Cutting diet guidance needed

[mikeh]

Quote[/b] ]One of the crux of the program is clean food that shouldn't cause the insulin surge that processed grains do. I hope you understand that I don't want to lay out the book out here that he profits from.

Ryan,

Thanks for the reply, the link and no I didn't expect you to layout the diet book here.

I'm just old school "avoid the starchy carbs and do some pushups"
(push yourself away from the table

One more question were you able to keep your strength and gains ?

Again congratulations on your fat loss

 

[Ryan]

Quote[/b] (mikeh @ June 05 2003,3:03)]One more question were you able to keep your strength and gains ?

Let's see, I have been progressing as expected strength wise on everything except front squat and bench press. Size wise, LBM dropped was just under 4lbs, which puts fat loss/lbm to over 2/1. I it's all water weight.

If you want to read more about another hypothesis about why high carb diets work read The Glucose Economy by Robert Thoburn.

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (Ryan @ June 06 2003,9:56)]Here's a quote from Venuto on that topic from an interview he did with Tom Benson:

Thats similar to the old Parillio concept of why to do more cardio and more eating. But it doesnt matter
The body doesnt care. If theres a calorie reduction either way, the body will fight it. Because your body knows that fat is leaving the system, if you eat 1000kcals less, or burn it in cardio. All the hormone systems know what you are up to, so they will fight back.
Also depends on your initial bf percentage etc, cardio will reduce visceral mass quicker,and diet reduces subcataneous easier. doing them both works best.

Quote[/b] ]If you want to read more about another hypothesis about why high carb diets work read The Glucose Economy by Robert Thoburn.

Doesnt actually seem to show much at all, apart from a high carb low fat diet, that cycles.

All diets work, some work better for others, once you have your protein and potentailly some efas, all else depends on what you like and how you respond.

 

[mikeh]

Ok search around and found a few more articles by Robert Thoburn

planetmuscle

Basically we are back to "almost all diets work" as all as you eat less than maintenance cals,
lift, do some cardio and are consistent.

I might bump my carbs during the 15's and report back.

 

[Ryan]

Quote[/b] (Aaron_F @ June 05 2003,5:38)]Also depends on your initial bf percentage etc, cardio will reduce visceral mass quicker,and diet reduces subcataneous easier. doing them both works best.

I thought Bryan has noted just the opposite, I may be wrong.

Aaron since you are offering up your knowledge, your opinion is specifically valuable to my current problem with squats given your strength training background, I could sure use your 2 cents.

 

[jsraaf]

Quote[/b] (Ryan @ June 05 2003,2:56)]

Quote[/b] (jsraaf @ June 05 2003,8:53)]

Quote[/b] ]Or just split the remainding calories between a monounsaturated fat (olive for example) and low gi carbohydrates (with some high GI before and after training)

Aaron, can you give me an idea or two on what would be considered low or high GI carbs? Are we talking sugar content?

Here's a quote from Venuto on that topic from an interview he did with Tom Benson:
"That's the very first thing I would say, because the first thing that comes to people's minds when they want fat loss is to simply eat less and that's it, but what I'm saying is that you should eat more and at the same time do more cardio. Because when you decrease your calories, your metabolic rate is going to slow down. When you increase your calories, your metabolic rate is going to increase. When you do cardio, that is going to increase your metabolism. So I consider eating more and doing more cardio as a double boost in metabolism; whereas if you don't do very much cardio and all you do is decrease your calories, you're just getting that decrease in metabolism from taking in less food. Most people won't do that because in their mind, it seems that the two somehow cancel each other out, but they don't they enhance each other."

Ryan, if I may ask a follow-up question on this: it says to "eat more & do more cardio."

Eat more than what? Maintenance? What if you're already eating an appropriate amount for gaining - continue that?

 

[Ryan]

Let me step away from the science and get back to the practical world that I understand.

I was eating 2000 kcals a day and I wasn't losing any weight for months trying my best to cut fat. I set calories in - calories out so I should have lost weight using the formulas that Byran has any for size, that calories expended for HST + HIIT.

Now I eat an average of 2,500 kcals and given activities levels I should lose .5 lb a week, and generally lose more.

