Region3
Ryder Cup Winner
Just run fast, he'll never be able to keep up! 
Best way to lose a beer belly...
- Thread starter Big D 88
- Start date
switch to spirits
stevek1969
Money List Winner
get lipo suction
JPH
Q-School Graduate
Burn more energy than you consume
Simples
Simples
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Consume less energy than you Burn.
JPH
Q-School Graduate
MadAdey
Money List Winner
I was once told a good little phrase...
"Remember your mouth is 10 times bigger than your bumhole"
I think the point is it is easier to shovel it in than get rid of it.
One thing I have learned is that it is the extra bits and bobs that put the pounds on. Having a pizza is not the best thing but then having a big dollop of Mayo and BBQ sacue with it just adds extra calories. If you have a cooked breakfast try cooking the sausages on a rack in the oven and have poached instead of fried eggs. Have baked wedges not chips. Try not to sit eating junk food everyday of the week. Maybe just at the weekend. If your feeling peckish have a big glass of water.
Just a few ideas that can help you loose weight there. I have not removed the food that we love to eat more just altered the cooking and removed the extra calories.
"Remember your mouth is 10 times bigger than your bumhole"
I think the point is it is easier to shovel it in than get rid of it.
One thing I have learned is that it is the extra bits and bobs that put the pounds on. Having a pizza is not the best thing but then having a big dollop of Mayo and BBQ sacue with it just adds extra calories. If you have a cooked breakfast try cooking the sausages on a rack in the oven and have poached instead of fried eggs. Have baked wedges not chips. Try not to sit eating junk food everyday of the week. Maybe just at the weekend. If your feeling peckish have a big glass of water.
Just a few ideas that can help you loose weight there. I have not removed the food that we love to eat more just altered the cooking and removed the extra calories.
Rooter
Money List Winner
I have lost almost 2 stone by cycling to work for about 4 months. no change in diet, i probably eat more now than i used to. dont really "watch" what i eat either and still drink beer!! I am now 5'10" and 11st 4lb. was about 13st in August.
Big D 88
Q-School Graduate
Thanks the advice all,
Cheers
Cheers
Khamelion
Tour Winner
The only way to lose weight is to change your eating and drinking habits and do some exercise, contrary to what menay think hitting the gym and lifting weights or weight based exercise is more efficient at buring fat than all out cardio work.
If you must do cardio do interval training short runs interspersed with fast sprints.
Weight work is better at burning fat, as combined with the right diet to promote muscle growth and no you don;t have to end up looking lke the hulk if you don't want to, but by increasing your muscle mass you metabolism increases as your body works to produce the nutrients need to grow and repair your muscle and an increased metabolism means faster fat burn.
Some tips, eat a good protein rich breakfast, don't eat any carbs before you train your body will use that as fuel before any fat you have stored, eating an orange is better for you than drinking orange juice even if said juice "has bits in", eat as much veg as you want (that doesn't include potatoes though) that said sweet potatoes are very good for you, cut out crisps, fizzy drinks, sweets etc...if you feel hungry try drinking water it may be that you are dehydrated, eat several small meals a day rather than 3 or 4 big ones, nuts are good for you and are easy to snack on during the day, but not the dry roated or salted kind, eat brazil nuts, full of the right stuff.
Don't calorie count, waste of time, don't use the BMI charts they are just wrong, for me the BMI calculator puts me in the obese category, something I am definatley not, 5ft 11in at 15st 7lbs 34inch waist, I train a lot and know the majority of my weight is muscle not fat.
If you must do cardio do interval training short runs interspersed with fast sprints.
Weight work is better at burning fat, as combined with the right diet to promote muscle growth and no you don;t have to end up looking lke the hulk if you don't want to, but by increasing your muscle mass you metabolism increases as your body works to produce the nutrients need to grow and repair your muscle and an increased metabolism means faster fat burn.
Some tips, eat a good protein rich breakfast, don't eat any carbs before you train your body will use that as fuel before any fat you have stored, eating an orange is better for you than drinking orange juice even if said juice "has bits in", eat as much veg as you want (that doesn't include potatoes though) that said sweet potatoes are very good for you, cut out crisps, fizzy drinks, sweets etc...if you feel hungry try drinking water it may be that you are dehydrated, eat several small meals a day rather than 3 or 4 big ones, nuts are good for you and are easy to snack on during the day, but not the dry roated or salted kind, eat brazil nuts, full of the right stuff.
Don't calorie count, waste of time, don't use the BMI charts they are just wrong, for me the BMI calculator puts me in the obese category, something I am definatley not, 5ft 11in at 15st 7lbs 34inch waist, I train a lot and know the majority of my weight is muscle not fat.
bobmac
Major Champion
Khamelion
Tour Winner
:thup: Yup that about sums it up :thup:
DappaDonDave
Journeyman Pro
A1ex
Head Pro
Get a hybrid/road bike and cycle. A solid hours cycling at a decent pace will burn 800-1000 cals. Non weight bearing, enjoyable and you can travel further distances and therefore not get bored.
