# Help cutting belly fat



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi, some of you may have read my journal of fat loss but if not here are 2 pics to give perspective (below),basicly i have come this far and now i rly want to get rid of the last of the belly to show some abs i have a prety good diet and i work out 4 times a week minimum can anyone help?

start:19st 6lbs










now: 14st 13lbs










cheers Grant


----------



## Stvjon41 (Jan 16, 2011)

Good results so far mate, kudos! Post up your diet and training regime and then some of the members on here can go through it to help you lose the last bit of fat.

Well done so far though buddy


----------



## biker1948 (Jan 26, 2008)

Brilliant progress, more cardio (45 minds before breakfast is ideal) and clean diet will help.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi, Yea sorry a habbit of mine to give not enough info lol here is a typical day for food followed by workout weekly:

breakfast: 2 bagles with butter

snack : ham or peperami

lunch: chicken or ham salad wrap with cheese lettice onion low fat mayo.

snack: chicken bites or egg or peperami

dinner: 2 pork chops with 3 eggs and colslaw with pepers and onions

drinks are 3 cups of tea a day with 2 sugars and rest is pepsi max or water.

work out

mon:back and bi's

tue: chest and tri's

wed: shoulders and abs

thursday: cardio

friday: legs

sat: rest

sunday: cardio

this is an exaple as due to work commitments i do often miss one of these days but i follow the routine structure on the next free day.

cheers grant


----------



## CoffeeFiend (Aug 31, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> Hi, Yea sorry a habbit of mine to give not enough info lol here is a typical day for food followed by workout weekly:
> 
> breakfast: 2 bagles with butter
> 
> ...


I dont think doing your entire upper body, core and arms on 3 consecutive days is a good idea. You work out monday, your going to be repairing the next day but your under more stress doing chest and tris, come the next day i would think your very tired and your body is trying to do an awful lot of repair yet you still have another full workout to do.

In my experience of myself and from what i see others do, you pick your muscle groups, you train them then have a full rest day before you do another muscle group e.g. Train, Rest, Train, Rest, Train. You seem to have made some pretty awesome progress though so you must be doing something right, just keep in mind dont overwork yourself.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

what your saying makes sence to me i do sometimes feel rly burned out after my chest and tri's workout maybe i will start to introduce cardio on the rest days between my workouts or will this slow down muscle gains?


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

I'd just do more cardio.

Do a push/pull/legs routine which gives you an extra day for a dedicated cardio sssion and chuck in 20 mins of cardio after each weights session. It's been working for me lately.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

is cardio after weights ok? i have been lead to belive by ppl at my gym that there is some wort of negative effect on the muscle work out ive just done if i add in cardio, if this is a fairytale then i will easily be able to spare 20mins for a HIIT on the stair machine or rowing machine


----------



## CoffeeFiend (Aug 31, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> what your saying makes sence to me i do sometimes feel rly burned out after my chest and tri's workout maybe i will start to introduce cardio on the rest days between my workouts or will this slow down muscle gains?


The thing i think your missing is your body needs time to repair and the annoying thing is you can feel fantastic but still be in a state of repair, this is how overtraining occurs in most cases. Its better to be 100% rested and at your best for each workout rather than moderately rested and half assed for all of them. I would change to something like..

mon:back and bi's

tue: Rest

wed: chest and tri's

thursday: Rest

friday: shoulders and abs

sat: rest

sunday: Legs

Rest periods inbetween the workouts. Ive not included cardio because thats probally better for you to work out when to put it in. I know a lot of people do cardio on rest days so you could try that.


----------



## CoffeeFiend (Aug 31, 2010)

CoffeeFiend said:


> The thing i think your missing is your body needs time to repair and the annoying thing is you can feel fantastic but still be in a state of repair, this is how overtraining occurs in most cases. Its better to be 100% rested and at your best for each workout rather than moderately rested and half assed for all of them. I would change to something like..
> 
> mon:back and bi's
> 
> ...


P.S Even this is pretty stressful on your body if done routinely week by week. Would suggest every couple of weeks you take a single longer rest period of 2-3 days off.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Thanks for the advice guys all makes perfect sence i do have to reduce my bench press about 10-15kg if i dont have a rest between workouts the only time this occours is if i am working and it falls on a wknd when my gym shuts early


----------



## CoffeeFiend (Aug 31, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> Thanks for the advice guys all makes perfect sence i do have to reduce my bench press about 10-15kg if i dont have a rest between workouts the only time this occours is if i am working and it falls on a wknd when my gym shuts early


Its all good mate never hesitate to ask people here for help  by no means feel what i suggested is set in stone though, mix the muscle groups around a little if you think itll benefit you better. A lot of people have chest/Tri's or shoulder/tris together because when you work chest or shoulders your also hitting your tri's indirectly so you maximising the pump getting lots of groups with one excersise etc. Might be why your doing it but just thought i would point it out.

How long was the transition between pic 1 and 2? Its awesome work bud


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

it will be 8 months on the 1st of febuary from when i decided enough was enough lol i am fitting in gym around work and we have a new baby so i think ive done ok in this time not super fast but i am hopeing it will stay off.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

Grantewhite said:


> Hi, Yea sorry a habbit of mine to give not enough info lol here is a typical day for food followed by workout weekly:
> 
> breakfast: 2 bagles with butter
> 
> ...


Fantastic progress mate, you look a different person. Its proof to all that exercise and a calorie restrictions work.

Getting back to your initial question of loosing the last bit of belly fat; I think you will need to look at your diet and be more restrictive with what you eat. Things like Bagels, ham, pepperami and even pork chops could do with being replaced with cleaner less processed foods. And with regards to your workout, i would go with what Smitch recommended, push/pull/legs with 3 cardio sessions in between the days not lifting. If you go do fasted cardio this would be even better


----------



## austin84 (Nov 18, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> Hi, some of you may have read my journal of fat loss but if not here are 2 pics to give perspective (below),basicly i have come this far and now i rly want to get rid of the last of the belly to show some abs i have a prety good diet and i work out 4 times a week minimum can anyone help?
> 
> start:19st 6lbs
> 
> ...


what time scale was this loss over ???

Welldone!


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> Getting back to your initial question of loosing the last bit of belly fat; I think you will need to look at your diet and be more restrictive with what you eat. Things like Bagels, ham, pepperami and even *pork chops *could do with being replaced with cleaner less processed foods.


Pork chops processed? What exactly is wrong with a pork chop? Clean foods?

The entire concenpt of "clean" eating has nothing to do with fatloss, it's just harder to overeat on so called "clean" foods. And who decides what's clean and what isn't?

So long as protein is sufficient (At least 1g per pound of body weight) and calories are in check you'll retain muscle and lose fat. If a few "unclean" foods make up your total daily energy intake it's not going to make or break fat loss, so long as you don't see that as a ticket to go hog wild. Tracking your daily intake on something like www.fitday.com is probably your best bet.

In terms of total calories you want to aim for between 12-14 calories per pound of total bodyweight, some people for various reasons need to go lower, but depends how aggressive you want to be. 12-14 is good ballpark figure nevertheless.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> Pork chops processed? What exactly is wrong with a pork chop? Clean foods?
> 
> The entire concenpt of "clean" eating has nothing to do with fatloss, it's just harder to overeat on so called "clean" foods. And who decides what's clean and what isn't?
> 
> ...


Well thank you for the basics, and when talking about the pork chops i wasn't talking about them being processed. Pork chop is high in fat and beef or chicken would be a better substitute. A clean food would be determined as something that has not gone through a form of processing. Basing a diet on things like Sweet Potatoe, Fibre rich veg, Meat, Poultry, Fish etc

And yes, a to a point you are right with regards to weightloss and clean eating. When your 19 stone it probably won't have any effect what you eat as long as you're in a calorie deficit, which what has been achieved. However to remove the last remaining bit of belly fat the OP will need to concentrate a lot harder on his diet and clean eating will play a major part in this.

Even on something like a CKD I wouldn't recommend eating highly processed crap like pepperami, ham (although some do).


----------



## Doink (Sep 21, 2010)

take a look at the ultimate diet 2.0 mate, excellent book and would suit you fine really, they do advise you to be 15% BF or less but on the diet your on it will work for you.

I'd throw 20 mins cardio Steady state in after every workout, great fat burning tool and as it's steady state and you're eating plenty of protein then muscle loss wont be an issue, Especially at your current Bf levels. I'd also add in cardio on rest days. Unfuelled if you can make the time for it but any cardio will help you get to your goal.

Excellent work so far bud, keep plugging away and you'll see those abs just in time for summer!


----------



## stuboy (Nov 1, 2010)

Congrats on the progress so far mate, good luck with the rest.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> Well thank you for the basics, and when talking about the pork chops i wasn't talking about them being processed. Pork chop is high in fat and beef or chicken would be a better substitute. A clean food would be determined as something that has not gone through a form of processing. Basing a diet on things like Sweet Potatoe, Fibre rich veg, Meat, Poultry, Fish etc
> 
> And yes, a to a point you are right with regards to weightloss and clean eating. When your 19 stone it probably won't have any effect what you eat as long as you're in a calorie deficit, which what has been achieved. However to remove the last remaining bit of belly fat the OP will need to concentrate a lot harder on his diet and clean eating will play a major part in this.
> 
> Even on something like a CKD I wouldn't recommend eating highly processed crap like pepperami, ham (although some do).


Sorry if I cam accross as patronising, but I still don't see what is wrong with a pork chop, even if it is higher in fat. So long as it fits with his macro's for the day its a quality source of protein and fat.

Agree with you on the pepperami and ham, they tend to be higher in sodium for a start. Still better than certain other snacks for sure.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

Pork has less amino's than other meats like chicken. Having them once a week is fine i suppose, but to be the staple in his diet...well i would choose a leaner, better cut of meat. The current diet is filled, with ham, chicken bites and pepperami, all processed foods, not the ideal for dropping <12%.

But we need to take into account his living situation, a young lad with a child, the cost of unprocessed food is probably more expensive, so its trying to make the best of any given situation.


----------



## engllishboy (Nov 1, 2007)

Virtus said:


> Pork has less amino's than other meats like chicken. Having them once a week is fine i suppose, but to be the staple in his diet...well i would choose a leaner, better cut of meat. The current diet is filled, with ham, chicken bites and pepperami, all processed foods, not the ideal for dropping <12%.
> 
> But we need to take into account his living situation, a young lad with a child, the cost of unprocessed food is probably more expensive, so its trying to make the best of any given situation.


A lean cut of pork will be just as beneficial as chicken. Asda now have a "leaner" range of meat.



CoffeeFiend said:


> The thing i think your missing is your body needs time to repair and the annoying thing is you can feel fantastic but still be in a state of repair, this is how overtraining occurs in most cases. Its better to be 100% rested and at your best for each workout rather than moderately rested and half assed for all of them. I would change to something like..
> 
> mon:back and bi's
> 
> ...


Swap Sunday and Friday around, otherwise legs and back are next to each other. Personally, on that routine, i'd train Fri and Sat back to back so that Sunday is a full rest day away from work and everything. Unless of course he works on Sundays, then it doesn't matter lol.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

engllishboy said:


> A lean cut of pork will be just as beneficial as chicken. Asda now have a "leaner" range of meat.


Most supermarkets do a lean range. A pork fillet would be better than a pork chop but a chicken would be better than both. The fact that this is his only main staple of protein and its pork, chicken is a far superior source of protein and lower in fat.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Thank for the replys makes very interesting reading,for once everyone is sort of right lol i am not amazingly rich in money or time at the moment which is why processed foods are quick and easy to lay my hands on, in terms of breakfast i usualy waver between porrage with raisens or bagles, lunch chicken or ham salad /wrap, dinner is not always pork it is offen steak chicken or even vennison but tends to be what is on offer at asda lol.

i try to have boiled eggs for my snacks if i remember to pre boil them also i work 12hr shifts so everything i tk has to be easy to keep in my office mini fridge and have no heating facilitys. The workout advice has been noted and i am going gym for back and bi's in a bit then takeing tomorow as a rest day as i am working.

cheers grant


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

Ok well that settle that argument about the pork lol. You've done really well mate so keep up the good work, would try and add protein to your breakfast and other meals. For your snacks look at an a bit of fruit, peanut better (the whole earth stuff), nuts, cottage cheese (i hate the stuff but mixed with sugar free jelly and its a winner). There was a good article about food on a budget in here a while ago, maybe worthwhile dragging that up. Good look and if you need any more advice then just post up


----------



## d4ead (Nov 3, 2008)

awesome progress mate congrats you can be truely proud.

personally i always believed that cardio after weights was a far more effective and better then before and dont really believe on the negative effect compared to its comparative benefits.

with the pork chop issue there both right, obviously chicken or turkey would be a better choice, but hell who wants to eat the same meat all the time pork will not matter as said if its within your days macros. personally i have a thing for lamb.. but yes go fillet not chop haha

as far as the routine is concerned, remember you grow on your rest days not your training days, and even if your muscle has recovered your cns needs 48 hours to fully recover.

i like

mon chest bicep

tue legs

wed off

thu shoulders tricep

fri back

weekends off

but thats just a personal choice.

good luck with your future goals buddy.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> Most supermarkets do a lean range. A pork fillet would be better than a pork chop but a chicken would be better than both. The fact that this is his only main staple of protein and its pork, chicken is a far superior source of protein and lower in fat.


I still think you're missing the wood from the trees here. Better is a relative term, like I said, so long as the pork fits within his Macro and calorie goals it's fine. It would also add variety to the diet, which is important might I add to those who have been dieting for long in term of diet adhereance.

Stayting chicken is a "far superior" protein source is also a stretch at best. Anyway, enough about the pork.

Also, I'd avoid snacking on nuts. They're calorie dense, and easy to overeat.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Cheers, i will have a look through and see if i can find it im not very good with the search facility lol, i purchased a big bag of mixed nuts in the shopping today to going to start throwing them in to the snack positions also got my self a big bag of broccoli to put with dinners, o also i do sometimes have chedar cheese in my bagel in the morning would this fit the criteria or protien in the morning or should i try and find a better alternative.

thanks again

grant

edit: D4EAD : i have never thought to do biceps with chest because of the differing movments (press , curl) and my back routine atmo takes about 20/25mins a week so i think i would struggle to streatch it out to a single day unless you can recomend diffrently?


----------



## d4ead (Nov 3, 2008)

what the fuk is a bagel? some kind of Americana role?


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Tosted bagels spread with quark / low fat soft cheese would be alright. I sometimes have this as a PWO snack.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

"what the fuk is a bagel? some kind of Americana role? " lol that is classic 

you'r prety much on the money but it has a hole in the middle lol, thanks i will take a look in the shop for some lawfat soft cheese would a spread be ok ?


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> "what the fuk is a bagel? some kind of Americana role? " lol that is classic
> 
> you'r prety much on the money but it has a hole in the middle lol, thanks i will take a look in the shop for some lawfat soft cheese would a spread be ok ?


Just look for the supermarket equivelant of Philly, that or quark (essentially the same thing).


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Thanks again i will put all of this in to play starting this week as there is no time like the present and i will update my journal "grants fat to fit" each 4 weekly to show progress, this will include pic of progress hope to be displaying nicly showing abs in time for my holiday in may  wish me luck

grant


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> *Also, I'd avoid snacking on nuts. They're calorie dense*, and easy to overeat.


What?? Nuts are an excellent source of fat and protein. Grant, nuts like Almonds, cashews, pistachios are brilliant and full of vitamins, stay clear of the KP covered in salt, but for a quick snack they are great.

I'd also dropped the processed carbs, like bagels, for eggs in the morning.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> What?? Nuts are an excellent source of fat and protein. Grant, nuts like Almonds, cashews, pistachios are brilliant and full of vitamins, stay clear of the KP covered in salt, but for a quick snack they are great.


They really aren't as brilliant as you make them out to be, especially on a diet as they are very easy to overeat and aren't particularly filling. You can scoff down 500kcal of nuts without thinking (well I can at least) and wreck a caloric deficit very easily. They might be useful during a bulk, but they guy is trying to lose fat here.

I've never understood why they're so ubiquitously recommended in the bb'ing community..


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> They really aren't as brilliant as you make them out to be, especially on a diet as they are very easy to overeat and aren't particularly filling. You can scoff down 500kcal of nuts without thinking (well I can at least) and wreck a caloric deficit very easily. They might be useful during a bulk, but they guy is trying to lose fat here.
> 
> I've never understood why they're so ubiquitously recommended in the bb'ing community..


In all fairness have you ever set up a cutting diet??? What you are saying about scoffing food down can be applied to almost anything, eat to much fruit and you will pack weight. The high fat content of nuts will fill you up for at least 2.5-3hours until your next meal and are handy if you are up and about.

Nuts contain B Vitamins, minerals, calcium and Vitamin E as well as protein and fibre. Its a far better snack than pepperami, ham, chicken bites (that grant currently has), they also better than bagels which he has for breakfast

You do realise that when you are on a cutting most people will weigh everything out and know the nutrional values of the food they are eating so won't just scoff everything down. They know the food they are putting into there body to fall into there calories, and macros, limits for the days


----------



## Hard Trainer (Apr 29, 2009)

Fair play bud. Nice work, me to cut down next!


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> In all fairness have you ever set up a cutting diet??? What you are saying about scoffing food down can be applied to almost anything, eat to much fruit and you will pack weight. The high fat content of nuts will fill you up for at least 2.5-3hours until your next meal and are handy if you are up and about.
> 
> Nuts contain B Vitamins, minerals, calcium and Vitamin E as well as protein and fibre. Its a far better snack than pepperami, ham, chicken bites (that grant currently has), they also better than bagels which he has for breakfast
> 
> You do realise that when you are on a cutting most people will weigh everything out and know the nutrional values of the food they are eating so won't just scoff everything down. They know the food they are putting into there body to fall into there calories, and macros, limits for the days


Have you? Why do you have to be eating every 2-3hrs? There's no data to suggest it's any better than your intake over 3 large square meals. In fact, when cutting a larger less infrequent meal can lead to you feeling fuller rather than lots of small snack type meals.

And has Grant indicated he is weighing anything at present? No he hasn't. So the best way for him to limit his caloric intake is to limit potential foods that you can overeat on, nuts being one IMO.

I've already directed him to start logging his intake on the likes of fitday, if he does this he could well fit some nuts into his diet, but I think there are better choices out there.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> Have you? Why do you have to be eating every 2-3hrs? There's no data to suggest it's any better than your intake over 3 large square meals. In fact, when cutting a larger less infrequent meal can lead to you feeling fuller rather than lots of small snack type meals.
> 
> And has Grant indicated he is weighing anything at present? No he hasn't. So the best way for him to limit his caloric intake is to limit potential foods that you can overeat on, nuts being one IMO.
> 
> I've already directed him to start logging his intake on the likes of fitday, if he does this he could well fit some nuts into his diet, but I think there are better choices out there.


Yes I have, in fact i'm doing it right now. I know,and weigh, every portion of every bit of food that crosses my mouth: cals, protein, fats and carbs. Even my homecooked meals are worked on value and then added into my meal planner for the day. I know how may body reacts to carbs, cals, excess protein, large amount of cals before bed.

And i know there is sufficient data stating that eating every 2-3 hours is better than eating 3 sqaure meals, but the reason i do it is because I fell sluggish if i eat 3 larger meals to meet my calorific requirements for the day, i funtion better if i get around 350-400cals every 3 hours rather than 730-750cals in one sitting.

Where is the data stating that eating 3 larger meals makes you feel fuller for longer?? Its all down to personal preference and how you feel as an individual.

And its ok pointing him to fitday, but he needs to get an understanding of food, theres only so much calorie reduction will do while trying to maintain muscle mass while dropping body fat it comes down to the quality of food that crosses his lips. If he stays in a calorific deficit and continues to eat bagels, pepperami etc i'm pretty certain that them abs will stay covered. Weighing food and knowing what he needs is the next step, so regardless of what he hasn't done, he now needs to.

And if you had read the post I also recommended fruit, cottage cheese, peanut butter and nuts, all adding variety and various forms of nutrients to help him succeed. Seeing has where are discussing what other snacks would you recommend other than nuts??


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

bayman said:


> Have you? Why do you have to be eating every 2-3hrs? There's no data to suggest it's any better than your intake over 3 large square meals. In fact, when cutting a larger less infrequent meal can lead to you feeling fuller rather than lots of small snack type meals.
> 
> And has Grant indicated he is weighing anything at present? No he hasn't. So the best way for him to limit his caloric intake is to limit potential foods that you can overeat on, nuts being one IMO.
> 
> I've already directed him to start logging his intake on the likes of fitday, if he does this he could well fit some nuts into his diet, but I think there are better choices out there.


 :thumbdown:


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> *And i know there is sufficient data stating that eating every 2-3 hours is better than eating 3 sqaure meals*, but the reason i do it is because I fell sluggish if i eat 3 larger meals to meet my calorific requirements for the day, i funtion better if i get around 350-400cals every 3 hours rather than 730-750cals in one sitting.
> 
> Where is the data stating that eating 3 larger meals makes you feel fuller for longer?? Its all down to personal preference and how you feel as an individual.


Show me the data that a more frequent meal intake is better than a less frequent one? And I'm not talking isolated studies, but the weight of the whole evidence. I went into great detail in this thread to show meal frequency has no bearing on results so long as diets are isocalorific. You could get your cals and macro's over 2, 5, 10 meals and the results would be identical. And no, more frequent meals do not "up metabolism".

