Fitness Advice

[Asheron]

Strength training without carbs?

With all due respect, you have NFI!!!!

Rice, yes even white, is a quality carb, and can be consumed in proportion to ones weight / needs, but to try and workout with weights on zero carbs, you'll find you wont be lifting much. On top of that, its unhealthy to eliminate carbs, just as its necessary to consume a certain amount of fats in your diet.

OP, try out different suggestion made by people here and see what works best for you, but one thing I can recommend is don't cut out carbs.

NFI... i guess that means "no f***ing idea"?

Well, that should then be used on you as a normal human being can very well do strength training only when eating protein and fat. I have done it and many million others have done it and still are living to tell about it. There isn't anything magical about carbs... it's just easier for the human body to use carbs as a fuel "to do shit". Both fat and protein can be turned into glucose and if you eat basicly "zero" carbs each day that is exactly what will happen.

Let me finish by saying: there are no essential carbohydrates that anyone has to eat.

You should read this[1] and this[2].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glucose

[Asheron]

Obesity problems are mostly associated with a non-functioning metabolism.

Obesity is caused by eating more than you burn each day.

You can lose weight by eating less, exercising more, or both.

I live in CM, cycle up the road to Wat Doi Suthep, or run up the trail, problem solved.

Don't even have to do it every day.

Are you claiming that All Obesity is caused by eating more than you burn each day?

If so, you would be WRONG. Overeating is NOT the only cause of obesity.

Nutrition is far more critical than calories. Its nutrition that enables your body to function effectively and if you must consume more calories (providing its from real wholesome food) then so be it.. You will be rewarded with a healthy body in part because the nutrition allows your metabolism to function normally as the fat burning furnace that its meant to be.

Correcting a sluggish metabolism through good nutrition is often enough to correct weight problems.

If overeating was the only link to obesity then some diabetics whom I know that eat very little and actually suffer from malnutrition as a result of insufficient and inadequate food, would not be grossly overweight..

So please explain to someone whom has completed 4 modules on nutrition (doctors do approx 2 hours of nutrition at university), how people who don't fit your calorie intake/expenditure paradigm can possibly be overweight. I think you should consider the possibility that your opening statement is not entirely true and other factors are increasingly involved.

If you eat 3000 kcal while your maintenance level is 2500 kcal then yes, you will get fatter over time no matter what. Or are you saying that energy can disappear or be created? If so, i guess the Nobel prize is waiting for you...

[h90]

Strength training without carbs?

With all due respect, you have NFI!!!!

Rice, yes even white, is a quality carb, and can be consumed in proportion to ones weight / needs, but to try and workout with weights on zero carbs, you'll find you wont be lifting much. On top of that, its unhealthy to eliminate carbs, just as its necessary to consume a certain amount of fats in your diet.

OP, try out different suggestion made by people here and see what works best for you, but one thing I can recommend is don't cut out carbs.

I think some basic education, what Fat, Protein, Carbohydrates are would be good.

The body can not build Aminoacids by itself but it can change most Aminoacids to others. Essential amino acids can't be produced. So we need enough protein that contains enough essential amino acids. Protein is used to build structures like muscles but is also a source of energy.

Fat: The body can produce fat or take it from food. But there are essential fat acids which we must eat. The body can not produce it itself.

Glucose (from starch for example) is a necessary source of energy, which is stored in the liver and the muscles. If you don't eat any, amino acids will be converted into glucose and the body shift to more fat than glucose burning.

So even if you would eliminate carbs 100 % from your diet (which is outside the lab impossible) you still have enough carbohydrates in you. As muscles burn glucose and use more as more force you use (slow cardio=more fat burning, heavy lifting more glucose), they need longer to regenerate if there is lower blood sugar + insuline and they don't load themself as much up with glycogen. So you are stronger when you eat 3 times per day pasta. As well insulin increase the protein synthesis in the muscles.

So as more carbs+protein you eat between training as faster your muscles will grow. On the same time your muscles and the rest of the body will burn less fat and the fat syntheses (carbohydrates to fat) on your belly runs at full speed.

So if you want to win Sumo competition it is perfect.

If you want to get fit and reduce your body fat it is complete wrong. With low (not no) carbohydrates you still gain muscles fast as beginner and you loose your belly at the same time.