Khamelion
Tour Winner
Cardio work will get you fit and burn some fat, but it is not hte most effiicient way of burning fat, weight training and muscle growth has been proven the best way to promote fat loss.
V
vkurup
Guest
Do you have a copy that can be shared?
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Costs around a £7.50 from Amazon or WH Smiths.
Khamelion
Tour Winner
Many people mistake weight loss and fat loss, the two are very different. If you are 'over weight' the common term used for basically being fat, then most people will diet in an attempt to lose weight (fat), but the problem I have when people say they want to lose weight is that they really mean they want to lose fat.
Exercise or training of any kind be it cardio or weight based will promote muscle growth, muscle is heavier than fat, so people automatically think that after two weeks of eating the right food and training, when they step on the scales and look at the figures they see very little difference from what they were two weeks prior to what they currently are. Then they think the exercise and food are not working, get disheartened and give up.
Weight loss is the wrong term, you should be talking about fat loss.
Using scales to determine fat loss success when training is going to give false positives##, look in the mirror instead, try on clothes that didn't used to fit, both of those will give you a better visual result.
##If you are trying to lose week by diet alone without any exercise then the scales will show you what you have lost or not as the case maybe.
If you are training and losing weight but not fat then you're not eating right and your body has gone into a catabolic state. This is where to try and find the nutrients needed to feed itself, it destroys the muslces you have built up, it dose not use the stored fat.
One Planer
Global Moderator
While I agree with 90% of what you say, this I can't agree with.
Muscle is not heavier than fat. Take 1lb of muscle and 1lb of fat, which weighs more? The difference is density and how it is spread.
Building muscle and losing fat (weight) require completley different metabolic states with diet influencing these states.
Building muscle requires an energy surplus that will account for your basal metabolic rate (BMR) any activity and any recovery required. In excess, eat more than you need
Losing weight (fat) can only be accomplished in an energy defecit. You can't eat more than you need and lose weight.
You will find it very, very difficult to build muscle while your calorie intake is at a deficit level.
You are quite right to say that more muscle equals a higher metabolic rate, but, as muscle is metabolically active, to maintain the muscle it must be, as you say stimulated the progressive overload (Lifting weights) in the absence of excess calories from diet. The problem then comes in the form of recovery. While in a calore deficit, your body will take longer to recover from the same exercise while in -calorioes than the same exercise with +calories which can lead to muscle faigue and injury if your training programs lifting volume is not reduced. We could get into the debate of which form of trainig is best suited to maintaining lean mass (Sarcoplasmic or myofibrillar hypertrophy), but that is a whole new kettle of fish
I also disagree with calorie counting being a waste of time.
It's easy to say "Eat less" and "Do more" but eat how much less or do how much more? If you don't have a grasp of how many calories you consume, how do you know how much to safely drop?
When I was a P.T, the biggest thing I saw was people with exactly this attitude. They go from eating a steady, a little OTT diet, to eating nothing and doing lots more exercise. While good and as your rightly point out, catabolism is all that is occuring and, in the long run counter productive as when they return to their regular diet, the weight returns also.
The simple solution is this. In the fitness comunity it is widely regarded that diet plays an equal, if not bigger role than the actual activity.
I'm going to use myself as an example.
I'm a 30 year old male, 6ft tall and weigh approx 14 stone (196lb) with a moderately active lifestyle.
I can tell you my BMR is 1998kcal per day. This is how many calories my body requires just to function in a healthy manor. If I add in activity using the Harris Benedict formula, this figure rises to 3196kcal.
3196 is the number of calories I need to eat, per day, to maintain my current weight at my current activity level.
Here's the easy part. To lose weight, reduce that figure (3196) by 300. If I consume that number of calories at my current activity level, I'm in a calorie deficit. Eat that number of calories with the same activity for 2 weeks and weigh myself again. If no loss reduce another 300kcal off (Now -600kcal), again weigh myself in 2 weeks. If I'm losing weight at around 2-3lb/week keep going until it slows or stops, then reduce another 300kcal and repeat as required until I'm at my desired weight.
The same goes for gaining weight.
Unless you use a hydrostatic flotation tank and have the calculations done for you, you'll never know how much fat/muscle/water you will be losing as you lose or gain weight, just be content you're moving in the right direction. If you're happy that's all that matters.
Like I said earlier in the thread. All you need is to understand what your body requires (BMR + Harris Benedict) then eat 250-300kcal less than that. Weigh yourself in 2 weeks, if no loss, drop the same number of calories again. Repeat until you are losing a steady 2-3lb a week and reduce as the losses slow or stop. Once you are at your desired weight. You stop reducing and continue to eat roughly the same number of calories.
