• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Official Fitness Thread of Whipping Your Butt into Shape

Status
Not open for further replies.
So I've been trying to get into shape this spring, started running last week and eating shit like salad and granola. Woke up this morning and had a root beer and 3 slices of cold pizza. Dammit food is just so damn tempting :(
 
funkmastergeneral said:
So I've been trying to get into shape this spring, started running last week and eating shit like salad and granola. Woke up this morning and had a root beer and 3 slices of cold pizza. Dammit food is just so damn tempting :(

And if you keep starving yourself, you're going to keep binging like that.

Don't think of it as a punishment to get in shape. Eat smart. It should be a lifestyle, not a cycle you do every springtime.
 
funkmastergeneral said:
So I've been trying to get into shape this spring, started running last week and eating shit like salad and granola. Woke up this morning and had a root beer and 3 slices of cold pizza. Dammit food is just so damn tempting :(
Like Snrub said, you have to give your body the fuel it needs--it can't keep itself running if you're exercising hard and only giving it rabbit food. You do need to eat lettuce, but you need lean meat, too.

And if I had had cold pizza in my fridge, I might have eaten it this morning. That's why I don't have it in the fridge. I would strongly recommend that if you are doing a weekly cheat meal, go buy that food the day you plan to eat it. Other than that, there's no reason at all [unless you have kids or something] to have any of that type of food in the house at all.
 

Davedough

Member
Captain Glanton said:
This link is to one of my favorite articles, ever. Everyone should read it.
I wish I'd thought of linking to it here.

Also, just to emphasize, no one who knows fitness stuff minds being asked to help out people who don't know but are willing to work hard to learn. We do mind being asked to do the work others won't do for themselves.


Please clarify something for me. Between you and Slo, what did I say that in any way shape or form suggested that I'm trying to get something for nothing and make you guys do work for me, or for that matter I'm unmotivated and unwilling to participate in a workout regiment? I simply asked for an opinion of a fitness program. Is asking for an opinion too much to ask for people who've already achieved their health nirvana? I came here hoping that I could further the motivation I have, and get some idea of what I can do but instead was immediately hit with abrasiveness and malcontent. WTF? I've already begun doing some cardio exercises and I have a punching bag in my garage that I've been using to keep my heartrate up. I was merely asking for an opinion on something a bit more structured so I have some kind of clue of what I'm doing to get in shape. You people assume too much, but I guess its way too much to ask "the internet" to drop their stigmas and actually care about anyone but themselves.

If I said something in my post thats to the contrary and I missed it, then its news to me. But if asking for a bit of assistance is too much trouble, then I wont soil your precious thread.
 
Davedough,
I missed your post. I don't have any experience with that program, nor do I know anyone else who does...

But if it gets you moving and you eat right, I don't see why it would be a bad thing. Probably very similar to all the other video workouts you can get and if it's all you can do, then why not do it?
 
Davedough said:
Please clarify something for me. Between you and Slo, what did I say that in any way shape or form suggested that I'm trying to get something for nothing and make you guys do work for me, or for that matter I'm unmotivated and unwilling to participate in a workout regiment? I simply asked for an opinion of a fitness program. Is asking for an opinion too much to ask for people who've already achieved their health nirvana? I came here hoping that I could further the motivation I have, and get some idea of what I can do but instead was immediately hit with abrasiveness and malcontent. WTF? I've already begun doing some cardio exercises and I have a punching bag in my garage that I've been using to keep my heartrate up. I was merely asking for an opinion on something a bit more structured so I have some kind of clue of what I'm doing to get in shape. You people assume too much, but I guess its way too much to ask "the internet" to drop their stigmas and actually care about anyone but themselves.

If I said something in my post thats to the contrary and I missed it, then its news to me. But if asking for a bit of assistance is too much trouble, then I wont soil your precious thread.

I will bold the parts that irked me. Pissed off? No, but irked.

Davedough said:
I'll be perfectly honest, I'm not motivated enough to glance through 28 pages of this, but let me ask this and I apologize if it's been covered in depth already.

I want to know some of your opinions from people who know about fitness on the DVDs for the Power 90 series by Tony Horton. A friend of mine gave me his copies and said he never got around to using them and since I dont think I'm physically ready for the P90X system, I think the Power 90 is right up my alley.

I'm 6'3" and 220lbs. I'm only slightly overweight, but greatly out of shape. What are some of your opinions on this workout routine for someone who doesn't have the time or money to attend a gym just yet?

