Xevy
Log Wizard
- 8,958
- 4,221
No man they do that to absorb energy because they're ectothermic. I'm trying to wreck my metabolism for sweet intercostal muscle definition cuz babes.
Weight Loss Thread
- Thread starter Sean_sl
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 46,823
- 100,036
Himeo
Vyemm Raider
- 3,263
- 2,802
I'm the most successful weight loss story on these forums, and I already posted my monthly anti-sugar rant.
Stop eating sugar and starch, lose weight. I just don't understand why this is still a topic for debate. So much science has come out in the last 12 months validating what I and the low carb community has been preaching for two hundred years.
What we were taught in school about weight management and heart disease was wrong. Catch up.
Eidal
Molten Core Raider
- 2,001
- 213
This is just re-branding the calories in < calories out formula. No one disputes this; but many have their own personal nuances of addiction that complicate the formula. I may as well just tell someone to eat less than they burn. I also have doubts regarding long-term athletic performance with your anti-carb approach. How do you gauge your own personal level of fitness right now? I agree with you that not being 400lbs is a great personal accomplishment, but for many, that is the default state and they'd d like to cut a few pounds while pursuing other activity.
Last I heard, you were doing some resistance training following a 5x5. How are your lifts these days? How is your cardio? For example, could you go run a 30 min 5k? I ask this specifically because cardio places high demands for energy and it seems incredibly inefficient to compel the body to utilize nothing but fats/proteins for it. If your end-state goal is simply (Be normal body weight) then there isn't much to discuss. Yes, sedentary people eat way too much sugar and starch.
Khane
Got something right about marriage
- 20,626
- 14,374
Himeo, you aren't the most successful weight loss story on these forums, there are many people who have lost a ton of weight and gotten themselves into great shape in this thread. Ketogenic diets aren't the only thing that works for people. You do not need to cut ALL sugar out of your diet. Sugar certainly is the culprit for a lot of this nation's obesity problems but not because fat people are eating too many bananas.
Eidal, low carb doesn't mean no carb and someone doing it properly adjusts their carb intake to match their exercise program. The more you're exercising the more carbs you eat. High protein diets are the same thing as low carb diets. Many athletes and professional body builders live and eat this way.
Eidal, low carb doesn't mean no carb and someone doing it properly adjusts their carb intake to match their exercise program. The more you're exercising the more carbs you eat. High protein diets are the same thing as low carb diets. Many athletes and professional body builders live and eat this way.
Kuriin
Just a Nurse
- 4,046
- 1,020
Crone, you are going to see some results pretty quickly if you keep this up. I agree with Khane that if you are looking to lose weight, then to cut a lot of the protein shakes out of your diet. I would recommend eating plain veggies as well (broccoli, celery, etc.) as it will provide a feeling of satiety but have a calorie deficit.
Also, please do not follow McCheese's advice. Wow, I can't imagine what his labs look like. x_x
Also, please do not follow McCheese's advice. Wow, I can't imagine what his labs look like. x_x
McCheese
SW: Sean, CW: Crone, GW: Wizardhawk
- 6,922
- 4,327
Fit as a fiddle. I posted my blood work results here last year when I had it done.
Anyway, not sure where my advice to Crone was bad? I told him to keep doing what he's doing as long as its working, and then I said that a subway sub is a reasonably filling meal without being a calorie bomb, which wasn't even directed at him as advice (although I still contend for someone simply trying to lose a lot of weight, eating a 500 - 600 calorie turkey and veggie subway sub is not a horrible thing like some here claim).
As badly as you might think I eat, I never tell other people in this thread (or the Fast Food thread) to eat or do like me. In fact, I think the majority of the advice I give here is pretty solid and agrees with what most other people say.
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
Except building muscle is the best way to burn calories. For every pound of muscle you gain, you burn 50 more calories a day at rest. You don't get that with cardio. There is only a negligible increase BMR after cardio. Gain ten pounds of muscle, and you'll look better, and burn one pound a week just by living. That's four pounds a month, 50 pounds a year!
Most people want to lose 20-30 pounds, and half of it is muscle mass, so they look worse than before, and damage their metabolism.
Warmuth
Molten Core Raider
- 877
- 520
Not to mention its harder to get under 10%bf than it is to go from 400 to 200 pounds. It takes longer but there is no great mystery to "eat less". People can hate on anyone who got ripped all they want, it takes a shit ton of effort to get in that shape.
Eidal
Molten Core Raider
- 2,001
- 213
No. Not even close. 5 minutes of Google is saying 6-13ish.
Evaluation of Specific Metabolic Rates of Major Organs and Tissues: Comparison Between Men and Women
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
Apparently, there are a bunch of studies, and they all say anywhere between 10 to 50 a day, and there is no definitive answer. What we do know is, muscle burns x amount of calories. When people are losing weight, they need to be at least maintaining their muscle mass, and just hitting the treadmill won't do that. What's the point of losing 30 pounds, and hindering your fat burning, along with being skinny-fat?
