fat burning diet

[Ace in the Hole]

Very true for the beached whales you talk about.
So many of them will be watching The Biggest Loser, thinking they can just go hardcore instantly.
Don't work like that, just going to end up injured, physically and mentally burnt out shortly after.
They got fat slowly over years of body abuse, so why try to lose it instantly?
Pay the penalty and lose it slow with consistant persistence.
Results don't always show by the day or week, but will do after months and years.

 

[intrigued]

I would recommend they start with the very fast walk - instead of the lazy stroll around the block looking at the butterflies while the dog takes a dump on the neighbors' lawn - then progress to a light jog, then onto the semi-heart-pump distance run, then on to the Hussein Bolt shazoom.

Gee you guys are throwing me into a panic.
After a year I'm up to 650m jog my god its been hard work. Thats what you get for smoking for 41 years.

Sprinting may be a while away yet. Weight hasnt moved though.

 

[BayView]

So many of them will be watching The Biggest Loser, thinking they can just go hardcore instantly.

That happened during the Olympics; one of the commentators was saying that during the week of the games the sports injuries went up by X% due to would-be's who got all inspired and it rushed to their head.

It happens in all sports though; I used to see a spike in players (in golf) every year after the British Open, the US Open etc.

 

[fokas]

Alright kids...time for an update!

Now 1 week after finishing I am still 7 kilos under the original weight...I can put 2 kilos back on over time if I want as wanted to only lose the 5 kilos. I am eating normally, but different foods, I snack on handfulls of dried sultanas, dried bananas and cranberries.

SamSiam what is your weight at now comparative to this post? What are you eating now?

I'm into the 3rd week now. I stopped after1 week as I had lost 5 kgs and felt great. I've been half on it since I guess. I've kept the soup going but I'm eating more regular foods but no sugar and few carbs. Lots of fruit and veg, Fish and chicken.

So to date I've lost about 6.5 kgs and it's going down a little bit every day.

Dylan how has your weightloss been? Did you keep up the juicing?

I too have headed down the 'no carbs, no sugar, no alcohol' path for the next 3 weeks, in conjunction with exercise and a supplement program. So things like organic eggs, organics meats (beef & chicken), salmon & smoked salmon, avocado, some nuts, steamed & raw vegetables are all on the agenda. Everything else is out....dairy, fruit included

Having up to 7 meals (albeit smaller ones) per day. That does take a little planning mind you.

My objective is to loose body fat and in the first week, although I have a caliper test to re-measure my body fat content in 3 weeks, I have already dropped 4kg, so I would assume some of this must be fat (bloody better!). Actually I can already tell the looser fit of jeans/pants. I am really surprised at the weight loss in such a short period of time..

buzzlightyear what's your body fat percentage at now compared to when you posted this? Feeling fabulous?

 

[MaxwellSmart]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pfna7nV7WaM

&

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/in-search-of-the-perfect-human-diet/

 

[pinkboy]

Fat burning exercise requires you to stay aerobic (long and slow), as opposed to anaerobic (sprinting). Once your body depletes itself of simple sugars, it slowly looks to burn more efficient fuels like carbs and fats. The body doesnt eactly follow a rule to burn fuel in any type of order, as it will burn fat straight away to a small degree, even when sprinting. The target is to burn fat as a fuel, then you need to stay within your oxygen debt threashold at a sustainable pace for a longer period of time.

I myself have been an endurance athlete in a past life (yeah, Im 29 you know), and after a few years of sedentry lifestyle, Ive gained a little weight. (I raced Hawaii Ironman in 2004 at 67kg whippet weight, and wind the clock forward and I currently sit around 80kg, not fat - I just got bigger). I carry a fair bit of weight in the ar$e and upper legs, only because the cycling Im doing makes these areas muscley, and thus weigh more.

So after a fair solid 6 weeks of training, Ive not lost a single kg, but my body shape has change considerably. It does however take this long for your body metabolism to get used to the fat burning, so I suspect I will drop a little weight, but not much as it turns to mor muscle mass where its needed in the shoulders and legs.