I would not have been the first one to make a response like Slo's, but I see where he's coming from. Did you read the article he linked to? People like us have those encounters on a regular basis, and it does get tiresome to have people admit up front that they aren't prepared to fully commit themselves. The question seems to boil down to, 'How can I look like you without enduring all the pain you do to look like that?' [My back is so strong because I do pullups with a 120lb dumbbell tied to my waist. That shit hurts.] The language I've bolded just sounds a lot like that conversation. And I made 24K on my tax returns last year, and I'm finishing my dissertation, so there are ways to get around time and money.

Had you just posted the question about the DVDs, no one would have said anything wrong.

You people assume too much, but I guess its way too much to ask "the internet" to drop their stigmas and actually care about anyone but themselves.
I'm not in the fitness industry at all. I'm an English teacher. I do the thread because people want help, and I put a lot of time into giving it to them, as do a few other regular contributors in here. That's fine with me; I'm glad to do it. But it's not like I get something out of it.
 

Davedough

Member
Fair enough, I can see your point there. And I respond better when something like that is brought up intelligently, and I appreciate your response. I could have worded it better, but at the time, I was at work and had read 3 pages worth of another user trying to find his own motivation and failing and wasn't feeling like I was getting any good information aside from the wonderful first post you made. With that said, my wording was off in saying that I didn't go through the 28 pages of forum thread, so I was asking my question.

Duly noted and I apologize for the confusion.
 

Shoho

Banned
How much fat a day can a person get if they want to loose weight?

I love stuff like peanuts, almonds, cashew and that sort of stuff...

They contain natural fat that is good for the body, and plenty of protein. Is this something to avoid, or what?



Also... someone in this thread suggested fruits as a good "diet thing". But how bad is fruits that contain natural fruit sugar(is that fruktose or something?)?
I mean... how bad is apples, apple juice, orange, orange juice, water melon, peaches, strawberry, raisins, and all that sort of stuff?

If its "natural" or "ecological" how much better is it?


I saw these crackers the other day that said that they contained that brown raw sugar.. what is it called? sugar cane? natural healthy sugar?


But is that a wrong assumption? sugar is sugar, no matter if it comes from nature or if its made by man?
 

Struct09

Member
Shoho said:
How much fat a day can a person get if they want to loose weight?

I love stuff like peanuts, almonds, cashew and that sort of stuff...

They contain natural fat that is good for the body, and plenty of protein. Is this something to avoid, or what?



Also... someone in this thread suggested fruits as a good "diet thing". But how bad is fruits that contain natural fruit sugar(is that fruktose or something?)?
I mean... how bad is apples, apple juice, orange, orange juice, water melon, peaches, strawberry, raisins, and all that sort of stuff?

If its "natural" or "ecological" how much better is it?


I saw these crackers the other day that said that they contained that brown raw sugar.. what is it called? sugar cane? natural healthy sugar?


But is that a wrong assumption? sugar is sugar, no matter if it comes from nature or if its made by man?

It's spelled "lose". When people say "loose weight" it bugs me :p

Grammar nazism aside, there is no set amount of fat per day that you're "allowed". Dietary fat doesn't hinder weight loss, but excess calories from fat (or carbs, or protein) will. Nuts are a great source of dietary fat, and including something like a handful of almonds is good for any healthy diet. Same concept applies to fruit.

When trying to lose weight, your biggest concern should be that the calories you take in are less than the calories you expend. That being said, keeping balance between fat, carbohydrates, and protein is a good idea to ensure your diet is healthy. You could eat "clean" food 100% of the time and still have a crappy diet - an example being if your diet was entirely chicken breasts.

Just keep in mind that there's a difference between eating for weight loss and eating for health. You can eat shitty and still lose weight, and you can eat "clean" and get fat. Of course you can have a diet where you lose weight and eat healthy, which is always recommended.

EDIT: To address the question about sugar - sugar isn't necessarily evil. The best reason for avoiding processed sugar (doesn't matter if it's 'raw', 'natural', or whatever) is that it piles on calories that don't do much for you. Getting your calories from an apple will leave you satisfied much longer than getting your calories from a spoonful of sugar.
 
Shoho said:
Has anyone seen this? some dude.. hes a vegan or something says protein is not the source of getting muscle..: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ae-dlHOmwk4


he seems quite convicing, but I dont know this stuff... what do u guys think?

Yeah, he looks like he has the size and strength to prove it.

Also, PLEASE be aware of the old adage "the exception and not the rule". Look at what works on the masses.

Amino acids are VERY important because they help with the entire muscle synthesis/breakdown process. But come on...just look at him.