Here's a very good critique of a recent study showing less meals gives better blood glucose control: http://www.leangains.com/2011/01/better-blood-glucose-with-lower-meal.html

So that's a convincing argument for less meals giving less peaks and troughs in blood glucose, helpful whilst dieting for sure.

One thing you're right on is that it is totally individual, some find more meals better, others (like me) find infrequent meals better for controlling hunger.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

greenspin said:


> :thumbdown:


Constructive.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

bayman said:


> Constructive.


No :nono: It was not constructive.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> Show me the data that a more frequent meal intake is better than a less frequent one? And I'm not talking isolated studies, but the weight of the whole evidence. I went into great detail in this thread to show meal frequency has no bearing on results so long as diets are isocalorific. You could get your cals and macro's over 2, 5, 10 meals and the results would be identical. And no, more frequent meals do not "up metabolism".
> 
> Here's a very good critique of a recent study showing less meals gives better blood glucose control: http://www.leangains.com/2011/01/better-blood-glucose-with-lower-meal.html
> 
> ...


That was actually a typo, i meant to put 'i know there isn't sufficient data' so i applogise for making you type all that.

Now back to the snacks?? Name some?


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

greenspin said:


> No :nono: It was not constructive.


Do you have anything useful to contribute? My argument stand-ups. Going by your avi you should NOT be posting in the losing weight section...


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> That was actually a typo, i meant to put 'i know there isn't sufficient data' so i applogise for making you type all that.
> 
> Now back to the snacks?? Name some?


Don't see the need to, I don't buy into needing snacks on a diet. I'm currently cutting myself, 3 - 4 meals per day does me just fine.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

On a serious note Bayman, one of the reasons for the thumbs down was saying not to eat nuts ect. They are not a wonder food, but the are a good food. And to say to avoid them just because they are calorie dense is insane. I hear what you are saying about the 3 meals, and yes, weight loss is about the over all kcal deficit, but, on a diet if you are not weighing things ect and don't have any control then you are cutting yourself short of progress. And eating numerous times a day, on a diet, can be more satisfying.

By the way Grant Good progress man :thumbup1:


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> Don't see the need to, I don't buy into needing snacks on a diet. I'm currently cutting myself, 3 - 4 meals per day does me just fine.


Why not, you're whole argument was naming better snacks than nuts. I've shown what the benefits of eating nuts, and considering this is not your diet we are talking about, you then adviced the OP not to eat nuts (which was a very ill advised thing to say) with out giving him any othe ideas.

In fact you have not once listed any other adivce other than go to fitday and try to eat 12-14 cals per lb of bodyweight. You've argued over pork, the concept of clean eating and nuts, not once helping the OP but just arguing for the sake of it.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> Why not, you're whole argument was naming better snacks than nuts. I've shown what the benefits of eating nuts, and considering this is not your diet we are talking about, you then adviced the OP not to eat nuts (which was a very ill advised thing to say) with out giving him any othe ideas.
> 
> In fact you have not once listed any other adivce other than go to fitday and try to eat 12-14 cals per lb of bodyweight. You've argued over pork, the concept of clean eating and nuts, not once helping the OP but just arguing for the sake of it.


I'm not just arguing for the sake of it. But why do people feel the need to overcomplicate weightloss and push a totalitarian stance on what you can and cannot eat when dieting?

You're recommending the eliminating of pork chops on the fallacious argument they are an inferior protein source and high in fat, then singing the praises of nuts - which are definitely an inferior protein source to pork, also high fat, calorie dense and easy to overeat. Can you not see the irony there?

Clean eating does not help with results, it just results in cravings for the foods "he's not allowed." So long as the majority of his intake is from wholefoods he's lose weight just fine, so long as he's in the ballpark of his calorie and macro targets for the day *consistently.*

I posted the info on meal frequency to show there's no difference between either approach. It's completely individual, in fact the weight of evidence lies with the less frequent approach, in naturals at least...


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

bayman said:


> You're recommending the eliminating of pork chops on the fallacious argument they are an inferior protein source and high in fat, then singing the praises of nuts - which are definitely an inferior protein source to pork, also high fat, calorie dense and easy to overeat. Can you not see the irony there?
> 
> .


Was he directly saying to exchange these two foods for one another?


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

greenspin said:


> Was he directly saying to exchange these two foods for one another?


No he wasn't, but I'd hazard a guess if you replaced pork chops with chicken breast, then had nuts as a snack (as recommended) you'd end up at very similar cals and macro's anyway. So why bother?


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

TBH I think you are undermining the ability of all dieters by saying what you are saying. If you control your diet, in the case of the OP, learn the skills to control diet then eating nuts (I cant believe this is such n issue for you) or any food will not cause you to put on weight. But will potentially make you healthier.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> I'm not just arguing for the sake of it. But why do people feel the need to overcomplicate weightloss and push a totalitarian stance on what you can and cannot eat when dieting?


The attention to detail to get desired results for the OP is whats required. Grant has proved that a calorie deficit and exercise will loose weight, his main focus is now to remove belly fat, which being a man is the harest thing to do i.e. attention to detail.



bayman said:


> You're recommending the eliminating of pork chops on the fallacious argument they are an inferior protein source and high in fat, then singing the praises of nuts - which are definitely an inferior protein source to pork, also high fat, calorie dense and easy to overeat. Can you not see the irony there?


Pork is an inferior protein source to chicken, why do most body builders use it when coming into show and not pork. But the fact the he is alternating his protein source i had no issues with?? Pork is high in saturated fat, which does boost testosterone production, the benfits of nuts far out way that of pork. Nuts contain Omega 3 fats, as well as many other nutrients i have listed in previous posts. Nuts are not calories dense as they benefit the body, foods with no nutrional value (bagels, white bread, fizzy drinks) are dense. If he his aware of what he his eating then he will not over eat on nuts.



bayman said:


> Clean eating does not help with results, it just results in cravings for the foods "he's not allowed." So long as the majority of his intake is from wholefoods he's lose weight just fine, so long as he's in the ballpark of his calorie and macro targets for the day *consistently.*


And again this sort of comes back to my first point, attention to his diet to gain the required results. 'Food he's not allowed' got him in state he was in previous, cravings can be overcome by simply having a cheat meal on a saturday night, a technique used by the mass.



bayman said:


> I posted the info on meal frequency to show there's no difference between either approach. It's completely individual, in fact the weight of evidence lies with the less frequent approach, in naturals at least...


Meal frequency findings are a load of my ****, its down to the individual and how you react and feel with eating a big load of cals in one sitting or spreading it out


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> Pork is an inferior protein source to chicken, why do most body builders use it when coming into show and not pork. But the fact the he is alternating his protein source i had no issues with?? Pork is high in saturated fat, which does boost testosterone production, *the benfits of nuts far out way that of pork. * Nuts contain Omega 3 fats, as well as many other nutrients i have listed in previous posts. Nuts are not calories dense as they benefit the body, foods with no nutrional value (bagels, white bread, fizzy drinks) are dense. If he his aware of what he his eating then he will not over eat on nuts.


Just because bodybuilders do it, doesn't mean there's any sense to it, bodybuilders do lots of orthorexic things, a lot with no founding. But in truth they probably favour leaner meats are they contain less calories, simple really.

If you really believe the highlighted sentence I see not much point in going further, but I will for the benefit of the Op.

Nuts contain Alpha Linoleic acid (pre cursor to O3) not actual omega 3, which is converted at around 10% to O3 in the body. Any animal soucrce of omega 3 will be vastly superior. Most meats, especially those with fat attached are very dense in nutrients, especailly fat soluble ones. And amino profile is a moot point so long as the pork forms part of a mixed diet.



Virtus said:


> Meal frequency findings are a load of my ****, its down to the individual and how you react and feel with eating a big load of cals in one sitting or spreading it out


Well a peer reviewed study has some merit IMO, but I've been saying it's individual too.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> Just because bodybuilders do it, doesn't mean there's any sense to it, bodybuilders do lots of orthorexic things, a lot with no founding. *But in truth they probably favour leaner meats are they contain less calories, simple really*.
> 
> If you really believe the highlighted sentence I see not much point in going further, but I will for the benefit of the Op.
> 
> ...


And thats the point i was trying to make all along, and after making statement after statment you have just answered it for me

Pork does not contain any source of O3, and reagrdless of the uptake the body still converts ALA to EPA and DHA; seeing as most people do not get enough in there diet this is a bonus. Even so the nutrients contained in within nuts is more than that of pork, i wasn't stating that nuts should replace pork but in terms of its benefits on the human body.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

This is largely becoming an irrelevant argument, but I'll indulge you nevertheless.



Virtus said:


> And thats the point i was trying to make all along, and after making statement after statment you have just answered it for me


Er no it wasn't your point. You argued that pork was inferior to chicken as it lacked amino acids and contained higher levels of fat. It had nothing to do with pork being more calorific, do I need to quote your posts?

My point all along was: so long as the pork chops fit within his macro targets, their perfectly acceptable.

And anyway, the nutrition data page on a pork chop indicates it contains all nine EAA's...

http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/pork-products/10299/2



Virtus said:


> Pork does not contain any source of O3.


Oh but it does! Go look at the above page again, and you'll see an average pork chop contains 26.8mg of readily absorbable Omega 3!



Virtus said:


> Even so the nutrients contained in within nuts is more than that of pork, i wasn't stating that nuts should replace pork but in terms of its benefits on the human body.


Here's the page for walnuts: http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/nut-and-seed-products/3138/2

You'll see if you compare it to that of the pork chop that the walnuts contain less minerals (Completeness score), a less complete amino profile (score of 55 vs 155 for the pork) and a fullness score of 0.9 compared to 3.1 for the pork. Need I go on?

Now you may argue I'm comparing apples to oranges here as you never said replace pork with nuts, but you are trying to argue that nuts are in some way magically beneficial, which I hope the above shows you they aren't in comparison to most animal based foods.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi Guys just caught up to where the post has got to sorry i havent been on to explain or update anything i have been working back to back 13hr security shift 

in terms of breakfast i would very much appreciate a diffrent sugestion to my bagles i would be happy to scrap them, following what has been said for my snack mid morning i now have loads of pre weighd out almonds in bags i can just grab so i know i wont eat to many, for lunches i am sticking to chicken salads or chicken with brown rice with egg, i have indeed subed pork this week with chicken and beef acompanied with broccli and mushrooms, i have also nipped 1 spoon of sugar out of my cups of tea.

i am realy wanting to get fully focused on gettin my abs out for holiday any help from people who know what there talking about is greatly recieved.

thanks again

grant


----------



## Doink (Sep 21, 2010)

Why argue over it...|

It doesn't matter WHAT you eat as long as calories out are more than calories in.... this is what makes you lose weight. If you want to focus on muscle maintenance or even gaining with the right diet then protein has to be the focus, but basic fat loss aims can be achieved purely by lowering calories.

