My fat loss experiment

simonpeter said:

Hi friends,

For the last couple of months, I've been experimenting with intermittent fasting. In line with this diet philosophy, I've been eating only two heavy meals a day (lunch and dinner), with some beverages in between.

The result: lost two inches off my waist in two months.

I am happy with the progress but am wondering if this progress is too slow. I know people who lose 3 inches in just one month. So are there people with experience in intermittent fasting - do u see it as a lifestyle thing or just a temporary diet to shed fat?

Your thoughts and insights will be appreciated. I still have two more inches to lose in my waist, and I hope Intermittent fasting can help.

Click to expand...

Intermittent fasting can be quite good, because when you go extended periods without eating, you do not release insulin into the blood and many studies have shown, the more insulin you release, the more fat you store. Now, some of this will depend on how active you are, because a highly active person is less likely to store fat and a more sedentary person is, when insulin is released.

As long as you don't go days without eating, you should be fine. Long periods without eating, can actually lower your metabolism, as your body goes into survival mode and then you pack on fat when you return to a normal diet.

Regarding the inches, it is hard to determine, because I don't know how much fat you had around your waist. Also, keep in mind, it is physiologically impossible, to lose fat quickly, since one pound of fat, is equivalent to 3500 calories of energy, which the average person could walk 30-35 miles on.

One to two pounds of weight loss a week is a good target, to assure you are losing mostly fat and not water.

simonpeter said:

Thanks, bhsmte. Before this weight loss I couldn't even do one chinup, now I can do two (and a half, lol). So I'll make a reasonable assumption that I've lost some fat. They say chinups is the ultimate test for relative strength. Do u agree? Because if that's the case, do I keep on testing myself month after month (with chinups) to see if I've lost fat and gained muscle? Is that a good method?

Click to expand...

Well, chin ups are really not a good measure of fat loss, it is really a good measure of your ability to do chin ups, which requires strength in certain muscles.

Typically, if you lose weight, chin ups become easier, because you have less body weight to lift, even without improving strength.

Chin ups are a good measure of upper body strength but with this caveat; thin people, tend to be able to do more pull ups, vs heavier people, even if the heavier person has more muscle mass, because the extra weight makes chin ups more difficult.

The best way to determine if you are losing body fat, are skin fold measurements by a trained person who can measure your body fat. Men are typically measured, in the upper chest right below the arm pit, a couple inches on either side of the belly button and the front of the mid thigh. The thicker the skin folds in these areas, the higher the body fat.

I realize everyone can't use skin folds, but the type of exercise you want to concentrate on to lose body fat, are weight bearing activities; running, walking or any aerobic activity in which you have to carry your own body weight. Weight training is good, but it doesn't have the overall physiological impact that doing aerobic exercise 5 times a week, for the right amount of duration and intensity.

Of course, check with your doctor to be sure you are healthy for exercise.

simonpeter said:

People say the problem with aerobics is that it may burn muscle along with fat. So in the end you will lose fat but also muscle and so look unhealthy. Is it true? Is it better to do weights and eat less instead?

Click to expand...

What people say that? Anyone who states aerobic exercise burns muscle along with fat, has no clue what they are talking about.

The best exercise regimes include; aerobic activity and strength training activity. The bottom line though, if you can only do one, aerobic exercise has a more comprehensive positive impact on your overall health.

What are your specific goals, you want to achieve?

simonpeter said:

I want what everyone wants: to lose fat and build muscle. I am not obese and just have two extra inches to lose in my midsection. So maybe aerobics doesn't apply to a guy like me who only has a few more pounds to lose?

Even otherwise, I am confused by your logic - would it not look good to have at least a little muscle definition and less fat (rather than perform aerobics/lose fat and have no muscle definition)? So even if you're right that aerobics doesnt burn muscle, still the only benefit you get is fat loss - which means even after successfully losing fat you will still look like a weak, undermuscled person?

I just dont see how that's healthy or a desirable look.

Click to expand...

Aerobic exercise applies to everyone, who wants to be in excellent physical condition.

This fear of; I will look skinny and have no muscle by performing endurance activities is a fallacy. I am 6 feet 2 and weigh 210 pounds (12% body fat) and have been an avid runner for many years. I also lift weights 2 times a week and have a good deal of muscle mass.

Cardiovascular exercise provides the following benefits, which strength training alone will not:

-strengthens heart and cardio vascular system
-improves cardio pulmonary efficiency
-improves ability to utilize oxygen during exercise
-increase insulin sensitivity, which promotes fat burning and reducing the storage of fat
-weight bearing activity improves bone density

And there are many more.

Regarding aerobics, I need to chime in here and say some folks do well with long periods of aerobic activity, but most tend to do better with short bursts of aerobics. Let's not forget the oxidative stress factor, cortisol response, and premature aging experienced by many atheletes and folks who go overboard with aerobics. Intervals can be a solution here. There's everything from walk/jog intervals to HIIT, but still neither should be overdone because it can bring a cascade of stress hormones that ultimately cause insulin resistance and encourage the body to keep fat, especially around the mid section.

Walk/jog will build a little muscle and burn fat. Example (which can also be done outdoors):
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=4FFE68F7E07734CEA3DB4FFE68F7E07734CEA3DB

With this sort of HIIT you can build more muscle and burn fat. Example:
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=4D33BB34B2A8CC72EB224D33BB34B2A8CC72EB22

miss-a said:

Regarding aerobics, I need to chime in here and say some folks do well with long periods of aerobic activity, but most tend to do better with short bursts of aerobics. Let's not forget the oxidative stress factor, cortisol response, and premature aging experienced by many atheletes and folks who go overboard with aerobics. Intervals can be a solution here. There's everything from walk/jog intervals to HIIT, but still neither should be overdone because it can bring a cascade of stress hormones that ultimately cause insulin resistance and encourage the body to keep fat, especially around the mid section.

Walk/jog will build a little muscle and burn fat. Example (which can also be done outdoors):
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=4FFE68F7E07734CEA3DB4FFE68F7E07734CEA3DB

HIIT can build a lot of muscle and burn fat. Example:
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=4FFE68F7E07734CEA3DB4FFE68F7E07734CEA3DB

Click to expand...

HIIT is excellent activity and one of the reasons that it is, is because it stresses the aerobic system to pay back the anaerobic debt that is accumulated with high intensity activity.

When I say aerobic activity is important, I am not talking about going out and running 10 miles, I am talking about quality aerobic activity, which HIIT can provide.

Let me give this example of two different people.

Person A runs 6 miles a day at a 10 min per mile pace and person B runs 3 miles a day at an 8 min per mile pace. Person B, will see greater physiological benefits, than person A who is working for 60 minutes, in only 24 minutes of activity.

It isn't the quantity of the exercise, it is the quality of the exercise.

bhsmte said:

HIIT is excellent activity and one of the reasons that it is, is because it stresses the aerobic system to pay back the anaerobic debt that is accumulated with high intensity activity.

When I say aerobic activity is important, I am not talking about going out and running 10 miles, I am talking about quality aerobic activity, which HIIT can provide.

Let me give this example of two different people.

Person A runs 6 miles a day at a 10 min per mile pace and person B runs 3 miles a day at an 8 min per mile pace. Person B, will see greater physiological benefits, than person A who is working for 60 minutes, in only 24 minutes of activity.

It isn't the quantity of the exercise, it is the quality of the exercise.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Excellent example.

miss-a said:

Agreed. Excellent example.

Click to expand...

One other point about HIIT:

As I stated, it is an excellent activity if done correctly, but the vast majority of people can't sustain HIIT activity over time, because of the discomfort pushing yourself with high intensity training causes. A lot of people just can't deal with the discomfort that challenging your body creates.

bhsmte said:

One other point about HIIT:

As I stated, it is an excellent activity if done correctly, but the vast majority of people can't sustain HIIT activity over time, because of the discomfort pushing yourself with high intensity training causes. A lot of people just can't deal with the discomfort that challenging your body creates.

Click to expand...

Very sad truth. We've become a soft, weak culture. Our bodies were created to enjoy exercise and not think of the discomfort as a negative, and effectively we are training this out of ourselves as a culture. I'm glad I've always been one to buck the system and status quo!

simonpeter said:

You're most likely genetically gifted, else 210 pounds with 12% bf is not something you come across often. Let's face it, most people have the tendency to gain fat and poor ability to gain muscle. If such people do cardio without weights, what would happen?

Click to expand...

No, I am not genetically gifted, I worked my rear end off.

And you are right, most people have a tendency to gain fat and poor ability to gain muscle. Not because they can't, but because their body adapts to their lifestyle.

This is important to remember and it applies to all; your body adapts to the stress you place upon it. This is why marathon runners look as they do and why offensive lineman look the way they do, their bodies adapted to their training regime.

Again, the best exercise regime one can embark on, is one that includes cardiovascular activity, with strength training. Ask you doctor this question though; if you could only participate in one type of activity, which would provide the greatest health benefits; cardiovascular training, or strength training?

Eating a diet consisting of 70%+ fats has kept me fit and toned.

simonpeter said:

Granted cardio has benefits but it has no muscle building potential. That's what I am talking about. So even if a person loses fat and becomes healthy (and gets other benefits like insulin sensitivity etc.) through cardio, he'd still look undermuscled which isn;t a good look. Not sure why you can't accept this point. No one can truly say cardio builds muscle, it only sheds fat. But after shedding fat - and without muscle - a person would look like he's no muscle tone or definition. Even in your case, your 10% bf without muscle mass will make you look weak and skinny. But due to strength training, you have muscle so 10% bf looks good on you.

Click to expand...

Really?

Try doing 200 meter repeats on a track running as hard as you can with brief rest periods in between for 20-25 minutes and tell me if it doesn't build muscle required to complete the activity? Try doing interval work on an stair master for 15-20 minutes changing from high intensity for 30-45 seconds to relative rest periods of 60 seconds and tell me if it doesn't build muscle. Try the same high intensity interval work on a rowing machine and tell me if it doesn't build muscle in the upper body.

You falsely assume, the right type and quality of cardiovascular work, can not build muscle.

Of course, if it is your goal to simply build muscle and you are not concerned with the physiological benefits of taxing the aerobic system, then just lift perform strength training to reach your specific goals.

ananda said:

Eating a diet consisting of 70%+ fats has kept me fit and toned.

Click to expand...

How does consuming a diet of 70% fats, work to keep one fit and their muscles toned?