So you want a nice stomach
Replies
-
Supposed to be 3 10 minutes. Not sure how to edit post on here0
-
I don't really agree with the general look of this.
Assuming you are an average person with an average weight;
I'd focus mostly on muscle building.
Calorie deficit? That's not going to help you building those muscles, in contrary.
What's working for me is HIIT with a focus on strength and stability.
Combined with the NEEDED caloric intake (Check out the Harris–Benedict equation) or even higher.
Have regular meals, your caloric intake evenly spread throughout the day in 5 meals.
Your metabolism will be soaring up.
The logic behind it is to build muscle.
To increase muscle, you need to feed them so they can recover and build up.
More muscle means more energy burn, in action and in rest.
Getting a ripped stomach is all about losing body fat.
And the most efficient way for you to do so is by strengthening or increasing your muscles.
An energy deficit will not work in your advantage, in contrary.
My experience, my opinion.0 -
I dig it too. Thanks!0
-
governatorkp wrote: »I don't really agree with the general look of this.
Assuming you are an average person with an average weight;
I'd focus mostly on muscle building.
Calorie deficit? That's not going to help you building those muscles, in contrary.
What's working for me is HIIT with a focus on strength and stability.
Combined with the NEEDED caloric intake (Check out the Harris–Benedict equation) or even higher.
Have regular meals, your caloric intake evenly spread throughout the day in 5 meals.
Your metabolism will be soaring up.
The logic behind it is to build muscle.
To increase muscle, you need to feed them so they can recover and build up.
More muscle means more energy burn, in action and in rest.
Getting a ripped stomach is all about losing body fat.
And the most efficient way for you to do so is by strengthening or increasing your muscles.
An energy deficit will not work in your advantage, in contrary.
My experience, my opinion.
So... basically... you didn't read the OP.
Not to mention... the vast majority on this site are looking to lose weight because they are overweight, or are unhappy with their current weight/physique. So, yes... a calorie deficit would be needed. You appear to be far from overweight.0 -
Love #2. Knowing your talking about core, I often read from dieticians that sit ups do nothing for mid section fat and one of them just the other day said DON'T DO THEM! I'm not arguing that it does burn fat but when I do them it makes me hold my stomach in which provides better posture. It makes me feel better about my self and is encouraging.0
-
BusyRaeNOTBusty wrote: »
2. Strength training. If you want that toned mid section look you have to put some muscle there. If you just want a nice flat stomach muscle will still help it look tight. You can begin with Strong Lifts, a hypertrophy routine or a strength program from bodybuilding.com (free!). One that includes compound lifts like deadlift, squat, bench press and pull ups will help. Work on increasing the amount of weight you use. When the weight gets heavier you engage your core more and it builds the muscle.
I want to expand on this. It seems some people, especially young women with very little muscle, might even need to go on a bulk to get a "six-pack". They just don't have big enough muscles. They'd have to get dangerously lean for them to show. The better way would be to gain weight (including fat and muscle, but hopefully mostly muscle), then try again to lose the fat and reveal the new pretty muscles.
0 -
Be very careful with that concept. Yo-yo dieting can create a nightmare for trying to lose weight and maintain a healthy weight0
-
-
governatorkp wrote: »I don't really agree with the general look of this.
Assuming you are an average person with an average weight;
I'd focus mostly on muscle building.
Calorie deficit? That's not going to help you building those muscles, in contrary.
What's working for me is HIIT with a focus on strength and stability.
Combined with the NEEDED caloric intake (Check out the Harris–Benedict equation) or even higher.
Have regular meals, your caloric intake evenly spread throughout the day in 5 meals.
Your metabolism will be soaring up.
The logic behind it is to build muscle.
To increase muscle, you need to feed them so they can recover and build up.
More muscle means more energy burn, in action and in rest.
Getting a ripped stomach is all about losing body fat.
And the most efficient way for you to do so is by strengthening or increasing your muscles.
An energy deficit will not work in your advantage, in contrary.
My experience, my opinion.
Since when do you lose bodyfat by eating more? Something is very wrong in your thinking there.0 -
governatorkp wrote: »I don't really agree with the general look of this.
Assuming you are an average person with an average weight;
I'd focus mostly on muscle building.
Calorie deficit? That's not going to help you building those muscles, in contrary.
What's working for me is HIIT with a focus on strength and stability.
