Fat loss - how to lose the bulge and gain the ripples

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Mar 22, 2002
10,484
16
81
I'll have to stop by Whole Foods on the way home, pick some up ... GF works there, we get a decent discount .. 30%.

Are there issues with taking more? I plan to do 2200~ calories a day, and try to just sustain my weight...6 foot, 220 LBS, age 23.

Would it even be possible to lose weight @ 2200 calories?
No, no real issues to taking more. Also, just as a side note, did you calculate your BMR? 2200 calories seems low for someone of your size, considering I'm about 5'9", 155, and 22 with a BMR of 1800-1900cal.
 

Terzo

Platinum Member
Dec 13, 2005
2,585
12
81
I have a question about the mechanics of BMR.

For one, do you need to be above BMR for simply calories taken in, or for calories in-calories out? E.G. if you have a BMR of 2000 calories, eat 2400, but expend 500 through activities. In that situation, your calories in are greater, but after expenditures you are below BMR. Does that send your body into starvation mode?

Other question, what time frame does it take for starvation mode to kick in? Given a BMR of 2000 calories, say over the course of two days you consume 4500 calories, but it's split 1500 calories the first day and 3000 the second day. Does your body start "starving" at the end of the first day, or is the timeframe short enough that you can average the two days to stay above BMR?

Sorry if I'm not clear, if there's any confusion I can answer your questions to clarify mine.
 
Mar 22, 2002
10,484
16
81
Carbohydrates is driving insulin is driving fat is driving health problems.
And stupidity is driving claims to cram macronutrients into the stigma of all being bad. Yeah, sugar is bad. Yeah, processed carbs are bad. Sure, wheat, rice, grains, they're pretty bad too. Sweet potatoes? Full of carbs and wonderful for you. Pineapple? A wonderful treat that staves off scurvy. Stop talking, please... especially in the name of paleo. You're not doing it any justice.
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
And stupidity is driving claims to cram macronutrients into the stigma of all being bad. Yeah, sugar is bad. Yeah, processed carbs are bad. Sure, wheat, rice, grains, they're pretty bad too. Sweet potatoes? Full of carbs and wonderful for you. Pineapple? A wonderful treat that staves off scurvy. Stop talking, please... especially in the name of paleo. You're not doing it any justice.
You deserve a seizure for your post. Please enlighten me how the body needs carbs to survive. Can someone not survive on a ketongenic diet.
 

Tencntraze

Senior member
Aug 7, 2006
570
0
0
You deserve a seizure for your post. Please enlighten me how the body needs carbs to survive. Can someone not survive on a ketongenic diet.
He never said that you can't survive without carbs. Given your user name and the associated nutrition plan, it's obvious what approach you subscribe to, but everyone has different needs. For example, since I play hockey and tennis several times per week, a ketogenic diet fails miserably for me; my energy level is just not there. Furthermore, I enjoy carbs and account for them in my intake. I enjoy food and have learned from past experience that I can't cut out everything I like; live to eat, not vice versa. You have to strike the balance between achieving your goals and enjoying life. Sure, if you need to lose a lot of weight you may need to be more strict, but being able to still sample things you like will help you keep it up in the long term.
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
He never said that you can't survive without carbs. Given your user name and the associated nutrition plan, it's obvious what approach you subscribe to, but everyone has different needs. For example, since I play hockey and tennis several times per week, a ketogenic diet fails miserably for me; my energy level is just not there. Furthermore, I enjoy carbs and account for them in my intake. I enjoy food and have learned from past experience that I can't cut out everything I like; live to eat, not vice versa. You have to strike the balance between achieving your goals and enjoying life. Sure, if you need to lose a lot of weight you may need to be more strict, but being able to still sample things you like will help you keep it up in the long term.
Thats cool....but you can still get carbs thru gluconeogenesis
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
Cardio should be done after weightlifting since it allows you to lift hard and have a much lower chance of injuring yourself due to excess muscle fatigue.
What type of cardio, aerobic, anaerobic?

For how long?

Whats the purpose of doing cardio after a lifting?

Is it necessary to to cardio after weightlifting?

Do you think if exercise is carried on for too long, glycogen begins to deplete and protein from muscles tissues is used to maintain glucose homeostasis?
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
And I quote...

"5 plate doesn't mean much...are they 45lb plates you are talking and a 45lb bar?

If you are having hip flexor issues though you are more than likely over training or pushing too much too fast.

If your hands are being torn apart chances are your form is suffering too."

Hip flexor issues are often flexibility issues - not injury or overtraining related. And hands being torn apart does NOT effect form. This is crap advice. It has no merit.

And that is not ignorance at all. Perhaps my word choice was lacking, but I corrected in a later post saying that I did not mean "look up in the movement past the horizon." I was telling him to look up from where his gaze was. I was saying to look AT the horizon rather than at the ground. He needed to push out his chest. Looking parallel to the ground makes that easier biomechanically.

And I'd love to hear how this is not educating people on how their bodies work and how to lose weight. I've read countless "how to" articles on weight loss and they are jokes - even the ones on bb websites. A 40/40/20 split is commonly used for bodybuilders as a cutting ratio usually because your calories are low and it allows you to maintain the amount of protein your body would need. If you're saying it's not commonly used, then I don't understand what kind of bodybuilders you deal with. It is THE most common I've seen used. I was cutting from about 13% -> 8%. This is an article for those over 15% to get to a respectable number.

Hm, don't have much experience in lifting... except in personally training, reading research, talking with athletes, talking with coaches and sports psychologists, athletic trainers, and exercise physiologists. I know what lifts creates explosive power. I know what lifts create strength. I know what lifts benefit with speed, with agility, with coordination. I know how long somebody should go and I know what they should do. I feel this is sufficient to be able to give advice from.

Referring to a standard weighted plate is fine. I'm really not going to argue with you about this because it's irrelevant. I must not attend "serious gyms" then clearly.

That's fine. Like I said, your abilities may be decent but that doesn't mean your coaching capabilities are matched. Your lifting numbers don't mean anything when it comes to trying to give info. When you can give logical information - that gives you the right to give your opinion. This is lacking though directly by your quoted post (and by others) that show you are talking out of your ass.
You're a walking wikipedia on exercise. :rolleyes: What's the best way to recruit fast twitch muscle fibers during weightlifting?
 
Mar 22, 2002
10,484
16
81
You deserve a seizure for your post. Please enlighten me how the body needs carbs to survive. Can someone not survive on a ketongenic diet.
They don't. But they do need carbohydrates to perform. Ever heard of that awesome thing called glycogen?
 
Mar 22, 2002
10,484
16
81
Thats cool....but you can still get carbs thru gluconeogenesis
Do you even know the process of gluconeogenesis? It is a process typically used under extreme conditions for survival. By no means is it the optimal way to produce carbohydate for utilization during exercise. The conversion wastes energy and is slow compared to digestion of regular carbs. Also, you do know that what you're saying is not Paleo's viewpoint, right? You're just an extremist condoning ketogenesis.
 
Mar 22, 2002
10,484
16
81
What type of cardio, aerobic, anaerobic?

For how long?

Whats the purpose of doing cardio after a lifting?

Is it necessary to to cardio after weightlifting?

Do you think if exercise is carried on for too long, glycogen begins to deplete and protein from muscles tissues is used to maintain glucose homeostasis?
Actually, I need to modify that in my post. New research has shown endurance exercise after resistance training inhibits hypertrophic pathways. I leave it open to the person. If they're a sprinter and they want to train sprints, then anaerobic. If they're an endurance athlete, do something longer. The purpose of cardio after lifting is typically to save time. It's not exactly optimal, but neural gains will still occur even if hypertrophic gains don't. It's a much better alternative than doing cardio before lifting.

Gluconeogenesis is an extreme condition. If the exercise is extreme (i.e. a marathon), then yes this does occur. If you run a 5k, then no. You know what's more efficient than gluconeogenesis during a marathon? Direct intake of carbohydrates. Go lead some research on a) performance, b) health and exercise, and c) insulin responses in an insulin sensitive individual. During exercise, glucose transporters used are insulin-independent, meaning near to no insulin response even to high GI carbs.
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
They don't. But they do need carbohydrates to perform. Ever heard of that awesome thing called glycogen?
Hiigh intense exercise promotes i think glycogenolysis....the breakdown of glucose within skeletel muscles. this breakdown restores insulin sensitivity on muscle cells, which are the greatest glycogen in the depot in the body.

I bet the averege human stores about 75 grams of glycogen in the liver and about 220 grams in the muscles...chicks store about 20% less. The glycogen thats is stores in the muscles is for on site only, whereas the glycogen that is stored in the liver serves to maintain glucose homeostatsis in the bloodstream..which is largely modulated on a long term basis by a balance between insulin and glucagon.

A similar process of tapping glycogen stores occurs during fight of flight situations..which in turn stimulates the secretion of stress hormones as epinephrine and norepinephrine. When such an event occurs the muscles cells empties intself of a significant amount of glycogen, which mans insulin can now act on cell surface, allowing glucose to reenter the muscle.

The same process that activates glycogenolysis also activitaves hormone sensitive lipase and the mobilization of fatty acides for energy utilization. SO during high intense training, yoou are gonna to be mobilizing both glucose and fatty acids into the bloodstream, where thay can be carried to the liver for beta oxidation....do you beta oxidation is?

Then they are taken into the mitochondria to produce 96 molecules of ATP.

Is this the glycogen you were talking about?!?!
 
Last edited:
Mar 22, 2002
10,484
16
81
Hiigh intense exercise promotes i think glycogenolysis....the breakdown of glucose within skeletel muscles. this breakdown restores insulin sensitivity on muscle cells, which are the greatest glycogen in the depot in the body.

I bet the averege human stores about 75 grams of glycogen in the liver and about 220 grams in the muscles...chicks store about 20% less. The glycogen thats is stores in the muscles is for on site only, whereas the glycogen that is stored in the liver serves to maintain glucose homeostatsis in the bloodstream..which is largely modulated on a long term basis by a balance between insulin and glucagon.

Is this the glycogen you were talking about?!?!
Yep, the thing that is reduces intrahepatically and intramuscularly with a low-carbohydrate diet, thereby decreasing ability to maintain duration and intensity in all exercise trials other than purely anaerobic. And actually, the glycogen breakdown doesn't do anything to affect insulin sensitivity. It is the induction of exercise itself that modifies the need for insulin.

PS: Way to use wikipedia. I've always been a fan.
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
The best way, in all technicality, is lifting heavy weight.
Science says the brain ascertains the precise amount of force your muscles require to move the resistance and accordingly recruits the precise amount of muscles fibers necessary to do the job economically as possible in terms of the body's energy systems.

Even though the force output from fast twitch fibers is much greater than the force output from slow twitch fibers, what you'll see on a molecular basis is that twitch velocity of fast twitch fibers is actually slower than slow twitch fibers. And also the rate of recovery is slower on fast twitch fibers.

Slow twitch fatigue slowly but recover quickly...fast twitch fatigue quicker and recovers slower.
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
Yep, the thing that is reduces intrahepatically and intramuscularly with a low-carbohydrate diet, thereby decreasing ability to maintain duration and intensity in all exercise trials other than purely anaerobic. And actually, the glycogen breakdown doesn't do anything to affect insulin sensitivity. It is the induction of exercise itself that modifies the need for insulin.

PS: Way to use wikipedia. I've always been a fan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycogenolysis

how did i use wiki?
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
Yep, the thing that is reduces intrahepatically and intramuscularly with a low-carbohydrate diet, thereby decreasing ability to maintain duration and intensity in all exercise trials other than purely anaerobic. And actually, the glycogen breakdown doesn't do anything to affect insulin sensitivity. It is the induction of exercise itself that modifies the need for insulin.

PS: Way to use wikipedia. I've always been a fan.
do you know what beta oxidation is?

DO you understand my post?
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
hm... So you suggest your nutrition plan, which is more complex than mine while mentioning that you lost 25 pounds of muscle while losing your fat weight. Sounds like you did exactly what i told people not to do. you don't have enough experience in the subject to give others advice. of course color doesn't matter. Neither does a lot of things. These are general guidelines. Please keep your lack of knowledge out of the h&f forums and especially out of this thread.

Also, to everybody else, i'll be making some small modifications for clarity and for correctness this week. I'll be looking for some educated feedback afterwards so lemme know what you think.

lol
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
For cardio, you gotta do what makes you happy and what keeps you entertained. I can't stand ellipticals because they're boring to me, but you can do whatever program you like - intervals, hills, slow and steady. Challenge yourself, just make sure to listen to your body when it needs a little break intermittently or when it just needs to be flat out done with the workout. That's a good heart rate, keep doin' what you're doin'.

General cardio workout equipment has an extremely inaccurate or rather imprecise measurement of calories expended. If you're losing weight, then that's the goal here. It's hard for me to tell you when there are varying calculations as to how many calories are burnt during an exercise. Like I said before, challenge yourself. Go hard, but know when it's time to go off. When running, I usually set a distance or a time and adjust my intensity accordingly. You could try that. I know some people just go till they don't want to anymore. Whatever works for you is the best option.
Ladies and gentlemen, the first law of thermodynamics, what goes in must come out in some other form or stay in, doesn't pertain to humans.

The energy balance theory...if you eat more calories, you put on lbs. If you burn calories you lose lbs. Doesn't matter where the calories come from. Its like balancing your check book, more you spend you're calorically in the red, make more than you spend you're calorically in the black.

Your cardiovascular system is always engaged.

