Easy to follow/understand guide to losing fat

ThraxThrax 🐌Austin, TX Icrontian
edited May 2011 in Fitness
http://www.simplyshredded.com/layne-norton-the-most-effective-cutting-diet.html

Must be combined with weightlifting. You don't need to look like the dudes in the article.

Comments

  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited April 2011
    Also, here are my results from following the article:

    3000 calories required for maintenance

    2400 calories per day for 1.5 lbs/wk
    - 259g protein (1036 cal): 43%
    - 61g fat (552 cal): 23%
    - 203g carbs (812 cal): 33%

    Re-feed day:
    1. Refeed on most grueling day
    2. Keep fats as low as possible.
    3. Reduce protein to grams=BW.
    4. No fructose
    5. Increase carbs by 50%

    Carb timing:
    15% at breakfast (30g)
    35% 2 hours before workout (70g)
    20% during workout (40g)
    25% post-workout (50g)




    Breakfast (9:00AM): 36g carbs/24g fat/29.5g protein
    4 eggs + banana

    Lunch (12:00PM): 7.2g carbs/12.35g fat/48.9g protein
    3 oz carrots
    6 oz chicken

    Post-lunch (3:00PM): 7.2g carbs/12.35g fat/48.9g protein
    3 oz carrots
    6 oz chicken

    After work (7:00PM): 55g carbs/2.4g fat/47.5g protein
    2 cups milk
    1 scoop protein powder
    1/2 cup oatmeal

    Mid-workout: 52.3g carbs/2.4g fat/41g protein
    2 cups milk
    1 scoop protein powder
    24g maltodextrin

    Post-workout: 46g carbs/7.5g fat/33g protein
    250g cottage cheese
    6 oz sweet potato
  • TushonTushon I'm scared, Coach Alexandria, VA Icrontian
    edited April 2011
    Saved for later perusal.
  • UPSLynxUPSLynx :KAPPA: Redwood City, CA Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    I've been working out regularly for a few months now. I'm actually building muscle (which is hilarious, because it's me). Most ICers have made threads about their progress, but I haven't posted about it. I guess I just sort of do this stuff on my own and sort of in secret. I haven't had any troubles sticking to the routine regularly though, and now I'm ready to take it to the next level though. I want to get my body fat under control and lowered.

    Currently, my weekly schedule is like this:

    Wake up: 9AM
    Breakfast: 9:45AM
    Work: 10am to 4:30PM
    Lunch: 12:30PM
    Gym: 4:30PM to 7PM
    Home: 7PM to 1AM
    Dinner: 8:30PM

    At the gym, my routine is as follows:

    MWF: run 2 miles warmup, Full body workout (core, arms, legs, lower back, chest, abs)
    TTh: Cardio - Run 3-4 miles

    Switching my diet to a five "meal" day won't be too difficult with my schedule. However, I've never been one to do any kind of protien powder or supplements. I haven't yet finished reading the full article you linked, but I have yet to see any major note of powders or supplements.

    Are supplements something I should be doing on this diet, Or can I reduce perfectly fine without it? I'm not too concerned with the muscle build, I just want to cut bodyfat.
  • UPSLynxUPSLynx :KAPPA: Redwood City, CA Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    bump
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    This diet is not for building muscle. Also, lol full body workout? Counter-productive.
  • UPSLynxUPSLynx :KAPPA: Redwood City, CA Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    But I'm not concerned with muscle building, I want to lower body fat, which is what this article speaks to (combined with weight lifting you said).
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Let's say you want to lose 1.5 lbs of fat a week, which is the absolute metabolic maximum for any male who isn't carrying around 22%+ body fat. 1.3 lbs of that will come from your diet, and the other .2 pounds from cardio.

    Notice what isn't contributing?

    Weight lifting is an anaerobic process, which means it rarely--if ever--consumes anything more than muscle glycogen and some creatine byproducts for energy. It also does not burn hundreds of calories per hour.

    What weightlifting <i>does</i> do is reduce body fat percentage by raising lean mass volume, and protect muscles from being metabolized for energy during cardio and a reduced-calorie diet.

    Case in point, a person who tries to diet/cardio and never lift weights will never look especially "fit," because their muscle mass was reduced at roughly the same rate as their total body fat. The end result is someone who has maintained roughly the same body fat percentage, despite being many pounds lighter. We call this "skinny fat."
  • djmephdjmeph Detroit Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Thrax, I keep having to erase my Palm Profile and every time I do I lose my bookmarks, and I lose the link to that site you told me about. Can you tell me what that is again?

    Also, I wonder what my body fat percentage is. I bet it's more than 22%, but I'm also pretty sure that my "lean mass volume" is higher than normal. Somewhere hidden in this 300 pound body is a sizzling stud. Gotta find that guy, and bring him back.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Probably fitday.com.
  • djmephdjmeph Detroit Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    So at first I thought I wanted to lose 50 pounds by July 4th. I guess that's not happening. (~8lbs/week) However, this can't be right.

    9k5jX.png
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Their math is as "right" as BMI can be.
  • djmephdjmeph Detroit Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Damn. :-(
  • GnomeQueenGnomeQueen The Lulz Queen Mountain Dew Mouth Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    BMI is totally crap. It doesn't take how much muscle you have into account, which is heavier than fat. So yes, that's your BMI, but you really need to figure out what your %bodyfat is.
  • CBCB ΖΈΜ΅Μ‘ΣœΜ΅Μ¨Μ„Ζ· Der Millionendorf- Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    I thought most nutritionists and doctors stopped looking at BMI a while ago.
  • djmephdjmeph Detroit Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Using the US Navy body fat formula I'm at about 41% body fat.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    They did, CB, you're totally right. It persists because it's an easy number, and if there's anything people losing weight want, it's easy.

    Interestingly enough, the higher the body fat percentage, the more accurate the BMI becomes. For example, people with very lean/muscular bodies don't rate very well on the BMI scale, but people with low lean body mass rate fairly accurately. But I digress.

    The only true measure of health is your body fat percentage.
  • CBCB ΖΈΜ΅Μ‘ΣœΜ΅Μ¨Μ„Ζ· Der Millionendorf- Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Thrax wrote:
    The only true measure of health is life length/happiness. Unfortunately, it is a retrospective measurement.

    ftfy
  • BasilBasil Nubcaek England Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    BMI is not crap, it's a crude estimation used for it's inherent simplicity rather than precision.

    It's shortcomings are well known, doctors/dieticians will recognise when it's not appropriate or greater precision is required and do a skinfold/use a hydrostatic balance/etc.

    That said, it's acceptably accurate for almost everyone as your exact body composition isn't all that significant. BMI (possibly supported with a waist circumferance or waist to hip/height ratio) is only one factor in calculating cardiovascular risk.
  • WagsFTWWagsFTW Grand Rapids, MI Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    CB wrote:
    I thought most nutritionists and doctors stopped looking at BMI a while ago.

    Some insurance companies that provide a discount if you are healthy, require you to get a physical, where they check your BMI, etc. and test your blood to see if you are a smoker. The insurance company will only accept the doctor to record the BMI number, and won't use a body caliper instead, to check % body fat. Completely ridiculous... but I guess that's where they get you. Oh, and if you are considered "overweight" according to the BMI, you have to get a pedometer or sign up for Weight Watchers.

    If only all doctors and insurance companies looked at % body fat instead of BMI...
  • TushonTushon I'm scared, Coach Alexandria, VA Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Sounds like a "market incentive" to switch carriers (been arguing with libertarians on reddit)
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Basil wrote:
    BMI is...a crude estimation used for...simplicity rather than precision.

    So, it's crap?
  • BasilBasil Nubcaek England Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Hardly, the same trade off is made in many tests.

    Take glucometers as an example, I've run several against lab assays and none have ever been 'right' but they have all been accurate to an acceptable degree and when a simple test/measurement gives results good enough for the majority of cases it gets used.

    Yes if used in an inappropriate case you will get inappropriate results but that happens with practically everything.
  • djmephdjmeph Detroit Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    Tushon wrote:
    Sounds like a "market incentive" to switch carriers (been arguing with libertarians on reddit)
    The problem is if one carrier adopts this policy, the rest are going to as well, because they have to answer to their shareholders. The only way to change it is through legislation. It ends up being the governments job to level the playing field.
  • TushonTushon I'm scared, Coach Alexandria, VA Icrontian
    edited May 2011
    djmeph wrote:
    The problem is if one carrier adopts this policy, the rest are going to as well, because they have to answer to their shareholders. The only way to change it is through legislation. It ends up being the governments job to level the playing field.
    Oh I agree. I was just feeling feisty and sarcastic because of the libertarian assault on my thinking in some reddit thread.
Sign In or Register to comment.