Combined with the NEEDED caloric intake (Check out the Harris–Benedict equation) or even higher.
Have regular meals, your caloric intake evenly spread throughout the day in 5 meals.
Your metabolism will be soaring up.
The logic behind it is to build muscle.
To increase muscle, you need to feed them so they can recover and build up.
More muscle means more energy burn, in action and in rest.
Getting a ripped stomach is all about losing body fat.
And the most efficient way for you to do so is by strengthening or increasing your muscles.
An energy deficit will not work in your advantage, in contrary.
My experience, my opinion.
@governatorkp Did you actually read the OP? And you say that being in a deficit isn't going to help build muscle...are you taking into account noob gains as well as recomping? And just because you say logic doesn't make it so.0 -
arditarose wrote: »
^Agreed0 -
Hi, @usmcmp
Quick question. I'm trying a recomp right now and while I never did much direct ab work in a deficit, I'm wondering if I might add a bit in now? I don't really like doing ab work so I'm kind of just hoping that I'll get a nice little result from my compound lifts-but maybe not. Thoughts?0 -
arditarose wrote: »Hi, @usmcmp
Quick question. I'm trying a recomp right now and while I never did much direct ab work in a deficit, I'm wondering if I might add a bit in now? I don't really like doing ab work so I'm kind of just hoping that I'll get a nice little result from my compound lifts-but maybe not. Thoughts?
@arditarose From the look of it you have a solid foundation for your core that has come from compound lift. Compound lifts will help maintain that foundation, but by now you probably notice that there are areas that lag a bit (my obliques suck). At this point is where I would add in more isolation work for the core.0 -
governatorkp wrote: »I don't really agree with the general look of this.
Assuming you are an average person with an average weight;
I'd focus mostly on muscle building.
Calorie deficit? That's not going to help you building those muscles, in contrary.
What's working for me is HIIT with a focus on strength and stability.
Combined with the NEEDED caloric intake (Check out the Harris–Benedict equation) or even higher.
Have regular meals, your caloric intake evenly spread throughout the day in 5 meals.
Your metabolism will be soaring up.
The logic behind it is to build muscle.
To increase muscle, you need to feed them so they can recover and build up.
More muscle means more energy burn, in action and in rest.
Getting a ripped stomach is all about losing body fat.
And the most efficient way for you to do so is by strengthening or increasing your muscles.
An energy deficit will not work in your advantage, in contrary.
My experience, my opinion.
I don't think you read my first post.
1. It was written for the general MFP population who are trying to lose weight. The goal is to maintain lean mass while losing weight.
2. People can increase muscle mass on a deficit. Considering that the majority of people reading this or who have responded don't know much about lifting, we can safely assume most people on MFP are going to experience beginner gains (plus the obese population can gain muscle in a deficit)
3. The calorie goal I suggest is fairly high because we want to fuel the body/muscle while they are still losing fat (that's also why my protein suggestion is fairly high).
4. This post is in the general diet and weight loss section, not the gaining section. That means people in this section should absolutely not be eating more than their body needs. Meal timing is irrelevant to this population and eating 5 evenly spaced meals is broscience that is not backed by real science.
Getting a ripped stomach is about having adequate lean mass and low body fat. Both of those can be accomplished using everything I wrote in the first post.0 -
arditarose wrote: »Hi, @usmcmp
Quick question. I'm trying a recomp right now and while I never did much direct ab work in a deficit, I'm wondering if I might add a bit in now? I don't really like doing ab work so I'm kind of just hoping that I'll get a nice little result from my compound lifts-but maybe not. Thoughts?
@arditarose From the look of it you have a solid foundation for your core that has come from compound lift. Compound lifts will help maintain that foundation, but by now you probably notice that there are areas that lag a bit (my obliques suck). At this point is where I would add in more isolation work for the core.
Thanks, that's what I figured. Will find the best way to work in a bit more isolation work. Love this thread
0 -
governatorkp wrote: »I don't really agree with the general look of this.
Assuming you are an average person with an average weight;
I'd focus mostly on muscle building.
Calorie deficit? That's not going to help you building those muscles, in contrary.
What's working for me is HIIT with a focus on strength and stability.
Combined with the NEEDED caloric intake (Check out the Harris–Benedict equation) or even higher.
Have regular meals, your caloric intake evenly spread throughout the day in 5 meals.
Your metabolism will be soaring up.
The logic behind it is to build muscle.