It can be more efficient to do it a certain away, i.e imo dropping carbs and eating moderate fats i.e 80/90g a day and 350g approx protein will accomplish a quick and effective cut with the right exercise, everyone has their own view but when all is said and done, it's about putting less calories into your body and burning more cals off.

Have a low carb whey shake i.e phd pharma whey for your breakfast, there's plenty of others, thats just the first one that sprang to mind.

Get a sweetner i.e sweetex for your brews, i had to make that change and yeah it was tough but now i prefer the sweetex if im honest.

OP stop eating junk, you know what to eat and what not to, exercise self discipline and get yourself in the gym and do some cardio.

I'd scrap the rice and eat Veg for the first few weeks but balance your cals in and out and if the rice fits then fair play.

stick to your diet, Add some high rep sessions in during your gym routine and hammer the cardio to increase calories used and you'll get those abs out.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

i attempted having just a shake for breakfast befor but i found i was so hungery by 10am that i found my self having to eat another breakfast to sort it out, it is hard as i have to be able to make double fast low cal brakfasts and run out the door eating them most days lol, also i have doubled my cardio this week so i will step on the scaled next week and c whats going on.

cheers grant


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> i attempted having just a shake for breakfast befor but i found i was so hungery by 10am that i found my self having to eat another breakfast to sort it out, it is hard as i have to be able to make double fast low cal brakfasts and run out the door eating them most days lol, also i have doubled my cardio this week so i will step on the scaled next week and c whats going on.
> 
> cheers grant


Im cutting, and have 65-75g oats for breakfast atm. If you get a good start to the day, it can make it easier to exercise discipline with the rest of your diet and training. As long as you are not in a calorie surplus and you are training hard and getting the cardio in, then you will be good to go.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Doink said:


> Why argue over it...|
> 
> It doesn't matter WHAT you eat as long as calories out are more than calories in.... this is what makes you lose weight. If you want to focus on muscle maintenance or even gaining with the right diet then protein has to be the focus, but basic fat loss aims can be achieved purely by lowering calories.
> 
> ...


Thank God someone has the sense to post this.Forget macros, micros, carbs, protein and the other plethora of virtually useless protocols.As this post correctly states, its all about calories in calories out.Plain and simple.If you hit a wall, regarding your fat loss, either your eating too much, your not hydtated enough or your body has gone into "panic" and has become more efficient at conserving energy(as it percieves food is scarce)So cut back slightly.Forget using cardio, its a totally inefficent way to burn fat.You will likely lose more fat if you REDUCE your workouts.Again, your body views trainning as stress, and again will attempt to conserve more energy (fat) to protect against further attacks(training) This theory has been well documented by Little/Mcguff, in the weight loss protocols of 2000 trainees.The ones who trained weekly lost MORE fat than those that trained twice weekly.Ive dropped 52lbs this year, Im never hungry, train once a week, and never do any cardio

Well done on the fat loss.However "getting the abs out" is only possible by removing fat from the body as a whole, and more importantly IF your genes will allow it.Not everyone has the physiological makeup, to make this possible.


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

essexboy said:


> Thank God someone has the sense to post this.Forget macros, micros, carbs, protein and the other plethora of virtually useless protocols.As this post correctly states, its all about calories in calories out.Plain and simple.If you hit a wall, regarding your fat loss, either your eating too much, your not hydtated enough or your body has gone into "panic" and has become more efficient at conserving energy(as it percieves food is scarce)So cut back slightly.*Forget using cardio, its a totally inefficent way to burn fat*.You will likely lose more fat if you REDUCE your workouts.Again, your body views trainning as stress, and again will attempt to conserve more energy (fat) to protect against further attacks(training) This theory has been well documented by Little/Mcguff, in the weight loss protocols of 2000 trainees.The ones who trained weekly lost MORE fat than those that trained twice weekly.Ive dropped 52lbs this year, Im never hungry, train once a week, and never do any cardio
> 
> Well done on the fat loss.However "getting the abs out" is only possible by removing fat from the body as a whole, and more importantly IF your genes will allow it.Not everyone has the physiological makeup, to make this possible.


So your advocating what nearly (id say) every pro, amateur and recreational trainer who is trying to lose bodyfat does? :confused1:

Strong opinion, but im sure it works for some.

Rest of your post makes sense to an extent.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Well quite literaly everything i thought i knew seems to be wrong lol, can i try and sumarise how i percieve the advise goes so that i know what im working on? sorry thread has confused me a bit.

lower carbs.

cut out processed foods.

almonds are ok for protein in weighed amounts.

eat more lean meats and sources of protein.

throw in 20mins HIIT after weight sesions.

take a rest day inbetween each muscle group and use as a cardio days.

Throw in some fasted cardio before breakfast when possible.

do core work twice a week for abs.

exchange sugar for sweetners

please add or subtract from this if im wrong, also i am still confused about weather or not i can start the day with carbs for breakfast eg: bagles with low fat cream cheese or porridge with almonds and raisens ?

cheers grant


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> Well quite literaly everything i thought i knew seems to be wrong lol, can i try and sumarise how i percieve the advise goes so that i know what im working on? sorry thread has confused me a bit.
> 
> lower carbs.
> 
> ...


looks about bang on the money to me.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> Well quite literaly everything i thought i knew seems to be wrong lol, can i try and sumarise how i percieve the advise goes so that i know what im working on? sorry thread has confused me a bit.
> 
> lower carbs.
> 
> ...


To sum it up Grant, there is a lot of different opinions and methods. I've given advice and then others have given advice. But weight loss is dictated by a calorie deficit. So in simple terms this is all you need to do to lose weight. Then you get to the methodology of how to best achieve this to spear muscle ect. That is the part that can get tricky, only because if you don't know what type of diet you want to follow you have to find out. And by asking on here you get lots of mixed opinions. But what you just said in your previous post is not to far off the basics.

No processed food (unless you are having a cheat meal)

Days rest between weight sessions (as a general rule, this again is debatable. But is common practice)

Cardio on rest days (The type of cardio is optional as is the time that it is done. Fasted is an option, but not the be all and end all)

Low carbs is an option. But not essential.

I personally think that sweeteners are unsafe, but many disagree. However they will cut calories if you do want to replace sugar, and so are another way of helping to achieving a calorie deficit.

Hope this seems relevant to you. And you have one of the most important qualities, that is the desire to achieve and find out how you can reach your goal.

Keep it up. You'll soon start understand how at all works.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

essexboy said:


> Thank God someone has the sense to post this.Forget macros, micros, carbs, protein and the other plethora of virtually useless protocols.As this post correctly states, its all about calories in calories out.Plain and simple.If you hit a wall, regarding your fat loss, either your eating too much, your not hydtated enough or your body has gone into "panic" and has become more efficient at conserving energy(as it percieves food is scarce)So cut back slightly.*Forget using cardio*, its a totally inefficent way to burn fat.You will likely lose more fat if you REDUCE your workouts.Again, your body views trainning as stress, and again will attempt to conserve more energy (fat) to protect against further attacks(training) This theory has been well documented by Little/Mcguff, in the weight loss protocols of 2000 trainees.The ones who trained weekly lost MORE fat than those that trained twice weekly.Ive dropped 52lbs this year, Im never hungry, train once a week, and never do any cardio
> 
> Well done on the fat loss.However "getting the abs out" is only possible by removing fat from the body as a whole, and more importantly IF your genes will allow it.Not everyone has the physiological makeup, to make this possible.


That is the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard anyone say.

And with regards to cals in cals out - yes it works when extremly over weight (i.e. you dropping 52lbs). But get 2 people around grants bf, put both on restrictive calories (say around 2000cals a day), have one eating bread, mcdonalds and chocolate and the other eating clean with a scheduled diet plan based on macronutirent values, both doing the same cardio and training. After 10 weeks see who looks the best???


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Virtus said:


> That is the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard anyone say.
> 
> And with regards to cals in cals out - yes it works when extremly over weight (i.e. you dropping 52lbs). But get 2 people around grants bf, put both on restrictive calories (say around 2000cals a day), have one eating bread, mcdonalds and chocolate and the other eating clean with a scheduled diet plan based on macronutirent values, both doing the same cardio and training. After 10 weeks see who looks the best???


Merely stating what I posted as "Ridiculous" ie disagreeing is of no value , unless you can offer a rational response.Can you, or do you want me to elaborate more?


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

hi guys good news i have been eating clean for 4 days now with cardio every day and have got rid of sugar all together and the scales today confirmed my hard work with a loss of 5lbs  SCORE, here is a quick outline of what ive been eating last few days please add in anything you think might help any further.

breakfast:2 weight watchers bagles with low fat cream cheese

snack:small tin of macral in olive oil

lunch: chicken salad (lettice, red onion, pepers,low fat mayo,low cheese, 3 eggs.

snack:40g almonds

dinner: diced steak with mushrooms and brocolli with 2 tea spoons of low at cheese stired in.

cheers grant


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> hi guys good news i have been eating clean for 4 days now with cardio every day and have got rid of sugar all together and the scales today confirmed my hard work with a loss of 5lbs  SCORE, here is a quick outline of what ive been eating last few days please add in anything you think might help any further.
> 
> breakfast:2 weight watchers bagles with low fat cream cheese
> 
> ...


Grant, good going on the weightloss mate, Id try and include a portion of protein with breakfast meal though, as you've gone all night with no protein feeding your muscle, you don't wanna be tapping into muscle when losing weight mate.

Its a good start, clean at least, results are there too so keep at it mate.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

essexboy said:


> Merely stating what I posted as "Ridiculous" ie disagreeing is of no value , unless you can offer a rational response.Can you, or do you want me to elaborate more?


Essexboy, you really are suckling from Dr Dough MCGuff's teat very nicely. Where what he says (from independent research blah blah blah) may be true in a literal sense, there is so many things like this. And all have a Dr or scientist ect backing it with the so called evidence and proof ect. I actually found it to be quite interesting. But I certainly am not going to start a religion about it. My main problem with what you are saying, is, you are telling someone relatively new to the game ie the OP, fractured and incomplete information about a less collectively known approach to diet/training/ exercise philosophy ect. Now what you are arguing against is a very widely practiced approach to weight loss/ exercise/ diet ect. that people, including myself, have had very real results with. On here many people will be able to help Grant achieve his goals by sharing this information. Where as what you are telling him becomes irrelevant, as it is just benign comments with no explanation. Unless you are going to explain fully to Grant your comments - I think you'd have to read him the hole book, and explain additional things to make the book make sense - then I think you should be less negative about the help and information given to grant in this thread that actually does work.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

Might I also say essexboy I find your signature to be quite negative, science - according to Dr MCGuff - has had flaws that are now being re evaluated. So you may find that his new evaluation of these flaws are also found to be flawed.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> That is the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard anyone say.
> 
> And with regards to cals in cals out - yes it works when extremly over weight (i.e. you dropping 52lbs). But get 2 people around grants bf, put both on restrictive calories (say around 2000cals a day), have one eating bread, mcdonalds and chocolate and the other eating clean with a scheduled diet plan based on macronutirent values, both doing the same cardio and training. After 10 weeks see who looks the best???