So speed is not ideal. Its about calories in vs calories out, using the right energy system to burn fat efficiently, and about getting the results you want!

pinkboy

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Fat burning exercise requires you to stay aerobic (long and slow), as opposed to anaerobic (sprinting). Once your body depletes itself of simple sugars, it slowly looks to burn more efficient fuels like carbs and fats. The body doesnt eactly follow a rule to burn fuel in any type of order, as it will burn fat straight away to a small degree, even when sprinting. The target is to burn fat as a fuel, then you need to stay within your oxygen debt threashold at a sustainable pace for a longer period of time.

Interval training such as sprint or fartlek is just as effective as long slow cardio if you are looking to burn fat (lose fat) and I would recommend a combo of the 2 in a program. I like to have a mixture of both long, slow and moderate cardio such as slow jogging and interval sprint work which includes sprinting for 70 metres followed by a very slow jog for 70 metres for a total of around 20 minutes.

This is a myth. Actually it doesn't matter what fuel the body burns whether its fat or sugars that are stored in your body, its the total amount of energy burnt that counts. For example you may burn the same amount of calories doing a slow 45 minute jog and burn a higher percentage of your bodies fat stores but burn just 400 calories, whereas you could do a 30 minute sprint interval program burn the exact same amount of calories (400 calories) do it in a smaller amount of time period burning a smaller amount of fat %, using a greater amount of sugars from your body as fuel compared to the fat % you use. What is important is this. Its all about calories burnt, it doesn't matter what stores it comes from. Its calories in versus calories out.

Also the post exercise calorie burn is said to be a lot higher when doing ultra vigorous sprint-interval work so that in the other 23.5 hours of the day your metabolism is more revved up than if you had of done a more moderate exercise such as slow jogging. A lot of benefit is gained for hours afterward (up to 24 hours and that is where the real benefit is, the extra amount of calories burned even when you sit on the couch watching tv) [the epoc is a lot higher than slow jogging]

Sorry if this is too long winded. I sometimes tend to repeat myself.

 

[Ace in the Hole]

Fat burning exercise requires you to stay aerobic (long and slow), as opposed to anaerobic (sprinting). Once your body depletes itself of simple sugars, it slowly looks to burn more efficient fuels like carbs and fats. The body doesnt eactly follow a rule to burn fuel in any type of order, as it will burn fat straight away to a small degree, even when sprinting. The target is to burn fat as a fuel, then you need to stay within your oxygen debt threashold at a sustainable pace for a longer period of time.

I myself have been an endurance athlete in a past life (yeah, Im 29 you know), and after a few years of sedentry lifestyle, Ive gained a little weight. (I raced Hawaii Ironman in 2004 at 67kg whippet weight, and wind the clock forward and I currently sit around 80kg, not fat - I just got bigger). I carry a fair bit of weight in the ar$e and upper legs, only because the cycling Im doing makes these areas muscley, and thus weigh more.

So after a fair solid 6 weeks of training, Ive not lost a single kg, but my body shape has change considerably. It does however take this long for your body metabolism to get used to the fat burning, so I suspect I will drop a little weight, but not much as it turns to mor muscle mass where its needed in the shoulders and legs.

So speed is not ideal. Its about calories in vs calories out, using the right energy system to burn fat efficiently, and about getting the results you want!

pinkboy

Sprinters are plenty more shredded than endurance athletes, and hold more muscle mass and strength too.

How do you explain that, cos they definitely don't do long and slow time wasting aerobic exercise.

 

[pinkboy]

Interval training such as sprint or fartlek is just as effective as long slow cardio if you are looking to burn fat (lose fat) and I would recommend a combo of the 2 in a program. I like to have a mixture of both long, slow and moderate cardio such as slow jogging and interval sprint work which includes sprinting for 70 metres followed by a very slow jog for 70 metres for a total of around 20 minutes.