DickTrickle
Definitely NOT Furor Planedefiler
- 13,571
- 15,882
He links actual research and you link a bodybuilding.com article with no citations? Sorry, but those are not equivalent.
Fifey
Trakanon Raider
- 2,898
- 962
Shonuff
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 5,538
- 791
There are numerous studies on weight loss out there. As the one referenced in the quote says, weightlifters lost six more pounds of fat than the people on just cardio. And the ones on cardio lost more muscle, so you can see, they just got flabby. And it hurt their BMR. You might burn more calories when doing cardio, but you get more benefit all day from weights. For overall health, you should be doing both.
Look at it this way, even if the calories burned per muscle is only ten calories a day, that's one pound a month you'd gain back, if you were the average person in that study.
Another strike against doing cardio alone: you have to figure in cardio adaptation, eventually your body gets more efficient at cardio, meaning you burn less calories doing it. So the better cardio shape you get in, the less calories you actually burn while doing it. Ever go to gym and see fat aerobics instructors? There's a reason why that is so prevalent.
Khane
Got something right about marriage
- 20,626
- 14,374
All the fatties who've never done an ounce of training in their lives are definitely losing all that hard earned muscle when they start eating better.
Lyrical, you're quoting some musclehead's interpretation of a scientific study that he doesn't even properly cite because, one can only assume, if people don't take his word at face value they'll find information that conflicts with his message which would drive traffic away from his site.
Lyrical, you're quoting some musclehead's interpretation of a scientific study that he doesn't even properly cite because, one can only assume, if people don't take his word at face value they'll find information that conflicts with his message which would drive traffic away from his site.
Khane
Got something right about marriage
- 20,626
- 14,374
Yeah but bro, don't forget to confuse your muscles while lifting otherwise they get better at lifting and you don't make those sick gains anymore.
Rezz
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 4,486
- 3,531
Over time your body does adapt to strain and you expend less energy doing it. But I don't think it is really an amount that anyone whose goal is to lose weight needs to worry about. Marathon runners probably burn a lot less calories than a fatty running a 5k, but that has a lot to do with body makeup/weight/speed and a bunch of other factors. The simple take away is that if stuff starts getting easier... do more. There's no confusion nonsense, but your body does get better at maximizing the caloric usage over time. So all you do is add reps/laps/whatever, and the problem is solved. It's one of the reasons why burnouts aren't the greatest thing in the world for strength, but they tend to burn a shitload of calories and help increase stamina, so you can lift longer and burn more. With the effort needed to put on 1lb of muscle on the frame of someone who is 250-300+ (and not just a large dude/chick) they could easily burn a lot more calories by just doing high rep count lifts and cardio. That 1lb of muscle is a lot more important when you aren't in the overweight category.
Low-medium weight supersets 3 days a week with light to moderate cardio on days between more than covers your exercise and muscle growth needs for -anybody- trying to lose weight. After that it is diet and commitment. No magic bullet. As to how many calories you should be cutting? If you are exercising, you don't have to turn into a rabbit to make noticeable gains, and super drastic diet changes are bound to be a lot more difficult to follow than more measured ones. That's why, instead of looking up how many calories you need to maintain your current weight and then subtracting some arbitrary number from it, you should be looking at the calories needed for your target weight and eat that. It probably won't be 2000 under what your BMI suggests you eat at your current weight, so you aren't going to be on a crazy strict diet (definitely smaller, but not 3k to 1400 crash diet shit) and it will actually be easier to maintain over time. As you get closer to your target weight, you simply continue ramping up your workouts/cardio so that you are still technically under your needed calories each day, and you'll do it in a healthy and non-crash way.
If your doctor says something different though, I would follow their advice instead. But the above is a pretty easy method to lose weight at a manageable level and keep it off once you get there. No hippy techniques; no muscle confusion; no broscience. Just common sense.
Btw, carbs are fine.
Low-medium weight supersets 3 days a week with light to moderate cardio on days between more than covers your exercise and muscle growth needs for -anybody- trying to lose weight. After that it is diet and commitment. No magic bullet. As to how many calories you should be cutting? If you are exercising, you don't have to turn into a rabbit to make noticeable gains, and super drastic diet changes are bound to be a lot more difficult to follow than more measured ones. That's why, instead of looking up how many calories you need to maintain your current weight and then subtracting some arbitrary number from it, you should be looking at the calories needed for your target weight and eat that. It probably won't be 2000 under what your BMI suggests you eat at your current weight, so you aren't going to be on a crazy strict diet (definitely smaller, but not 3k to 1400 crash diet shit) and it will actually be easier to maintain over time. As you get closer to your target weight, you simply continue ramping up your workouts/cardio so that you are still technically under your needed calories each day, and you'll do it in a healthy and non-crash way.
If your doctor says something different though, I would follow their advice instead. But the above is a pretty easy method to lose weight at a manageable level and keep it off once you get there. No hippy techniques; no muscle confusion; no broscience. Just common sense.
Btw, carbs are fine.