How cardio works...energy enters the cell in the form of glucose. Once in the cell it is metabolized in the cytosol portion of the cell anaerobically through a series of some 20 chemical reactions until it becomes a chemical called pyruvate. This is an example of anaerobic metabolism. Pyruvate then is moved inside the mitochondria where it is metabolized through a process make use of the Krebs cycle and repiratory chain. This process converts pyruvate to a total of 36 molecules of ATP...this process is called aerobic metabolism.

THE PROBLEM IS THE BELIEF THAT AEROBIC METABOLIC PATHWAYS CAN IN FACT BE ISOLATED FROM THE REST OF THE METABOLISM.

The reality is that metabolism is an uninterruopted whole that is intrinsically tied together.
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
Weight loss is a result of taking in fewer calories than your body actually burns. This forces your body to dip into its natural stores of energy (aka fat cells). 3025 is your calculated caloric maintenance level. That means that if you take in that amount every day, nothing will happen. You won't lose weight and you won't gain weight; therefore you want to be under that number.

However, I think that the calculation becomes a bit skewed for you. You're a pretty big guy if I remember correctly from your other thread and sometimes the calculations start to get a bit incorrect. For example, I would expect you to burn a great deal more than ~250 calories greater than your BMR. Those with a greater amount of weight to lose can sustain a greater caloric deficit usually. However, I'll be totally honest here, I don't have as much experience with that sort of situation. I usually tell people not to go below their BMR, but I honestly think you could go with consuming 2500-2700 calories a day and be perfectly fine. Be sure to track calories too because if you don't, you'll realize that you're often times getting too little or too much food. If you have any other questions, continue to ask (or PM me). I'd be glad to help.
See above post...this guy has no clue. First Law of Themodynamics.
 

Paleo

Junior Member
Oct 14, 2010
22
0
0
Or you could just eat right, be in a caloric deficit, and not be hungry at all. You don't have to be hungry. Don't tell people to be hungry. It's not your place because that just shows that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Practice what you preach.
 
Mar 22, 2002
10,484
16
81
do you know what beta oxidation is?

DO you understand my post?
Yes. Do you understand the rate of beta oxidation? That occurs at low level exercise. At roughly 70% VO2max, half of the energy used to fuel exercise comes from fats (beta oxidation + TCA cycle) and half comes from carbohydrates (TCA cycle, anaerobic glycolysis). Beta oxidation occurs at a significantly slower rate, meaning intensity is unable to be maintained based just off of that. Now let's put that into context... You're low-carbing it. Your glycogen stores are half of what they are in a normal person. You work at 80% of your VO2max, which is dominantly carbohydrate fueled. Your glycogen stores will deplete in a short time and the ability to increase intensity will be lost. Even the meal before a competition will affect the duration of exercise at a given intensity. Go look in any exercise physiology book and it will show you that someone eating a fat-dominant meal can only last around 3 hours at low level exercise compared to someone who ate a carbohydrate meal (lasting over 4 hours).
 
Mar 22, 2002
10,484
16
81
Ladies and gentlemen, the first law of thermodynamics, what goes in must come out in some other form or stay in, doesn't pertain to humans.

The energy balance theory...if you eat more calories, you put on lbs. If you burn calories you lose lbs. Doesn't matter where the calories come from. Its like balancing your check book, more you spend you're calorically in the red, make more than you spend you're calorically in the black.

Your cardiovascular system is always engaged.

How cardio works...energy enters the cell in the form of glucose. Once in the cell it is metabolized in the cytosol portion of the cell anaerobically through a series of some 20 chemical reactions until it becomes a chemical called pyruvate. This is an example of anaerobic metabolism. Pyruvate then is moved inside the mitochondria where it is metabolized through a process make use of the Krebs cycle and repiratory chain. This process converts pyruvate to a total of 36 molecules of ATP...this process is called aerobic metabolism.

THE PROBLEM IS THE BELIEF THAT AEROBIC METABOLIC PATHWAYS CAN IN FACT BE ISOLATED FROM THE REST OF THE METABOLISM.

The reality is that metabolism is an uninterruopted whole that is intrinsically tied together.
So let me get this straight... The first law of thermodynamics doesn't apply... and then you say calories in vs calories out does? Either you're not explaining yourself well or you're making some seriously contradictory statements.

Also, what does the CV system have to do with this? We don't talk about the cardiovascular system burning the majority of calories during exercise. We talk about skeletal muscle, since that requires most of the energy utilized in movement.

And now you spout off irrelevant information? Talking about glucose, a carbohydrate derivative... Which is not created by gluconeogenesis, except in EXTREME conditions. You don't seem to understand the conditions under which GNG occurs. It's called starvation. Marathon running. Not everyday life. People survive via ketogenesis on KETONE BODIES, not exactly a preferable source compared to glucose.

The rest of your post made no sense at all. I have no idea what you were trying to say.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY