The real key to losing weight is Metabolism!!

CoachVakaNERD

It's weird...I've noticed since I've started exercising that my mood has become very positive. But I'm noticing that is not the case for many others haha. Goodness, so much negativity. I thought the post was wonderful!

sandimack

Bump

bek416

ACG??

I can't wait to see Acg tear this apart...

yes, who is ACG?

_Sally_

This is not an HCG thread... please no hijacking.

With Respect,
_Sally_
MFP Forum Moderator

(BTW - my post here has nothing to do with the reference to ACG in the post immediately above this one.... in case anyone is doing a quick read and got confused! )

tigersword

I don't know why people are being so mean about what the OP wrote. Nothing he put out there is harmful. All he said was what was working for him. He's not promoting unhealthy weight loss. Who cares if the "science" is correct or incorrect. I'd LOVE for the people arguing with the OP to give scientific reasoning of how eating breakfast, drinking more water and exercising is unhealthy? Please point out to me what the OP wrote that will harm someone who follows his advice.

If someone doesn't eat breakfast, and isn't comfortable eating breakfast, reads the original post, and believes that in order to lose weight they must force themselves to eat breakfast, struggle with it, feel terrible doing it, and ultimately give up completely, I'd say that's a pretty good example of eating breakfast being unhealthy for that individual.

Also, someone running a marathon drinking more water without replacing electrolytes, that's also fatally unhealthy.

grinch031

but the rate of metabolizing that food is very different. That is why when a diabetic person has a low blood sugar, you give them something without fat to bring their blood sugar up---juice is usually the preferred because of this fact. You would not give a diabetic a piece of steak to treat a low blood sugar, right? My point wasn't so much that as it is you need to eat healthy first and you shouldn't sacrifice the healthy foods otherwise you could spend all of your calories on junk and still be within your calorie range but not be meeting your fitness goals.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html

This professor of nutrition ate all junk food and met his fitness and health goals. He basically did it to prove a point, that what you choose to eat is less important than how much you eat. Losing excess body fat will do much more for your overall health and well being than eating any particular type of food.

He proved that somebody with HIS genetics and HIS prior health could eat whatever they want and meet their fitness and health goals over a VERY SHORT period of time. To me its a very useless study that proves absolutely nothing other than merely that a calorie is a calorie when you look at the simplest of cases.

Try putting the entire American population on the twinkie diet and tell me what happens over the next 2 years.

tubbstattsyrup

Stop arguing. We are all fortunate to have the choice to eat at all.

good2bthaking

That was great to read, thanks for taking the time to get that out there. I found ot not only informative, but highly useful.Much appreciated!!!

grinch031

The plan I outlined is solid and works for people all the time. Does it work for everyone...I doubt it; however, it's worked very very well for me. I simply provided information for people to consider trying. I personally think weight loss is a very very simple formula...and there is nothing complicated about it. Getting fit, muscular & lean is a very very simple formula...nothing complicated about it; however, people spend billions of $$/year buying supplements, diet pills, weight loss programs, etc.

If you don't like what I have outlined...it's unnecessary to be mean about it.

Good luck to you whatever your weight loss/fitness goals are.

I think had you read through this, you'd see the contention is not with what you were advocating, but the basis on which you were advocating it on. For instance there's nothing wrong with suggesting to eat breakfast, but holding calories and macros constant it makes no difference if you eat breakfast or not. And there's no need to throw in the discounted food combination theory or metabolic advantage to meal frequency, it's completely unnecessary

I think eating breakfast is important if you are a carb addict. The longer you go withour your carb fix, the worse you will feel. The same can't be said about someone eating a low-carb diet.

HotBodUnderConstruction

ACG??

I can't wait to see Acg tear this apart...

yes, who is ACG?

It's the dude with the abs who actually understands what statistically significant means.

thistimeismytime

Bump. Great info and summary OP.

junyr

But most people dont want to experiment and see what fits them best.

This very true and very sad.

tedrussell

I didnt read one mean post in this thread. seems like all this "encouraging" etc has turned people into a bunch of "yes (wo)men" instead of paying attention to the basics of weight loss.


on a side note, i have spent the last 10 minutes reading this forum with grass clippings in my pants....i havent lost any weight yet, but will report back soon!

tigersword

Grass clippings are too slow, you wanna go with a 50/50 mix of mulch and dried twigs.

MattGetsMad

new evidence suggests that these twigs need to be changed out every 3 hours or you lose the effect.

TexNut

Grass clippings are too slow, you wanna go with a 50/50 mix of mulch and dried twigs.

What?! That's ridiculous!!! If you really want to lose weight, put 1-2 rabid squirrels in your pocket. Works like a charm.

_Sally_

No hijacking of the thread, please. If all we are going to be talking about now is grass and twigs in a slightly veiled attempt at making fun of other posts in the thread, it may indicate that this topic has run its course....

Thanks for understanding.

_Sally_
MFP Forum Moderator

KeriA

If you disagree with the poster don't send us to sites that want us to subscribe and seem to be oriented to the fitness elite. The topic was losing weight not body recomposition whether related or not. Recently I read an abstract of a study suggesting that HIIT did have benefits over sustained cardio for people like me who need to lose weight and are of my sex and age and weight category. I am trying some of the things suggested here because I need to know if they will work for me. I really don't want to change when I eat so I was interested to see if there was support for or against. The links provided by one who disagreed with the OP weren't that helpful to me but then I am not subscribing to them and I do not claim to be in the category of fitness elite.

ninerbuff

Truth lies in actual peer reviewed clinical studies. While what the OP has posted sounds really good, it's still important to find out if it's just hearsay or if it's actually been studied and verified. If people believe that eating after 7pm piles on weight because someone told them so, wouldn't it make sense to have a clinical study on why rather than just take word on it because it sounds like it makes sense?
I totally changed a lot of the broscience I was fed and now use actual science with clients. Result is that they are getting great results without the issues of weight regain and having to change their lifestyles too much.

A.C.E. Certified Personal Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

tigersword

If you disagree with the poster don't send us to sites that want us to subscribe and seem to be oriented to the fitness elite. The topic was losing weight not body recomposition whether related or not. Recently I read an abstract of a study suggesting that HIIT did have benefits over sustained cardio for people like me who need to lose weight and are of my sex and age and weight category. I am trying some of the things suggested here because I need to know if they will work for me. I really don't want to change when I eat so I was interested to see if there was support for or against. The links provided by one who disagreed with the OP weren't that helpful to me but then I am not subscribing to them and I do not claim to be in the category of fitness elite.

HIIT is effective, but only short term. HIIT is actually more like strength training and weight lifting than it is cardio. As such, your body adapts well to it, but once your body adapts to it, there's no real advantage to doing it anymore. So it's great for a few weeks, but once your body adapts to it, progress stops, as there is really no way to increase the resistance, so to speak. It's a great add-on to a workout program to fill in or as a substitute once in a while, but it's not that great an idea to base an entire work out routine around.

fit4everyoung

Great information to review and balance your meals!

Kymwho

Thank you for the tips!!

november03

bump

thinmintme

The real key to losing weight is CALORIES IN AND CALORIES OUT....not rocket science...just eat less and move more!

Exactly!
Sure, there might be tweaks here and there that could rev the metabolism but it won't turn you into superman.
My grandmother would say you need to drink more (water) and eat less (junk food, sweets, pastries, etc). That's all there is to it!
And of course, stop sitting around.

(It's driving me nuts right now to read 'calories in, calories out' and I can't even take a walk because of my broken foot! )

EatClenTrenHard

Point 1 and 2 are *********
stop scaring people.

There are 180 pound ripped brahs who eat warrior diets. (eat 1 time per day 3000 calorie)

The only thing which makes sense in your post is HIIT. Which is way better than cardio-bunnying.

MyFeistyEvolution

I can't wait to see Acg tear this apart...

