Jump to content
disolusiond

Weight loss diary 2012

Recommended Posts

yeh my sister is a type 2 diabetic. she was a normal healthy skinny teenage (13) girl when she was diagnosed, and there's no history of diabetes in the family. Shes' one of only 8 kids with it and neither of my parents and no grandparents or cousins etc have it either.

 

I think zambo may revise that to 'to get your type 2 diabetes under control you must get your insulin under control". which is obvious. cause they take insulin, and plenty can control through just sensible diet, not caveman diet only.

Edited by kikz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 yrs ago I got a friend into the paleo diet, he got his father to cut out most of the crap mentioned above and he completely reversed his fathers alzheimers. Think about that for a minute, a dietary cure to alzheimers! Imagine going to the nursing home you had your father booked in at and getting your deposit back. Imagine having the doctors say its not diet, it cant be, and they got the original diagnosis wrong, imagine getting your father back.

Fuck, if it can cure Alzheimer's, it can cure diabetes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:)

 

I remain interested, so far as I'm concerned conventional medicine and the overseers don't have all the answers - a good doctor understands that - the doctors, and I rarely need one, that I've seen the past few years did.

 

Give you an example - my wife had had fibro-mialgia for decades, something magic happened when we met, not taking any credit for it whatsoever but not long after we met she had an attack and wanted me to leave whilst she dealt with it - no way - I'm just not that kind of person, looked after her, cooked dinner, she hasn't had an attack since. Her doc of 26 years was more than bemused :)

 

There are no absolute answers, what works for one does not for another.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing does - creating a deficit whereas your energy expenditure is greater than your intake. I've already covered this, and the best types of foods in my first couple of posts.

 

Works 100% of the time.

 

 

This zumba fella comes across as nothing more than a crackpot. Next thing he'll tell us all that his fad diet will cure male pattern baldness!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:)

 

I can agree and disagree with you Juggs - my diet is what's to hand? Which I suppose devolves to what did I shop? But it's always healthy- no junk in my pantry - well... Christmas nibbles, but they'll get divided out so much it wont matter.

 

You and Cheeky have a great one, really mean that :)

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next thing he'll tell us all that his fad diet will cure male pattern baldness!

I think I'll give that diet a try then :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next thing he'll tell us all that his fad diet will cure male pattern baldness!

I think I'll give that diet a try then :p

 

 

ROFL!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing does - creating a deficit whereas your energy expenditure is greater than your intake.

It sounds like you're quibbling about the different ways of efficiently doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cardio first to drop fat, for tone and tightening, get into weights near the end of your weight loss.

Just started reading the first page and this is absolutely the worst advice that could be given, please do not take it seriously.

 

If you want to change your body composition, and you do, weights are absolutely your best friend. Weights are proven to be more effective at stimulating body composition changes.

 

Regarding nutrition, don't waste your time counting calories. Start by making the obvious smart choices and cut the junk.

 

For the record some time ago I started as a 180kg Type-2 Diabetic. Now I'm a 115kg (2m tall) Personal Trainer/Body Transformation Specialist with no sign of Diabetes. Happy to pass on any advice/answer any questions for those in need. Threads like this are of great interest to me since my profession revolves around helping/coaching people to massive lifestyle changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weights are only effective if you plan on continuing them in the long term. If you don't plan on being a muscle man or even just a toned gentlemen then they won't benefit you more than cardio.

 

If your ultimate goal is to be a 3-4 time a week muscle building/maintaining kind of guy, then go for it. If it isn't, stick with the cardio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest weight lifting as an alternative to cardio exercise. As far as loosing weight is concerned, it's just as effective if not more so. One of the more advertised benefits is the increased recovery time which as a result, burns more calories over a longer period of time.

(FWIW I get heavier when I lift weights - so lifting weights for weightloss is fail :p)

 

Needs more source, because while the fat loss benefits of cardio are really only felt while doing cardio AND the fat loss does in theory continue beyond a weights workout, around 24 hours, the total burnt in one 24 hour period from 1 hour of running or even cycling versus 1 hour of weight training would still favour running/cycling. Yep, the literature does say fat isn't burnt after all cardio. It also says that the optimal fat burning zone is around 60% of max heart rate. That's true too, but it's misleading because that's the optimal fat burning zone - where more fat is used to as energy as opposed to glycogen in the blood being used. The reality is if I run at 12 km/hr for an hour, buring around 1200-1300 calories, I'm definitely going to burn more overall fat than walking for an hour at 5 km/hr buring about 450-500 cals.