Let me reiterate Venuto has many techniques that work together and alone they aren' impressive. Matter of fact you can go over to website read his articles, Q&A, and Newsletter and will read every single one of them and won't think twice about applying them. The book merely puts them all together, along with deeper explanation, and helps you regulate the plan in process (example: what adjustments to make if you are losing weight but fat does not change).

 

[Ryan]

Quote[/b] (jsraaf @ June 06 2003,9:46)]Ryan, if I may ask a follow-up question on this: it says to "eat more & do more cardio."
Eat more than what? Maintenance? What if you're already eating an appropriate amount for gaining - continue that?

Now to directly answer your question. If you want to cut on the calories you are bulking on, without adjusting the calories you can up the activity level to where calories out is higher then calories in you should burn more fat over long period time, because the metabolim won't downregulate as fast....at least that what I think.

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (Ryan @ June 07 2003,4:40)]I thought Bryan has noted just the opposite, I may be wrong.
Aaron since you are offering up your knowledge, your opinion is specifically valuable to my current problem with squats given your strength training background, I could sure use your 2 cents.

I could have put it backwards, it was a late night post

I'll look at the other point soon

 

[restless]

I'll have to chime in and leave my pice of empirical contribution to this debate.

I mantain my belief that cardio is overrated as I've lost 11 Kg, with better muscle preservation than ever, 11-12 cm on my waist gained a huge amount of definition all over my body without a single cardio session. I only started doing HIIT a few weeks ago and the results have been unbelievable. I've regained a bit of size in my legs while dropping a little more in my waist, and I've increased my calories and have been most days over maintenance.


One thing that everyone always seems to neglet mentioning is the fact that cardio has a almost negible impact on RMR and causes a cortisol raise that lasts for quite a while after it's finished. This means, to my knowleadge, that once you're done in the threadmill not only you're pretty much done in what concerns fat burning as you might, especially when coupled with reduced calories, a less than optimal environment for muscle grwoth/preservation.


HIIT rules, that's for sure.

 

[imported_edziu]

Restless, I hate to break it to you, but HIIT is cardio.

There's HIIT cardio and steady-state cardio, but they're both cardio.

 

[Cliner9er]

I think this is all variable. I can't lose an ounce without cardio regardless of how intense my resistance training is. I incorporate Lyle's cardio program with 6 HIIT sprints and then 20 minutes of SS cardio. I feel cardio is part of a total fitness program. I lost 40 pounds when I did a variety of HIIT routines with my resistance. I agree edziu, HIIT is cardio.

 

[micmic]

There is no universally accepted definition for 'cardio'. For example, one definition is that "cardio is any activity that elevates your heart rate for at least 20 minutes". By that definition, HIIT may very well not be cardio.

For me, cardio is whatever activity can be sustained for more than 2-3 minutes at the same level of performance. Or whatever is below 90% of HRM.

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (restless @ June 08 2003,12:11)]I'll have to chime in and leave my pice of empirical contribution to this debate.
I mantain my belief that cardio is overrated as I've lost 11 Kg, with better muscle preservation than ever, 11-12 cm on my waist gained a huge amount of definition all over my body without a single cardio session.

Unfortuantely you are also a freak™ in the nicest possible way. What are the calories that you are cutting on?
From what you have said before, its relatively high calories than a large amount of people at your weight would use.

Quote[/b] ]One thing that everyone always seems to neglet mentioning is the fact that cardio has a almost negible impact on RMR and causes a cortisol raise that lasts for quite a while after it's finished

mot exercise has little acute effect on RMR, resistance only really has an effect because of increases in muscle mass.
Its total daily energy expenditure what 'cardio' is useful for

 

[restless]

Quote[/b] (edziu @ June 08 2003,12:30)]Restless, I hate to break it to you, but HIIT is cardio.
There's HIIT cardio and steady-state cardio, but they're both cardio.

I probably should have said aerobic exercise, but anyway I didn't do any untill a few weeks ago, so I in fact dieted for 4 months without any cardio, like I said in my first post.

 

[restless]

Quote[/b] (Aaron_F @ June 08 2003,1:48)]

Quote[/b] (restless @ June 08 2003,12:11)]I'll have to chime in and leave my pice of empirical contribution to this debate.
I mantain my belief that cardio is overrated as I've lost 11 Kg, with better muscle preservation than ever, 11-12 cm on my waist gained a huge amount of definition all over my body without a single cardio session.

