a workout schedule to lose weight

[Goi]

fakebun, if you're really serious about losing fat, I suggest you pick up a nutrition book, and then pickup a training book. I recommend anything by John Berardi, Chris Mohr or Mike Roussell on the nutrition side, and Cosgrove's Afterburn or Ballantyne's Turbulence Training on the training side. If you follow those programs, you are GUARANTEED to lose fat.

 

[KoolDrew]

Originally posted by: Goi
fakebun, if you're really serious about losing fat, I suggest you pick up a nutrition book, and then pickup a training book. I recommend anything by John Berardi, Chris Mohr or Mike Roussell on the nutrition side, and Cosgrove's Afterburn or Ballantyne's Turbulence Training on the training side. If you follow those programs, you are GUARANTEED to lose fat.

Diet - Guide to Flexible Dieting by Lyle McDonald
Training - Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe

Oh.. and Girth Control by Alan Aragon.. and New Rules of Lifting by Alwyn Cosgrove

 

[fakebun]

alrighty

thanks alot guys. really appreciated =)

 

[Goi]

Yes, I forgot about Lyle McDonald.

Starting Strength and NROL are great books for learning the lifts, and should be in every beginner's book list, but the ones I mentioned were just more geared towards fat loss. When in doubt, get them all.

 

[spamsk8r]

Originally posted by: TecHNooB

Originally posted by: paulxcook

Originally posted by: TecHNooB
I would go with high protein, medium carbs, low fat. You weigh 240, so you should consume around 320g protein, 180g carbs, 60g fat. Eat this amount between 5-6 meals spaced 2-3 hours in between. Consume most of your carbs and fat in the morning and eat protein throughout the day. Do at least 15-30 minutes of cardio a day and moderate lifting a few times a week.

If he's not trying to bulk up or even gain much muscle at all, do you really think he needs that much protein? The starting point is usually about 1 gram per pound of body weight, or even lean body mass.

Well, the way I see it, too many extra carbs slow down fatloss. And you don't want too much fat in your diet when slimming down. So the only way to add extra calories is by adding more protein. The numbers I mentioned add up to around 2540 calories. He weighs 240 lbs which means his maintainence is at least 2640 calories. If he doesn't drop 1 lb a week, lower the amount of protein. I don't recommend adding more carbs or fat though.

I am so sick of this misinformation. No offense to you, TecHNooB, but this is patently false. Adding fat is probably one of the better ways to slim down for a multitude of reasons. First, fat does not provoke an insulin response, meaning that there is less insulin that will be transporting calories into your fat cells. Second, fat fills you up better than protein or carbs. You have to eat less of it, but you feel fuller and more satisfied. If you eat good fats you will be helping your body, not harming it. If you reduce your carbohydrate intake enough, your body will run off fat for fuel almost completely, so it's not like we can't handle it.

Let me say this for one last time: Eating fat will not make you fat. Eating too many calories will make you fat. The macronutrient ratios, to be honest, are not that important. It has been shown that low-carb, high-fat diets work, and low-fat, high-carb diets work. The calories are the important thing. I tend towards the lower carb myself, as its more sustainable (percentage of calories: 40% carbs, 30% fat, 30% protein) as a lifestyle for me, but do whatever you think you can sustain, that's the important part.

 

[Goi]

40% carbs isn't low carbs really. Most low carb diets tend to be limited to 50g/day, at least initially. But yes, eating fat doesn't make you fat, but the amount of various macronutrients DO count, because of the TEF as well as hormonal response. It has been shown in most cases that low carb, high fat diets works better for fat loss than low fat, high carb diet, but of course, total caloric intake still counts.

 

[KoolDrew]

40% carbs isn't low carbs really.

Why do people insist on always using percentages when referring to macronutrients? Telling somebody to eat 40% of carbs is meaningless unless recommended within the context of total calories. Depending on the individual, 40% could be far too low, just about right, or too high, depending on their caloric needs and goals. An individual with a calorie level set at 3000 would be consuming 300g of carbs (40%), which may be just right. A lighter individual, with a much lower calorie level (say 1500) would only be getting 150g of carbs, which is far too little for the long term with the exception of inactive individuals. Both would be consuming 40% of their daily calories in carbs though.

Look at things in grams, not percentages. For people involved in weight training protein should be set to around 1-1.25g per LBM, carbs should be no lower than 100g and more should be added the more active you are. Then whatever is left should be from fats. That's how I like to do it anyway. Find whatever you're comfortable with, just make sure you're getting enough protein.

 

[Goi]

My reply was in the context of spamsk8r's post. 40% of any meaningful caloric intake would not be low carb. I assume he's not eating like Nicole Richie. And people can survive on <100g of carbs long term, no problem. That's how humans survived before agriculture, for millions of years.

 

[KoolDrew]

And people can survive on <100g of carbs long term, no problem. That's how humans survived before agriculture, for millions of years.

Where did I say anything about survival? People can easily survive with protein intakes well under 1g per pound of LBM, still doesn't mean you should consume that little.

 

[Goi]

OK, let me rephrase myself, people can also do well on low carb diets when strength training, with carb refeeds. Lotsa diets follow these similar principles.

 

[KoolDrew]

Originally posted by: Goi
OK, let me rephrase myself, people can also do well on low carb diets when strength training, with carb refeeds. Lotsa diets follow these similar principles.

That I agree with. The part you left out was with refeeds.