LOL


It's amusing several people thought this including me....

funkycamper

Truth lies in actual peer reviewed clinical studies. While what the OP has posted sounds really good, it's still important to find out if it's just hearsay or if it's actually been studied and verified. If people believe that eating after 7pm piles on weight because someone told them so, wouldn't it make sense to have a clinical study on why rather than just take word on it because it sounds like it makes sense?
I totally changed a lot of the broscience I was fed and now use actual science with clients. Result is that they are getting great results without the issues of weight regain and having to change their lifestyles too much.

A.C.E. Certified Personal Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

I agree with you but I still think the OP has good advice that is worth trying for some people. For me, eating 5-7 small meals daily works much better than 2-3 bigger meals or IF. That's for me. For somebody else, IF or less but bigger meals might be perfect. I also incorporate several of his other tactics with success. Again, YMMV.

I think the title of the thread is where the failure is as somebody else has already noted. If the title had indicated that this is what worked for him and some or all of it may work for somebody else without indicating that there was science behind the tactics, I don't think there would be such a ruckus.

Anyway, that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. :drinker:

funkycamper

If you disagree with the poster don't send us to sites that want us to subscribe and seem to be oriented to the fitness elite. The topic was losing weight not body recomposition whether related or not. Recently I read an abstract of a study suggesting that HIIT did have benefits over sustained cardio for people like me who need to lose weight and are of my sex and age and weight category. I am trying some of the things suggested here because I need to know if they will work for me. I really don't want to change when I eat so I was interested to see if there was support for or against. The links provided by one who disagreed with the OP weren't that helpful to me but then I am not subscribing to them and I do not claim to be in the category of fitness elite.

HIIT is effective, but only short term. HIIT is actually more like strength training and weight lifting than it is cardio. As such, your body adapts well to it, but once your body adapts to it, there's no real advantage to doing it anymore. So it's great for a few weeks, but once your body adapts to it, progress stops, as there is really no way to increase the resistance, so to speak. It's a great add-on to a workout program to fill in or as a substitute once in a while, but it's not that great an idea to base an entire work out routine around.

My experience with HIIT makes me disagree with you. As my fitness is increasing, I can do HIIT with more intensity and for more rounds. For example, when I do outdoor sprints at the track, I cover more ground for 30 seconds than I did when I first started. I'm also seeing that I can do another sprint after a shorter recovery time. I used to have to do 1:3, then 1:2. I am now doing it at around 1:1.5. Also, when I first started my recovery cycles were really slow. I felt like I could barely walk. Now my recovery cycles involve walking at a much faster pace. And I used to be lucky to get 10 minutes in. Now I can do about 20 minutes before I'm gutted.

I also occasionally do tabatas. I used to have problems completing the cycle. I'm still gutted when I'm done but I can do the whole 4-minutes and really work up a good sweat doing it. There is definitely an increase in intensity over my beginning attempts. I used to just do it running in place, now I can do more intense things like burpees and mountain climbers, etc.

Of course, HIIT can't and shouldn't replace heavy lifting in a good, well-rounded exercise program but I think it's fallacious to say that progress stops.

cruiser3004

I read the first few posts after your very informative article, which was well written and no doubt took a considerable amount of your time to write. All with the intent of sharing what works for you and trying to help others.

I cant believe how many negative posts there are.

But for me I really appreciate the time and effort spent, and from personal experience agree with you.

Thanks

tigersword

I really want someone to specifically point out a negative post. The only negative posts I've seen are the ones accusing people of making negative posts.

Correcting misinformation isn't "being negative." It's attempting to educate and help someone. I appreciate the time it takes someone to write a post, but if that post contains incorrect information, are people that have more knowledge just supposed to let it go, and not try and correct it?

The only negativity I see in this thread are the people who seem to be angry that people are correcting the OP's mistakes. If a student tells a teacher that 2+2=5, and the teacher corrects the student and tells them that 2+2 is not 5, 2+2 actually equals 4, is that teacher being negative? After all, it took that student time and effort to come up with the solution they came up with, should the teacher just allow them to remain wrong?