(But it won't make you look like Hulk)

In Europe we always lived half the years on a non carb diet, as hunter and gatherer. You can only find animals for food during winter in Europe. So it is a complete normal situation for the body.

[sanuk711]

BTW. Being superfit does not make you live longer. My great grandmother never exercised a day

in her life and she lived until the ripe old age of 102.-----------Pistol101

I don't know corkman------My grandmother started walking five miles a day when she was 60. She's well over 97 now, but we don't know where the F#ck she is.',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[Pistol101]

Obesity problems are mostly associated with a non-functioning metabolism.

Obesity is caused by eating more than you burn each day.

You can lose weight by eating less, exercising more, or both.

I live in CM, cycle up the road to Wat Doi Suthep, or run up the trail, problem solved.

Don't even have to do it every day.

Are you claiming that All Obesity is caused by eating more than you burn each day?

If so, you would be WRONG. Overeating is NOT the only cause of obesity.

Nutrition is far more critical than calories. Its nutrition that enables your body to function effectively and if you must consume more calories (providing its from real wholesome food) then so be it.. You will be rewarded with a healthy body in part because the nutrition allows your metabolism to function normally as the fat burning furnace that its meant to be.

Correcting a sluggish metabolism through good nutrition is often enough to correct weight problems.

If overeating was the only link to obesity then some diabetics whom I know that eat very little and actually suffer from malnutrition as a result of insufficient and inadequate food, would not be grossly overweight..

So please explain to someone whom has completed 4 modules on nutrition (doctors do approx 2 hours of nutrition at university), how people who don't fit your calorie intake/expenditure paradigm can possibly be overweight. I think you should consider the possibility that your opening statement is not entirely true and other factors are increasingly involved.

If you eat 3000 kcal while your maintenance level is 2500 kcal then yes, you will get fatter over time no matter what. Or are you saying that energy can disappear or be created? If so, i guess the Nobel prize is waiting for you...

Not only are you incorrect, (unless its your terminology thats wrong), but you also failed to answer the question.

How does someone who eats far less calories than their body uses at rest, able to gain bodyfat?? This is the question you have not answered, nor will you be able to sufficiently satisfy this question.

Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) is what you are probably referring to and is the over-riding factor here.

What your saying is (if I understand correctly) is that on any given normal day, if you consume 3000 calories when your BMR requires 2500 calories in order to perform all its vital and some non-vital processes, then the result is weight gain. This too is not entirely true for numerous reasons.

1. There is no accurate way of determining a persons BMR which still baffles science today because there are too many variables that can't be accounted for.

2. You have no way of knowing exactly how many calories you burn since you dont know how well, if at all, you digest your food and absorb all of the calories that passed your lips. Even if your intestinal microflora was at the top of its game, its still not possible to completely digest everything you eat and thus there are calories that 'go missing'.

3. HIIT performed on a regular basis has the ability to increase BMR's and extend additional calorie burning for as much as 24 hours after exercise is completed. It's then possible to create a calorie deficit as time progresses, providing the routine continues.

What we do know is that referring to BMR and calorie expenditure in regards to weight loss is fundamentally flawed because the equations don't account for the multitude of variables including the unpredictable nature or unforeseen thoughts, & movements of the person in question that affect a true BMR calculation. Even mild excitement can affect the results which requires absolutely no stimulation and complete rest, which we never really do.

Understanding the full extent of the issue requires a change in perspective and the removal of so many people involved in the health and fitness industry who do more harm than good including doctors and bigpharma funded scientists and researchers, and if we continue to rely upon their answers which are half truths at best in many circumstances then we will continue to struggle with obesity as a civilization.

Oh and I care not for Nobel Prizes or their religious science.

[Asheron]

Are you claiming that All Obesity is caused by eating more than you burn each day?

If so, you would be WRONG. Overeating is NOT the only cause of obesity.

Nutrition is far more critical than calories. Its nutrition that enables your body to function effectively and if you must consume more calories (providing its from real wholesome food) then so be it.. You will be rewarded with a healthy body in part because the nutrition allows your metabolism to function normally as the fat burning furnace that its meant to be.

Correcting a sluggish metabolism through good nutrition is often enough to correct weight problems.