As a matter of fact, I'm dieting right now and following a similar approach. 11-12 days of carb and calorie restriction, and then a 3 day refeed. Dropped 2 inches off my waist and I'm on day 10 right now and strength has actually been increasing as well. Currently sitting at probably 13% bodyfat (started at probably 16%). Those are just guesses though because my bodyfat tester is a peice of crap. Currently says I'm at 9%, which I definitely know isn't true. Anyway, after the refeed plan to take a 2 week break and then follow a UD2.0 type approach to get down to 7-8% (4 day calorie/carb restriction with glycogen depletion workouts, followed by a 2-day carb load, then 2 days of maintenance, repeat).

 

[Goi]

Good luck with that.

 

[fakebun]

well so far i dont know if i lost any weight or not since its only been 3 days since i start my diet and workout. my scale is a pos so its not accurate >.<

at least I feel better by eating healthy now.

peanut butter and whole grain bread
granola cereal and bar
alot of fruits
chicken breasts
eggs
and water

I really do hope i can lose up to 20lbs in 2 months tho...a bet with my sister haha...300$ if i lose 20lbs in 2months

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

Originally posted by: Goi
OK, let me rephrase myself, people can also do well on low carb diets when strength training, with carb refeeds. Lotsa diets follow these similar principles.

That I agree with. The part you left out was with refeeds.

As a matter of fact, I'm dieting right now and following a similar approach. 11-12 days of carb and calorie restriction, and then a 3 day refeed. Dropped 2 inches off my waist and I'm on day 10 right now and strength has actually been increasing as well. Currently sitting at probably 13% bodyfat (started at probably 16%). Those are just guesses though because my bodyfat tester is a peice of crap. Currently says I'm at 9%, which I definitely know isn't true. Anyway, after the refeed plan to take a 2 week break and then follow a UD2.0 type approach to get down to 7-8% (4 day calorie/carb restriction with glycogen depletion workouts, followed by a 2-day carb load, then 2 days of maintenance, repeat).

As far as I know, the only purpose of a carb refeed in a low carb diet/weight training regiment is for the energy boost because anaerobic exercise pulls directly from glucose and glycogen. The idea being that someone who lifts significantly needs to be at 100% efficiency for their lifting periods or they would actually fall behind.

 

[KoolDrew]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: KoolDrew

Originally posted by: Goi
OK, let me rephrase myself, people can also do well on low carb diets when strength training, with carb refeeds. Lotsa diets follow these similar principles.

That I agree with. The part you left out was with refeeds.

As a matter of fact, I'm dieting right now and following a similar approach. 11-12 days of carb and calorie restriction, and then a 3 day refeed. Dropped 2 inches off my waist and I'm on day 10 right now and strength has actually been increasing as well. Currently sitting at probably 13% bodyfat (started at probably 16%). Those are just guesses though because my bodyfat tester is a peice of crap. Currently says I'm at 9%, which I definitely know isn't true. Anyway, after the refeed plan to take a 2 week break and then follow a UD2.0 type approach to get down to 7-8% (4 day calorie/carb restriction with glycogen depletion workouts, followed by a 2-day carb load, then 2 days of maintenance, repeat).

As far as I know, the only purpose of a carb refeed in a low carb diet/weight training regiment is for the energy boost because anaerobic exercise pulls directly from glucose and glycogen. The idea being that someone who lifts significantly needs to be at 100% efficiency for their lifting periods or they would actually fall behind.

A structured refeed will refill muscle glycogen, help to spare LBM loss, and help normalize all the hormones related with metabolic slowdown. Also, if done properly refeeds can be used to rebuild muscle lost during the diet phase, which is the idea behind Lyle McDonalds Ultimate Diet 2.0

 

[teh spazz]

You guys are getting too scientific. He needs to eat a 500 calorie deficit of his bmr. Being 6'3 he probably is burning ~2400. Therefore, 1900-2000 calories is a GREAT number to be at. That's a good number for non-workout days. On workout-days up it by about 300.

The best part about losing weight is you get to eat A LOT...which is awesome.

My diet:

Morning: Raisin bran w/ skim milk ~ 400 calories
Meal 2 (Around 10:30): Protein Bar ~14g Protein ~240 calories
Meal 3 (Around 12-1): Chicken Breast or Thigh Sandwich ~35g Protein ~500 Calories
Meal 4 (Around 2-3): Chicken Breast or Thigh Sandiwch ~35g Protein ~500 Calories
I Then go to the Gym
Post-Gym Protein Shake: ~80g Protein ~600 Calories
Meal 5 (Around 7-8): Turkey Tacos/Chicken Breast/Brown Rice/Veggies ~40g Protein 500 Calories
Meal 6 (Before I sleep ~10): Cottage Cheese and some frozen berries ~150 calories ~15g protein

That's my diet for bulking (I'm 6'1 195lbs) which really isn't enough. If you take out the protein shake, it is very easy to convert that to a fat loss diet. For my sandwiches I use mustard ( a lot of it) and lettuce and chicken that was grilled on a foreman grill. It's easy and tastes pretty good. Find stuff that works for you and get into that mode of feeding your muscles to burn the fat away. Enjoy your diet and have fun working out.

 

[spamsk8r]

Originally posted by: Goi
40% carbs isn't low carbs really. Most low carb diets tend to be limited to 50g/day, at least initially. But yes, eating fat doesn't make you fat, but the amount of various macronutrients DO count, because of the TEF as well as hormonal response. It has been shown in most cases that low carb, high fat diets works better for fat loss than low fat, high carb diet, but of course, total caloric intake still counts.

40% is low compared to the recommended amount of 55-65%, but no, it's not ketogenic.