The real key to losing weight is Metabolism!!

Thank you so much for this info! I'm using these tips moving forward!

Great information. As with anything, do what works for you. All of this advice works for me. Nice reminders!:happy:

Bump

#3 is the only one that has any truth whatsoever to it. I eat more fat - more saturated fat than any other macronutrient. Right now I"m fighting to keep my body fat from dropping anymore. And I can put away a lot of food.

The real key to losing weight is figuring out what has broken your body's ability to burn fat. (My guess is it's the huge amounts of insulin that our body has to produce all day to compensate for the amount of carbs/sugar we eat. And the amount of Omega-6 in the recommended diet. And the commercially processed PUFA veggie oils).
but as long as you have high levels of insulin in your bloodstream - and you will if you are eating the recommended amount of carbs - you are not burning fat you are burning sugar and storing fat. And in the process you are screwing up the entire hormonal process of using/storing macronutrients.

Heck, the only time the body has a chance to burn fat is at night when insulin levels have finally dropped down. But my body burns fat all day and night. In fact, my muscles don't even want the glucose anymore - they want fat. So does my brain. The only thing in the body that needs glucose is red blood cells. The rest can run (thrive) on fat and ketones.

And why is Intermittent Fasting so healthy for the body and the digestive system? Sometimes my dinner is my only meal of the day and it's HUGE!!! Very easy to get in a lot of calories with plenty of healthy, natural fats.

Some mornings I eat, some I don't. Sometimes I have 85% dark chocolate with my AM coffee. All breakfast is is the first meal of the day - why should it matter when you decide to have that first meal? (I think our ancient ancestors had the biggest meal of the day in the evening - after being out all day looking for that dinner.)

Since y'all like a good debate, could I please get your opinions on whether I should use real sugar in the numerous cups of coffee I drink a day, or a sugar substitute. I'm all for the sugar substitute as there aren't any calories in it, however, my daughter says I should use real sugar (even though it's loaded with carbs, etc.), because it is healthier. What do you think?

This. Just because you happened to get to an awesome physique, doesn't mean it was because of what you are quoting either.

I strongly beg to differ. The OP is sharing techniques that he has used to obtain his physique. Admittedly, others have achieved a similar physique using different techniques. But that doesn't mean that the technique that he used did not help him to obtain it. This statement here is doing EXACTLY the same thing that you all are accusing him of.

What it all boils down to is eating right and exercising! It doesn't matter when you eat, how much you eat, how often you eat. All that matters is that you put the right foods in your body and expend some extra energy during the day. If you find that eating 6 times a day has helped you, then do it. If you prefer gorging on all your calories at once, then do it. But lets not discredit someone for achieving success just because they did it differently than we did.

Since y'all like a good debate, could I please get your opinions on whether I should use real sugar in the numerous cups of coffee I drink a day, or a sugar substitute. I'm all for the sugar substitute as there aren't any calories in it, however, my daughter says I should use real sugar (even though it's loaded with carbs, etc.), because it is healthier. What do you think?

It is personal preference. Some studies shows that its safe. Other studies show that its not.

. Drink when you're thirsty to maintain proper hydration, drinking more than that does you no good.

i would have to disagree a bit with this sentance. When i was a teenager i started to have postural hypertensiopn-dizzy spells on standing-went to the doctor and i had low blood pressure. So he asked how much fluids i drink a day and my reply was 'maybe one glass of squash' .
My problem is that i never used to be thirsty! I've literally had to train myself over the years to drink fluids!
Also many people confuse thirst and hunger, so drinking more water is always a good idea (though obviously not over the daily recommended amount as that can cause serious illness/death!)

. But that doesn't mean that the technique that he used did not help him to obtain it.

I think the above is wrong and I'll use an example below:

I will use an example. I would like you to eat at a calorie deficit and exercise and I would like you to wear a tinfoil hat between noon and 6pm and I would like you to sleep in a bathtub filled with soybeans. Please do this for 6 weeks and report your results back to me.

This example is absurd, Swhitney2, but please take it seriously. This example is a very realistic comparison to what you are getting in the original post. The reason the OP looks good is because his intake has been reasonable and he trains hard in the gym.

