Gaining strength vs losing fat - Page 4

Mr. Lee is only good for one thing.

Mr. Lee's sauce.

at wahoo's.

Why try to do both at once? Pick whichever is most important and concentrate on that - you may find that your belly fat will fade as you lift more.

If you want to lose weight, follow this procedure - it's never been known to fail:
reduce your caloric intake below your caloric output until your target is achieved.

It is not about "gaining weight" vs. "losing weight", but losing the fat and gaining muscle mass. Your scale weight may not change much, if any during the process.

You might consider a DEXA scan to determine what your body mass composition is (accuracy is stated to be about 25), and then do another six or months later (can't do it sooner due to the low energy radiation from the scan) to determine what changes have occurred.

Following a program of 5-6 meals per day, limit fat and carb intake, with higher protein intake, and follow a cardio and weight lifting regime, and you will lose the fat and gain muscle mass.

Note: Yes, I was in the obese category (still need to lose more), but I have seen this program work for all different ages and different starting physical conditions at the studio where I workout. It can do amazing things.

Oh please, not this again.

+1

So... not dogpiling with the one health and body meme?

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/res...ch-review.html http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19943985 From Leangains:

Highlighting the positive impact of increasing feeding frequency on metabolism and weight management. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15806828 Beneficial metabolic effects of regular meal frequency on dietary thermogenesis, insulin sensitivity, and fasting lipid profiles in healthy obese women http://www.ajcn.org/content/81/1/16....urcetype=HWCIT There is more than 1 study, some showing different conclusions, and it is not just about the TEF, but preventing elevation of insulin levels. Go back to school like a good kiddie and ask your teacher what you're supposed to say now. And while you're there don't forget to feed the troll.

Cretin, The debate on meal frequency and its effect on metabolism have bounced back and forth since at least the 1960s (when some key papers were published in Lancet and the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition). Although the most recent study (the one that I linked) claims increased meal frequency "does not promote greater weight loss", it would be unfair to say that since this study is the most recent, it is the most accurate. Admittedly, more research is needed to draw definite conclusions. I suppose I am a bit biased on the subject, as I have tried both methods of eating and have found greater success with a one or two "big meal" approach in conjunction with intermittent fasting (which will dramatically lower your insulin levels, along with a low carbohydrate diet) as opposed to 5 or 6 smaller meals. Additionally, the idea that 5 or 6 meals a day is the best dieting approach seems to be suspiciously like a recommendation, based without any solid scientific evidence, pushed by the food industry to sell more pre-packaged meals and protein bars to the average dieter. Who really has time to prepare six meals a day? Moreover, to me, the ideas behind increased meal frequency promoting a greater effect on weight loss just doesn't make a great deal of sense. If you find that this approach indeed does produce favorable results, and you feel good implementing such a diet, go for it. If you've adopted an eating plan that you feel comfortable with and have success adhering to, I suppose the scientific evidence doesn't really matter; stick to what work's best for you.

+1 It's been said that the best diet for you is the one you can stick to.

I agree with your conclusion that more research does need done. And the debate will continue - likely as not another study will be done in the next couple of years and who knows what the outcome will be. I have found that for me 5-6 meals/day works well, but I also make certain of controlling sugar intake (controlling insulin response).

With your program, is it high protein/low fat/low carb (which mine is)? I have found that on this program I have been able to lose an average of 10-12 lbs/month, and have put on about 10 lbs of muscle mass over the last year (estimated from DEXA scan results).

Firstly, I don't consider it a "program"; it is just the way I am most comfortable eating. I prefer to eat one or two meals and feel well sated so my mind is not preoccupied with food all day (this is another reason I dislike eating many small meals during the day: it always seemed like I devoted a disproportionate amount of my time obsessing over what I was going to eat next). Currently, I am a rather fit individual, however, when I was a a bit overweight last year after putting on a few pounds at school, this is the eating pattern I adopted. I started with a high protein and low fat/carb approach, but found it to be extremely boring and unsustainable in the long term. I eat moderately high levels of fat and protein each day, and keep carbs to a minimum (mostly green vegetables, and some fruit every now and then). This way of eating has helped me lose the weight, and successfully keep it off while gaining a good degree of muscle mass. And as I said, it is something I am confident I can sustain for the rest of my life, so I have no fear of ever putting the weight back on. As far as intermittent fasting, I suppose it isn't for everyone. However, I have practiced fasting for the past year (including an extended fast in December) for various reasons, and have found that it is not only a great catalyst for weight loss, but I've found mental clarity is exponentially increased during periods of fasting. I find this method allows for much greater productivity, consistent energy levels, and I am just overall a happier person when not thinking or worrying about what I have to eat. But again, I stress, whatever works best for you.