To increase muscle, you need to feed them so they can recover and build up.
More muscle means more energy burn, in action and in rest.
Getting a ripped stomach is all about losing body fat.
And the most efficient way for you to do so is by strengthening or increasing your muscles.
An energy deficit will not work in your advantage, in contrary.
My experience, my opinion.
I don't think you read my first post.
1. It was written for the general MFP population who are trying to lose weight. The goal is to maintain lean mass while losing weight.
2. People can increase muscle mass on a deficit. Considering that the majority of people reading this or who have responded don't know much about lifting, we can safely assume most people on MFP are going to experience beginner gains (plus the obese population can gain muscle in a deficit)
3. The calorie goal I suggest is fairly high because we want to fuel the body/muscle while they are still losing fat (that's also why my protein suggestion is fairly high).
4. This post is in the general diet and weight loss section, not the gaining section. That means people in this section should absolutely not be eating more than their body needs. Meal timing is irrelevant to this population and eating 5 evenly spaced meals is broscience that is not backed by real science.
Getting a ripped stomach is about having adequate lean mass and low body fat. Both of those can be accomplished using everything I wrote in the first post.
"The goal is to maintain lean mass while losing weight."
In that case, I agree with your suggestions.
However, to get a 'lean', 'toned' middle section like this?
Perhaps we have different views on what 'toned' is.
How is the FACT that eating regularly throughout the day improves your metaboliosm, broscience?
What it does is managing your insulin levels throughout the day to maximize time spent in the fat burning zone.
I'm guessing I totally misunderstood your post, apologies.
It indeed will work for obese or sports newbies, what I meant is that an average, already fit person would most probably need more to become toned in their middlesection, regarding exercise and nutrition.
It wasn't quite clear to me that the community group these instructions were directed to were the total beginners/obese.
Keep up the good work!
0 -
governatorkp wrote: »governatorkp wrote: »I don't really agree with the general look of this.
Assuming you are an average person with an average weight;
I'd focus mostly on muscle building.
Calorie deficit? That's not going to help you building those muscles, in contrary.
What's working for me is HIIT with a focus on strength and stability.
Combined with the NEEDED caloric intake (Check out the Harris–Benedict equation) or even higher.
Have regular meals, your caloric intake evenly spread throughout the day in 5 meals.
Your metabolism will be soaring up.
The logic behind it is to build muscle.
To increase muscle, you need to feed them so they can recover and build up.
More muscle means more energy burn, in action and in rest.
Getting a ripped stomach is all about losing body fat.
And the most efficient way for you to do so is by strengthening or increasing your muscles.
An energy deficit will not work in your advantage, in contrary.
My experience, my opinion.
I don't think you read my first post.
1. It was written for the general MFP population who are trying to lose weight. The goal is to maintain lean mass while losing weight.
2. People can increase muscle mass on a deficit. Considering that the majority of people reading this or who have responded don't know much about lifting, we can safely assume most people on MFP are going to experience beginner gains (plus the obese population can gain muscle in a deficit)
3. The calorie goal I suggest is fairly high because we want to fuel the body/muscle while they are still losing fat (that's also why my protein suggestion is fairly high).
4. This post is in the general diet and weight loss section, not the gaining section. That means people in this section should absolutely not be eating more than their body needs. Meal timing is irrelevant to this population and eating 5 evenly spaced meals is broscience that is not backed by real science.
Getting a ripped stomach is about having adequate lean mass and low body fat. Both of those can be accomplished using everything I wrote in the first post.
"The goal is to maintain lean mass while losing weight."
In that case, I agree with your suggestions.
However, to get a 'lean', 'toned' middle section like this?
Perhaps we have different views on what 'toned' is.
How is the FACT that eating regularly throughout the day improves your metaboliosm, broscience?
What it does is managing your insulin levels throughout the day to maximize time spent in the fat burning zone.
I'm guessing I totally misunderstood your post, apologies.
It indeed will work for obese or sports newbies, what I meant is that an average, already fit person would most probably need more to become toned in their middlesection, regarding exercise and nutrition.
It wasn't quite clear to me that the community group these instructions were directed to were the total beginners/obese.
Keep up the good work!