If overeating was the only link to obesity then some diabetics whom I know that eat very little and actually suffer from malnutrition as a result of insufficient and inadequate food, would not be grossly overweight..

So please explain to someone whom has completed 4 modules on nutrition (doctors do approx 2 hours of nutrition at university), how people who don't fit your calorie intake/expenditure paradigm can possibly be overweight. I think you should consider the possibility that your opening statement is not entirely true and other factors are increasingly involved.

If you eat 3000 kcal while your maintenance level is 2500 kcal then yes, you will get fatter over time no matter what. Or are you saying that energy can disappear or be created? If so, i guess the Nobel prize is waiting for you...

Not only are you incorrect, (unless its your terminology thats wrong), but you also failed to answer the question.

How does someone who eats far less calories than their body uses at rest, able to gain bodyfat?? This is the question you have not answered, nor will you be able to sufficiently satisfy this question.

Basal Metabolic Rate (BMR) is what you are probably referring to and is the over-riding factor here.

What your saying is (if I understand correctly) is that on any given normal day, if you consume 3000 calories when your BMR requires 2500 calories in order to perform all its vital and some non-vital processes, then the result is weight gain. This too is not entirely true for numerous reasons.

1. There is no accurate way of determining a persons BMR which still baffles science today because there are too many variables that can't be accounted for.

2. You have no way of knowing exactly how many calories you burn since you dont know how well, if at all, you digest your food and absorb all of the calories that passed your lips. Even if your intestinal microflora was at the top of its game, its still not possible to completely digest everything you eat and thus there are calories that 'go missing'.

3. HIIT performed on a regular basis has the ability to increase BMR's and extend additional calorie burning for as much as 24 hours after exercise is completed. It's then possible to create a calorie deficit as time progresses, providing the routine continues.

What we do know is that referring to BMR and calorie expenditure in regards to weight loss is fundamentally flawed because the equations don't account for the multitude of variables including the unpredictable nature or unforeseen thoughts, & movements of the person in question that affect a true BMR calculation. Even mild excitement can affect the results which requires absolutely no stimulation and complete rest, which we never really do.

Understanding the full extent of the issue requires a change in perspective and the removal of so many people involved in the health and fitness industry who do more harm than good including doctors and bigpharma funded scientists and researchers, and if we continue to rely upon their answers which are half truths at best in many circumstances then we will continue to struggle with obesity as a civilization.

Oh and I care not for Nobel Prizes or their religious science.

I'm not incorrect, if you eat more calories than you use it will eventually lead to you getting fatter or obese. Show me any scientific study where the test persons were confined into a facility where they were given any and all the food they ate for a period of time and it was under their used energi each day and it still lead to increase in weight.

People have no fracking clue how many calories they eat or drink each day (if they don't weight it) and it has also been scientifically proven that people grossly underestimate how many calories they eat and drink each day. So to say "How does someone who eats far less calories than their body uses at rest, able to gain bodyfat??" is pointless because of the meantioned reason.

And no, i wasn't talking about BMR as that would mean a person who basicly is immobile in a bed when i wrote "maintenance level". Most (all) people i know do actually get up from bed, take a shower, work, walk, run, train strength, scratch their balls and so on and all these things burn energi and this is what i mean with "maintenance level".

[robblok]

@pistol101

Yes the body is not a machine, no we cannot calculate correctly how much our BMR is, yes its hard to calculate what we eat. Still the its correct that if you eat more as you burn you will get fat. I could get fat on eating a healthy diet of unprocessed food without sugars. It does make a small difference in how much you burn if you eat other kinds of food (some foods are harder to burn protein for instance). This does not make it untrue that if you eat more then what you burn that you get fat.

There is no magic food that lets you eat all you want and still stay slim. Every body is different in how much it burns.. there are differences up to 20% what people burn, that is in your genes and food will ever help you. Sure you can improve and loose fat by eating better (too much carbs can make you insulin resistant and thus you can gain fat even if you don't eat more as you burn) This is however rare and most people are not in that situation (diabetics could be there for sure).

Other user also pointed out that tests in a closed environment have proven the formula to be true. Give people less food and they will loose weight.

I have seen some nice documentaries with some genetic freaks, there was an asian guy who was forced fed more food and his body started burn more and he even gained some muscle. However for the rest of the people they all got fat when eating more as they needed. Guess what after that experiment they all lost the weight when they went back to eating what they used too.