Protein is not an "empty" nutrient the way he makes it sound.
 

Futureman

Member
What's healthier, chicken fried rice or white rice? I know that brown rice is better than white rice, but would white be better than chicken fried? I assume chicken fried rice is insanely high in sodium.
 

Struct09

Member
Futureman said:
What's healthier, chicken fried rice or white rice? I know that brown rice is better than white rice, but would white be better than chicken fried? I assume chicken fried rice is insanely high in sodium.

The calories stack up pretty quickly in fried rice. If you can watch your portions, you're fine. I'd personally stick to the white rice.

Also, the difference between brown and white rice is pretty small. The difference in one serving of each is that the brown rice contains about 1g of fiber and a few grams of protein. Brown rice is technically better nutritionally, but white rice is nothing to fear.
 

GHG

Member
Mr. Snrub said:
Yeah, he looks like he has the size and strength to prove it.

Also, PLEASE be aware of the old adage "the exception and not the rule". Look at what works on the masses.

Amino acids are VERY important because they help with the entire muscle synthesis/breakdown process. But come on...just look at him.

Protein is not an "empty" nutrient the way he makes it sound.

Exactly what I thought watching that :lol .

I'll continue to eat my protien and my apple than you very much. That way I get the best of both worlds if what he's saying is true. Plus I know it works...
 
Struct09 said:
The calories stack up pretty quickly in fried rice. If you can watch your portions, you're fine. I'd personally stick to the white rice.

Also, the difference between brown and white rice is pretty small. The difference in one serving of each is that the brown rice contains about 1g of fiber and a few grams of protein. Brown rice is technically better nutritionally, but white rice is nothing to fear.
As a general note, I will add that some bodybuilders take the "chicken and rice" dinner too far. It's a great meal, but if you're eating that every night you're missing out on some key nutrients. I try to mix up my "chicken + rice" with "chicken + frozen vegetables" meals.
 
Any general topics that aren't in the OP yet, that people would want to see in there? I do realize the thread has become enormous, and the GAF search engine sucks ass.
 
Glanton,
Interesting bit about "tone"/tonus from Rippetoe's Practical Programming (p.60). Tone is the electrophysiological phenomenon, a measure of ionic flow across the muscle membrance. In general, compare the muscles of those who do low intensity (their muscles will generally be soft/"relaxed") to those who do high intensity work. I forget the EXACT spectrum he gives, but its something like marathon runner>sprinter>cyclist>olympic weightlifter in terms of how hard their muscles are, at rest. Tone, in a functional sense (not just low bodyfat), is the measure of a muscle's readiness to perform anaerobic activity. I'll try to get more info when I get home, if anyone wants quotes on this.

Might want to add a section regarding equipment and chalk, as well.
 

Sol..

I am Wayne Brady.
Mr. Snrub said:
Glanton,
Interesting bit about "tone"/tonus from Rippetoe's Practical Programming (p.60). Tone is the electrophysiological phenomenon, a measure of ionic flow across the muscle membrance. In general, compare the muscles of those who do low intensity (their muscles will generally be soft/"relaxed") to those who do high intensity work. I forget the EXACT spectrum he gives, but its something like marathon runner>sprinter>cyclist>olympic weightlifter in terms of how hard their muscles are, at rest. Tone, in a functional sense (not just low bodyfat), is the measure of a muscle's readiness to perform anaerobic activity. I'll try to get more info when I get home, if anyone wants quotes on this.

Might want to add a section regarding equipment and chalk, as well.


moar please.
 

MrToughPants

Brian Burke punched my mom
Mr.City said:
I've recently found out during a visit to the chiropracter that my pelvis is uneven and cause one leg to be shorter than the other. I've always noticed weight being place more on one leg more than the other during my squats.

My question is if I should to unilaterial leg exercises exclusively. Single-leg squats make me a bit nervous considering I don't have the best balance in the world.

Just put an extra in-sole in one of your shoes.


Anyone seen this training video? Venceslas Dabaya (151lbs) doing 5x 440 lbs front squats that's almost three times his bodyweight :lol
 

BlueTsunami

there is joy in sucking dick
I did some heavy (to me) Squats yesterday. I used the fixed machine since I need to get a belt but I worked out my whole back thigh area and my glutes real well. I love the feeling you get when your pushing up, your whole body tenses. After 12 Reps of that you definitely get some sort of high :lol
 
BlueTsunami said:
I did some heavy (to me) Squats yesterday. I used the fixed machine since I need to get a belt but I worked out my whole back thigh area and my glutes real well. I love the feeling you get when your pushing up, your whole body tenses. After 12 Reps of that you definitely get some sort of high :lol

Hey Blue,
Any reason why you need a belt for free weight squats? They're really not necessary unless you have a debilitating injury or are on a max attempt. Embrace free weight squats--the "high" is much better.
 