"fat burning zone"? No. If you have insulin issues you would need to manage your eating and carb timing. Other than that your body will maintain a certain balance of glycogen, which it will fill from fat stores if you are not adding enough fuel (if you are in a calorie deficit). You can't do anything special to ensure your body burns fat instead of glycogen. It doesn't matter if you are burning fat or glycogen at any given moment because overall calories in compared to calories out is what determines fat loss.
There are actually studies showing that your metabolism increases once you reach 14-16 hours in the fasted state and it doesn't drop below the normal level until 72 hours in the fasted state. The reason people say to eat every few hours is because of the thermic effect of food. Even then it is misunderstood. People see more spikes when the metabolism increases to digest food eating every few hours. You would get larger spikes eating less often. Calories and macros being equal, the metabolic boost you get from eating 6 meals versus 3 would be equal, because it isn't about timing.0 -
governatorkp wrote: »governatorkp wrote: »I don't really agree with the general look of this.
Assuming you are an average person with an average weight;
I'd focus mostly on muscle building.
Calorie deficit? That's not going to help you building those muscles, in contrary.
What's working for me is HIIT with a focus on strength and stability.
Combined with the NEEDED caloric intake (Check out the Harris–Benedict equation) or even higher.
Have regular meals, your caloric intake evenly spread throughout the day in 5 meals.
Your metabolism will be soaring up.
The logic behind it is to build muscle.
To increase muscle, you need to feed them so they can recover and build up.
More muscle means more energy burn, in action and in rest.
Getting a ripped stomach is all about losing body fat.
And the most efficient way for you to do so is by strengthening or increasing your muscles.
An energy deficit will not work in your advantage, in contrary.
My experience, my opinion.
I don't think you read my first post.
1. It was written for the general MFP population who are trying to lose weight. The goal is to maintain lean mass while losing weight.
2. People can increase muscle mass on a deficit. Considering that the majority of people reading this or who have responded don't know much about lifting, we can safely assume most people on MFP are going to experience beginner gains (plus the obese population can gain muscle in a deficit)
3. The calorie goal I suggest is fairly high because we want to fuel the body/muscle while they are still losing fat (that's also why my protein suggestion is fairly high).
4. This post is in the general diet and weight loss section, not the gaining section. That means people in this section should absolutely not be eating more than their body needs. Meal timing is irrelevant to this population and eating 5 evenly spaced meals is broscience that is not backed by real science.
Getting a ripped stomach is about having adequate lean mass and low body fat. Both of those can be accomplished using everything I wrote in the first post.
"The goal is to maintain lean mass while losing weight."
In that case, I agree with your suggestions.
However, to get a 'lean', 'toned' middle section like this?
Perhaps we have different views on what 'toned' is.
How is the FACT that eating regularly throughout the day improves your metaboliosm, broscience?
What it does is managing your insulin levels throughout the day to maximize time spent in the fat burning zone.
I'm guessing I totally misunderstood your post, apologies.
It indeed will work for obese or sports newbies, what I meant is that an average, already fit person would most probably need more to become toned in their middlesection, regarding exercise and nutrition.
It wasn't quite clear to me that the community group these instructions were directed to were the total beginners/obese.
Keep up the good work!
You know what's funny? Right now we've got a thread going on talking about a study that suggests the exact opposite might be true.0 -
muffin0615 wrote: »Any ideas for losing baby belly? I have difficult time with weights due to back problems and prior back surgery. I'm 5'4" currently 160 lbs. Pre baby weight was 145lbs. and before working nightshift I was around 135lbs. I am eating 1200 calories a day and working out about an hour daily on my treadmill. Thanks!
Go back and read the first post. Start implementing what you can. Find a way to add some sort of resistance training even if it's just body weight stuff.
You have the patience of a saint!0 -
Big thanks for useful info.0
-
stevencloser wrote: »
Here's what I mean;
I'm not a chemistry expert, I'm not a dietician or food consulent.
I cannot argue with you about what you claim to be facts.
However I have my own experiences.
The more I look into people 'dieting' (Calorie deficit, eat 3 times a day) the more I see "cravings" and "cheating" and such.
The more I look into people doing as I did.. Well, those problems are almost non-existant, results are faster, more stable and retained way longer.
To compare, on a slight calorie deficit eating 3 times a day, following HIIT focused on strength,
I went from 21.5% of BF to 19.7% (-1.8%) in 3 months. I lost 3kg weighing 59 kg. (January-March).
I started eating more and 5 times a day, still doing the very same exercise, not changing anything else beside diet;
I went from 19.7% BF to 17.7% (-2%) in 5 weeks. I gained 4kg weighing 63 kg. (April-May).