Your argument doesn't quite hold water.

If you had two people, both on isocalorific isomacro diets, but one getting it from supposed "clean" foods and the other from processed foods, weight / fat loss would be identical - Health would be another thing mind.

The ultimate determiner of fat loss is caloric deficit. You can't argue with this and multiple metabolic ward studies back this fact up.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

And all cardio does is add to your total daily energy burn.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Jim78 said:


> Grant, good going on the weightloss mate, Id try and include a portion of protein with breakfast meal though, *as you've gone all night with no protein feeding your muscle, you don't wanna be tapping into muscle when losing weight mat*e.
> 
> Its a good start, clean at least, results are there too so keep at it mate.


So long as total daily protein intake is sufficient, it doesn't really matter when you get it in.


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

Whats essex's boys stats, id like to see the fruits of his work if he follows what he preaches.

Im all for brief training, but training intensley, Ive never been happy spending long in a gym as my pics prove lol but his theories seem a bit wild.


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

bayman said:


> So long as total daily protein intake is sufficient, it doesn't really matter when you get it in.


I disagree bud, Breakfast is a time (IMO) where you need protein, as is PWO and before bedtime, might seem a little old in methodology but in my opinion, and I might be disproved wrong, its one of the unwritten rules of bodybuilding.

There are a lot of new methods, ie leangains etc etc and they probably do work, but id rather see what works for people on here that actually showcase their bodies, ie; the likes of DB, James L, Paul Scarb etc etc....and im sure they all advocate protein at those times.

Tried and tested thats all Im saying, not that it doesn't necessarily work by doing the new fasted type diets.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

bayman said:


> And all cardio does is add to your total daily energy burn.





bayman said:


> So long as total daily protein intake is sufficient, it doesn't really matter when you get it in.


I am not say this is true nor false. But I do think you need to fully explain to Grant, in an understandable and relevant way, why you made these statements.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

greenspin said:


> I am not say this is true nor false. But I do think you need to fully explain to Grant, in an understandable and relevant way, why you made these statements.


Ok, fair cop.

1. Cardio - Doing some form of cardio be it walking, HIIT, treadmill, rower, sports has innumerable benefits (not just on weight loss) and all have their relative pro's and cons. However, you can do cardio till the cows come home and not lose an scrap of fat if you're consuming more energy than your body is using, the old adage "you can't out-train a bad diet" comes to mind (well you can if you have a ridiculous level of activity, but you get my point.) So whilst cardio on a diet can be beneficial by adding to your caloric burn, going OTT with it can be just as bad.

2. Protein - The boire study showed that even whey protein (a supposed fast protein) digests at around 10g per hour. Caesin is even slower, and wholefoods at around 3-6g per hour. The mistake people make is thinking digestion is discrete, as in each meal is digested on it's own. In truth it a constant absorption process, so worrying about meal frequency etc is pretty worthless. If Grant (as is recommended by most) has had a meal pre bed, especially with a slow digesting protein source he'll still have plenty of circulating aminos in the morning. Being consistent with total daily protein intake is more important than when.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Jim78 said:


> I disagree bud, Breakfast is a time (IMO) where you need protein, as is PWO and before bedtime, might seem a little old in methodology but in my opinion, and I might be disproved wrong, its one of the unwritten rules of bodybuilding.
> 
> There are a lot of new methods, ie leangains etc etc and they probably do work, but id rather see what works for people on here that actually showcase their bodies, ie; the likes of DB, James L, Paul Scarb etc etc....and im sure they all advocate protein at those times.
> 
> Tried and tested thats all Im saying, not that it doesn't necessarily work by doing the new fasted type diets.


So because everyone else does it, that makes it logically sound right? This is known as an "appeal to authority" fallacy. Just because it works for the people you've mentioned doesn't factor in numerous other things, such as the use of AAS. We all know AAS increase nitrogen retention, so getting in sufficient protein to take advantage of this may result in a more frequent consumption of it, especially if you're talking 300g+ of protein per day?

This has no relevance to naturals wishing to ensure they either gain muscle optimally, or maitain muscle whilst dieting - as in Grant's case.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

bayman said:


> Ok, fair cop.
> 
> 2. Protein - The boire study .


Im interested to read this, can you send me a link to this study. I can only find ones relative to cassein.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

essexboy said:


> Merely stating what I posted as "Ridiculous" ie disagreeing is of no value , unless you can offer a rational response.Can you, or do you want me to elaborate more?


No please don't bore me with some study that a doctor has carried out and you've applied it to your life because you can't ****d doing exercise. Performing CV has many positives, which i'm sure you are aware of, including a direct affect of the bodys metabolism. In other words EPOC, and performing HIT training has shown in studies that it can increase a person metabolic rate by 13% 3 hours after exercise.



bayman said:


> Your argument doesn't quite hold water.
> 
> If you had two people, both on isocalorific isomacro diets, but one getting it from supposed "clean" foods and the other from processed foods, weight / fat loss would be identical - Health would be another thing mind.
> 
> The ultimate determiner of fat loss is caloric deficit. You can't argue with this and multiple metabolic ward studies back this fact up.


You do nothing but argue and add pointless studies. Weight loss and fat loss are 2 different things, a calorie deficit using any foods will result in WEIGHT LOSS, but for fat loss is something different. Seeing has you are so knowledgable on the idea i am not going to argue but instead ask one simple question. A bodybuilder who is 6 weeks out for competition and is dieting, why doesn't he eat any foods?? I mean according to you and your studies it doesn't make any difference???



bayman said:


> And all cardio does is add to your total daily energy burn.


See first response, it has more benefits than that.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

greenspin said:


> Im interested to read this, can you send me a link to this study. I can only find ones relative to cassein.


This is only the abstract, but sure you could find the full text with a bit of googling. Pay particular attention to the graphics that are linked to, especially figure 2.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> You do nothing but argue and add pointless studies. Weight loss and fat loss are 2 different things, a calorie deficit using any foods will result in WEIGHT LOSS, but for fat loss is something different. Seeing has you are so knowledgable on the idea i am not going to argue but instead ask one simple question. A bodybuilder who is 6 weeks out for competition and is dieting, why doesn't he eat any foods?? I mean according to you and your studies it doesn't make any difference???


This a strawman from your end. I know full well there's a difference between weight and fat loss. Maybe I should have qualified my stance a little more, but if two diets are isocalorific (same calories) iso protein (same protein) and other macro's, then FAT loss, assuming training is identical will be the same, regardless of what foods the diet is made up of.

And I never said anywhere here that people shouldn't worry about food at all? Please direct me to where I did? I stated that it doesn't matter (in the grand scheme of things) when you eat, so long as you hit your protein and calorie targets for the day. Yet again, you seem to miss this simple point and would prefer to endlessly (and needlessly) micromanage a diet. 1, 3, 8, 52 meals per day, it really doesn't matter.



Virtus said:


> See first response, it has more benefits than that.


See my later post, again I'm fully aware of this. But in terms of fatloss it's benefit stretches purely to increasing energy expenditure.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> Your argument doesn't quite hold water.
> 
> If you had two people, both on isocalorific isomacro diets, but one getting it from supposed "clean" foods and *the other from processed foods, weight / fat loss would be identical* - Health would be another thing mind.
> 
> The ultimate determiner of fat loss is caloric deficit. You can't argue with this and multiple metabolic ward studies back this fact up.





bayman said:


> This a strawman from your end. I know full well there's a difference between weight and fat loss. Maybe I should have qualified my stance a little more, but if two diets are isocalorific (same calories) iso protein (same protein) and other macro's, then FAT loss, assuming training is identical will be the same, *regardless of what foods the diet is made up of.*
> 
> And I never said anywhere here that people shouldn't worry about food at all? Please direct me to where I did?


In the same post. You are saying as long as protein, calories and training are the same you can eat anything



bayman said:


> See my later post, again I'm fully aware of this. But in terms of fatloss it's benefit stretches purely to increasing energy expenditure.


It can also increase metabolism

Also are you going to answer this: A bodybuilder who is 6 weeks out for competition and is dieting, why doesn't he eat any foods?? I mean according to you and your studies it doesn't make any difference???


----------



## henleys (Sep 28, 2010)

surely even if the protein and training were the same surely 100kcals from brocolli and 100kcals from dair milk chocolate would be different would it not?


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> In the same post. You are saying as long as protein, calories and training are the same you can eat anything


Yes, but whether you can stick to such a diet is another point. Eating refined foods can increase hunger etc, but in theory, if you could stick to it, yes results would be the same. Have a look up of the rebuttal to "Supersize me", a bodybuilder who successfully lost FAT on a diet of solely Mcdonalds - why? He was controlling his calories.



Virtus said:


> It can also increase metabolism
> 
> Also are you going to answer this: A bodybuilder who is 6 weeks out for competition and is dieting, why doesn't he eat any foods?? I mean according to you and your studies it doesn't make any difference???


Fine, yes it can increase metabolism. So does lifting weights, your point?

As for your second point, I'm not going to answer it as I never said anything of the sort, neither did any of the studies I've referred to. This is a ridiculous line of argument from you, and I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to prove with it.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

henleys said:


> surely even if the protein and training were the same surely 100kcals from brocolli and 100kcals from dair milk chocolate would be different would it not?


Different caloric densities? Yes. You'd get more (in terms of quantity) of the broccoli than the chocolate for a 100kcal's worth. Different in terms of carb, fat, protein, fibre, content - yes. But in terms of absolute energy they are the same.


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

bayman said:


> So because everyone else does it, that makes it logically sound right? This is known as an "appeal to authority" fallacy. Just because it works for the people you've mentioned doesn't factor in numerous other things, such as the use of AAS. We all know AAS increase nitrogen retention, so getting in sufficient protein to take advantage of this may result in a more frequent consumption of it, especially if you're talking 300g+ of protein per day?
> 
> This has no relevance to naturals wishing to ensure they either gain muscle optimally, or maitain muscle whilst dieting - as in Grant's case.


Yes, they do it because it works, and gives them results, thats good enough from me, does that make sense or do you not understand lol

Stop making it sound too technical, naturals would IMO need protein more than most after a long fast..ie sleeping.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

bayman said:


> Different caloric densities? Yes. You'd get more (in terms of quantity) of the broccoli than the chocolate for a 100kcal's worth. Different in terms of carb, fat, protein, fibre, content - yes. But in terms of absolute energy they are the same.


Im not sure that the relative energy difference between them, to be digest to a point of available nutrition, would in fact change there actual energy values post digestion.


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

Bayman, do you practise what you preach? Genuine question?

Reason why is because Ive seen loads of people on here quote crap only to look like that themselves, I like to follow proper peoples real life experiences, on what works, and what does not.

You seem happy to quote article after article, Id like to see how your methodolgy of training has worked for you, if you practice what you preach and look good, I shall be the 1st to say well done.


----------



## Virtus (Apr 30, 2007)

bayman said:


> Fine, yes it can increase metabolism. So does lifting weights, your point?


Yes I know, i never questioned weighting lifting, but you argued that cardio only relates to energy expenditure (and you are wrong) after I questioned Essexboys post. My point is that you will argue for the sake of it.



bayman said:


> As for your second point, I'm not going to answer it as I never said anything of the sort, neither did any of the studies I've referred to. This is a ridiculous line of argument from you, and I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to prove with it.


I didn't think you would because it just proves that your entire agrument on this post is fruitless and pointless, every post you've gone on about studies proving this and proving that without adding anything constructive to grants original post.

When I first posted to help Grants diet (something you have not done except point him to fitday) and told him to concentrate on his diet and remove all processed foods, think about eating clean and healther and making better food choices you argued that it doesn't make any different. Now seeing has Grant asked about loosing BF around his stomach (not general weight loss) and everytime I have tried to suggest something you have jumped in; the only way to drive this messeage home is by asking the above question on a bodybuilder going to contest. Why doesn't a bodybuilder eat any foods, all these professional bodybuilders who have been doing it wrong all these years, when according to your studies they can eat anything as long as they have required amount of protein and in a calorie deficit.

My point is A bodybuilder off season will have a higher BF percentage,but when he starts dieting he drops BF and retains lean muscle mass by eating clean non processed foods. Anhyway this is the last time i will reply to your post on this subject because you will just quote another study


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi, I have been reading this with a lot of interest and it has realy given me a lot to think about, i think in heind seight my post should have been called how to reduce my bf%, i have got a reasonable idea now of how to clean up my eating and i have altered my training program to allow more cardio and more rest between muscle groups, i know the post has sparked off a bit of debate but good or bad it is nice from a new guys perspective to see so many people have the time to read my posts and give advice, thank you.

Grant

edit: also please feel free to follow my progress in the up coming months on my journal

http://www.uk-muscle.co.uk/member-journals-pictures/117828-grants-fat-fit-journal.html


----------



## Geordie Mc (Oct 23, 2010)

Great progress so far mate. Well done. I'm trying to shed some fat myself while still adding lean muscle. I wouls maybe go for more protein in your breakfast even if it's just a shake on top of the bagels. How about cutting the sugar in your tea to 1 spoonful? I used to take 2 but don't use any now. Just gradually put less in and got used to it. You could maybe add 15 minutes of intense interval cardio on the end of workouts too. Good luck.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Virtus said:


> Yes I know, i never questioned weighting lifting, but you argued that cardio only relates to energy expenditure (and you are wrong) after I questioned Essexboys post. My point is that you will argue for the sake of it.


I wasn't "arguing" anything. But aside from the health benefits, cardio does only add to energy expenditure, be that directly by the act itself, or EPOC / metabolism effects afterwards. It's still just adding to the calories out side of the equation. So I am correct in this point.



Virtus said:


> I didn't think you would because it just proves that your entire agrument on this post is fruitless and pointless, every post you've gone on about studies proving this and proving that without adding anything constructive to grants original post.
> 
> When I first posted to help Grants diet (something you have not done except point him to fitday) and told him to concentrate on his diet and remove all processed foods, think about eating clean and healther and making better food choices *you argued that it doesn't make any different*. Now seeing has Grant asked about loosing BF around his stomach (not general weight loss) and everytime I have tried to suggest something you have jumped in; the only way to drive this messeage home is by asking the above question on a bodybuilder going to contest. *Why doesn't a bodybuilder eat any foods, all these professional bodybuilders who have been doing it wrong all these years, when according to your studies they can eat anything as long as they have required amount of protein and in a calorie deficit*.
> 
> My point is A bodybuilder off season will have a higher BF percentage,*but when he starts dieting he drops BF and retains lean muscle mass by eating clean non processed foods.* Anhyway this is the last time i will reply to your post on this subject because you will just quote another study


My point has been this (Grant if you're reading this and want anything expanding upon feel free to ask):

To lose fat and maintain muscle mass you need an appropriate caloric deficit (to generate fat loss), coupled with adequate protein intake and resistance exercise (to maintain muscle mass). It's sensible to base your diet in the majority around wholefoods - so called "clean" foods, because they are generally more satiating (keep you feeling full), but it's not a deal breaker if you include a few so called "unclean" foods.

To reiterate - The biggest factors are an appropriate caloric deficit and an adequate protein intake.

Now you're advocating that the only way to do the above (by using a bodybuilder as an example) is to eat only "clean" unprocessed foods, which is simply untrue. This is why I've cited "studies" as this has been researched numerous times.

To answer why bodybuilders diet like they do, it's quite simple: Lean meats, broccoli and the like and every other accepted clean food aren't particularly energy dense, you get a lot of food (bulk wise) for your calories, which can lead to you feeling fuller on a diet and better compliance. But ultimately this restricted diet just creates a calorie deficit by preventing overeating, it has nothing to do with the "cleanliness" of the food taken in. Most find it easier to be restrictive with their diet to prevent temptation etc, but if your still in an energy deficit the type of food is of lesser concern.

In fact, a day or meal per week where you eat higher cals on a diet can be beneficial. It can break the monotony of dieting by allowing the foods you have been craving to be had, but it can also up-regulate important fatloss hormones such as Leptin, which drop in response to energy restriction. Again, this has been studied and holds true.

Now Virtus, if you want to refute any of the above points with actual credible scientific data, rather than, "Bodybuilders do it like this so it must be true" then fire away.

Grant, this is what I would recommend:

1. Track your diet intake on something like fitday.

2. Aim for 12-14 cals per lb of bodyweight as a target caloric intake. You could go as low as 10cals per lb if you really want to attack it hard. But moderation is usually best.

3. You need a minimum 1g per lb of protein.

4. Set carbs and fats as you see fit, whichever you prefer to make the rest of your diet up from. Fats ideally should be a minimum of 20% of your total intake for maintaining hormones etc.

5. Lift hard and heavy 2-3 times per week. More is not better on a diet.

6. Do some cardio on off days, but don't do too much as it can lead to overtraining. Walking is an excellent choice.

7. Have one day per week or a couple of meals where you aim for higher cals and calories. If you choose the one free day method I had good success with putting such a day as this on the weekend so I could enjoy meals out etc. If you go for the few free meals method, aim to have them on the days you lift, preferablly post workout.

8. So long as you're in an overall caloric deficit at the end of the week with the above, you'll lose fat no problem.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi Bayman, Thank for the clear consise post, the only thing i think i need clarification on is the cal intake you recoment 12-14 cals per lb i currently weigh 208lbs but at the moment i genearly only eat between 1700-1900 cal per day, do you think weight loss would be increased if i was to eat more ? this is the part that always confused me i generaly thought the rule was eat less loose more, also according to this scale i need approx 210g of protein a day atmo i think i am short of that aswell 

thanks grant


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> Hi Bayman, Thank for the clear consise post, the only thing i think i need clarification on is the cal intake you recoment 12-14 cals per lb i currently weigh 208lbs but at the moment i genearly only eat between 1700-1900 cal per day, do you think weight loss would be increased if i was to eat more ? this is the part that always confused me i generaly thought the rule was eat less loose more, also according to this scale i need approx 210g of protein a day atmo i think i am short of that aswell
> 
> thanks grant


The 12-14 cal per lb is only a ball park figure. Some find they need more than this not to lose weight too quickly and get weak, others find they need less than this lose signifiant amounts of fat. Metabolism can vary a lot between person to person.

So are you still consistently losing fat at 1700-1900kcal? Do you find you have enough energy to make gym sessions productive? If not a more moderate calorie deficit with more activity might suit you better.

If you've been at that level of caloric restriction for a while and fat loss is stalling a bit, you might find the day refeed per week that I talked about above might actually help you out. A refeed is designed to off-set diet induced reductions in metabolism and the hormone Leptin, which regulates fat loss.

On a refeed you actually go above you maintenance calorie requirement and favour carbs (as these have the biggest effect on leptin) to reset things. You may find the day after a refeed you weigh more as a result (stored glycogen and water) but after you return to your fat loss diet you lose fat at an accelerated rate until you refeed again. It also breaks the boredom a bit on a diet. Might be an option?

Make sure you're in the region of 210g of protein yes, you should always priorotise protein on a diet to maintain muscle mass.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Yes my weight loss has stalled a bit recently i was consistantly loosing 2lbs a week up until end of december where i put a bit on over crimbo, i got that off soon enough but until yesterday had not noted any weight loss for the whole of january, it has been surgested by friends that i do not eat enough but i still smash it in the gym i would say my level of determination makes up for any short coming i might have in energy lol this is probably not best practice i guess, do you have any top tips for upping protein levels through out the day? at the moment i have roughly 2 whole chicken breasts 3-4 egg whites another portion of meat with dinner and 2-3 spoons of low fat cheese with breakfast.

i am off the diet for a couple of days as i have tonsilitis and my throat is so swolen i cant realy eat  so far ive had soup and tea im not very pleased cant even train but im on antibiotics so should hopfuly be feeling better by thursday (fingers crossed)


----------



## pyrowill (May 19, 2007)

Those are some pretty impressive before and after pics man. Whats the timescale between the two?


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

greenspin said:


> Might I also say essexboy I find your signature to be quite negative, science - according to Dr MCGuff - has had flaws that are now being re evaluated. So you may find that his new evaluation of these flaws are also found to be flawed.


That signature was coined by Jones/Nautlius long before Mcguffs writings were published.


----------



## Glassback (Jun 18, 2010)

Grant - Bloody well done there mate - Put it this way getting to your next goal should be easier than reading through the conflicting posts posted on this thread. If you can de-scramble them you will **** reaching your next goal!


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Jim78 said:


> Whats essex's boys stats, id like to see the fruits of his work if he follows what he preaches.
> 
> Im all for brief training, but training intensley, Ive never been happy spending long in a gym as my pics prove lol but his theories seem a bit wild.