BlueTsunami

there is joy in sucking dick
Mr. Snrub said:
Hey Blue,
Any reason why you need a belt for free weight squats? They're really not necessary unless you have a debilitating injury or are on a max attempt. Embrace free weight squats--the "high" is much better.

Its more or less my posture. I guess I'm not confident enough to tackle free weight squats without a belt. I actually do have a belt but the thing seems like it was made for the "No Protein" guy :lol
 
Mr. Snrub said:
Glanton,
Interesting bit about "tone"/tonus from Rippetoe's Practical Programming (p.60). Tone is the electrophysiological phenomenon, a measure of ionic flow across the muscle membrance. In general, compare the muscles of those who do low intensity (their muscles will generally be soft/"relaxed") to those who do high intensity work. I forget the EXACT spectrum he gives, but its something like marathon runner>sprinter>cyclist>olympic weightlifter in terms of how hard their muscles are, at rest. Tone, in a functional sense (not just low bodyfat), is the measure of a muscle's readiness to perform anaerobic activity. I'll try to get more info when I get home, if anyone wants quotes on this.

Might want to add a section regarding equipment and chalk, as well.


Hmm interesting. I think it is better just to tell all women that their 'toning' exercises are generally pointless and tone (at least the way they seem to think) doesn't really exist.
 
Oh wait. I hope everyone didn't think "runner>sprinter>cyclist>olympic weightlifter" is like some sort of MATHEMATICAL progression. The olympic weightlifter has the hardest muscles out of the group.

Therefore, we need to get soccer moms doing heavier weights to "tone up".

And adjust their diets.

BlueTsunami,
Haha, well, what you SHOULD do is practice with just the bar or very light weight until your form is better. The belt is only going to impede your actual muscular development and strength progress, until it becomes more of a dependence rather than an aid. And that's not good.
 

teh_pwn

"Saturated fat causes heart disease as much as Brawndo is what plants crave."
Struct09 said:
It's spelled "lose". When people say "loose weight" it bugs me :p

Grammar nazism aside, there is no set amount of fat per day that you're "allowed". Dietary fat doesn't hinder weight loss, but excess calories from fat (or carbs, or protein) will. Nuts are a great source of dietary fat, and including something like a handful of almonds is good for any healthy diet. Same concept applies to fruit.

When trying to lose weight, your biggest concern should be that the calories you take in are less than the calories you expend. That being said, keeping balance between fat, carbohydrates, and protein is a good idea to ensure your diet is healthy. You could eat "clean" food 100% of the time and still have a crappy diet - an example being if your diet was entirely chicken breasts.

I disagree with the bolded. Your body doesn't whip out a calculator at the end of the day and tally up calories and instantaneously add fat to your body if you're in excess and remove it if you consumed too little.

While mathematically it is true that calories out has to be higher than calories in, it doesn't take into account the motives for breaking from a diet nor does it consider the long term effects on the metabolism.

If you were to eat nothing but fat, protein, and fiber all day, you would lose body fat each day. You simply cannot overeat when these macronutrients are alone, and it is the premise of the Atkins diet.

Fat is very calorie dense, yes, but your body is unable to digest it quickly enough to create a caloric surplus when there isn't any carbs along with it. Protein is less calorie dense but follows the same idea. It's simply too difficult to digest to create those calorie bursts that warrant body fat storage. Protein also takes more energy to digest, so your metabolism increases if you ate 100 calories of protein versus 100 calories of carbs.


So try all you want, but without carbs, you simply won't be hungry enough to overeat. If anything, you'll under eat.

When you add carbs, especially fiberless refined carbs like flour, to fat, everything changes. Oil + flour/sugar is the ultimate obesity formula. Your body will digest this almost instantly, storing the excess energy as body fat. When digestion is over, you'll get hungry again. The lack of protein starves muscles and causes the body to cannibalize itself to get the protein it needs. Lost muscle tissue reduces your metabolism.
 

Ace 8095

Member
For all those who have so much trouble losing weight, I would like to introduce you to my problem. Gaining weight for a 158 pound 18 year old is hard. I eat over 3000 calories a day, perform no cardio other than a few warm-up exercises before lifting, and drink at least a half gallon of milk a day. I sleep 8 to 9 hours a night, lift 4 times a week performing cleans, presses, squats, and dead lifts, and progress is still slow. But for all those who think it's not worth it, you're wrong.