 

...My opinon is to eat (green + yellow + maybe orange) vegetables (non starchy vegetables) intead of potatoes and pasta. Get the carbs in before 12-2pm. Like breakfast being a bowl of oats or 3-4 weetbix. And maybe 2 slices of wholemeal bread for lunch. Even the CSIRO recommends that.

 

Cardio isn't more effective than weights for weight loss simply because it can't help raise your resting metabolic rate like weights can. The biggest determining factor in a human's metabolic rate is their lean muscle mass. You aren't going to build muscle by running on the treadmill for 100 minutes a day.

 

The optimal fat burning zone stuff is a load of shit too, btw. If you want to do cardio that is aimed directly at fat burning, you need to work at the highest intensity levels you possibly can. You're making the mistake of counting calories burned during a workout. Unless you're going to exercise for around 8 hours a day, you've got no chance of "burning off" the calories consumed by eating. The trick is to raise your resting metabolic rate so that you are always burning calories at a higher rate even when you're not exercising.

 

Weights are only effective if you plan on continuing them in the long term. If you don't plan on being a muscle man or even just a toned gentlemen then they won't benefit you more than cardio.

 

If your ultimate goal is to be a 3-4 time a week muscle building/maintaining kind of guy, then go for it. If it isn't, stick with the cardio.

Terrible advice. You're assuming that everyone who lifts weights does it to be a bodybuilder, and totally disregarding what even a slight increase in muscle mass can do for body composition and overall health - increased immune function, increased functional strength, increased flexibility, improved quality of life as we age.

 

You're also disregarding just how much work goes in to being a "muscle man", even beyond the exercise into the supplement and nutrition approach. tsk tsk

 

 

Some mostly decent advice in here. It's actually really easy for a very fat person to lose a lot of weight, all it takes is sticking with it.

 

1. Diet.

By far the most important thing, but everyone makes it about a million times more complicated than it needs to be. Eat 20% less than your Total Daily Energy Expenditure. That's it. You will lose mass. Get plenty of protein in that energy to preserve muscle. Specifically lowered carbs will help slightly.

 

This calc will do. Choose the lowest activity level.

http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/tdee-calculator.html

 

2. Exercise.

Seriously not even necessary for the very overweight, but it's a good habit to get into. I HIGHLY advise getting into lifting as soon as you're able, cardio is shit and boring and tiring and doesn't really do much. Your time is better spent resistance training than endless hours on a treadmill. Cardio will contribute to your energy deficit, which you can do by eating less, but it will improve your cardiovascular health which can only be a good thing.

 

3. There is no three.

Well I guess consistency is three. No one day's food or day's workout matters overall. But a bunch added together spells your results.

Great post my friend. You've hit the nail on the head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weights are only effective if you plan on continuing them in the long term. If you don't plan on being a muscle man or even just a toned gentlemen then they won't benefit you more than cardio.

 

If your ultimate goal is to be a 3-4 time a week muscle building/maintaining kind of guy, then go for it. If it isn't, stick with the cardio.

yeah also agree with Ug Lee,

Weights are extremely good beyond building muscle. by tearing your muscle they cause your body to use more energy to repair them so your getting weight loss benefits even when your out of the gym. with cardio you only get the weight loss while your exercising and using your energy sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just FEI (for everyone's info)

 

Aerobic exercise is BAD for weight loss.

 

You should do INTERVAL training.

Bang. It's rare to know of someone who doesn't work in the health and fitness industry who realises/understands that interval training is the best form of cardio exercise for fat loss. Hell, 90% of health and fitness "professionals" don't even know this.

 

Want to do cardio that will carve fat off your body? a 30 minute HIIT session will do the trick. A few of these per week backing up a structured resistance training program that emphasises progressive overload will guarantee a supremely impressive body transformation.

 

edit - guarantee as long as you're not eating shit of course! ;)

Edited by Ug Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weights are only effective if you plan on continuing them in the long term. If you don't plan on being a muscle man or even just a toned gentlemen then they won't benefit you more than cardio.