Sorry to disapoint Jim, those theories are not mine.They were being practised as long as 60 years ago.Jones(Nautilus) re discovered them in the 70s and made a billion dollars.My personal results,are not relavant.Any study requires many subjects to make accurate evaluations,and unfortunately within the realms of muscle building, too many factors serve only to make accurate evaluation non sensical at best.Im merely responding to empirical evidence, of thirty years of being in gyms.What I will tell you though, is that over the previous three years, training once weekly, my most advantageous body part(legs) have grown stronger EVERY workout.That is the performance of one set of a high quality leg press, or my nautilus duo squat machine, with a tul of at least 120 and not more more 180 seconds.Im also fighting against deminishing testosterone output(age) This is in stark contrast to the years, I listened to the "knowledge" of the experts,(the big guys right?)with zero results.Its an extremely taxing way to train.However if you can learn to master it,extremely rewarding both physically and emotionally.My lodger at the time, (48 year old male, builder) with above average genetics gained 13 lbs in a little under 3 months using the same protocol.A little over 12 minutes training time once a week.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

if you have stalled revaluate your diet.Are you cheating? are you well hydrated? If so,cut back on the calories slightly(100 a day) drink more water(iced) and turn the central heating down.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

essexboy said:


> That signature was coined by Jones/Nautlius long before Mcguffs writings were published.


Fair play. Never the less I still find it negative. But your free to write what you want. As fare as your comment to jim, would you teach someone a language you could not speak?

And as far as turning heating down and drinking cold water ect, they are just to give an edge. Not to necessary, just get diet and cardio sorted.


----------



## Bulk1 (Apr 12, 2007)

What ever your doing, you've done very well so far... you should be very proud of your progress.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

greenspin said:


> Fair play. Never the less I still find it negative. But your free to write what you want. As fare as your comment to jim, would you teach someone a language you could not speak?
> 
> And as far as turning heating down and drinking cold water ect, they are just to give an edge. Not to necessary, just get diet and cardio sorted.


Whether you choose to judge a truthful statement as negative is your decision.I will continue to post, what i deem to be the truth, your acceptance is not a consideration.Your comparision is poor at best.Does not knowledge and experience qualify one to teach? I think it does.Ill say it again.Empirical evidence.


----------



## Greenspin (Dec 27, 2010)

essexboy said:


> Whether you choose to judge a truthful statement as negative is your decision.I will continue to post, what i deem to be the truth, your acceptance is not a consideration.Your comparision is poor at best.Does not knowledge and experience qualify one to teach? I think it does.Ill say it again.Empirical evidence.


Yes, very poetic and evasive. Im quite bored of debating your ego, there is evidence of this, PMSL . I am not the kind of person to be narrow minded about things, and I dont try to stop people from having input and ideas. But you seem to have one way and that is it. So for the sake of this thread not getting even longer and more irrelevant to the OP, I will stop posting here for now. Grant if you want to PM me with any questions you have, I will be happy to try and help. In terms of weight loss, you can see the result of my techniques in my avi - take in mind I was very over weight too, and have kept it off for 6 years.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi, thanks "greenspin" i will bear you in mind for tips and hints, in terms of drinking more water i probably could but i dont want to pee ever 15 seconds lol, i to have read the womens section in the mail online last week telling us heating in our houses makes us fat.... NO cakes and pies make us fat lol.

Neway, when i originaly posted for your help i was tiping the scales at 14st 13lbs, today i steped up and to my joy was a 14st 6lbs WOOHOO all of these little tips seem to have got my body kickstarted back in the right direction for my weight loss goals.

Im possitive i can do it and tay on track but i will probably be on here looking for tips and hints here and there just to make sure i maximise my goals.

Thanks again

Grant

Edit: sorry in answer to an earlier question this was acheived from the 2nd wk of may 2010 to present over all lost 5 stone.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

quick update i am not down to 14st 5lbs diet is prety much spot on now i am awaiting an order of whey to get my protein amounts up to there correct levels and i am using a skipping rope aprox 2 hours a week now to sweat off excess fat  i will add pics and update to my journal at the end of the month, also i am now 5 weeks in to my cla trial which i am noticing help me out a little now i am told most results will be noticed over the 8-12 week period so i will keep posted on that front aswell i might do a review of the product 

thanks grant


----------



## IrishRaver (Feb 4, 2010)

bayman said:


> Show me the data that a more frequent meal intake is better than a less frequent one? And I'm not talking isolated studies, but the weight of the whole evidence. I went into great detail in this thread to show meal frequency has no bearing on results so long as diets are isocalorific. *You could get your cals and macro's over 2, 5, 10 meals and the results would be identical.* And no, more frequent meals do not "up metabolism".
> 
> Here's a very good critique of a recent study showing less meals gives better blood glucose control: http://www.leangains.com/2011/01/better-blood-glucose-with-lower-meal.html
> 
> ...


You must have a source for such a drastic statement bro, I'm very interested to read it. I've read over and over that our bodies can only cope with absorbing so much at a given period of time, protein is mainly referenced.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

IrishRaver said:


> You must have a source for such a drastic statement bro, I'm very interested to read it. I've read over and over that our bodies can only cope with absorbing so much at a given period of time, protein is mainly referenced.


It's only a drastic statement if you don't understand digestion, or worst still listen to what supplement companies tell you.

All the info in support of that statement is in the other thread I linked too. Read from post #10 onwards here.


----------



## IrishRaver (Feb 4, 2010)

bayman said:


> It's only a drastic statement if you don't understand digestion, or worst still listen to what supplement companies tell you.
> 
> All the info in support of that statement is in the other thread I linked too. Read from post #10 onwards here.


It is drastic to me because it is directly conflictive with everything I have read many times over.

The fact I know little about digestion is irrelevant in this case.

going on to read now, hopefully some insight...


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

IrishRaver said:


> It is drastic to me because it is directly conflictive with everything I have read many times over.
> 
> The fact I know little about digestion is irrelevant in this case.
> 
> going on to read now, hopefully some insight...


Feel free to ask anything if you want clarification.


----------



## IrishRaver (Feb 4, 2010)

bayman said:


> Feel free to ask anything if you want clarification.


As usual, a lot of interesting stuff to be read!

The absorption of food is mentioned, this is obviously one crucial factor to consider when we need our nutrients most, so I ask are faster absorbing proteins (like whey) deemed useless? They are used at specific intervals - the speed of absorption being a common reason for their use PWO and upon wakening.

You also mention there are studies which show there is no difference in absolute results among more and less frequent meals being consumed, so long as they within a caloric limit.

Are these 'results' based on total body changes? Fat & lean muscle?

Another question which must be taken into account, how quickly are the nutrients that aren't being used converted into fat? - In comparison with how quickly they are absorbed

If you have a source that could possibly answer my questions I would gratefully read it


----------



## IrishRaver (Feb 4, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> Hi, thanks "greenspin" i will bear you in mind for tips and hints, in terms of drinking more water i probably could but i dont want to pee ever 15 seconds lol, i to have read the womens section in the mail online last week telling us heating in our houses makes us fat.... NO cakes and pies make us fat lol.
> 
> Neway, when i originaly posted for your help i was tiping the scales at 14st 13lbs, today i steped up and to my joy was a 14st 6lbs WOOHOO all of these little tips seem to have got my body kickstarted back in the right direction for my weight loss goals.
> 
> ...


First off excellent progress thus far bro! Just compare your transformation to all the countless lazy f**kers out there who were in the same position, and just won't put down the fork and get on the treadmill.

I think you should post up your diet in the diet section or losing weight section asking for critisim. Get your macros sorted (I'd say 150g carbs, 200g protein and 80g fat-though I'm no expert) and then find out what foods we should be eating! My main problem was distinguishing the good from the bad, but you get the hang of it.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

IrishRaver said:


> As usual, a lot of interesting stuff to be read!
> 
> The absorption of food is mentioned, this is obviously one crucial factor to consider when we need our nutrients most, so I ask are faster absorbing proteins (like whey) deemed useless? They are used at specific intervals - the speed of absorption being a common reason for their use PWO and upon wakening.
> 
> ...


Firstly, you're worrying about stuff that's pointless worrying about, I already referenced that speed of absorbtion is pointless worrying about in the other thread I linked you to, like I said, even whey has shown to take 4hours or so to be fully absorbed. It's much more important to hit your total daily calorie and macro requirement that when you take them in.

And just to allay your fears further with reagrds to the metabolism question - here's a great collection of studies showing meal frequency has no impact on metabolism:

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=119024341

As yo can see somebody had already done the work for me! I suggest reading the whole thread.

As for muscle / fat gain, read up on Layne Norton's stuff, he's done some very interesting research on this topic which seems to suggest (contrary to mainstream advice) a lower meal frequency is better for mass gains. My opinion having read a lot on the subject is: It doesn't matter.

I don't really understand your last question either.


----------



## IrishRaver (Feb 4, 2010)

bayman said:


> I don't really understand your last question either.


Cheers buddy, I'll have a read tonight.

As for my last question... when we are over eating, the unused nutrients are stored as muscle tissue and fat tissue, how quickly does this happen? How long are the nutrients free to be used before they are stored is what I'm asking

WTF are we drinking protein and carbs PWO for then? I'm not so sure on this mate. PWO shakes by this theory are excess as they are supplementing our daily macros

I highly advocate being anal about PWO nutrition, it's when we need it most, when our body begins the repairing stage (growing)!


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi Just a quick update on diet i now have some my protein unflavourd protein powder provides exclent values for breakfast assist and PWO and mix's so well other than colour it is almost undetectable


----------



## IrishRaver (Feb 4, 2010)

I use flavoured whey for breakfast (with milk,delicious!) and unflavoured PWO with water, so it's not slowed down by the fats in milk.

All from MP


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

IrishRaver said:


> I use flavoured whey for breakfast (with milk,delicious!) and unflavoured PWO with water, so it's not slowed down by the fats in milk.
> 
> All from MP


Milk is actually really good post workout, don't worry about fat "slowing down absorption" either.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Im glad you posted that because ive been using milk to mix with it lol


----------



## Starh (Feb 12, 2011)

Keep it up, you've done well so far. Good luck


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

IrishRaver said:


> Cheers buddy, I'll have a read tonight.
> 
> As for my last question... when we are over eating, the unused nutrients are stored as muscle tissue and fat tissue, how quickly does this happen? How long are the nutrients free to be used before they are stored is what I'm asking
> 
> ...


What I don't get is why you want to know how long it takes to store them as fat? Depending on multiple factors some excess calories will go towards muscle gain some towards fat. You can try play clever little nutritional tricks so a higher proportion go towards LBM only but that's the holy Grail of bodybuilding no matter what anyone else says. Obviously drugs help massively in this regard.

As for PWO "recovery" shakes and the like, you drink them because of habit, because supplement companies tell you you "need" them and other pseudo science. People were getting big long before they ever existed and will continue to without too. You have to bear in mind that most of the favourable research done on PWO drinks is done in fasted subjects, so unless you're training very early in the morning I'm not sure what if any difference they make. Consider if you've fed pre WO the nutrients from that meal will be being released for hrs afterwards, it will have already elevated amino levels in the blood etc. So as long as you're getting something PWO be that a shake or a meal you'll be golden.

I pointed you to the other thread as there's research showing even whey - a supposed fast protein, takes 60mins to peak protein synthesis and is still being absorbed 4hrs after injestion, so it's hardly a straight ticket to anabolism immeadiately PWO, and is if even necessary if you consider what I've pointed out above?