Unfortuantely you are also a freak™ in the nicest possible way. What are the calories that you are cutting on?
From what you have said before, its relatively high calories than a large amount of people at your weight would use.

Ummmm, I'm on around 2700-2800 at a weight of 180-182 pounds, I went as low as 2500 on some days but usually not more than two or three per week....

 

[imported_edziu]

Quote[/b] (micmic @ June 07 2003,8:13)]There is no universally accepted definition for 'cardio'. For example, one definition is that "cardio is any activity that elevates your heart rate for at least 20 minutes". By that definition, HIIT may very well not be cardio.
For me, cardio is whatever activity can be sustained for more than 2-3 minutes at the same level of performance. Or whatever is below 90% of HRM.

It's pretty universal that 'cardio' is exercise for the cardiovascular system; it stresses the heart and lungs.

Hit cardio exceeds aerobic ability for brief periods, making it anaerobic, but it's still cardio in that it challenges the cardiovascular system. In fact, some places call HIIT "cardio interval training."

Quote[/b] ]Cardio interval training is defined as high intensity work efforts that push up to and beyond your maxVo2 (anaerobic) followed by low intensity cardio recovery (aerobic).

 

[restless]

9-->

Quote[/b] (edziu @ June 08 2003,2

9)]It's pretty universal that 'cardio' is exercise for the cardiovascular system; it stresses the heart and lungs.

By this definition plenty of my HST sessions are also cardio as a lot of exercises are alternated with very little rest resulting in a permanent increase in heart rate and respiratory frequency, or whatever the term is. But anyway, this is not really important.
Bottom line is, at least if you are me, cardio (as in aerobic exercise) is perfectly expendable when dieting.

 

[micmic]

9-->

Quote[/b] (edziu @ June 08 2003,2

9)]

Quote[/b] (micmic @ June 07 2003,8:13)]There is no universally accepted definition for 'cardio'. For example, one definition is that "cardio is any activity that elevates your heart rate for at least 20 minutes". By that definition, HIIT may very well not be cardio.
For me, cardio is whatever activity can be sustained for more than 2-3 minutes at the same level of performance. Or whatever is below 90% of HRM.

It's pretty universal that 'cardio' is exercise for the cardiovascular system; it stresses the heart and lungs.
Hit cardio exceeds aerobic ability for brief periods, making it anaerobic, but it's still cardio in that it challenges the cardiovascular system. In fact, some places call HIIT "cardio interval training."

Quote[/b] ]Cardio interval training is defined as high intensity work efforts that push up to and beyond your maxVo2 (anaerobic) followed by low intensity cardio recovery (aerobic).

This is exactly the reason why there is no definiton for 'cardio'; because there is no thick line between 'aerobic' and 'anaerobic'. Both pathways are active at all times, in fact we are more 'aerobic' than 'anaerobic' even when we lift heavy. When exactly does an exercise classify for the one or the other characterization and what are the physiological values associated with each of them ? While there is no consensus for this, if we try to categorize various types of exercises by means of various physiological indicators (VO2 max, heart rate, lactic acid etc), then it's obvious that HIIT is much closer to weight lifting than it is to 'cardio'.

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (restless @ June 08 2003,1:06)]

Quote[/b] (Aaron_F @ June 08 2003,1:48)]Unfortuantely you are also a freak™ in the nicest possible way. What are the calories that you are cutting on?
From what you have said before, its relatively high calories than a large amount of people at your weight would use.

Ummmm, I'm on around 2700-2800 at a weight of 180-182 pounds, I went as low as 2500 on some days but usually not more than two or three per week....

Well yes, that awnsers part of your question.

To achieve any reasonable weight loss, (when I was 198) i had to eat <2000kcal/day plus add in about 3-4sessions per week of cardio.
I dont lose muscle that easily tho

Because every one is different.

But if there is one thing that i have seen many many times, people who are lean/bodybuilders etc usually stay lean from lowered calories and 'cardio' of whatever means. THe number of people who manage to attain significant leanness with diet alone is extremely slim.