Lifting weights, eating ALOT of good food, and getting enough sleep is amazing. Since I started lifting weights last November I feel better, look better, and am happier than ever before. There is nothing quite like the feeling of accomplishment in knowing that today I lifted as hard as I could, ate as much good food as I could, and made sure to get enough sleep. It's worth much more that all the time, money, and effort it takes.
 

mr stroke

Member
whats better for you in the long run?
Sugar or Splenda?

I am having an arguement with the wife about what I should be putting in my coffee. She says I am better off with the sugar because its "natural" and I will burn off the calories from my daily workouts, but I say the Splenda because it has zero calories. She thinks Splenda causes cancer and is naturaly bad for your body because of the chemicals it contains??
 

GHG

Member
Ace 8095 said:
For all those who have so much trouble losing weight, I would like to introduce you to my problem. Gaining weight for a 158 pound 18 year old is hard. I eat over 3000 calories a day, perform no cardio other than a few warm-up exercises before lifting, and drink at least a half gallon of milk a day. I sleep 8 to 9 hours a night, lift 4 times a week performing cleans, presses, squats, and dead lifts, and progress is still slow. But for all those who think it's not worth it, you're wrong.

Lifting weights, eating ALOT of good food, and getting enough sleep is amazing. Since I started lifting weights last November I feel better, look better, and am happier than ever before. There is nothing quite like the feeling of accomplishment in knowing that today I lifted as hard as I could, ate as much good food as I could, and made sure to get enough sleep. It's worth much more that all the time, money, and effort it takes.

Progress always feels slow. Because you see yourself everyday you don't notice the small changes that happen all the time so much. I'm always looking to improve, so I'm seemingly never satisfied with my physique (god knows where it will end up :lol ) whereas other people will be complimenting me saying I look better than I did when they last saw me a couple of months ago. The problem is that although I know fullwell my body is in good shape, I also know it could be a lot better and see areas where I could improve.

Thats the thing with lifting. Once you start its a commitment forever if you are dedicated to it. You wont suddenly wake up one morning, look in the mirror and think damn I look great and stop pushing weights. You'll be satisfied with your body but will keep looking at those areas you most want to improve instead.

Or at least thats how it works for me...
 

GHG

Member
mr stroke said:
whats better for you in the long run?
Sugar or Splenda?

I am having an arguement with the wife about what I should be putting in my coffee. She says I am better off with the sugar because its "natural" and I will burn off the calories from my daily workouts, but I say the Splenda because it has zero calories. She thinks Splenda causes cancer and is naturaly bad for your body because of the chemicals it contains??

Women know nothing... I'm not even joking. My mum tells me I'll get cancer from the amount of protien I eat :lol . What she doesn't realise is the amount of excersise I do, the amount of fluids I drink and the way in which my diet is balanced so I'm not just eating tons of protien totally nullify the whole "oh but you'll get cancer!!11!" arguement. The quality of the protien also helps.

Just do what you have to do man.
 

beelzebozo

Jealous Bastard
well, i do, but i actually use equal, which contains the dreaded aspartame. ymmv, but i haven't gotten cancer yet. i guess it could be killing me, but what isn't?
 

MrToughPants

Brian Burke punched my mom
I got a great deal here at IGA they had boneless chicken breasts @ $6.10/kg so I bought $40 worth. Two days prior they had it listed at $13/kg!! and I bought about $60 worth then. :(

My diet looks like this right now

1-2lbs of chicken + salad/veggies
2 cans of tuna
500ml cottage cheese
1-2L milk
5-6 scrambled eggs
bunch of fruits
alot of baked potatoes, a 50lb bag is $8 here :lol
sometimes I throw in some salmon or whatever was cooked for dinner
 
MrToughPants said:
I got a great deal here at IGA they had boneless chicken breasts @ $6.10/kg so I bought $40 worth. Two days prior they had it listed at $13/kg!! and I bought about $60 worth then. :(

My diet looks like this right now

1-2lbs of chicken + salad/veggies
2 cans of tuna
500ml cottage cheese
1-2L milk
5-6 scrambled eggs
bunch of fruits
alot of baked potatoes, a 50lb bag is $8 here :lol
sometimes I throw in some salmon or whatever was cooked for dinner

I envy those of you that live in a place where you can cook your own food. Living in a dorm makes it quite a bit harder for me to eat what I'd like to be eating, since I can't really cook any of it myself.

