Discussion in 'Serious Chat' started by Derek, Jun 24, 2010.
punk! Its not 2011 yet! Meanie
I don't follow any diet regimen at all. I think the vital key of slimming down is to discipline yourself.
Vital key is to just eat less. Whether paleo helps you do that or avoiding fried and sugary foods or whatever. Just put less food in your body. Some people *really* overcomplicate this, and seem to be desperate for a magic solution that allows them to lose weight without eating less.
You are fat because you eat. too. much.
Consume less calories than you burn and you'll lose weight. That's all you need to know. It has nothing to do with how much you eat. I can eat 3 pounds of lettuce a day and I'll lose weight.
Some people have bodies with a faster metabolism, so they don't have to work out as much compared to people with slower metabolism.
at the last part. Albeit, it holds truth, some peoples body cannot handle that type of food/foods because of their metabolism. I hold pure determination and discipline. And when I say discipline, its extreme. Most couldn't even stick with it. Over the holidays I didn't stray nor budge. Why should I? I'm following this plan with two others and they couldn't resist the temptation of the holidays.
Now, the Paleo diet isn't just some fad. Its designed in our very own genetics. Our bodies haven't adjusted to the typical modern diet. The consumption of foods like sugar and bread are new and introduced in such a way that our bodies haven't caught up and we are still in the hunting and gathering mode; hence, deriving from the meaning Paleolithic. While some of you may have a high metabolism, the effects of prossesed food and the chemicals added to it will have its effects on your body. The FDA regulates what goes into our foods and poisons are in our foods and we wonder why cancer rates and obesity rates have gone up. I.E., High fructose syrup and aspartame. Ok I've ranted enough.
You're (partially) wrong.
And you're right.
The key to losing weight is physical exercise, not just how much you eat (of course don't take this literally, nothing will help you if you eat only tons of burgers every day and drink coke).
As a matter of fact, if you try losing weight by eating only a minimal amount of food, you'll actually gain weight, because our bodies are programmed to respond to emergency situations like lack of food by first using the proteins and carbs from your muscles and storing fat for later when there's no more proteins and carbs. Basically, if you don't eat enough, your body is going to get weak as hell and you're gonna get fatter.
The other question is what physical exercise is the best for losing weight. Sit-ups, push-ups and weightlifting aren't gonna help you. The best way to lose weight is by running.
Now most people can't see results from running because they're doing it wrong. First, it's not gonna happen over night. Don't lose hope if you don't lose any weight in the first month, you're muscles are probably too weak for enough running that's needed for actually burning fat, so you need to get them in shape first. Second, people think that the faster they run, the faster they're gonna lose weight. Wrong. Just like not eating enough, running fast is considered an emergency situation too, thus when you run fast, you're using carbs and proteins from your body, not your fat. So obviously, you need to run really slowly (5-10 kmph) and for a long time (anything less than 20-30 minutes won't really help you). A lot of people are ashamed to go out and run really slowly, so they never actually lose any weight by running. After you come home, you'll be exhausted, but don't be a pig and eat pizza and drink milkshake. Have a tuna fish and tea. You're still gonna be eating as much as you did before, but you're gonna have to change what you eat.
I've been into running for for a couple of years now and I'm preparing for my first marathon in the spring (42km) so I kinda know a lot about running and nutrition in general, you if anyone has any specific questions, just ask.
I use to drink 3 sodas a day and eat all the junk food in the world and I wouldnt really gain weight. I got a kidney stone(thank god it broke up in my system before I pissed it) and the doctor said my kidneys were stone dry. Since them I have drank nothing but water mostly no soda at all and lost pounds just by doing that. I cut out all junk food and only really eat fruits and turkey sandwiches during the day. I have been going to the gym almost every day except Saturdays and some Fridays, but i feel so much better about myself. When I ate unhealthy I weighed about 155 and stayed there, I really dont gain wain weight. Now I am at 146-148. Tell me if this is a good diet...
Morning- Cereal(about 100 calories but with 1g or less of fat calories)
Afternoon- Apple or banana(something thats a fruit)
Lunch- Turkey Sandwhich
Late Afternoon- More fuits
Dinner- Something Home cooked
8-10 is gym time with a hour of weights and 30 minutes of running or swimming then 30 in the sauna because I love it...
All this changed from a boy who ate nothing but junk. I just want a flat stomach and some abs.(which is being hard)O yeah my doctor told me it isnt really doesnt matter how many calories you take in but how many fat calories you take in because those are the ones your body takes most.
Remember Kids a 6 pack isnt made in the gym but the kitchen!
It is true that you need to burn more than you consume. However, you can create a deficit either through exercise or diet. If you create a deficit through diet you WILL lose weight, you just need to eat less than someone who is exercising to create that deficit. Metabolic slowdown does exist, but cardio doesn't necessarily help and can even do more harm than good in excessive situations.
If people couldn't lose weight by just eating less third would countries would be full of obese people due to all the starvation that goes on there.
Exercise is a good thing and I would of course encourage it, but it isn't a necessity if weight loss is your goal. I've lost 15lbs just eating at a deficit and lifting weights. No added cardio at all. Because a deficit is a deficit.
EDIT: And pizza and a milkshake is WAY more calories than tuna and tea unless you consume the latter is truly gargantuan amounts.
Paleo is supposed to be based on that, but it tends to be rather lacking in any data that shows it does what it claims it does. And in the very least, total calories in vs out is FAR more important than where they came from. You can gain weight overconsuming lean protein and lose weight underconsuming HFCS. And as I referenced above, aspartame has no data showing it causes cancer or really any other harm. HFCS is generally overdemonized as well.
You're right deficit is a deficit, but in real life it's really hard to burn more than you take in without physical exercise. You went to gym yourself, it still counts for something.. Of course, some people have better metabolisms than others and it takes them less physical activity to achieve it.. Maybe you're lucky, most people can't just stare into computers, eat little and lose weight
And about the third world countries, you can't really compare that with not eating to lose weight. What happens to African children is an extreme, I'm sure nobody will really take it that far with no eating in order to lose weight
That's pretty good, but this is how I'd rearrange it:
Morning- right after you get up: Cereal(about 100 calories but with 1g or less of fat calories), after an hour or so Turkey Sandwhich
Afternoon- Apple or banana(something thats a fruit)
Lunch- Something Home cooked
Late Afternoon- More fuits
Dinner- something really light, or you can even skip it, you don't need a lot of food before going to bed
Of course they wouldn't take it that far. All I mean is that it is obviously *possible*. A lot of people sludge away at a treadmill every morning, then have a big thing of gatorade as for "recovery" and have effectively wasted their morning accomplishing nothing from a weight loss perspective. It is just really important to keep in mind that a deficit is a deficit, and one that is known let someone find the easier was to make a deficit for them.
This is all just from a weight loss perspective though. If concerned with not losing muscle when losing fat, it is a different story. As it is if concerned about any other parameter (health, conditioning, etc.) .
Yeah, that's the most common mistake people make and then complain how they can't lose weight..
I learned from one nutrition expert that the best recovery drink is plain water with a few drops of lemon juice and a pinch of salt. That's all you need
That sounds kinda gross haha
Ok so, the best recovery drink is actually low fat chocolate milk. The carb to protein ratio is perfect. Ive taken quite a few nutrition classes at my University and they all said the same. Not only that but intensive research. Back in the day thats exactly what I used and it worked. Gatorade has way to much sugar and is basically kool-aid with electrolytes. My dad was a Body builder as well although he was in amateur competitions, he was huge. Also, you loose more weight by lifting. The muscle mass added speeds up your metabolism and the added muscle you pack on makes you burn more calories because your body has to work harder because of the extra weight. If you plan on being a stick, then running is the way to go. No offense
Chocolate milk is a great post-weight training drink. If you are doing cardio and then taking a recovery drink like chocolate milk after, you're just cancelling out the deficit you created though.
Also, you do not lose more weight weight-lifting, but it does effect the quality (fat vs muscle) you lose. Weight lifting burns relatively few calories. In fact, you may even lose less weight weight lifting because your body is less willing to let you lose muscle mass. Which is why a lot of diets recommend no exercise, to maximize muscle catabolism and consequently weight loss.
Slow running is actually worse than doing sprints. It's also worse than weight lifting for losing weight. As long as you refuel within a couple hours, your body will be burning fat from your body over the next couple of days after your intense workouts. Anaerobic exercise is the best for losing fat and building muscle. Most people are still stuck in the past and running 5 miles a day. The only reason you're losing weight is because you're losing muscle and losing water weight doing that from most likely being dehydrated. Ever wonder why all long distance runners at the world-class level are skinny as hell? Running long and slow doesn't do anything for muscle. You have to lift just to maintain your form when you run that far.
If you want to lose fat and gain muscle, lift weights as well as run sprints on a track or open field. You'll get shredded if you follow a decent diet full of protein and carbs. Just drink enough water, too.
It all depends on what you want to achieve you know.
If you want to look like this guy:
you go weightlifting
If you wanna look like these guys:
you go running
It takes years and years of extensive running to actually become sticks like those guys you see in the Olympics, so don't worry, that's not gonna happen even if you want it to
You're confusing things too
Here's a fat guy:
Do you think it's better for him to lift weight and run sprints or do 5km every day?
I guarantee it's 5km trainings. And that's not being stuck in the past, that's a fact.
And if you really think that anaerobic exercise it the best way to lose fat, then you really don't know a lot..
Aerobic is the way to do it, but it's slow as shit and most people say it's wrong because they wanna lose 10kg in a month which is almost impossible and would be really dangerous to your health.
I don't know where you're getting your info. Aerobic exercise actually breaks down muscle and uses less fat for energy compared to anaerobic. Anaerobic (sprinting, weight lifting, intense biking, etc.) workouts can boost your metabolism for up to a couple days. That means you'll be burning more fat just sitting around and recovering compared to your rest time after an aerobic workout.
The other good thing about anaerobic workouts is that they take way less time to complete. You can efficiently work them into your weekly schedule. You can get a killer workout on the track in a half hour. Aerobic workouts can take a few hours and don't have the lasted benefits of anaerobic. It's just a less effective way to work out and won't burn as much calories as the shorter workout time of anaerobic. Both aerobic and anaerobic will burn fat, but they are not equal.
I guess im looking at it in the wrong perspective. Im still in strength training mode. Although, the combination of both cardio and strength training will produce optimum and efficient results. And no the cardio doesnt need to be intense. It could be a brisk walk. I hop on the treadmill for 20-30 min before lifting to get the blood flowing. When I used to go to gyms I didnt meet one person who didnt do this. When I first started off a personal trainer approached me and told me you need to do some sort of cardio before lifting. Im just going by whats worked for me.
If you have time, read this article.
It's about the use of fat and carbs as a fuel for running.
Here's a glimpse:
I know there are a lot of theories about losing fat, but as far as I know this is scientifically proven and honestly, nobody I know has lost weight by running sprints.
Separate names with a comma.