Because the calorie drop has been incrimental rather than one, large crash, your body chemistry has time to adjust to the reduced calorie inatake and make neccecery changes to your body chemistry to allow your body to cope with reduced calories. When you reach your goal weigh, continue to eat those calories and allow your body chemistry to mormalise for around 2-3 weeks and then you're done.
http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/
http://www.bmi-calculator.net/bmr-calculator/harris-benedict-equation/
Khamelion
Tour Winner
Okay fair point on muscle v fat weight thing, it's like sayinf which is heavier a tonne of feathers or a tonne of lead, obviously they weigh the same. What I failed to get across is that muscle is denser than fat and for, shall we say for the sake of argument one cubic foot of fat is going to weight less than the same measure of muscle.
Can we also, or the sake of argument differentiate between fat and weight, you can have two people, same height, same weight, just one is primarily built up of fat, the other is lean muscle, the terminology while some may think is just semantics, the difference are a t polar opposites.
You Say:
I disagree and agree, in the first instance, in a resting state, a person to maintain their current state requires 2000 calories, to gain weight put on fat, they eat 2500 calories, to lose weight or reduce fat they eat 1500 calories, that is a person with a sedantory lifestyle, your basic couch potato.
If said person now decides to start exercising and they maintain the same 2000 calorie intake, they will start to burn fat and as a result become lighter, if said person eats 2500 calories, then they will gain or maintain the same weight, but at the same time burn fat, if said person exercies but reduces their calory intake to 1500, they will lose fat, muscle and potentially do themselves more harm than good.
I disagree, okay this example may be a bit extreme, but someone eating 2000 calories derived from poultry, fish, legumes, vegetables etc... healthy stuff, if they decrease the calories based on this diet then calory counting in this instance would work, but many people when calory counting cheat and sneak a bag of crisps, ice cream, confectionary then all of a sudden their daily intake is shot, if they stick to the 2000 rule, they go hungry and are doing themselves more harm than good, they are effectively starving themselves, if thy then eat to fill the hunger, they exceed their daily calory count and put on fat.
There was a program on TV last week which was about people in hospital waiting for gastric surgery so they could lose fat, these people were obese, massive. One guy was in for 2 weeks, he was on a low calory diet, fresh veg chicken etc...he weighed in at 304lbs, after two weeks of being in hospital and eating well, he was still 304lbs, why because he wasn't moving and when the tuck shop trolley came round he was buying fizzy pop and crisps. It wasn't until the surgen put through endscopic hell that the penny dropped and he stopped the snacking, and did some walking and lost some fat.
The point I'm trying to make is that counting calories is all good if you are eating the right stuff, but if those calories are made up of mainly sugars and saturated fats, calory counting is pointless.
For someone to lose weight, it has to be a lifestyle choice, they have to want to make the changes that will make a difference to them. To make those changes they have to want to eat differently and exercise more. The people that want to lose weight get bogged down with the huge number of diet plans and the huge number of exercise regimes, to that end it's personal choice and you have to go with what works for the individual.
Can we also, or the sake of argument differentiate between fat and weight, you can have two people, same height, same weight, just one is primarily built up of fat, the other is lean muscle, the terminology while some may think is just semantics, the difference are a t polar opposites.
You Say:
I disagree and agree, in the first instance, in a resting state, a person to maintain their current state requires 2000 calories, to gain weight put on fat, they eat 2500 calories, to lose weight or reduce fat they eat 1500 calories, that is a person with a sedantory lifestyle, your basic couch potato.
If said person now decides to start exercising and they maintain the same 2000 calorie intake, they will start to burn fat and as a result become lighter, if said person eats 2500 calories, then they will gain or maintain the same weight, but at the same time burn fat, if said person exercies but reduces their calory intake to 1500, they will lose fat, muscle and potentially do themselves more harm than good.
I disagree, okay this example may be a bit extreme, but someone eating 2000 calories derived from poultry, fish, legumes, vegetables etc... healthy stuff, if they decrease the calories based on this diet then calory counting in this instance would work, but many people when calory counting cheat and sneak a bag of crisps, ice cream, confectionary then all of a sudden their daily intake is shot, if they stick to the 2000 rule, they go hungry and are doing themselves more harm than good, they are effectively starving themselves, if thy then eat to fill the hunger, they exceed their daily calory count and put on fat.
There was a program on TV last week which was about people in hospital waiting for gastric surgery so they could lose fat, these people were obese, massive. One guy was in for 2 weeks, he was on a low calory diet, fresh veg chicken etc...he weighed in at 304lbs, after two weeks of being in hospital and eating well, he was still 304lbs, why because he wasn't moving and when the tuck shop trolley came round he was buying fizzy pop and crisps. It wasn't until the surgen put through endscopic hell that the penny dropped and he stopped the snacking, and did some walking and lost some fat.
The point I'm trying to make is that counting calories is all good if you are eating the right stuff, but if those calories are made up of mainly sugars and saturated fats, calory counting is pointless.
For someone to lose weight, it has to be a lifestyle choice, they have to want to make the changes that will make a difference to them. To make those changes they have to want to eat differently and exercise more. The people that want to lose weight get bogged down with the huge number of diet plans and the huge number of exercise regimes, to that end it's personal choice and you have to go with what works for the individual.
