Tuesday 14 June 2011

I Have Detailed Files

As everyone knows, nothing can possibly be happening on the PCP unless there are scientifically rigorous data to back it up.

To this end, may I present the first graph of weight loss to date (I know what you're thinking "WHAT? Only 2 primary and one derived metric?". Well, you needn't worry, I am keep ing a range of other metrics too - it's just I don't yet have sufficient data points to make a compelling graph. But many more graphs there will be).

So, as you can see week 1 came out swinging hard in the weight loss category. Average loss per day was over 500g. That's a pound a day for you Americans. Now, as Patrick rightly pointed out, this is not necessarily a good thing if you're losing muscle. And it sure as hell didn't look like I was losing fat according to the scales.

Week 2 changed everything, introducing almost 2kg of food per day (plus milk) and upping the activity a little. The weight immediately and abruptly stabilised and meandered around a 400g range for the whole week.

Okay, so weight-loss consolidated, but where's the payoff in fat reduction? Why is the body fat percentage stubbornly staying at 19-20%?

And then BOOM - this morning the the scales finally admitted things were moving in the right direction. Twice! 18% fat, bitches! Read my statistics and weep!

Next step: titanium endoskeleton under human flesh!

6 comments:

  1. Good work, geek san. The top chart looks scarily like my stock portfolio.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Then you should sell now, cause it's only going lower.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Holy super sciency graphs Noel-man. What is your profession?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Personally, I'm going for the mimetic polyliquid-metal-alloy...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well done digger! Don't push too hard 'cos at your current rate you are going to disappear. I going to chill till 30, 60 and then 90 days. Nice graph anyways. B

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kim, you must have guessed I'm a software developer - however the graph is just from Excel; no special skills required.

    ReplyDelete