That is a nice price for chicken!
 
mr stroke said:
whats better for you in the long run?
Sugar or Splenda?

I am having an arguement with the wife about what I should be putting in my coffee. She says I am better off with the sugar because its "natural" and I will burn off the calories from my daily workouts, but I say the Splenda because it has zero calories. She thinks Splenda causes cancer and is naturaly bad for your body because of the chemicals it contains??
The "splenda causes cancer" thing is a myth. Consume with pride, friend.
 

teh_pwn

"Saturated fat causes heart disease as much as Brawndo is what plants crave."
mr stroke said:
whats better for you in the long run?
Sugar or Splenda?

Cane or Beet sugar in moderation.

Artificial sweeteners have clinically been shown to cause hunger, and consequently overeating. Scientists believe it is a result of your body anticipating sugar when it tastes artificial sweeteners, only for sugar never to arrive.

I'd especially go with sugar if you're drinking coffee in the morning with a good breakfast. Because sugar is used to store energy for all types of cells, and because you're breaking the fast, you've got lots of cells that need their energy stores restored. By good breakfast I mean eggs, meat, whole fruit, oats. If you're eating a bunch of cereal, my argument doesn't hold true.
 

beelzebozo

Jealous Bastard
probably immaterial to you, mr stroke, but splenda doesn't actually have zero calories. pretty sure it has ~2-4 calories a packet. that's almost nothing, but if you ate enough of it i guess. . .
 

MrToughPants

Brian Burke punched my mom
Soka said:
I envy those of you that live in a place where you can cook your own food. Living in a dorm makes it quite a bit harder for me to eat what I'd like to be eating, since I can't really cook any of it myself.

That is a nice price for chicken!

The freezer is full of chicken I should probably slow down on it though. I'm just used to eating so much fish and now I turn to chicken :D

Baked Potatoes + chicken = HEAVEN
 
MrToughPants said:
The freezer is full of chicken I should probably slow down on it though. I'm just used to eating so much fish and now I turn to chicken :D

Baked Potatoes + chicken = HEAVEN

My roommate and I are both into lifting and eating well, and we'll be getting our own apartment with a couple friends in a year or so. We're literally working out all sorts of recipes before hand so we have a huge selection of possible combination of foods to cook through. Lots of chicken, fish, and tuna in our future, and I'm excited. Just wish I could start cooking now and not later.

I loved baked potatoes, they sound good to me right now even. I usually eat them with a ton of melted cheese, though, so I only treat myself to them on occasion. Cheese spuds from McAlister's Deli = nomnomnom.

Summer time is like my 3 month haven of cooking for myself, so I do have that to look forward to.
 

Struct09

Member
teh_pwn said:
I disagree with the bolded. Your body doesn't whip out a calculator at the end of the day and tally up calories and instantaneously add fat to your body if you're in excess and remove it if you consumed too little.

While mathematically it is true that calories out has to be higher than calories in, it doesn't take into account the motives for breaking from a diet nor does it consider the long term effects on the metabolism.

If you were to eat nothing but fat, protein, and fiber all day, you would lose body fat each day. You simply cannot overeat when these macronutrients are alone, and it is the premise of the Atkins diet.

Fat is very calorie dense, yes, but your body is unable to digest it quickly enough to create a caloric surplus when there isn't any carbs along with it. Protein is less calorie dense but follows the same idea. It's simply too difficult to digest to create those calorie bursts that warrant body fat storage. Protein also takes more energy to digest, so your metabolism increases if you ate 100 calories of protein versus 100 calories of carbs.


So try all you want, but without carbs, you simply won't be hungry enough to overeat. If anything, you'll under eat.

When you add carbs, especially fiberless refined carbs like flour, to fat, everything changes. Oil + flour/sugar is the ultimate obesity formula. Your body will digest this almost instantly, storing the excess energy as body fat. When digestion is over, you'll get hungry again. The lack of protein starves muscles and causes the body to cannibalize itself to get the protein it needs. Lost muscle tissue reduces your metabolism.

I tried to leave the science out of the equation, and I won't argue it with you. Most people don't want to cut carbohydrates from their diet, and they don't have to in order to lose weight.

I'm giving advice to someone who is just starting out with weight loss, in which case I would never recommend the high fat, moderate protein, low carb approach. That requires a harsh lifestyle change that most won't stick with. The most important concept is that you have to eat less than you burn - yes there's more to the equation but in the end that's still the most important aspect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom