[KETO] Just How Important are Carbohydrates for Athletes...Really?

[eezergood]

On 7/21/2019 at 10:54 AM, ExpatOilWorker said:

Lots of good information in this thread.

I am not a fitness person per se, but mainly going to the gym to get rid of some bally fat, this has proven harder than I anticipated.

I don't do any kind if specific diet, keto or otherwise, but generally limit my food intake. I go to the gym twice a week each time doing 40 min flat out on a bike at about 170-175 W with a 160-165 pulse.

 

Am I on the right track or could I do something different to get rid of my belly?

cannot spot reduce buddy, just keep at it. However we do adapt so change it up a little, try to do cycle sprints followed by medium pace etc..... 

[WaveHunter]

1 hour ago, eezergood said:

cannot spot reduce buddy, just keep at it. However we do adapt so change it up a little, try to do cycle sprints followed by medium pace etc..... 

As @eezergood said, there's no such thing as spot reducing body fat.  As I mentioned before, There’s a saying, “Abs are made in the kitchen, not the gym.  Exercise alone will strengthen, stabilize, and tone the body.  It will also improve your metabolic health greatly, and thus make your body more efficient at using food (and your stored body fat) for energy instead of being stored as body fat. 

 

In the final analysis though if you are carrying body fat on your belly (or anywhere else) that you want to lose, fixing your diet is the only way it's going to happen.

 

It's not so much about cutting calories as it is about proper food selection.  Just avoiding heavily processed foods made with high fructose corn syrup (which is hidden in almost all processed food to some extent), and avoiding junky snacks, will do amazing things for excess fat loss around the belly and everywhere else ????

 

Edited July 22, 2019 by WaveHunter

[eezergood]

13 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

As @eezergood said, there's no such thing as spot reducing body fat.  As I mentioned before, There’s a saying, “Abs are made in the kitchen, not the gym.  Exercise alone will strengthen, stabilize, and tone the body.  It will also improve your metabolic health greatly, and thus make your body more efficient at using food (and your stored body fat) for energy instead of being stored as body fat. 

 

In the final analysis though if you are carrying body fat on your belly (or anywhere else) that you want to lose, fixing your diet is the only way it's going to happen.

 

It's not so much about cutting calories as it is about proper food selection.  Just avoiding heavily processed foods made with high fructose corn syrup (which is hidden in almost all processed food to some extent), and avoiding junky snacks, will do amazing things for excess fat loss around the belly and everywhere else ????

 

I agree - HOWEVER if you are a beginner or haven't trained for a while, simply reduce caloric intake is your first step. This should then be followed by weight training, then cardio. Establish a routine & (where possible) cut out the crap, if you enjoy a beer/cake/chocolate etc..... just make allowances in your diet for that food. DO NOT look at foods as a reward or good & bad, in my opinion this is the wrong strategy. Learn to adapt them into your diet, then start to look at your macros and other factors. 

[WaveHunter]

2 hours ago, eezergood said:

I agree - HOWEVER if you are a beginner or haven't trained for a while, simply reduce caloric intake is your first step. This should then be followed by weight training, then cardio. Establish a routine & (where possible) cut out the crap, if you enjoy a beer/cake/chocolate etc..... just make allowances in your diet for that food. DO NOT look at foods as a reward or good & bad, in my opinion this is the wrong strategy. Learn to adapt them into your diet, then start to look at your macros and other factors. 

Everybody needs to do what works for them, so I agree with you on that BUT sometimes you have to make sacrifices and change bad habits as hard as it may seem.

 

Eating cake and drinking beer is not an effective strategy for fat loss, and if you are really serious about fat loss, you simply have to have the will power to say "no" to these things, and be willing to look at food more as fuel for the body, and not simply as a source of pleasure.

 

Caloric restriction is, of course, necessary, but proper food selection makes this a lot easier.  Simply avoiding "bad" carbs (processed foods) is a lot easier than severe caloric restriction.  For most people, that along with a less sedentary lifestyle will solve overweight issues.

 

As regards resistance training (and unlike cardio based exercise), it can have a huge positive effect on fat loss in terms of metabolic changes that occur as a result.  It seriously changes metabolic hormonal balance in a positive and long-term way that enhances how the body metabolizes fat stores.  The way it changes hormonal balance also has a psychological effect that replaces the desire to eat junky foods. 

 

And you have to remember that as you age, you naturally lose lean body mass which just exacerbates body fat storage.  Resistance training is the only way to counter this.

 

Combining diet with resistance training is the optimal way to lose body fat, even for someone who's never set foot inside a gym and irregardless of their age, and even if they have disabilities (with the help of a good coach or trainer).

 

That's just my opinion, and again, I agree with you, that one can only do what one can do, BUT sometimes in life, you have to be willing to go beyond what you think your limits are, if you are to make positive lifestyle changes. 

 

Most people find they can accomplish far more than they believe.  Just about everybody is capable of such changes if they are truly serious about fat loss.  It all really boils down to how much you really want it. 

Edited July 23, 2019 by WaveHunter

[stephenterry]

1 hour ago, eezergood said:

I agree - HOWEVER if you are a beginner or haven't trained for a while, simply reduce caloric intake is your first step. This should then be followed by weight training, then cardio. Establish a routine & (where possible) cut out the crap, if you enjoy a beer/cake/chocolate etc..... just make allowances in your diet for that food. DO NOT look at foods as a reward or good & bad, in my opinion this is the wrong strategy. Learn to adapt them into your diet, then start to look at your macros and other factors. 

I wouldn't promote any caloric intake reduction, because such CICO diets don't work - as has been scientifically proven - in that the body reacts by lowering the metabolic rate to compensate. 

 

A preferred weight loss regime, IMO, is to undertake Intermittent fasting, and to engage ketosis (which burns fat) and which doesn't reduce metabolic rate.  Anyone who has 'taught' the body to accept ketosis would enter that state some 12 hours after the last meal. Once fat burning begins, then look at a nutrition lifestyle change to eat healthier either before or when the desired weight loss is achieved.

 

As for Carbs, I'm a little hesitant in agreeing - or even suggesting - that the human body doesn't need Carbs to exist.

Why? 

Mainly, because I believe that a proper balance between (low) carbs, (high) fat and (good) protein is an essential nutritional factor - and the absence of one component is not conducive to maximum health benefits for the human body.

 

I'm just one person (out of billions) who has established a healthy dietary routine that works for me, and has maintained weight loss, but now looking to build muscle. 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[stephenterry]

WH said: -

As regards resistance training (and unlike cardio based exercise), it can have a huge positive effect on fat loss in terms of metabolic changes that occur as a result.  It seriously changes metabolic hormonal balance in a positive and long-term way that enhances how the body metabolizes fat stores.  The way it changes hormonal balance also has a psychological effect that replaces the desire to eat junky foods.

 

Combining diet with resistance training is the optimal way to lose body fat, even for someone who's never set foot inside a gym and irregardless of their age, and even if they have disabilities (with the help of a good coach or trainer).

 

That's just my opinion, and again, I agree with you, that one can only do what one can do, BUT sometimes in life, you have to be willing to go beyond what you think your limits are, if you are to make positive lifestyle changes. 

 

Most people find they can accomplish far more than they believe.  Just about everybody is capable of such changes if they are truly serious about fat loss.  It all really boils down to how much you really want it. 

 

 

Exactly. I agree. In your opinion what is the 'lowest' weight that is required for resistance training to be beneficial? Apologies for not knowing how the exercises - deadlift, squat, etc work and what muscle groups are benefitted.    

 

[WaveHunter]

3 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

I wouldn't promote any caloric intake reduction, because such CICO diets don't work - as has been scientifically proven - in that the body reacts by lowering the metabolic rate to compensate. 

 

A preferred weight loss regime, IMO, is to undertake Intermittent fasting, and to engage ketosis (which burns fat) and which doesn't reduce metabolic rate.  Anyone who has 'taught' the body to accept ketosis would enter that state some 12 hours after the last meal. Once fat burning begins, then look at a nutrition lifestyle change to eat healthier either before or when the desired weight loss is achieved.

 

As for Carbs, I'm a little hesitant in agreeing - or even suggesting - that the human body doesn't need Carbs to exist.

Why? 

Mainly, because I believe that a proper balance between (low) carbs, (high) fat and (good) protein is an essential nutritional factor - and the absence of one component is not conducive to maximum health benefits for the human body.

 

I'm just one person (out of billions) who has established a healthy dietary routine that works for me, and has maintained weight loss, but now looking to build muscle. 

 

Well, I think, technically, caloric reduction is a necessary element in fat loss, but agree 100% that a diet based totally on CICO have been been proven to be completely ineffective in the long run.

 

The trick is to reduce calories in a way that does not cause a metabolic slowdown.  IMO, restricting carbs is the key.  Consuming zero carbs isn't necessary.  Even being in ketosis isn't necessary even though it is highly effective.

 

As you say, striking an ideal balance of macronutrients that works for specifically for an individual is the way to go since everybody reacts to foods differently.  

 

I agree that carbs certainly play a positive role in optimal metabolic health.  The problem is simply that most people believe you need a lot more carbs than you really need, and they also believe that a carb is simply a carb, and don't distinguish between "engineered" carbs such as high fructose corn syrup, and natural ones such as whole fruit.

 

To me, it just seems natural and logical to eat the way nature intended.  Take processed foods out of the equation, and the body is smart enough to handle the rest.  I truly believe this! 

 

Add to this the fact that the body naturally loses lean body mass as we age, and countering this with resistance training (along with sound nutrition) is the ticket to maintaining optimal metabolic health...and more importantly, a happy sense of well-being.

 

It's really not rocket science when you think about it; it just makes common sense.

[WaveHunter]

5 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

WH said: -

As regards resistance training (and unlike cardio based exercise), it can have a huge positive effect on fat loss in terms of metabolic changes that occur as a result.  It seriously changes metabolic hormonal balance in a positive and long-term way that enhances how the body metabolizes fat stores.  The way it changes hormonal balance also has a psychological effect that replaces the desire to eat junky foods.

 

Combining diet with resistance training is the optimal way to lose body fat, even for someone who's never set foot inside a gym and irregardless of their age, and even if they have disabilities (with the help of a good coach or trainer).

 

That's just my opinion, and again, I agree with you, that one can only do what one can do, BUT sometimes in life, you have to be willing to go beyond what you think your limits are, if you are to make positive lifestyle changes. 

 

Most people find they can accomplish far more than they believe.  Just about everybody is capable of such changes if they are truly serious about fat loss.  It all really boils down to how much you really want it. 

 

 

Exactly. I agree. In your opinion what is the 'lowest' weight that is required for resistance training to be beneficial? Apologies for not knowing how the exercises - deadlift, squat, etc work and what muscle groups are benefitted.    

 

@robblok knows far more about this than I do but any weight that tears apart muscle fibers will result in atrophy.  Even starting out with super light weight in the beginning (even just an empty barbell) is beneficial in the beginning.  Knowing how to progress to heavier weights and having a workout schedule that allows for proper muscle recover is key.  Remember that with resistance training, your gains come from the period of recovery, not the actual lifting of the weights, so proper workout schedules are critical.

 

The best advice I could give someone who's never done resistance training before is to get a good trainer or coach in the beginning.  Easier said than done though.  Personal trainers run the gamut in terms of knowledge and coaching ability but if you look around you can find a good one.  

 

I decided to get serious with weight training and found an amazing trainer here in Pattaya who only charges me 300 baht per session.  That's a steal!  He is a former competitive powerlifter and now a gym owner, and even though bulking up is not my goal, the guy knows his shit, and has put together an amazing program that's tailored to my specific needs.  3 days a week, 45 minutes per session is not a huge time commitment for what I get out of it.

[stephenterry]

Taking processed foods out of the equation  - in today's world - is almost impossible to achieve. And made even more difficult by 'producers' pumping chemicals and unnatural foodstuffs into animals to fatten them up, and by spraying pesticides over crops.

 

To expect a family, in entering a supermarket, to be able to identify exactly which foodstuffs are 'natural' is an expectation too far.

 

For example, tins of 'Arctic' salmon would be non-processed, while canned Tuna is dubious (owing to its size and ability to consume pesticides etc.). Smaller fish like Mackerel, Herring and Sardines are probably okay. However, all farmed fish, beef, pork and chicken and eggs are likely not free-range pasture bred unless stated - and they would be the most expensive that would be rejected by the shoppers.

 

I could go on. But you can see a healthy diet is not easy to find. 

  

 

 

  

[WaveHunter]

40 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

WH said: -

As regards resistance training (and unlike cardio based exercise), it can have a huge positive effect on fat loss in terms of metabolic changes that occur as a result.  It seriously changes metabolic hormonal balance in a positive and long-term way that enhances how the body metabolizes fat stores.  The way it changes hormonal balance also has a psychological effect that replaces the desire to eat junky foods.

 

Combining diet with resistance training is the optimal way to lose body fat, even for someone who's never set foot inside a gym and irregardless of their age, and even if they have disabilities (with the help of a good coach or trainer).

 

That's just my opinion, and again, I agree with you, that one can only do what one can do, BUT sometimes in life, you have to be willing to go beyond what you think your limits are, if you are to make positive lifestyle changes. 

 

Most people find they can accomplish far more than they believe.  Just about everybody is capable of such changes if they are truly serious about fat loss.  It all really boils down to how much you really want it. 

 

 

Exactly. I agree. In your opinion what is the 'lowest' weight that is required for resistance training to be beneficial? Apologies for not knowing how the exercises - deadlift, squat, etc work and what muscle groups are benefitted.    

 

Also just want to add...a GREAT book you should read is called Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe.  It's one of the best barbell-based training books ever written, and is considered the "Bible" of weightlifting by many people. 

 

IMO he is a great man, providing novices and experts alike, with a straight-forward, no-nonsense, but completely science-based understanding of resistance training that translate into effective and safe workouts in the gym for everybody, irregardless of age, experience, or fitness level. 

 

One of the best fitness books I have ever read!  He also has a ton of YouTube videos that are pretty informative, and his brash, politically incorrect way of teaching makes them fun to watch! 

 

He's one of the few people that actually deserves the title of "guru" ????

 

Edited July 23, 2019 by WaveHunter

[WaveHunter]

46 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

Taking processed foods out of the equation  - in today's world - is almost impossible to achieve. And made even more difficult by 'producers' pumping chemicals and unnatural foodstuffs into animals to fatten them up, and by spraying pesticides over crops.

 

To expect a family, in entering a supermarket, to be able to identify exactly which foodstuffs are 'natural' is an expectation too far.

 

For example, tins of 'Arctic' salmon would be non-processed, while canned Tuna is dubious (owing to its size and ability to consume pesticides etc.). Smaller fish like Mackerel, Herring and Sardines are probably okay. However, all farmed fish, beef, pork and chicken and eggs are likely not free-range pasture bred unless stated - and they would be the most expensive that would be rejected by the shoppers.

 

I could go on. But you can see a healthy diet is not easy to find. 

Yes I agree it's hard to avoid precessed foods completely these days but you can still make intelligent choices.  Learning to read food labels is the key.  Knowing the tricks that the processed food producers use in labelling is important.

 

For instance, anything that is labelled as "low fat" is almost certainly loaded with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).  If all you did was avoid these type of products, you'd make great strides at eating a more healthy diet.  Another trick they use is to not list "sugar" content but instead break down sugar content into sub-components of sugar (usually with generic chemical names) so it appears there is less sugar in a product than there really is.

 

There are all sorts of smart ways to shop in supermarkets.  For instance, supermarkets are all laid out in a certain way.  Foods that are healthy and good for you are generally located around the periphery of the store.  More heavily processed foods are generally located along aisles, and tho most processed ones are located ay eye level on shelves.  Products that contains TONS of sugar and thus appealing to children are located on shelves low enough for them to see them, and usually use cartoon like characters to attract the interest of children!

 

It might be hard to shop for completely natural, unprocessed foods without spending a fortune, but you can put a real dent in it by being informed and shopping smart.

 

As for animal-based protein type foods, yeah I agree it's hard and expensive to buy free-range, or non-farmed product.  If you can afford to buy the best, then you should, but in Thailand that can be difficult. 

 

I'll buy the best quality that's available at a fair and reasonable price.  Sometimes it may mean canned tuna, or other non "organic" foods, but in the grand scheme of things, I wonder just how bad these products really might be.  I'm not so sure if some of this stuff is not just a bit over-hyped, ya know?

 

Edited July 23, 2019 by WaveHunter

[stephenterry]

I found this amusing, sort of. Taken my live-in to Rimping (a high-class farang supermarket in CM) a few days ago. I carried out my carefully inspected organic fruit and vegetables shopping while she found a packet of almond cookies - her nighttime snack.

 

While she's a mini-marathon runner, her attention to a healthy diet is not - loves chocolate and sugary drinks. Anyway, back home, I chanced upon the cookies, with a photo-cover showing a cascade of roasted almonds which was why she bought the packet. 

 

So I looked at the contents list -in English - and spotted sugar, fructose, glucose, sugar additives and about 20 ingredients. Right at the bottom with the least content I spotted 'almonds'. The description was - wait for it - ARTIFICIAL ALMOND FLAVOURING!!! 

 

And the producers get away with it...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[WaveHunter]

13 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

I found this amusing, sort of. Taken my live-in to Rimping (a high-class farang supermarket in CM) a few days ago. I carried out my carefully inspected organic fruit and vegetables shopping while she found a packet of almond cookies - her nighttime snack.

 

While she's a mini-marathon runner, her attention to a healthy diet is not - loves chocolate and sugary drinks. Anyway, back home, I chanced upon the cookies, with a photo-cover showing a cascade of roasted almonds which was why she bought the packet. 

 

So I looked at the contents list -in English - and spotted sugar, fructose, glucose, sugar additives and about 20 ingredients. Right at the bottom with the least content I spotted 'almonds'. The description was - wait for it - ARTIFICIAL ALMOND FLAVOURING!!! 

 

And the producers get away with it...

 

Funny but not surprising ????.  Which Rimping do you shop at...Maya Mall?  I lived right around the corner from there; shopped there daily even if it was expensive, though the one over by the river had a much bigger selection.  Plenty of decent food but prices for fresh fruit & veggies was a little ridiculous.

 

I used to regularly go over to the Muang Mai open air market by the river for fruit and veggies.  I never saw such an amazing market like that anywhere.  Now that I'm living in Pattaya, I really miss it, and the Food Court at Maya too LOL!

 

I miss Chinag Mai in general; never had a problem finding good food there; a lot harder down here for sure.

 

Edited July 23, 2019 by WaveHunter

[stephenterry]

Open air fruit and veggies market right next to my moobaan home. Huge selection and inexpensive, yet I still wonder where the sellers get their produce from as some tables are stacked high three times a week. Unlikely to be home grown?

 

Could be bought from the Wholesalers, who no doubt use pesticides...

 

But don't locate back here, unless using a visa agent. On many occasions, I've heard that Immigration are the pits...

   

[WaveHunter]

5 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

Open air fruit and veggies market right next to my moobaan home. Huge selection and inexpensive, yet I still wonder where the sellers get their produce from as some tables are stacked high three times a week. Unlikely to be home grown?

 

Could be bought from the Wholesalers, who no doubt use pesticides...

 

But don't locate back here, unless using a visa agent. On many occasions, I've heard that Immigration are the pits...

   

That's partly why I left.  CM IMM was just getting more and more ridiculous to deal with.  Down here IMM is a breeze!  Still though, there's something about Chiang Mai that's unique and I miss it.

 

I'm not sure where vendors get their stuff at Muang Mai but it was always super fresh, incredibly delicious, and cheap.  Nothing even close to that down here in Pattaya that I've found.

[eezergood]

22 hours ago, stephenterry said:

I wouldn't promote any caloric intake reduction, because such CICO diets don't work - as has been scientifically proven - in that the body reacts by lowering the metabolic rate to compensate. 

 

A preferred weight loss regime, IMO, is to undertake Intermittent fasting, and to engage ketosis (which burns fat) and which doesn't reduce metabolic rate.  Anyone who has 'taught' the body to accept ketosis would enter that state some 12 hours after the last meal. Once fat burning begins, then look at a nutrition lifestyle change to eat healthier either before or when the desired weight loss is achieved.

 

As for Carbs, I'm a little hesitant in agreeing - or even suggesting - that the human body doesn't need Carbs to exist.

Why? 

Mainly, because I believe that a proper balance between (low) carbs, (high) fat and (good) protein is an essential nutritional factor - and the absence of one component is not conducive to maximum health benefits for the human body.

 

I'm just one person (out of billions) who has established a healthy dietary routine that works for me, and has maintained weight loss, but now looking to build muscle. 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CICO is the ONLY way to START - yes you have to adjust as your body composition changes, however to begin you establish your caloric need - then when you reduce these you WILL loose weight. 

 

 

[eezergood]

22 hours ago, stephenterry said:

WH said: -

As regards resistance training (and unlike cardio based exercise), it can have a huge positive effect on fat loss in terms of metabolic changes that occur as a result.  It seriously changes metabolic hormonal balance in a positive and long-term way that enhances how the body metabolizes fat stores.  The way it changes hormonal balance also has a psychological effect that replaces the desire to eat junky foods.

 

Combining diet with resistance training is the optimal way to lose body fat, even for someone who's never set foot inside a gym and irregardless of their age, and even if they have disabilities (with the help of a good coach or trainer).

 

That's just my opinion, and again, I agree with you, that one can only do what one can do, BUT sometimes in life, you have to be willing to go beyond what you think your limits are, if you are to make positive lifestyle changes. 

 

Most people find they can accomplish far more than they believe.  Just about everybody is capable of such changes if they are truly serious about fat loss.  It all really boils down to how much you really want it. 

 

 

Exactly. I agree. In your opinion what is the 'lowest' weight that is required for resistance training to be beneficial? Apologies for not knowing how the exercises - deadlift, squat, etc work and what muscle groups are benefitted.    

 

Lowest weight required will very much depend on your base line strenght.... we are all different in that 20kg arm curls maybe tough for me yet very easy for another & vice versa. I would say that if you can lift the weight for a high number (12-15) or reps with ease then this is too light. You should feel the muscle burn from rep 8-10 ish this would then be a decent baseline start.

 

As for the very first few sessions, GO LIGHT & EASY, you will feel sore but there is no need to risk injury. 

[WaveHunter]

47 minutes ago, eezergood said:

CICO is the ONLY way to START - yes you have to adjust as your body composition changes, however to begin you establish your caloric need - then when you reduce these you WILL loose weight. 

With all due respect, CICO diets are not the ideal way to lose weight.  YES, you have to be burning more calories than you consume, but it is not a good dieting strategy to cut calories in order for this to happen.  The body itself has much more efficient mechanisms to make this happen.

 

CICO diets in general have a miserable track record for long term success.  The current epidemic in obesity and Diabetes type 2 is proof of that!  There are two reasons that CICO diets are not effective in the long-term: 

 

Reason #1:  CICO does not address the underlying nutritional cause of obesity.  The underlying cause is almost always poor food selection; specifically too many carbs, and even more specifically, junky carbs (i.e.: processed foods with lots of sugar in them such as high fructose corn syrup.)  Much better results will come form simply eliminating unnecessary carbs. 

 

If you are eating healthy (not overwhelming the body with unnecessary carbs), the body has mechanisms to control your appetite (leptin response), and to promote fat burning (insulin response).  Too many junky carbs blunts these responses; it's as simple as that.

 

So, the first step in reducing excess body fat should be to re-evaluate your nutritional lifestyle, and make changes to reduce unnecessary carbohydrates (not calories).  If you do that, the body will handle the rest.

 

Reason #2:  Almost everybody starts out on a CICO diet with good intentions but they are impatient for results and tend to cut calories too severely.  This is a fact!  This only results in a slowdown in resting metabolic rate.  So, even though they have reduced caloric intake, they will not lose body fat since they body's caloric demands are now lessened. 

 

In fact, it's entirely possible (and likely) to gain body fat from CICO dieting because most people will give up out of frustration after several days or a week, start eating as they did before, and in their lowered metabolic state will end up GAINING more body fat than they had before the dieting attempt, even though they are only eating the same calories as they did before the diet!

 

This is the classic path of CICO dieting, and it has been proven in countless of studies.  It is a pattern of yo-yo weight loss and gain as the dieter repeatedly tries one CICO type diet after another, and the long term result is that they get fatter and fatter over time.

 

To effectively lose excess body fat, you need to focus on cutting carbohydrates, not calories.  In a broader sense, you need to take a good look at your nutritional lifestyle, and improve it. 

 

Cut down on processed, junky foods high in carbohydrates, and the body will handle the rest.  The body is an amazing machine, capable of maintaining (and adjusting to) proper body fat levels if you are eating proper foods, and very bad at doing this if you are not.  It's really that simple.

Edited July 24, 2019 by WaveHunter

[stephenterry]

22 minutes ago, eezergood said:

CICO is the ONLY way to START - yes you have to adjust as your body composition changes, however to begin you establish your caloric need - then when you reduce these you WILL loose weight. 

 

 

Sorry, I don't agree it's a long time solution. It's being scientifically discredited as being the wrong approach towards losing weight. 

 

I will try and clarify. Cutting calories works in the short term. Weight is lost. But as soon as the dieter ends the diet, the weight WILL BE put back on if there are no nutrition life changes. There have been many diet studies to evidence this.