Do I believe that the static formula is perfect and can predict how much weight you loose.. NO.. do I believe that eating healthier and less helps you loose weight YES.

But its proven that there is almost no difference (weight not health wise) between eating junk foods and healthy foods at same caloric values. (minor changes there because of more insulin spikes).

Your argument goes about people with the metabolic syndrome.. yes they need to exercise and eat healthy and then later they can burn more food and loose weight as before. However there are far more healthy people af people with that syndrome.

But its always good to cut the carbs a bit if you fall into that category.. a blood-sugar test is a good idea.. then you can see if your insulin resistant or not.

[h90]

@pistol101

Yes the body is not a machine, no we cannot calculate correctly how much our BMR is, yes its hard to calculate what we eat. Still the its correct that if you eat more as you burn you will get fat. I could get fat on eating a healthy diet of unprocessed food without sugars. It does make a small difference in how much you burn if you eat other kinds of food (some foods are harder to burn protein for instance). This does not make it untrue that if you eat more then what you burn that you get fat.

There is no magic food that lets you eat all you want and still stay slim. Every body is different in how much it burns.. there are differences up to 20% what people burn, that is in your genes and food will ever help you. Sure you can improve and loose fat by eating better (too much carbs can make you insulin resistant and thus you can gain fat even if you don't eat more as you burn) This is however rare and most people are not in that situation (diabetics could be there for sure).

Other user also pointed out that tests in a closed environment have proven the formula to be true. Give people less food and they will loose weight.

I have seen some nice documentaries with some genetic freaks, there was an asian guy who was forced fed more food and his body started burn more and he even gained some muscle. However for the rest of the people they all got fat when eating more as they needed. Guess what after that experiment they all lost the weight when they went back to eating what they used too.

Do I believe that the static formula is perfect and can predict how much weight you loose.. NO.. do I believe that eating healthier and less helps you loose weight YES.

But its proven that there is almost no difference (weight not health wise) between eating junk foods and healthy foods at same caloric values. (minor changes there because of more insulin spikes).

Your argument goes about people with the metabolic syndrome.. yes they need to exercise and eat healthy and then later they can burn more food and loose weight as before. However there are far more healthy people af people with that syndrome.

But its always good to cut the carbs a bit if you fall into that category.. a blood-sugar test is a good idea.. then you can see if your insulin resistant or not.

I mildly disagree: The body is exactly a machine and all the code is in the DNA. Just with millions of parameter we can't understand the effects exactly.

there is a bit of a setpoint a weight the body tries to hold. If you are lucky and your body has it, you can eat more and will only gain very slow. The rest is burned to heat or whatever. But in my opinion these setpoints aren't very strong in most people and just reduce the speed of gain a little.

Yes, if you eat the worst McDonalds fastfood+coke 1500 kcal per day, you'll loose 1 kg per week if your body needs 2500 kcal per day. No matter how much chemicals are in that burger. You'll get slimmer, maybe not more healthy.

[robblok]

@pistol101

Yes the body is not a machine, no we cannot calculate correctly how much our BMR is, yes its hard to calculate what we eat. Still the its correct that if you eat more as you burn you will get fat. I could get fat on eating a healthy diet of unprocessed food without sugars. It does make a small difference in how much you burn if you eat other kinds of food (some foods are harder to burn protein for instance). This does not make it untrue that if you eat more then what you burn that you get fat.

There is no magic food that lets you eat all you want and still stay slim. Every body is different in how much it burns.. there are differences up to 20% what people burn, that is in your genes and food will ever help you. Sure you can improve and loose fat by eating better (too much carbs can make you insulin resistant and thus you can gain fat even if you don't eat more as you burn) This is however rare and most people are not in that situation (diabetics could be there for sure).

Other user also pointed out that tests in a closed environment have proven the formula to be true. Give people less food and they will loose weight.

I have seen some nice documentaries with some genetic freaks, there was an asian guy who was forced fed more food and his body started burn more and he even gained some muscle. However for the rest of the people they all got fat when eating more as they needed. Guess what after that experiment they all lost the weight when they went back to eating what they used too.

Do I believe that the static formula is perfect and can predict how much weight you loose.. NO.. do I believe that eating healthier and less helps you loose weight YES.