I think it's very short sighted to think of PWO as a limited "window". Training ups protein synthesis for 24-48hrs, so if you think whether or not your getting a shake PWO or not is gonna make or break gains then I reckon you need a word with yourself.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi Guys quick update, i have stuck to the "clean diet" from begining of post with only 1 cheat day per week throwing in the cardio inbetween muscle groups and keeping up with whey and supps, the results are gr8 i have cut from 14st 13lbs to 14st 2lbs my stomach is rapidly dissapearing and i am still full (most of the time) my question is this, i am 5ft 10 quite a large frame what wort of weight aprox do you think i will need to get down to before i start to see abs?

cheer grant


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi Quick update pic to show progress + if anyone can to BF est from this to goal be very greatful.










cheers, grant


----------



## pipebomb (Oct 3, 2009)

My guess would be about 14-16%

Btw well done so far keep it up


----------



## austin84 (Nov 18, 2010)

Grantewhite said:


> Hi Quick update pic to show progress + if anyone can to BF est from this to goal be very greatful.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fair play mate doin very well! As far as bf I really couldn't say as I'm a totally novice myself.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Thanks for the reply pipebomb, the machine at the gym guesses 15% but i dont trust them that much coz how to they know lol but its aprox rite, not to far to go to get to sum 12's now lol


----------



## gymjim (Feb 1, 2009)

Grant been following this tread since the start, mate youve done fantastic so far, credit is due where credit is due, keep going! hopefully your hair will grow back tho ay? ha ha, but on a serious note, fantastic achivement!


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Cheers for that mate the pic is just to show off my body i can pm you a pic of my hair if that is more what you were after? lol


----------



## JS95 (Aug 29, 2010)

Hey man, you problem here for starters is your breakfast, the baegels are good for protein and low GI carbs, but the butter is whats got all the fat. So your better with oats in a protein shake, or a protein shake and some porridge, if you can find a sub for mayo then that would be helpful and best to lay off the soda's like pepsi etc.

If your having eggs then its best to remove the yolks as they contain the bulk of the fat.

Hope I helped you mate


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

Jimmysteve95 said:


> Hey man, you problem here for starters is your breakfast, the baegels are good for protein and low GI carbs, but the butter is whats got all the fat. So your better with oats in a protein shake, or a protein shake and some porridge, if you can find a sub for mayo then that would be helpful and best to lay off the soda's like pepsi etc.
> 
> If your having eggs then its best to remove the yolks as they contain the bulk of the fat.
> 
> Hope I helped you mate


Eating Fat doesn't make you fat mate.


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

Better off cutting back on the carbs than the fats.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

My thread is back lol, I am slightly reducing my fats at the moment but i do still keep a good level, i am using a low carb diet 6 days a week with good protein intake and i have one "cheat" carb up day, now i say cheat i dont go mad but its nice to break the routine once in a while, i will post a new pic next week to show my progress over the last month, i think its comming on ok, i am also coming up to my "pay out" on the CLA which is suposed to have the most noticable effect in the space of the next 2-3 weeks being the end of the duration of time recomended, if it infact does not work as told i am open to any surgestion as to which fat burner supp i can take in place of it to keep the edge  , still hunting down abs for may...... stay tunes lol

Thanks for looking ,Grant


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

just a quick pic update of progress from basic front on stance, more pic's on my "fat to fit journal"










cheers grant


----------



## Tassotti (Feb 27, 2011)

Excellent work Grant. Keep going mate, you will get there.

For a rough guide on your bodyfat %, enter your details here

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/diet.html


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

thanks mate, i am still battlein on  here is the results from the link

Body Mass Index: 28.6 kg/m2

Waist-to-Height ratio: 0.46

Percent Body Fat: 13.4%

Lean Body Mass: 172.3 lb


----------



## Tassotti (Feb 27, 2011)

no worries. 13.4% is pretty good as, at a guess, I reckon you were about 38% at the start. Its gonna be a lot harder to shift that last bit, so you may have to go extreme on the diet, maybe keto it

http://www.uk-muscle.co.uk/losing-weight/8856-big-pscarb-other-diet-experts-advice-needed.html

You will have to adjust the amounts to fit in with your calorie intake


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Cheers, i am looking for about 11-12% so not far away, and yes your est for original BF is almost spot on i am ashamed to say lol , i am looking in to starting up a carb cycling diet to try shift the last of the weight, i had a dabble with keto a while back but tbh i think i was eating far to much fat and even though i lost weight i wasent doing my self much good lol.


----------



## bighead1985 (Dec 31, 2010)

Just seen the pictures. Congratulations


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

bighead1985 said:


> Just seen the pictures. Congratulations


 Thanks mate so far been training 10 months (almost) cant wait to see my 1 year pic


----------



## Greshie (Jan 15, 2011)

Brilliant progress mate , well done!


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Greshie said:


> Brilliant progress mate , well done!


Thanks


----------



## Tassotti (Feb 27, 2011)

Grantewhite said:


> Cheers, i am looking for about 11-12% so not far away, and yes your est for original BF is almost spot on i am ashamed to say lol , i am looking in to starting up a carb cycling diet to try shift the last of the weight, i had a dabble with keto a while back but tbh i think i was eating far to much fat and even though i lost weight i wasent doing my self much good lol.


I am around 32% bodyfat at the moment and was 18st 7lbs at my biggest. I have only just started on my journey, and I am doing a targeted keto diet. You can get an idea of the diet from my log. You may need to adjust the calorie intake slightly.

http://www.uk-muscle.co.uk/member-journals-pictures/129190-old-fat-ex-alcoholic-newbie.html

Your an inspiration to all us fat bar stewards


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

lol The start is the hardest part, as your technique/ stamina/ strength increase exercise gets easier and easier thus making intensity easier , i think i will have a bash at writeing up a new carb cycleing diet and post up to see if its on the money i could rly do with the last push now to get my abs on the loose 

if you got any questions mate im no exper but im always glad to share my experiances


----------



## hows_Neil? (Mar 22, 2011)

Amazing transformation man, congrats!

May I ask, when did you start bulking up? was there like a certain bf you were targetting then bulked up?


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

HI neil, basicly i started with an intense 3 month cardio and diet epic to rly get started on droping the fat then once i could see a steady trend of weight loss aprox 2lbs a week once over the initial bulk losses i started lifting weights 3 days a week mainly as i wanted to tone up whilest loosing weight so that i wasnt left with loose skin or the dreaded moobs. now i am bulking while cutting, a bit of a paradox i know and im sure some people will argue not possible but ....... im doing ok, the key is making sure you eat well in conjunction to your training, E.G 3 days a week heavy compound lifts 5 times a week HIIT and mixed cardio, making sure you have enough protein in your diet letting back on the bad carbs and enough sleep you will quickly start to grow.

hope that explains things ish lol

regards

grant


----------



## joesnow (Mar 24, 2011)

Great progress Grant and an inspiration to us who have hit the "fat loss plateau"

Quick question, What does your cardio sessions consist of??


----------



## myles (Sep 27, 2006)

Great progress, Grant. That has given me the impetus to push on and frazzle the last 8lb that is clinging to my middle like Leonardo DiCaprio in that infuriating Titanic. Watching your posts intently.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi, i am glad if i can some how help others fat loss is a pain in the **** lol, my cardio sesion typicaly consists of:

5 mins stretching and gentle skipping (warm up)

10 mins cross trainer (flat out)

1000m rowing in as short a time as possible

3 sets of 10 press ups in to 10 crunches

10 mins stair machine 35 second sets rest rate 65 work rate 155 (steps per min)

1000m rowing ( medium pace)

skipping 1 min on 1 min off (fast pace until ot of breath)

5 mins treadmill cool down

I also sometimes throw in burpies using pull up bars ie: jump in to a pull up drop to press up position 1 squar thrust 1 push up then jump in to pull up, repeat 10 times.

Outside of the guy i ride my MTB on days i cant get there just aim for the biggest hills you can find and do them as fast as possible 

Cheers, Grant


----------



## jacksong (Aug 25, 2010)

extremely good results bud, i myself weighed 25 stone about 8 months ago now down to 15s7 so trying still got the same belly problem though.. now it seems the real struggle begins.


----------



## Thug-Nasty (Mar 16, 2011)

The split routine I don at the moment which Is quite good is

Monday - Chest and Tri's

Tuesday - Shoulders

Thursday - Legs

Friday - Back and Bi's

Again its not set in stone but its good for me matey


----------



## NovemberDelta (Apr 17, 2011)

bayman said:


> I
> 
> Clean eating does not help with results, it just results in cravings for the foods "he's not allowed."


I totally disagree with this. Eating a clean diet provides much more energy than a less clean one. For instance, a breakfast of porridge oats, blueberries and egg whites will provide a much higher level of energy than white bread and bacon, whether calories in each is the same.

This feeds into motivation, training and mood. I firmly believe a clean diet is actually easier to stick to because it makes one feel more energetic.

This is from my experience. Horses for courses and all that.

PS Nuts are good on a cut, great source of fat. Nothing wrong with pork.

Finally, very well done on your results, I'm really impressed. The goal is to keep learning and improving, so just because something has worked does not mean it is the best way to do it.


----------



## Grantewhite (Oct 15, 2010)

Hi Guys, since this thread stoped for a while i have made fairly big process you can check out my most recent progress in the members journal section "grants competition journal" it has more up to date work out and diet info and more up to date pics. cheers grant


----------



## TommyFire (Jul 18, 2010)

niall01 said:


> I totally disagree with this. Eating a clean diet provides much more energy than a less clean one. For instance, a breakfast of porridge oats, blueberries and egg whites will provide a much higher level of energy than white bread and bacon, whether calories in each is the same.
> 
> This feeds into motivation, training and mood. I firmly believe a clean diet is actually easier to stick to because it makes one feel more energetic.
> 
> ...


Nuts are not good on a cut.


----------



## NovemberDelta (Apr 17, 2011)

TommyFire said:


> Nuts are not good on a cut.


I can't even be bothered arguing the point.


----------



## bayman (Feb 27, 2010)

niall01 said:


> I can't even be bothered arguing the point.


They're calorie dense and not very filling, plus easy to overeat on. I agree with Tommy.


----------



## TommyFire (Jul 18, 2010)

and are a poor source of protein.


----------



## Jim78 (Aug 20, 2010)

Nothing wrong with nuts whatsoever on a cut, for every excuse/reason you say they arn't good, Ill show you someone who eats them and looks good, its about type/portion control.


----------



## TommyFire (Jul 18, 2010)

Jim78 said:


> Nothing wrong with nuts whatsoever on a cut, for every excuse/reason you say they arn't good, Ill show you someone who eats them and looks good, its about type/portion control.


Nothing wrong with anything on a cut as long as, like you mentioned, portion size is controlled. Nuts are still a bad choice though.


----------