 

Just returning to what you've eaten before leads to weight gain, because the body has adjusted to the new level of calorie consumption by slowing down the metabolic rate - because the body is protecting you from starvation and an early death. So  - with a lower metabolic rate - you have to eat less to just maintain the new weight.

 

Just read up on it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[stephenterry]

32 minutes ago, eezergood said:

Lowest weight required will very much depend on your base line strenght.... we are all different in that 20kg arm curls maybe tough for me yet very easy for another & vice versa. I would say that if you can lift the weight for a high number (12-15) or reps with ease then this is too light. You should feel the muscle burn from rep 8-10 ish this would then be a decent baseline start.

 

As for the very first few sessions, GO LIGHT & EASY, you will feel sore but there is no need to risk injury. 

I've read a sample from the book you mentioned. First of all I will perfect the squat position to ensure I'm doing it right before even lifting weights. I'm not as supple nowadays. I'll move on from there - thanks for the advice - very useful. 

 

BTW I crossed on your response to Eezergood, which I agree with, and I hope he agrees it's worth researching more on the CICO diet failures. Trouble is, there are so many different approaches towards nutritional health that it's easy to be misled by a latest fad diet and wonderful gut-filling recipes that panders to being the best thing since sliced bread.   Well, anything is better than sliced bread, isn't it?

[WaveHunter]

46 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

I've read a sample from the book you mentioned. First of all I will perfect the squat position to ensure I'm doing it right before even lifting weights. I'm not as supple nowadays. I'll move on from there - thanks for the advice - very useful. 

 

BTW I crossed on your response to Eezergood, which I agree with, and I hope he agrees it's worth researching more on the CICO diet failures. Trouble is, there are so many different approaches towards nutritional health that it's easy to be misled by a latest fad diet and wonderful gut-filling recipes that panders to being the best thing since sliced bread.   Well, anything is better than sliced bread, isn't it?

Yes, technique is everything when it comes to lifting weights if you want to avoid possible injury.  While Rippetoe's book is amazing (and his YouTube videos are even more helpful BTW), it would be a wise thing to start out with a good trainer/coach. 

 

It's hard to self-visualize your body position even with a mirror so much better to have someone else watching you who understands the body mechanics of resistance training, and can correct your technique.  There's a very fast learning curve when you do it this way, so after a few weeks, you can safely go solo.

 

Just remember that weight training can be very unforgiving if you make mistakes, particularly if you are older, and especially with the Squat and Deadlift which can really screw up your lower back if done incorrectly.  But with proper technique, it can be very safe and rewarding.

 

As for nutrition, yes choices can be bewildering if you let all the health gurus overwhelm you but good nutrition is really simple if you let your own body guide you. 

 

It's important to be educated in science based fact as opposed to guru-type pseudoscience , but people usually underestimate the body's own ability to know what's good or bad for it. 

 

When you are eating "healthy" the body's metabolic machinery is in optimal balance.  When you eat poorly, it is not.  Your body tells you these things in no uncertain terms.

 

If you eat something bad for you, your body lets you know in no uncertain terms (i.e.: gastro-intestinal distress).  Conversely, if you eat well, it lets you know that too (i.e.: waking up in the morning with a clear head and no need for a cup of coffee to get started).

 

So, IMO, you don't need "new flavor of the month" wacky weight-loss diets, you don't need to watch health gurus on YouTube, you don't need to be counting calories, or following any other confusing, convoluted ideas. 

 

Just learning to listen to your body is the best nutritional strategy of all IMHO; it will tell you whether you're doing things right or not.  At least that's how I see it, and it works pretty good for me ????

 

Edited July 24, 2019 by WaveHunter

[eezergood]

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

I've read a sample from the book you mentioned. First of all I will perfect the squat position to ensure I'm doing it right before even lifting weights. I'm not as supple nowadays. I'll move on from there - thanks for the advice - very useful. 

 

BTW I crossed on your response to Eezergood, which I agree with, and I hope he agrees it's worth researching more on the CICO diet failures. Trouble is, there are so many different approaches towards nutritional health that it's easy to be misled by a latest fad diet and wonderful gut-filling recipes that panders to being the best thing since sliced bread.   Well, anything is better than sliced bread, isn't it?

Great way to start - squats are not (even though the instagram community would let us believe otherwise) the bee all and end all, so dont stress that. If you want to see a near perfect bio mechanical squat watch an infant pick up a ball from the floor. 

 

Do some research for sure, and DEFINITELY ask questions - Rob is a frequent poster and a great source also 

[eezergood]

1 hour ago, WaveHunter said:

With all due respect, CICO diets are not the ideal way to lose weight.  YES, you have to be burning more calories than you consume, but it is not a good dieting strategy to cut calories in order for this to happen.  The body itself has much more efficient mechanisms to make this happen.

 

CICO diets in general have a miserable track record for long term success.  The current epidemic in obesity and Diabetes type 2 is proof of that!  There are two reasons that CICO diets are not effective in the long-term: 

 

Reason #1:  CICO does not address the underlying nutritional cause of obesity.  The underlying cause is almost always poor food selection; specifically too many carbs, and even more specifically, junky carbs (i.e.: processed foods with lots of sugar in them such as high fructose corn syrup.)  Much better results will come form simply eliminating unnecessary carbs. 