I take nothing away from the OP's physique, he looks great and if I look that good when I'm in my 50's I'll be THRILLED, but it's not due to his eating frequency.

EDIT: And to clarify, I'm not personally attacking him or you -- the problem is that people are going to read his post and think that they must change their eating frequency or cardio selection because of some physiological reasons.

What it all boils down to is eating right and exercising! It doesn't matter when you eat, how much you eat, how often you eat.

^ This is correct, but this would indicate that you disagree with the OP.

If you find that eating 6 times a day has helped you, then do it. If you prefer gorging on all your calories at once, then do it. But lets not discredit someone for achieving success just because they did it differently than we did.

I don't think anyone is discrediting him, at least, they shouldn't be. I am pointing out that his assertions are incorrect. I am not saying that he doesn't look good or doesn't train hard. He looks great, he works hard, he probably has solid lift #s too. But it's not for the reasons he is suggesting.

. But that doesn't mean that the technique that he used did not help him to obtain it.

I think the above is wrong and I'll use an example below:

I will use an example. I would like you to eat at a calorie deficit and exercise and I would like you to wear a tinfoil hat between noon and 6pm and I would like you to sleep in a bathtub filled with soybeans. Please do this for 6 weeks and report your results back to me.

This example is absurd, Swhitney2, but please take it seriously. This example is a very realistic comparison to what you are getting in the original post. The reason the OP looks good is because his intake has been reasonable and he trains hard in the gym.

I take nothing away from the OP's physique, he looks great and if I look that good when I'm in my 50's I'll be THRILLED, but it's not due to his eating frequency.

EDIT: And to clarify, I'm not personally attacking him or you -- the problem is that people are going to read his post and think that they must change their eating frequency or cardio selection because of some physiological reasons.

What it all boils down to is eating right and exercising! It doesn't matter when you eat, how much you eat, how often you eat.

^ This is correct, but this would indicate that you disagree with the OP.

If you find that eating 6 times a day has helped you, then do it. If you prefer gorging on all your calories at once, then do it. But lets not discredit someone for achieving success just because they did it differently than we did.

I don't think anyone is discrediting him, at least, they shouldn't be. I am pointing out that his assertions are incorrect. I am not saying that he doesn't look good or doesn't train hard. He looks great, he works hard, he probably has solid lift #s too. But it's not for the reasons he is suggesting.

Tremendous respect to you, Sidesteal, but I am not saying that his methodologies are correct. I am just simply saying that this is what he did and it worked. He might not have accurate information about how it worked, but just simply that it cannot be disputed that he achieved success with this method.

Tremendous respect to you, Sidesteal, but I am not saying that his methodologies are correct. I am just simply saying that this is what he did and it worked. He might not have accurate information about how it worked, but just simply that it cannot be disputed that he achieved success with this method.

Do you think there's value in stripping away the parts of the method that have absolutely no relevance towards the outcome, for the sake of others who strive to achieve the same goal?

Had the post been titled: "here's how I changed my metabolism" or something to that effect I don't think he would have garnished all the detractors. However, the op posted this as information that everyone who wishes to lose weight and get in shape should have and that is where he ran aground.

The "do whatever works for you" argument is fine, but some of us appreciate the actual science behind what actually works.

Didn't have time to read all the posts.....but the ones I did were pretty snarky......come on people, lets be a little more positive. Maybe everyone needs to get to the gym and work out their crabbiness! hehe :laugh: But seriously, what is up with the negativity?!

Thank you for the information, it's very comprehensive. I'm a newbie and keen to find what works best for me. I'm definitely going to try HIIT... it makes perfect sense. I struggle with breakfast but am making a point of eating something - some fruit or piece of toast - because if I don't, I don't eat anything till late night and I know that's no good for me; I feel terrible when I do that.

So OP... thank you, thank you, thank you! :flowerforyou:



I don't understand the sneery comments and am not interested in that kind of negative crap at all. Take what you want from the information - or leave it - but it's pathetic to run down the efforts of anybody when you have nothing yourself to offer. I'm embarrassed for you. Bad form.

The "do whatever works for you" argument is fine, but some of us appreciate the actual science behind what actually works.

But that is precisely where we "detractors" have come in -- to point out those areas which are not based on science.