There's no denying that fartlek and interval training is as good as long slow distance work. However, obese people raise a sweat lifting chips from the cupboard, let alone do sprints. If dropping the fat is priority, then targeting the upper aerobic fuel burning system is the most ideal.

I do think you were trying to agree with me about the calories in v calories out though! Thats a given!

pinkboy

 

[Mooze]

Sprinters are plenty more shredded than endurance athletes, and hold more muscle mass and strength too.

How do you explain that, cos they definitely don't do long and slow time wasting aerobic exercise.

Have a look at any athletes diet - also the way the sprinters actually feed themselves (several that I know thought on the odd occasion they went over calorie allowance a good chunder session was in order - 100m max effort and bring it all up lactic acid included).

It also comes down to the outcome you want - weight loss vs fitness/speed - you can't eat and train for both at the same time (if you reduce the calories for weight loss you'll lose weight, but as you're also "starving" your muscles to use laymans terms, you won't actually increase you're fitness/speed from the workout, but from the actual drop in weight. 1kg loss = roughly 5 sec faster per k on run, depending on terrain).

If you're eating for fitness/speed - you'll have a set number of calories you need to eat and from certain food groups/types. You won't lose weight (cal in should = cal out to preserve muscle) doing this.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

So after a fair solid 6 weeks of training, Ive not lost a single kg, but my body shape has change considerably. It does however take this long for your body metabolism to get used to the fat burning, so I suspect I will drop a little weight, but not much as it turns to mor muscle mass where its needed in the shoulders and legs.

pinkboy

I can relate to this. I go for months at a time without losing any scale weight but my measurements and clothes sizes get smaller and smaller, I went 6 months last time without losing anything on the scale (as im nearly at goal weight) yet people kept commenting on how thin I was becoming. Yep body was recomping. I have been taking regular photos and it has been amazing to see just how different my body looks even though I've hardly lost anything on the scale in that time period.

About 8 weeks ago all of a sudden the scale decided to move so instead of hovering between 60 - 62 kg, i am now flucutating between 57.5 - 60 kg. I find I usually stay at this lower weight for a while before moving upward to the higher end. First I got to low 59 kg's and stayed there for a couple of weeks before losing more scale weight and getting to as low as 57.5, then I only stayed at 57.5 for a couple of weeks before moving up in weight. My body (as my past patterns of weight loss have shown) will soon shift back down the 57's soon. I doubt I will get any lower than 57 because I'm currently looking pretty damm lean. I'm getting more definition in my arms and tummy. My body may even settle in the high 50's, im not sure but who cares because its my body fat % and measurements and how I look that matters not some number on the scale.

Good luck with losing the fat. It takes a lot of patience and perserverance if you are finding the scale not to be moving but just remember the scale is not everything and if you are eating clean and exercising the scale eventually catches up.

I've lost 33 kg's now and its taken me since April 2010. I've been eating at a small defecit of between 1700 - 2300 depending on activity level. I've found this to work best for me as I have been able to maintain my muscle mass, have enough energy for my sports and my exercise. I have just had to be patient because its a long slow process. I eat clean 95% of the time. and have turned it into a lifestyle change

 

[pinkboy]

Sprinters are plenty more shredded than endurance athletes, and hold more muscle mass and strength too.

How do you explain that, cos they definitely don't do long and slow time wasting aerobic exercise.

Absolutely. Sprinters tend to do a lot of weights and much more explosive workouts, however, dont be naive, a sprinters weekly program will include a LSD run of some description, be it an hour recovery run, or even water running.

Bodyshapes are typically stereotyped though - there are plenty of whippets and incredible hulks in all forms of running as an example, playing their strengths and weaknesses in any given race.

I do believe however, a marathon runner would fair much better percentage wise doing a 100m sprint, than a sprinter doing a marathon. A top class marathon runner could probably run a 12sec 100m (20% give or take), but I reckon you be hard pressed to find a 100m specialist pull out a 2.30 marathon (20%).

LSD running is only junk miles if there is no purpose to the workout - thats the difference between a hack, and a serious athlete.

pinkboy

 

[Ace in the Hole]

We need to remember, weight loss is not the issue, body composition is.