But its proven that there is almost no difference (weight not health wise) between eating junk foods and healthy foods at same caloric values. (minor changes there because of more insulin spikes).

Your argument goes about people with the metabolic syndrome.. yes they need to exercise and eat healthy and then later they can burn more food and loose weight as before. However there are far more healthy people af people with that syndrome.

But its always good to cut the carbs a bit if you fall into that category.. a blood-sugar test is a good idea.. then you can see if your insulin resistant or not.

I mildly disagree: The body is exactly a machine and all the code is in the DNA. Just with millions of parameter we can't understand the effects exactly.

there is a bit of a setpoint a weight the body tries to hold. If you are lucky and your body has it, you can eat more and will only gain very slow. The rest is burned to heat or whatever. But in my opinion these setpoints aren't very strong in most people and just reduce the speed of gain a little.

Yes, if you eat the worst McDonalds fastfood+coke 1500 kcal per day, you'll loose 1 kg per week if your body needs 2500 kcal per day. No matter how much chemicals are in that burger. You'll get slimmer, maybe not more healthy.

I agree with your addendum. I don't want to fret over the small things. When i said machine.. i meant a simple machine with limited parameters.. the body has many parameters. You are right about your setpoint and loosing weight on MCD.

But you also know that in general it does not work the way you describe, real linear weightloss is not the normal way.. weight changes different.. not linear.. you might loose fat.. but your body is holding water.. and then after a while it looses the water too and the weight loss is apparent. So many things that influence it.. but I agree.. eat less as what you need and you loose weight even if the food is crap.

[mrfaroukh]

I just came back from an institute I stayed to loose weight. In 39 days lost 12.5 out of which I lost 10.2 kg of pure fat and rest was muscle and water. The only exercise I used to do was 9 km walk in the morning, 45 minutes simple yoga, get massage, and in the afternoon head to the gym (10 min warm up cardio, 45 min weight light but quick, 30 min cardio again HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training) it means few minutes waling at comfortable speed and few minutes at higher speed, then another 45 min yoga.

Food we got was a glass of juice every couple of hours, some salad+fruit+a bowl of vegetable soup for lunch and dinner.

For you I fee the best is to eat egg white (4 in the morning), an apple after 2 hours, some chicken breast grilled for the lunch with brown rice or vegetables, then gym for 2 hours one muscle group a day 6 times a week and rest on 7th day. Take care of your diet too.

[h90]

@pistol101

Yes the body is not a machine, no we cannot calculate correctly how much our BMR is, yes its hard to calculate what we eat. Still the its correct that if you eat more as you burn you will get fat. I could get fat on eating a healthy diet of unprocessed food without sugars. It does make a small difference in how much you burn if you eat other kinds of food (some foods are harder to burn protein for instance). This does not make it untrue that if you eat more then what you burn that you get fat.

There is no magic food that lets you eat all you want and still stay slim. Every body is different in how much it burns.. there are differences up to 20% what people burn, that is in your genes and food will ever help you. Sure you can improve and loose fat by eating better (too much carbs can make you insulin resistant and thus you can gain fat even if you don't eat more as you burn) This is however rare and most people are not in that situation (diabetics could be there for sure).

Other user also pointed out that tests in a closed environment have proven the formula to be true. Give people less food and they will loose weight.

I have seen some nice documentaries with some genetic freaks, there was an asian guy who was forced fed more food and his body started burn more and he even gained some muscle. However for the rest of the people they all got fat when eating more as they needed. Guess what after that experiment they all lost the weight when they went back to eating what they used too.

Do I believe that the static formula is perfect and can predict how much weight you loose.. NO.. do I believe that eating healthier and less helps you loose weight YES.

But its proven that there is almost no difference (weight not health wise) between eating junk foods and healthy foods at same caloric values. (minor changes there because of more insulin spikes).

Your argument goes about people with the metabolic syndrome.. yes they need to exercise and eat healthy and then later they can burn more food and loose weight as before. However there are far more healthy people af people with that syndrome.

But its always good to cut the carbs a bit if you fall into that category.. a blood-sugar test is a good idea.. then you can see if your insulin resistant or not.

I mildly disagree: The body is exactly a machine and all the code is in the DNA. Just with millions of parameter we can't understand the effects exactly.

there is a bit of a setpoint a weight the body tries to hold. If you are lucky and your body has it, you can eat more and will only gain very slow. The rest is burned to heat or whatever. But in my opinion these setpoints aren't very strong in most people and just reduce the speed of gain a little.

Yes, if you eat the worst McDonalds fastfood+coke 1500 kcal per day, you'll loose 1 kg per week if your body needs 2500 kcal per day. No matter how much chemicals are in that burger. You'll get slimmer, maybe not more healthy.

I agree with your addendum. I don't want to fret over the small things. When i said machine.. i meant a simple machine with limited parameters.. the body has many parameters. You are right about your setpoint and loosing weight on MCD.

But you also know that in general it does not work the way you describe, real linear weightloss is not the normal way.. weight changes different.. not linear.. you might loose fat.. but your body is holding water.. and then after a while it looses the water too and the weight loss is apparent. So many things that influence it.. but I agree.. eat less as what you need and you loose weight even if the food is crap.

yes non linear and with big fluctuations.....just in average as rough estimate.....

[h90]

I just came back from an institute I stayed to loose weight. In 39 days lost 12.5 out of which I lost 10.2 kg of pure fat and rest was muscle and water. The only exercise I used to do was 9 km walk in the morning, 45 minutes simple yoga, get massage, and in the afternoon head to the gym (10 min warm up cardio, 45 min weight light but quick, 30 min cardio again HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training) it means few minutes waling at comfortable speed and few minutes at higher speed, then another 45 min yoga.

Food we got was a glass of juice every couple of hours, some salad+fruit+a bowl of vegetable soup for lunch and dinner.

For you I fee the best is to eat egg white (4 in the morning), an apple after 2 hours, some chicken breast grilled for the lunch with brown rice or vegetables, then gym for 2 hours one muscle group a day 6 times a week and rest on 7th day. Take care of your diet too.

So you are telling you had almost no protein for 39 days, but training and low calories and lost only <2.3 kg muscle. How was the loose of 10.2kg fat measured?

[muskoka]

About 10 years ago I read an article in the local paper (Bracebridge, Ontario, Canada) by John Little explaining about how important it is for the body's joints to have strong healthy muscles. Well I had really bad elbow, shoulder and knee joints due to abuse the previous few years. My home/cottage was over 90 stairs from the dock at my water access home. All groceries and most firewood had to be hauled by boat to the dock then carried up those +90 stairs. Same for all construction material in building the cottage. My joints were a mess.

I was one of the first people to sign up at John's new fitness centre Nautilus North and I stuck with the training program for one year. In a nutshell his theory was/is each muscle group had to be pushed to exhaustion, and beyond thru a process he called "Max Contraction". A maximum of 8-10 raps was ideal with a weight/resistance level that completely exhausted the muscle group within 10 raps. Each session was attended by a trained coach (no-one was allowed to train without a personal coach attending), and a maximum of 3-4 muscle groups exercised per session. John started me off with 3 session per week and quickly cut back to twice a week. After around 8 months he had me down to once a week. Each session at his fitness centre lasted a maximum of 15-20 minutes for 3-4 muscle groups, but in the early days I had to rest 30-40 minutes before I was able to drive my car I was that exhausted and shaky after 15 minutes of exercise.

Bottom line, 8 or 9 years later and not doing any further exercise after that one year my joints are stil 100% - not one ache or pain. My strength more than doubled in average over that year and I felt GREAT!!!

IMPORTANT GUIDELINES BY JOHN LITTLE:

- supplements are bullshit for the most part, a balanced intake of normal healthy meals is all a person needs for prime fitness. John wrote monthly articles for Ironman Magazine (sample http://www.ironmanmagazine.com/index.cfm?page=article&pID=920 ) where he continually criticized the supplement business who were the main advertisers in that magazine.

- always keep breathing when working out, never NEVER stop free breathing or injuries can occur

- always keep the body in perfect alignment when exercising. The only exercises I did where they did not push for maximum muscle exhaustion were those where the spine was being twisted (golfers were frequent users of twisting exercises and were closely monitored during these exercises).

- always give the muscle group that has been exhausted sufficient time to completely rest up before exercising that muscle group once more. The time between repeating the same muscle group could vary from 1-2 weeks or longer, John himself often waited one full month before repeating an exercise - he had something like 40 machines so there was always another one to use.