 

If you are eating healthy (not overwhelming the body with unnecessary carbs), the body has mechanisms to control your appetite (leptin response), and to promote fat burning (insulin response).  Too many junky carbs blunts these responses; it's as simple as that.

 

So, the first step in reducing excess body fat should be to re-evaluate your nutritional lifestyle, and make changes to reduce unnecessary carbohydrates (not calories).  If you do that, the body will handle the rest.

 

Reason #2:  Almost everybody starts out on a CICO diet with good intentions but they are impatient for results and tend to cut calories too severely.  This is a fact!  This only results in a slowdown in resting metabolic rate.  So, even though they have reduced caloric intake, they will not lose body fat since they body's caloric demands are now lessened. 

 

In fact, it's entirely possible (and likely) to gain body fat from CICO dieting because most people will give up out of frustration after several days or a week, start eating as they did before, and in their lowered metabolic state will end up GAINING more body fat than they had before the dieting attempt, even though they are only eating the same calories as they did before the diet!

 

This is the classic path of CICO dieting, and it has been proven in countless of studies.  It is a pattern of yo-yo weight loss and gain as the dieter repeatedly tries one CICO type diet after another, and the long term result is that they get fatter and fatter over time.

 

To effectively lose excess body fat, you need to focus on cutting carbohydrates, not calories.  In a broader sense, you need to take a good look at your nutritional lifestyle, and improve it. 

 

Cut down on processed, junky foods high in carbohydrates, and the body will handle the rest.  The body is an amazing machine, capable of maintaining (and adjusting to) proper body fat levels if you are eating proper foods, and very bad at doing this if you are not.  It's really that simple.

Sorry i cannot respond more (work is busy today) please look closely at what I said 

 

CICO is the only way to START - i will (try anyway) to elaborate my thoughts further & thanks to you all for the responses without the flame wars. Very refreshing

[robblok]

45 minutes ago, eezergood said:

Great way to start - squats are not (even though the instagram community would let us believe otherwise) the bee all and end all, so dont stress that. If you want to see a near perfect bio mechanical squat watch an infant pick up a ball from the floor. 

 

Do some research for sure, and DEFINITELY ask questions - Rob is a frequent poster and a great source also 

I might be a good source of information but I never really know if I am doing things 100 mechanically correct. I have not had any injuries so i probably do. Though if I go real heavy with squats i notice that my technique changes (lower back gets more stress).

 

I just believe in a program that is build around compound lifts it has always served me well and made my best gains on it. 

[WaveHunter]

1 hour ago, eezergood said:

Sorry i cannot respond more (work is busy today) please look closely at what I said 

 

CICO is the only way to START - i will (try anyway) to elaborate my thoughts further & thanks to you all for the responses without the flame wars. Very refreshing

Yes, please elaborate when you get the time.  I think I do understand what you are saying, but as I said, I agree that weight loss requires less calories in than out BUT cutting dietary calories is not the way to accomplish this, as illogical as that might sound.

 

It might sound like a minor point when I say "cut carbs, not calories" but there's actually a critical distinction between these two approaches. 

 

The standard approach to CICO weight control considers all calories alike.  This is clearly not the case.  There is a huge difference between calories derived from carbs compared with those derived from proteins and fats.  Carbs create a strong insulin response compared to that of fats and proteins, and insulin response is what determines whether food is used for energy or stored as excess body fat .  It also determines whether stored body fat can be accessed to meet the fuel needs of yhe body.  Thus, carb control, not calories are what is important if the goal is to lose excess body fat.

 

What's more, carb restriction actually INCREASES resting metabolic rate (burns more calories), whereas caloric restriction DECREASES it (burns less calories.  See this study:  Effects of a low carbohydrate diet on energy expenditure during weight loss maintenance.

 

So, I'll agree with you that modifying diet is the way to START, but disagree that CICO dietary dogma is valid.  Science has proved that it is not.  Science has however proved that carb control is a more valid way to control excess body fat.

Edited July 24, 2019 by WaveHunter

[robblok]

1 hour ago, WaveHunter said:

Yes, please elaborate when you get the time.  I think I do understand what you are saying, but as I said, I agree that weight loss requires less calories in than out BUT cutting dietary calories is not the way to accomplish this, as illogical as that might sound.

 

It might sound like a minor point when I say "cut carbs, not calories" but there's actually a critical distinction between these two approaches. 

 

The standard approach to CICO weight control considers all calories alike.  This is clearly not the case.  There is a huge difference between calories derived from carbs compared with those derived from proteins and fats.  Carbs create a strong insulin response compared to that of fats and proteins, and insulin response is what determines whether food is used for energy or stored as excess body fat .  It also determines whether stored body fat can be accessed to meet the fuel needs of yhe body.  Thus, carb control, not calories are what is important if the goal is to lose excess body fat.

 

What's more, carb restriction actually INCREASES resting metabolic rate (burns more calories), whereas caloric restriction DECREASES it (burns less calories.  See this study:  Effects of a low carbohydrate diet on energy expenditure during weight loss maintenance.

 

So, I'll agree with you that modifying diet is the way to START, but disagree that CICO dietary dogma is valid.  Science has proved that it is not.  Science has however proved that carb control is a more valid way to control excess body fat.

CICO is great to start then later you focus on the quality of food. I have learned that you start little and change a bit more and more. You can't go crap diet to full blown super good diet. Same goes for training you start slow learn and improve.

 

Same now with my cardio im going faster now doing it a bit longer and will keep doing so. If I had rushed into it started faster and longer (i could physically) i would have stopped already. Sometimes you have to ease into things.

 

For all the studies you find I have found studies that say it does not matter much especially those in metabolic chambers. So I really don't believe much in that myth. Besides of course that if you remove carbs and ad proteins but keep the calories the same you will burn more as proteins have a higher thermic effect. Not if you replace it with fat as it has lower thermic effect as protein.  (but a good study should take that into account)

 

[WaveHunter]

I don't deny that the "CICO" style diet may work for some people but for the vast majority of obese people weight-loss diets based on the CICO concept fail miserably. 

 

If this were not so then there would not be an obesity epidemic today, and we would not be overwhelmed by a deluge of new CICO-style weight loss diets that come and go on an almost daily basis. It should be obvious that CICO diets have a miserable long-term success rate. 

 

If you are obese and continually fail to lose weight on CICO, maybe you really need to come to terms with the REAL underlying causes, and not just blindly repeatedly follow outdated, unfounded nutritional dogma which is all that CICO really is.

 

Diets based on calorie counting are simply not sustainable in the long-run if you have not addressed the underlying issues of obesity first.

 

Anybody's who's experienced frustrated attempts to lose fat on a CICO diet knows this.  One diet follows another, and the CICO dieter yo-yo's down a few pounds and then back up again, and in the long run just gets fatter and fatter over time.

 

The underlying causes of the obesity epidemic today, as I see it, are 1) excessive consumption of "concentrated" carbohydrates found in processed foods, 2) eating food from the moment you get out of bed in the morning to the moment you go to sleep (food grazing), and 2) an overly sedentary lifestyle.

 

Addressing these issues is the real solution to optimal metabolic health (and maintaining ideal body weight).  Unlike calorie counting CICO diets, it is sustainable in the long-term because it is a lifestyle, not just a short term diet.

 

I firmly believe you should not ever have to go on crazy weight loss diets to maintain proper body weight.  Your body has the capability to do that on its' own IF YOU ARE EATING HEALTHY, and eating healthy really means not overindulging in processed foods which have unnaturally high levels of carbs! 

 

The body has built-in metabolic mechanisms such as leptin and insulin response that do a great job at control the amount of calories we consume IF those mechanisms are functioning properly. 

 

Excessive carbohydrate consumption seriously screws with these mechanisms and THAT is the real cause of obesity.  It is these mechanisms that should control the quantity of calories you consume, not your will power!

 

And the thing is...it's not even that hard to do!  It's tough in the beginning like breaking any bad habit is, but the results come so fast and so profoundly that those health improvements become highly motivating. 

 

So, all I am saying is that, for those who have repeatedly tried CICO and failed, maybe you should try another approach.  What do you have to lose except your own body fat?

[ExpatOilWorker]

With a BMI of 23.1 I am not really fat, just have this 3-4 kg cannon ball belly I need to down size. I am already fairly active, so clearly my diet have been wrong.

Bread have my single biggest source of carbs and it will be dearly missed, but keto diet seem like the way forward.

 

[WaveHunter]

1 hour ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

With a BMI of 23.1 I am not really fat, just have this 3-4 kg cannon ball belly I need to down size. I am already fairly active, so clearly my diet have been wrong.

Bread have my single biggest source of carbs and it will be dearly missed, but keto diet seem like the way forward.

Bread is a big weakness for me to; I love fresh baked bread.  If you can eliminate it, and other unnecessary carbs, I think you'll be surprised how quickly you lose that belly fat. 

 

As for going on a keto "diet", I'd encourage you to think more about becoming "keto-adapted".  There's a significant difference.  Google for more information.

 

Personally I don't have much faith in any sort of short term "diets".  Becoming keto-adapted is not dieting.  It's a way to train your body to better use fats (both stored body fat and dietary fat) as an efficient fuel source.

 

When you are truly keto-adapted, your body is fully capable of maintaining ideal body weight without the need to be dieting or counting calories...and you can eat all kinds of foods (including bread) as long as you stay keto-adapted.  It's a pretty nice feeling to be free of of the ups and downs of weight loss dieting and calorie counting ????

 

Edited July 25, 2019 by WaveHunter

[robblok]

14 hours ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

With a BMI of 23.1 I am not really fat, just have this 3-4 kg cannon ball belly I need to down size. I am already fairly active, so clearly my diet have been wrong.

Bread have my single biggest source of carbs and it will be dearly missed, but keto diet seem like the way forward.

 

 

 

You are what they call a skinny fat person. My BMI is much higher then yours but with visible abs. Yes its probably your diet that makes it hard for you.

 

You might consider lifting some weights too not doing only cardio. 

 

I was fat but never a cannon ball belly (looks a lot like an insulin problem then cutting carbs is the way to go). When i was fat i was still active and lifting weights.. but my diet sucked. You cannot out train a bad diet.