 

If your ultimate goal is to be a 3-4 time a week muscle building/maintaining kind of guy, then go for it. If it isn't, stick with the cardio.

Terrible advice. You're assuming that everyone who lifts weights does it to be a bodybuilder, and totally disregarding what even a slight increase in muscle mass can do for body composition and overall health - increased immune function, increased functional strength, increased flexibility, improved quality of life as we age.

 

You're also disregarding just how much work goes in to being a "muscle man", even beyond the exercise into the supplement and nutrition approach. tsk tsk

The rate at which you ignored what I said is astounding! Are you some kind of superhuman forum reading ignoring man?!? Do you work out your ignoring shit people say muscle for that?!??!?

 

*EDIT* In the off chance it's been missed - I totally agree that muscle building/maintaining exercise is good for you. But it doesn't help much in weight loss if you don't plan on keeping it up.

Edited by tantryl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weights are only effective if you plan on continuing them in the long term. If you don't plan on being a muscle man or even just a toned gentlemen then they won't benefit you more than cardio.

 

If your ultimate goal is to be a 3-4 time a week muscle building/maintaining kind of guy, then go for it. If it isn't, stick with the cardio.

yeah also agree with Ug Lee,

Weights are extremely good beyond building muscle. by tearing your muscle they cause your body to use more energy to repair them so your getting weight loss benefits even when your out of the gym. with cardio you only get the weight loss while your exercising and using your energy sources.

 

Indeed. A weight-loss journey that focuses on cardio and not weights will leave a person looking "skinny fat". Sure, the number on the scales has come down, but the bodyfat percentage is still very high and you still look like a christmas pudding with your shirt off.

 

 

 

if you turn those 3 meals into 6 meals, your actually going to speed up your metabolism which will in turn burn more fat. Dont eat more just spread the same amount of food over 6 meals.

This is actually some very persistent broscience. You can slightly raise your metabolism by doing this, but it's like 1%. At the cost of spending all your time cooking and calculating and timing and carrying around tupperware containers. Cals in-cals out is the only thing that matters for the vast majority of people, it's only competitive bodybuilders and such who are already very lean and whom respond significantly to slight changes in diet who need to complicate matters.

 

I eat once or twice a day and I'm steadily losing fat and hanging onto most of my strength. In fact I'm going to go up an increment on my squats tomorrow and see how badly it kills me. Good fun.

 

It's not as much broscience as you think. Your anecdotal evidence re: eating twice a day is far more in the realm of broscience than alexdtree's post. Congrats on hanging on to most of your strength - those who are increasing their nutritional intake while exercising correctly are losing fat whilst increasing strength.

 

Have you read much into nutrient timing? Meal frequency is critical for the active person in ensuring their body receives as much nutrition as it can get. Reducing meals is like running your car without putting fuel back in.

 

Cals in vs cals out matters more to bodybuilders than the average person looking to lose some weight. Knowing what to do and sticking with it is hard enough for your everyday gym-goer, let alone asking them to factor in their daily caloric intake vs their daily caloric expenditure. For a figure competitor/bodybuilder where every .something of a percent lost in bodyfat means the difference in winning/losing the comp - yes I can see why you are measuring/weighting/counting everything.

 

Weights are only effective if you plan on continuing them in the long term. If you don't plan on being a muscle man or even just a toned gentlemen then they won't benefit you more than cardio.

 

If your ultimate goal is to be a 3-4 time a week muscle building/maintaining kind of guy, then go for it. If it isn't, stick with the cardio.

Terrible advice. You're assuming that everyone who lifts weights does it to be a bodybuilder, and totally disregarding what even a slight increase in muscle mass can do for body composition and overall health - increased immune function, increased functional strength, increased flexibility, improved quality of life as we age.

 

You're also disregarding just how much work goes in to being a "muscle man", even beyond the exercise into the supplement and nutrition approach. tsk tsk

The rate at which you ignored what I said is astounding! Are you some kind of superhuman forum reading ignoring man?!? Do you work out your ignoring shit people say muscle for that?!??!?

 

*EDIT* In the off chance it's been missed - I totally agree that muscle building/maintaining exercise is good for you. But it doesn't help much in weight loss if you don't plan on keeping it up.