Looking leaner, more toned yet stronger.
As I said, I can't give you any hard facts and won't bother to look any up either,
because the internet is full of contradictional information, and A LOT of false information.
I can tell you however, what I am suggesting worked and IS working for me, for my mother,
and for many others, with better and faster results, without cravings or hunger or tiredness,
and often permanently breaking the cycle of poor eating or dieting, succeeding, but then gaining weight and starting the whole thing all over again.
People can choose doing whatever they want to do.
I know a lot of people make the mistake of undereating.
The mistake of choosing 'dieting' instead of 'healthy eating' and healthy living.
People are often scared to eat more, they immediately link it to weight gain.
I see many people struggling with dieting just as I have.
I've been struggling with food for 6 years up until now, digging into and trying out advice such as your.
I've found something that actually works and provides relief and I believe it may be heard by others.
0 -
Loosely from all the previous comments,
HASfit provides some good full-body workouts on their website,
for both experienced and beginner,
for at home or in the gym.
If anyone needs some inspiration, you should check it out;
you can filter on Workout Type or Muscle Group.
0 -
There is no fat burning zone. You store fat if you're in a calorie surplus. You burn when you're not. You don't have to eat 6 times a day to lose fat, Intermittent fasting is the best evidence for that. The idea that not eating for a few hours makes your body think you're starving is ridiculous.1
-
stevencloser wrote: »There is no fat burning zone. You store fat if you're in a calorie surplus. You burn when you're not. You don't have to eat 6 times a day to lose fat, Intermittent fasting is the best evidence for that. The idea that not eating for a few hours makes your body think you're starving is ridiculous.
Altho many succesful weight loss plans are based on that idea.
I never claimed you have to eat 6 times a day to burn fat.
Read my previous post. I did lose body fat following all mentioned suggestions in the OP.
However lost more bodyfat faster without calorie deficit and with eating 5 times a day.
If intermittent fasting is a perfect evidence, then what do you have to say about my own personal experiences?0 -
Without calorie deficit goes against physics.0
-
Also you don't seem to understand how percentages work.
Even if your body fat estimations were correct to the 0.1st percent (they're not, not even if you went to a doctor to get a dexa scan done.) You didn't lose fat when you gained 4 kilos. 19.7% of 59 kilos is almost the same as 17.7% of 63.
You ate more and gained weight. You can believe that that was all muscle (it isn't), but not even your own experience supports the things you said.0 -
governatorkp wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »There is no fat burning zone. You store fat if you're in a calorie surplus. You burn when you're not. You don't have to eat 6 times a day to lose fat, Intermittent fasting is the best evidence for that. The idea that not eating for a few hours makes your body think you're starving is ridiculous.
Altho many succesful weight loss plans are based on that idea.
I never claimed you have to eat 6 times a day to burn fat.
Read my previous post. I did lose body fat following all mentioned suggestions in the OP.
However lost more bodyfat faster without calorie deficit and with eating 5 times a day.
If intermittent fasting is a perfect evidence, then what do you have to say about my own personal experiences?
Uhm, that total calories trump meal frequency. You will lose in a deficit regardless of your number of meals spread throughout the day....0 -
stevencloser wrote: »Also you don't seem to understand how percentages work.
Even if your body fat estimations were correct to the 0.1st percent (they're not, not even if you went to a doctor to get a dexa scan done.) You didn't lose fat when you gained 4 kilos. 19.7% of 59 kilos is almost the same as 17.7% of 63.
You ate more and gained weight. You can believe that that was all muscle (it isn't), but not even your own experience supports the things you said.
You've got a point there.
However, I suppose my personal goals are different from those the OP aimed at.
I'll stop bothering this topic and find my way in the weight gaining section.
Thanks for your insights.0 -
If you go to the weight gain section and say that you gained 4 kilos of muscle in 5 weeks you're not going to get much different answers.0
-
stevencloser wrote: »If you go to the weight gain section and say that you gained 4 kilos of muscle in 5 weeks you're not going to get much different answers.
I never claimed I gained 4 kilos of pure muscle.
Also, I am going to look there for more information about my specific personal goal,
as it's useless to keep commenting on it in this topic, which has nothing to do with that.
No need to be rude, you're making a lot of assumptions and are misunderstanding.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions