he lives by the rule of 0.8g per lb of body weight. Sounds like you and I weigh about the same. That's about 171 grams of protein a day. You'll want to get some decent quality whey powder.

I'll tell you the same thing my personal trainer told me - Don't count every calorie, don't obsess, and don't stress over what the scale says and if you have a piece of cake one day. Cause that ain't life and this isn't meant to be unrealistic, it's meant to work with your life.

I hope this helped a little, feel free to reach out any time, and good luck!
 

Cpb2020

Tele-Holic
Silver Supporter
Joined
Aug 16, 2020
Posts
645
Age
49
Location
New York
I’d go for “functional” health rather than muscle mass at your age. Due to joint-related issues I can’t put on much mass, so that’s what I’ve done at merely 49.

I’d rather be relatively in shape with fewer injuries than sidelined by injury after injury, which was what was happening when I pushed it too hard. So, I ride a stationary bike, do more reps with less weight, and try not to push it too hard. Doing that I seem to go 6 months before something sidelines me for a few weeks (last sideline was due to Lyme disease).
 

drmordo

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Posts
2,650
Age
48
Location
Tampa, FL
IME, with regards to weight, calorie restriction is far more important than exercise. A year ago, I restricted my calories by eating one large meal a day and a snack (and booze), and I lost 25 lbs without lifting a finger. If anything I've been less active due to a foot injury. I'd love to lose another 25 lbs, and maybe exercise will help, but step 1 is eat less food.
 

Alex_C

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Nov 8, 2020
Posts
1,339
Age
57
Location
Florida
Protein quantities are way over-hyped. 50 or 60 grams a day is all you need. The meat and milk industry are pushing most of this mis-information. I used to believe all the BS about protein. I was into bodybuilding and was taking in so much protein that I was a noxious fart factory! Living the bodybuilding lifestyle led to a heart attack in '16. Pro bodybuilders life expectancy is mid 40's. I now do cardio at least 5 times a week.
Anyway, I've read quite a bit about human protein needs. Human breast milk is very low in protein because humans don't need much.
I'm currently around 180lbs, in decent shape (run/ride bikes/lift weights) and I take in less than 60 grams of protein a day, all from plants.
 

FuzzWatt

Tele-Holic
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Posts
701
Age
33
Location
Canada
Pro bodybuilders life expectancy is mid 40's.

With all due respect, this is complete rubbish.

Arnold Schwarzenegger - 74

Lou Ferrigno - 70

Jack LaLanne - 96

Franco Columbu - 78

Steve Reeves - 74

Larry Scott - 75

Frank Zane - 79

Just to name a few.

I'm glad you're enjoying better health these days and there are many ways to achieve that goal. Your health issues are your own, and for all we know they are/were genetic issues. Going plant based may have been great for you, but it's no reason to spread misinformation.
 
Last edited:

unfamous

Tele-Holic
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Posts
571
Location
Tenesesee
Do keto as written and the weight will drop off. It's a real struggle, for me anyways. Then deal with the protein/muscle building.
 

Alex_C

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Nov 8, 2020
Posts
1,339
Age
57
Location
Florida
Will all due respect, this is complete rubbish.

Arnold Schwarzenegger - 74

Lou Ferrigno - 70

Jack LaLanne - 96

Just to name a few.

I'm glad you're enjoying better health these days and there are many ways to achieve that goal. Your health issues are your own, and for all we know they are/were genetic issues. Going plant based may have been great for you, but it's no reason to spread misinformation.
Funny you picked the few live bodybuilders, that is called 'cherry picking'.

Here is an article about the study: https://www.renalandurologynews.com...ge during competitive,range 26.6 – 75.4 years).

I was 220lbs at 6% at my best cosmetic shape. I had many bodybuilding friends and I can tell you that the crap we put our bodies through was epic. Most of those guys are dead. I was 100% blocked, could've been genetics or it could've been the dozen eggs I ate every morning for years, or maybe it was the two chickens I ate for lunch, for years. Dinner would be steak or chicken or whatever meat. I did no cardio because it makes you weaker when it comes to pushing iron. Why do you think heart disease is the number one killer? Maybe it is the crap-ton of meat we eat or maybe it is as you say ...genetics. We are not genetically designed to eat pounds of meat, daily.
In this day and age, we do not need to eat meat at all.
 

FuzzWatt

Tele-Holic
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Posts
701
Age
33
Location
Canada

You stated;

Pro bodybuilders life expectancy is mid 40's.

The study you just linked doesn't support your statement. If you read the study, of the 597 men studied, 9.7% of them died (during the timespan). Of that 9.7%, the mean age was 47. So, not all of them, not even most of them. Part of less than 10% of them. The way you present the stats is disengenuous. That's the part I have a problem with. It's dishonest.

You also left out this part of the findings;
The researchers found no significant difference in mortality rates above age 50 years.

"Although the cause is unclear, the increased mortality supports the possibility that use of performance enhancing drugs and unique competitive training, such as extreme weight changes, may contribute to deaths among younger professional bodybuilders.

Furthermore, the newest science says there is no link between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol. I've eaten all the stuff you listed for years and my blood numbers are fantastic, anecdotally. As for heart disease - culprit #1 is sugar.

At any rate, cholesterol and everything else is likely beyond the scope OP wanted this thread to entail, and out of respect for him, I'm going to leave this discussion at that.
 

nickmsmith

Tele-Holic
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Posts
852
Location
USA
IME, with regards to weight, calorie restriction is far more important than exercise. A year ago, I restricted my calories by eating one large meal a day and a snack (and booze), and I lost 25 lbs without lifting a finger. If anything I've been less active due to a foot injury. I'd love to lose another 25 lbs, and maybe exercise will help, but step 1 is eat less food.
I’ve heard that too. To lose weight, it’s easier with diet. To get fit, that’s the exercise part. I’ve got neither down!
 

Alex_C

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Nov 8, 2020
Posts
1,339
Age
57
Location
Florida
You stated;



The study you just linked doesn't support your statement. If you read the study, of the 597 men studied, 9.7% of them died (during the timespan). Of that 9.7%, the mean age was 47. So, not all of them, not even most of them. Part of less than 10% of them. The way you present the stats is disengenuous. That's the part I have a problem with. It's dishonest.

You also left out this part of the findings;


Furthermore, the newest science says there is no link between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol. I've eaten all the stuff you listed for years and my blood numbers are fantastic, anecdotally. As for heart disease - culprit #1 is sugar.

At any rate, cholesterol and everything else is likely beyond the scope OP wanted this thread to entail, and out of respect for him, I'm going to leave this discussion at that.
Not trying to be dishonest. That article was pulled up with a simple Google search that I did after your first reply. It fit what I've experienced. I was a bodybuilder, I know the lifestyle. I also know many men (ex-bodybuilders) who died in their 40's/50's from heart attacks. The main thing is we don't need much protein, like I said 50 or 60 grams is enough. ~0.8grams per kilo.
 

Call Me Al

Tele-Meister
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Posts
479
Age
42
Location
Ithaca, NY
Firstly, condolences for your loss.

I’d highly recommend looking into and considering plant based eating. Worked wonders for my wife and I. The weight just melts off; but it’s a foundation of health not “just” about the weight. It’s also a great plan when stress eating is involved (speaking from experience!)

But whatever you do, I’ve always considered weight to be controlled primarily by diet and exercise is about other benefits. So get your meal plan in order!

Some of my favorites are Forks Over Knives and Engine 2 for beginners; easy meal prep and focus on comfort foods. But there’s probably a dozen prominent meal plans/guide books out there.

As for movement, I like a focus on mobility. Yoga is good, if that fits your worldview. GMB fitness has some great movement exercises. Hybrid Calisthenics has a great program with progressions to build up to “regular” calisthenics. Or just start walking! Get back on the weights when you’ve build some strength and are over the injury.

Best of luck!
 

Brad Pittiful

Telefied
Silver Supporter
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Posts
20,145
Location
Philly Burbs
as i heard from some body fit advisors...when losing weight...try to lift the heaviest weight you can to help keep muscle mass...squat...dead lift...bench press are your big three...in a perfect world youll lose fat and keep or build muscle...i guess those with perfect genetics would be able to do that...good luck and be careful to not get injured
 

PastorJay

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Posts
2,196
Location
California
When you lose weight you also lose muscle. It is inevitable. A weight lifting routine while losing fat can help minimize muscle loss, and even help you gain muscle if you're working hard.

You can do both, but be realistic for your goals, age, and the amount of time you spend doing it. Use a decent TDEE calculator, like this one, and figure out what you need to consume in a day. Then, eat about 400 or 500 calories a day less than that and exercise a few days a week as well. You will see results.
Thanks. I looked at that calculator. At the amount of calories it said I need based on my weight and workout schedule, I'd gain weight.

So my metabolism is slow. Which doesn't surprise me.

In my 40s I was able to work out hard enough to gain muscle and lose weight simultaneously. Can't do it now.

I appreciated the advice.

Peace,
Jay
 

PastorJay

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Apr 12, 2014
Posts
2,196
Location
California
IME, with regards to weight, calorie restriction is far more important than exercise. A year ago, I restricted my calories by eating one large meal a day and a snack (and booze), and I lost 25 lbs without lifting a finger. If anything I've been less active due to a foot injury. I'd love to lose another 25 lbs, and maybe exercise will help, but step 1 is eat less food.

Thanks. Every effective weight loss plan has 2 elements: eat less, and exercise more.

I'm sure you're right that calorie restriction is more important for weight loss than exercise. It would take me 8 to 10 hours on a stationary bike or 6 or 7 hours on a rowing machine to lose a pound.

As it is, I'm down about 15-17 pounds. And my weight has plateaued. But I have clothes in my closet that fit again. And I had to buy a new belt.
 

Deeve

Doctor of Teleocity
Silver Supporter
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Posts
10,148
Location
Ballard
Thanks. Every effective weight loss plan has 2 elements: eat less, and exercise more.

I'm sure you're right that calorie restriction is more important for weight loss than exercise. It would take me 8 to 10 hours on a stationary bike or 6 or 7 hours on a rowing machine to lose a pound.

As it is, I'm down about 15-17 pounds. And my weight has plateaued. But I have clothes in my closet that fit again. And I had to buy a new belt.
30+ years of working at a desk gave me the body you'd expect.
The "gift" of a health crisis in my family in 2017 gave me a sudden "incentive" to eat less and exercise more.

In my case, I had to get into it rather slowly/steadily.
And it began w/ simple walking.
I'm fortunate to have a food allergy that makes it "easy" to eat/drink better - mostly food made at home, no booze and so some of the high calorie "temptations" (sometimes called processed foods).
Now, about five years into it, I've found a bit of stability re: weight and see a five-days a week light cardio as part of what's making things better. While it doesn't "cure" the grief that brought me to this place in life (my decision to look at weight/fitness) things are better.
A walking partner can be useful, too. Hit up a pal and you'll both benefit.

Peace - Deeve

1654117540514.png
 




Top