 

Rather than get too deep into this rabbit hole, just state as clearly as you can what you actually mean here? Don't lift weights if you don't plan on staying in good shape? I think we're both confused by what you're trying to say!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than get too deep into this rabbit hole, just state as clearly as you can what you actually mean here? Don't lift weights if you don't plan on staying in good shape? I think we're both confused by what you're trying to say!

Well paraphrased.

 

I know it blows your fragile little mind, but some people don't really intend on lifting weights for the rest of their life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then dont. Your knowledge of the effect of insulin on the body is clear from that statement

I could argue yours is clear as well. In one post you say to cut certain grains from one's intake, not realising what they can do for the body when consumed at the right time, ie after intense physical activity.

 

There are certain times in our active lives when high-quality high-energy carbohydrates are REALLY beneficial in accelerating the results from exercise.

 

However I do like I lot of what you're saying. 100% disagree with no whey protein intake, though.

 

 

 

Rather than get too deep into this rabbit hole, just state as clearly as you can what you actually mean here? Don't lift weights if you don't plan on staying in good shape? I think we're both confused by what you're trying to say!

Well paraphrased.

 

I know it blows your fragile little mind, but some people don't really intend on lifting weights for the rest of their life.

 

So you are advising if a person wishes not to pursue optimum health and quality of life, they're best off doing nothing but cardio exercise and reducing their functional strength whilst increasing their bodyfat percentage?

 

You're right - my mind has been blown. I propose a deal - I'll try to un-blow my fragile little mind, if you agree not to talk about things you clearly have no understanding or formal education about. Maybe just stick to throwing insults around?

Edited by Ug Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are advising if a person wishes not to pursue optimum health and quality of life

I think I made it pretty clear that's not what I was talking about.

 

It's a bit of a recap of something I said in another thread to another guy, but if I meant to say that, guess what? I WOULD HAVE FUCKING SAID IT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest weight lifting as an alternative to cardio exercise. As far as loosing weight is concerned, it's just as effective if not more so. One of the more advertised benefits is the increased recovery time which as a result, burns more calories over a longer period of time.

(FWIW I get heavier when I lift weights - so lifting weights for weightloss is fail :p)

 

Needs more source, because while the fat loss benefits of cardio are really only felt while doing cardio AND the fat loss does in theory continue beyond a weights workout, around 24 hours, the total burnt in one 24 hour period from 1 hour of running or even cycling versus 1 hour of weight training would still favour running/cycling. Yep, the literature does say fat isn't burnt after all cardio. It also says that the optimal fat burning zone is around 60% of max heart rate. That's true too, but it's misleading because that's the optimal fat burning zone - where more fat is used to as energy as opposed to glycogen in the blood being used. The reality is if I run at 12 km/hr for an hour, buring around 1200-1300 calories, I'm definitely going to burn more overall fat than walking for an hour at 5 km/hr buring about 450-500 cals.

 

...My opinon is to eat (green + yellow + maybe orange) vegetables (non starchy vegetables) intead of potatoes and pasta. Get the carbs in before 12-2pm. Like breakfast being a bowl of oats or 3-4 weetbix. And maybe 2 slices of wholemeal bread for lunch. Even the CSIRO recommends that.

 

Cardio isn't more effective than weights for weight loss simply because it can't help raise your resting metabolic rate like weights can. The biggest determining factor in a human's metabolic rate is their lean muscle mass. You aren't going to build muscle by running on the treadmill for 100 minutes a day.

 

The optimal fat burning zone stuff is a load of shit too, btw. If you want to do cardio that is aimed directly at fat burning, you need to work at the highest intensity levels you possibly can. You're making the mistake of counting calories burned during a workout. Unless you're going to exercise for around 8 hours a day, you've got no chance of "burning off" the calories consumed by eating. The trick is to raise your resting metabolic rate so that you are always burning calories at a higher rate even when you're not exercising.

 

No. 8 hours of cardio such as running or cycling is going to burn around 8000 calories. That's significantly more than a typical person would consume in one day of eating. A 1000 calorie, 1 hour ride, run or swim is enough to put a normal person, with a 2000-2200 calorie per day requirement in negative calories. I already agreed that the fat burning zone while sounds good in theory, doesn't apply in practice. I even included an example which you were kind enough to quote ;) AFAIK a weights workout raises the metabolism by about 10% for the day. That's about 200-220 cals. With a wieghts workout consuming between 500-700 cals on a good day, it's going to not as effective as a 1000 cal run over the entire day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest weight lifting as an alternative to cardio exercise. As far as loosing weight is concerned, it's just as effective if not more so. One of the more advertised benefits is the increased recovery time which as a result, burns more calories over a longer period of time.

(FWIW I get heavier when I lift weights - so lifting weights for weightloss is fail :p)

 

Needs more source, because while the fat loss benefits of cardio are really only felt while doing cardio AND the fat loss does in theory continue beyond a weights workout, around 24 hours, the total burnt in one 24 hour period from 1 hour of running or even cycling versus 1 hour of weight training would still favour running/cycling. Yep, the literature does say fat isn't burnt after all cardio. It also says that the optimal fat burning zone is around 60% of max heart rate. That's true too, but it's misleading because that's the optimal fat burning zone - where more fat is used to as energy as opposed to glycogen in the blood being used. The reality is if I run at 12 km/hr for an hour, buring around 1200-1300 calories, I'm definitely going to burn more overall fat than walking for an hour at 5 km/hr buring about 450-500 cals.

 

...My opinon is to eat (green + yellow + maybe orange) vegetables (non starchy vegetables) intead of potatoes and pasta. Get the carbs in before 12-2pm. Like breakfast being a bowl of oats or 3-4 weetbix. And maybe 2 slices of wholemeal bread for lunch. Even the CSIRO recommends that.

 

Cardio isn't more effective than weights for weight loss simply because it can't help raise your resting metabolic rate like weights can. The biggest determining factor in a human's metabolic rate is their lean muscle mass. You aren't going to build muscle by running on the treadmill for 100 minutes a day.

 

The optimal fat burning zone stuff is a load of shit too, btw. If you want to do cardio that is aimed directly at fat burning, you need to work at the highest intensity levels you possibly can. You're making the mistake of counting calories burned during a workout. Unless you're going to exercise for around 8 hours a day, you've got no chance of "burning off" the calories consumed by eating. The trick is to raise your resting metabolic rate so that you are always burning calories at a higher rate even when you're not exercising.

 

No. 8 hours of cardio such as running or cycling is going to burn around 8000 calories. That's significantly more than a typical person would consume in one day of eating. A 1000 calorie, 1 hour ride, run or swim is enough to put a normal person, with a 2000-2200 calorie per day requirement in negative calories. I already agreed that the fat burning zone while sounds good in theory, doesn't apply in practice. I even included an example which you were kind enough to quote ;) AFAIK a weights workout raises the metabolism by about 10% for the day. That's about 200-220 cals. With a wieghts workout consuming between 500-700 cals on a good day, it's going to not as effective as a 1000 cal run over the entire day.

 

You see the solution here? DO BOTH

Hit your cardio up early morning on an empty stomach then have you breakfast.

then go about your day and later lets say after lunch hit up a solid weight session.

this way your getting your 10% metabolism boost and your getting your so called 1000cal run done.

I personally dont do alot of cardio because i get up early for work and couldnt handle getting up early to run, but if you have the time a nice walk for the OP in the morning alot the beach like hes been doing followed in the the afternoon by a nice weights session boom!

also be careful about doing weights and cardio together in the same session as you can start using muscle as an energy source which is not good!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I ate so much food today :D

 

And will do again tomorrow. And probably the day after that.

 

Well at least my next workout should be a good'un what with all the rest and massive energy intake topping my tanks for probably the first time in 4 months. Then it'll be a very strict couple of months of cutting to get as close to my 12% goal as possible, before I finally get to start bulking and getting stronger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a reliable way to check things like body fat %? Most of the stuff I've seen is not seemingly aimed at people with naturally stocky/solid frames/builds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, you can get close enough with calipers, scales, and the eyes of those who can tell by the pixels and have seen quite a few shops in their time. I put myself around 14-15% right now, with calipers always coming in a few percent below what I actually am, and my scales being generally closer but with too much fluctuation to take for gospel.

 

But if you're well over 15% or so, it's a lot easier to just consider yourself fat or skinnyfat and keep on cutting down til you're definitely at a leaner level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×