- those who want to exercise more often than 1-2 times a week he only cautioned that they DO NOT push to exhaustion every day or the body cannot recover sufficiently between times. The body will eventually break down and injuries will occur. He often criticised professional sports coaches because they pushed their players to the point of exhaustion too frequently without allowing time for the body to recover and grow, so that injuries were too common, and totally unnecessary. If the players were only pushed to the max (exhaustion) a couple times a week, and light exercises and training were implemented between times then downtime of players due to injuries would drop dramatically.

Anyway, some more links below - Doug

Max Contraction Training : The Scientifically Proven Program for Building Muscle Mass in Minimum Time Paperback – December 12, 2003

by John Little (Author)

http://www.amazon.com/Max-Contraction-Training-The-Scientifically-Proven/dp/0071423958/

BODY BY SCIENCE 1 (COMMON THINKING ERRORS ABOUT FITNESS & HEALTH)

Doug McGuff, MD (co-author with John Little of the book "Body By Science") spoke recently at a book signing. In this excerpt Dr. McGuff speaks about failed fitness attempts and common thinking errors we all make in assessing authority in exercise (from the book's Introduction). For more information of the science behind time-efficient exercise, please visit www.bodybyscience.net

THE MAX PYRAMID PROTOCOL 1/4

[h90]

The main thing with getting where you want to go/get with fitness or muscle building is whats between your ears...100%.

A zillion years ago I would consume a dozen eggs a day in one shape or another with other stuff. But the main thing is your head, going for something you thought you could not do.........Been there and fought myself to get there.....

No strain, no gain, overcome your perceived weaknesses .

PS. Get a doc to check out your ticker first, full body heart pumping before my thoughts....

and time.....Lot people train like crazy hard for 2-6 weeks....seeing that they still look like a pudding and not loosing weight (loosing fat and building muscle, but if you are massive overweight it doesn't show) and give up.

Doing half as much for a year or two and they would have excellent success, just they gave up too early.

[MaeJoMTB]

The main thing with getting where you want to go/get with fitness or muscle building is whats between your ears...100%.

A zillion years ago I would consume a dozen eggs a day in one shape or another with other stuff. But the main thing is your head, going for something you thought you could not do.........Been there and fought myself to get there.....

No strain, no gain, overcome your perceived weaknesses .

PS. Get a doc to check out your ticker first, full body heart pumping before my thoughts....

and time.....Lot people train like crazy hard for 2-6 weeks....seeing that they still look like a pudding and not loosing weight (loosing fat and building muscle, but if you are massive overweight it doesn't show) and give up.

Doing half as much for a year or two and they would have excellent success, just they gave up too early.

It's taken me two years to lose 15Kg.

Cycling and hiking, no dieting, eat whatever I want.

Still got a bit round the middle that refuses to go, but down from a 40"+ waist to under 32".

[h90]

The main thing with getting where you want to go/get with fitness or muscle building is whats between your ears...100%.

A zillion years ago I would consume a dozen eggs a day in one shape or another with other stuff. But the main thing is your head, going for something you thought you could not do.........Been there and fought myself to get there.....

No strain, no gain, overcome your perceived weaknesses .

PS. Get a doc to check out your ticker first, full body heart pumping before my thoughts....

and time.....Lot people train like crazy hard for 2-6 weeks....seeing that they still look like a pudding and not loosing weight (loosing fat and building muscle, but if you are massive overweight it doesn't show) and give up.

Doing half as much for a year or two and they would have excellent success, just they gave up too early.

It's taken me two years to lose 15Kg.

Cycling and hiking, no dieting, eat whatever I want.

Still got a bit round the middle that refuses to go, but down from a 40"+ waist to under 32".

Well done!!! I did my 20+ kg at something like 1 kg per week. Sometimes faster at the end a bit slower and some breaks between. At the end I was very ripped...almost Bruce Lee. Got a bit sloppy and quickly gained some weight (maybe 7? and lost 2 of it again) again.

Downside of the fast reducing is that afterwards you gain very easily.......

So yours might be the smarter way....mine the faster.....If I have the choice between slow and smart or fast. I take fast (I like extreme things).