I'd rather be a jacked and shredded 90kg at 6 ft tall, probably regarded as almost obese on the BMI radar, than a soft, skinny fat, 75kg weakling.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

There's no denying that fartlek and interval training is as good as long slow distance work. However, obese people raise a sweat lifting chips from the cupboard, let alone do sprints. If dropping the fat is priority, then targeting the upper aerobic fuel burning system is the most ideal.

I do think you were trying to agree with me about the calories in v calories out though! Thats a given!

pinkboy

Yep totally agree re: the obese losing weight. Yep when you have a lot to lose you need to follow an activity that you can safely do and have the fitness for and also something you will stick to.

When I first started losing my weight because I was so heavy I started walking and I'd walk for hours at a time haha sometimes 2 hours. My joints wern't so good and had knee problems because of the fat i was carrying so it was not a good idea for me to run then. Then as I got thinner and fitter I combined walking with jogging. Then after I lost more I started sprinting.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

It also comes down to the outcome you want - weight loss vs fitness/speed - you can't eat and train for both at the same time (if you reduce the calories for weight loss you'll lose weight, but as you're also "starving" your muscles to use laymans terms, you won't actually increase you're fitness/speed from the workout, but from the actual drop in weight. 1kg loss = roughly 5 sec faster per k on run, depending on terrain).

If you're eating for fitness/speed - you'll have a set number of calories you need to eat and from certain food groups/types. You won't lose weight (cal in should = cal out to preserve muscle) doing this.

You can if you eat at a small defecit. I'm proof of that. I have been eating at a small defecit. Lost it really slowly over 2 and a half years. I've have had enough energy for my exercise and have gotten extremely fit and lean.

 

[pinkboy]

Good luck with losing the fat. It takes a lot of patience and perserverance if you are finding the scale not to be moving but just remember the scale is not everything and if you are eating clean and exercising the scale eventually catches up.

Im not looking to really lose that much. I think my power to weight ratio will suffer too much, as I have really matured in the last few years. My work scope has had a lot to do with that. When I raced that race in 2004, I was about 4-5kg underweight, due to obsessive compulsiveness to do well.

I believe my body shape and power now, will make my comeback faster (in time), plus endurance athletes usually peak between say 28-nearly 40, so heaps of time to make a real go of trying to get back to the level I was once at and maybe beyond!

pinkboy

 

[BayView]

So after a fair solid 6 weeks of training, Ive not lost a single kg, but my body shape has change considerably. It does however take this long for your body metabolism to get used to the fat burning, so I suspect I will drop a little weight, but not much as it turns to mor muscle mass where its needed in the shoulders and legs.

pinkboy

I remember my sister got addicted to aerobics back in the late '80's.

She was going 4 to 5 times a week and dieting as a well.

The same thing happened to her; her weight hardly altered, but she became a lot slimmer and toned - totally different body shape.

I suspect the fat was burned off and replaced by much heavier muscle.

 

[pinkboy]

We need to remember, weight loss is not the issue, body composition is.

I'd rather be a jacked and shredded 90kg at 6 ft tall, probably regarded as almost obese on the BMI radar, than a soft, skinny fat, 75kg weakling.

Agree. Even I sit outside the 25 BMI limit to healthy weight, but Im no means a porker!

pinkboy

 

[Alex P Keaton]

well i better get back to work, lunch break is over. ill come back later

 

[Mooze]

You can if you eat at a small defecit. I'm proof of that. I have been eating at a small defecit. Lost it really slowly over 2 and a half years. I've have had enough energy for my exercise and have gotten extremely fit and lean.

Not really. I'm talking at the top end of the athletic scale rather than hacks. So true athletes rather than us weekend warriors. There might be times in the macro cycle where they have a slight deficit (ie coming off two week off season back into training), but if an athlete is eating for fitness/speed they won't run a deficit - easiest way to break your body.

But that's why it all comes down to what you're end goal is and what level you're at.