JoshLibby Member

The same as it is with a man. 1.Strong core muscles. 2.consistency. 3.Low body fat percentage. 4.Not sure how much nutrition matters in the long run( it's an individual case, depending how much fat has accumulated and for how long). I only say this because some people are genetically prone to have good everything and eat…

If it's not broken, why try to fix it?

1. SInce you're 18 years old and have so much time to put on muscle. It's going to be 2-3 years for realistic results at your current level. 2. I don't recommend a dirty bulk for anyone who has never had a little weight on, cutting is just as stressing as gaining muscle.150- 250 extra calories a day is all you'll need! 3.…

The only real calories from liquid in my diet are from shakes, and milk.I usually have a shake in the morning. (190 calories 30 protien.) I don't drink coffee at all and alcohol is maybe consumed two times a year. I've never cared for alcohol that much. Since everything else is packageable, it's pretty easy to weigh an…

I don't mean to creep on you, but I went to your dairy, it looks like your sodium intake is the cause of the water weight. A huge problem with IIFYM. These things may not matter for everyone but it seems to matter for you. Another thing I notice is consistency of logging. If you take care of those things you'll be where…

The problem is this mind set that losing weight is all about cutting food calories People neglect that exercising burns calories, so they never take in consideration that you don't need to "just" cut food. It looks like you made your deficit by being under your overal caloric needs by excluding food, without thinking about…

It's a little tricky to saying "there is no fat burning exercise" Of course there is, the problem is there is no target fat loss on your body, you can't just lose fat in your stomach by doing crunches, running whatever! Although, you can lose overal body fat percentage which is usually the goal, and if not should be when…

Realistically it only matters with goals. If lifting is your priority do that first. If cardio is your priority do that first. Although, I would do what works for you and your body.

It would go against the whole CICO, IIFYM theory if it did. All this question/statement does is create pointless debates, with no winner. There is really not enough backed science to say it doesn't or say it does, so then it becomes heated opinions, you know what they say about opinions right?

2-3 days of weight training, 1 day of pull ups/chin ups. 2-3 days of H.I.T cardio. Playing with my son outside everyday, for he and his mother are the reason I do it in the first place.

Exercises that use a ton of energy for losing the gut, (although it won't just target your gut) are: Burpees, Circuit weight training. H.I.T (sprints) Jump rope. swimming. Of course intensity of the exercise matters! A lot of people say eat less! Oh how simple, and that can work, the problem I find is that it's short term,…

Best advice is always to get a professional to help you make sure their isn't a real problem. Wait until puberty hits, that is really what matters for a lot of kids. If that is still not a good option for you , instead of huge meals I would snack him every 1.5-3 hours when home if you can, of course you can change that…

Lifting heavy-check Eating enough food - check getting enough rest and recovery - check Thread should be closed here, You're doing exactly what you need. There is nothing more you can do that would matter unless you go on stage. High carb works. low carb works, high protein works, low protien works. High fat works low fat…

You can't stick to a diet, you can only stick to Nutrition. Diets are short term and meant to be so. The diet has to transition to lifestyle, probably the reason for the question itself.

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/76/1/24.abstract This one is an actual scientific study. A lot better than the other I posted. 2016 date too.

Well there is a lot evidence that the carbs from HFCS cause cancer. Feel free to debate this all you want for I will not be in the debate itself, but the link is down below. http://www.naturalmedicinejournal.com/journal/2012-10/high-fructose-corn-syrup-and-pancreatic-cancer Does it hold true for everyone? Who knows, but it…

1. Determine what is cardio. 2. Look at people who lift weights and do cardio are they still making gains? If they are making gains how would a person even determine if the cardio affected the gains? 3. Try an experiment on myself to see if I did more cardio would I lose muscle and be robbed of gains. Log it then do the…

I prefer to use resistance training to create a deficit. It does depend on how much of a deficit though. I would never recommend just exercise for a person trying to lose 25-100 pounds. They should do both, reach a deficit by moving more, and eating quality foods while tracking them, once they get used to what they eat…

I guess it would depend on your definition of metabolism. Biology, Physiology. the sum of the physical and chemical processes in an organism by which its material substance is produced, maintained, and destroyed, and by which energy is made available. Compare anabolism, catabolism.

???

Insufficient semantics. still doesn't take away from what fiber does.

Metabolic: Relating to metabolism, the whole range of biochemical processes that occur within us (or any living organism). Metabolism consists of anabolism (the buildup of substances) and catabolism (the breakdown of substances). The term "metabolic" is often used to refer specifically to the breakdown of food and its…

I used evidence that a calorie is not a calorie because of different variables, one being fiber. Is it true? if so then it contradicts this whole thread.

Proof me wrong. If I am wrong. then fine but proof would be great.

Who stated almonds were about the fiber? I was just sharing how you won't get those 160 calories promised because of the fiber in the almonds. And if almonds are a problem, then you won't get those 300 calories in red beans. Instead 100 is lost.

There are two types of fiber one slows down and one speeds up.

Wrong. you are so stuck on looking at fats, proteins, carbs you always forget the others. Fiber is a huge one. Fiber slows down the metabolic rate which uses less calories to process the food, so instead of 160 calories worth of almonds it becomes 130. As I said, it's not that simple.

The topic is too broad it's open for interpretation.

There is plenty of evidence that goes against a calorie being a calorie. The definition is true, until applied, then what? This is why you have an argument in the first place. A cow is just a cow until it's a hamburger, a hamburger is just a hamburger until it's digested now it's a calorie. The point, a calorie is just a…

There is nothing clear in any of it. As simple as it's trying to be made to be, it's just not.