The get fit, stay fit thread

[Mak]

It doesn't sound like you understand the principles behind intermittent fasting at all, to be honest.

It isn't about starving yourself for a while and then going back to eating normally; it's about working out the correct calorie and macronutrient intake needed for your goals (normally losing weight/burning fat, as restricting your feeding period isn't really a logical thing to do when trying to gain weight) and eating that amount over a shorter period of time having fasted until that point (at the extreme side of things this would be one meal, but the most popular method is a 16 hour fast followed by an 8 hour feeding period). You're still eating the same amount as you would be on a conventional fat loss diet, just over a shorter period of time.

This is an approach which works as well as any other - the whole thing about 'starvation mode' is mentioned a lot but is total nosense - but there's no evidence that it's any better. The benefits are more psychological (big meals) and social (no need to be loaded down with tupperware all day, worrying about where you can find a low-calorie option, etc). Anecdotally, a lot of people also feel that they have more energy and perform better in the gym whilst following IF protocol. It's perfectly compatible with regular exercise.

In your case, you've lost weight because you've dropped your overall caloric intake rather than because you're fasting, and would have noticed the same results if you'd dropped your intake by the same amount through just reducing the size of every meal. That's not a criticism of it, though; basically as long as macronutrient intake is right meal frequency/timing is largely irrelevant, regardless of what the 'six meals a day, no carbs at nighttime' or 'intermittent fasting is the only way to shred' brigades will tell you. The important thing is for people to find what works for them and stick to it.

Edit: that was aimed at Drooper's post.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Mak

[Mak]

What I've been doing is eating a diet of:

Breakfast: Brown toast with either egg or fish OR Porridge

Snack: Protein shake OR some fruit OR Seafood sticks

Lunch: Chicken/Fish with Baked Potato/Wrap

Snack: Same as before

Dinner: Meat and Green Veg OR a wrap with chicken or fish with the green veg in it too.

Snack: Fruit and natural yoghurt.

I'm doing this along with a weightlifting programme, but was thinking about doing the weight programme along with Insanity on cardio days (Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday) with a cheat meal on the Saturday too.

Thanks for all the advice so far

Food names aren't important; overall caloric intake and macronutrient intake is. That said, your diet sounds brotastic and extremely boring.

If you monitor macronutrient intake, you can eat foods you enjoy daily if that's what you want to do, with no need for 'cheat meals'. Trackers like Myfitnesspal make monitoring macros really easy.

I wouldn't bother with faddy insanity/P90x stuff. Do a bit of cardio to keep yourself fit if it's what you want to do, but too much could interfere with recovery and even lead to lean tissue being burned instead of fat.

[Stuart]

Cheers mhak.

Although, I'll have to pull you up on the Insanity/P90x thing haha. It isn't a fad, I've been doing both for over a year now, losing 5 and a half stone. They are absolutely perfect for someone like me who can't really afford the gym and has all the equipment in the house. Its people who do them half arsed and with no dietary change and expect results that give them a bad name. If you treat them like any other gym programme, you get the same results.

[Drooper]

It doesn't sound like you understand the principles behind intermittent fasting at all, to be honest.

It isn't about starving yourself for a while and then going back to eating normally; it's about working out the correct calorie and macronutrient intake needed for your goals (normally losing weight/burning fat, as restricting your feeding period isn't really a logical thing to do when trying to gain weight) and eating that amount over a shorter period of time having fasted until that point (at the extreme side of things this would be one meal, but the most popular method is a 16 hour fast followed by an 8 hour feeding period). You're still eating the same amount as you would be on a conventional fat loss diet, just over a shorter period of time.

This is an approach which works as well as any other - the whole thing about 'starvation mode' is mentioned a lot but is total nosense - but there's no evidence that it's any better. The benefits are more psychological (big meals) and social (no need to be loaded down with tupperware all day, worrying about where you can find a low-calorie option, etc). Anecdotally, a lot of people also feel that they have more energy and perform better in the gym whilst following IF protocol. It's perfectly compatible with regular exercise.

In your case, you've lost weight because you've dropped your overall caloric intake rather than because you're fasting, and would have noticed the same results if you'd dropped your intake by the same amount through just reducing the size of every meal. That's not a criticism of it, though; basically as long as macronutrient intake is right meal frequency/timing is largely irrelevant, regardless of what the 'six meals a day, no carbs at nighttime' or 'intermittent fasting is the only way to shred' brigades will tell you. The important thing is for people to find what works for them and stick to it.

Edit: that was aimed at Drooper's post.

Thanks for that (even if you prefaced it by suggesting that I'm a clueless idiot ).

I did emphasise that I developed my own hybrid approach.

Sometimes you need to consider the context. It is fine to suggest that I could easily lose the same amount of weight (something I'm not actually trying to do as much as simply controlling my weight more effectively) by reducing portion size, but that isn't always easy when I sit down to a meal with two teenage daughters who are bloody faddy eaters at the best of times, and don't need me setting a dodgy example by having a baby portion while trying to persuade them that they should eat a decent meal as they aren't verging on the obese. Okay, so a bit of artistic licence employed there, but hopefully you catch my drift.

I only have myself to think about and answer to when I skip a meal during the day. It isn't really any more scientific (or unscientific) than that.

[Greggy Wallace]

I really need to have a look at this macro business, do you have a decent link that would help me calculate what I need in a day, mhak?

going to get that app as well.

[JogaBonito]

If you're looking to trim down slightly, I don't think you need to go through the arduous process of counting your macro's and stuff.

It's only required for people who want to look shredded or whatever.

[Drooper]

I've absolutely no idea what the macro thing refers to in this context.

It all sounds a bit too technical for me, never mind counting them. I have enough trouble counting my fingers and toes.

[Greggy Wallace]

If you're looking to trim down slightly, I don't think you need to go through the arduous process of counting your macro's and stuff.

It's only required for people who want to look shredded or whatever.

I'm putting a fair bit of effort into the gym side of things so it makes sense to give yourself the best chance of achieving something

i reckon once you've done it for a month or whatever it becomes second nature

[Alert Mongoose]

What I've been doing is eating a diet of:

Breakfast: Brown toast with either egg or fish OR Porridge

Snack: Protein shake OR some fruit OR Seafood sticks

Lunch: Chicken/Fish with Baked Potato/Wrap

Snack: Same as before

Dinner: Meat and Green Veg OR a wrap with chicken or fish with the green veg in it too.

Snack: Fruit and natural yoghurt.

I'm doing this along with a weightlifting programme, but was thinking about doing the weight programme along with Insanity on cardio days (Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday) with a cheat meal on the Saturday too.

Thanks for all the advice so far

Are you the mad? Under no circumstances should these ghastly things ever be considered!

[BerwickMad]

I'm eating around 3500 cals per day at the moment as trying to bulk up. 1200 of these comes from weighgain shakes. 3 of them at 395 cals each. My normal diet is below:

7.30: Ready Brek and peanut butter.

9.00: Weightgain shake with skimmed milk

10.00: 3 boiled eggs. (two full egg and one just the white), Banana

12.00: Tin of tuna, two wholemeal pitta breads.

2.30: Chicken, brown rice, broccoli.

4.30: Weight gain shake with skimmed milk, Banana

5.00 - 6.30ish: training (Gaspari size on)

6.30: Weight gain shake with skimmed milk.

7.30: Tea. Can change but usually either salmon with sweet potato an veg, or Spag bol. Depends what I can afford at the time.

Plus plenty water all day, and usually snack on something like almonds or beef jerky when sitting at my desk.

[BerwickMad]

Quite happy for someone to rip that apart and tell me if im doing anything wrong btw.

[staggy4life]

Cheers for all the replies.

[dundeefc1783]

I try to keep with a very high protien low carbohydrate diet and find that works best for me.

It was difficult the first few days but once pushed past that I felt so much better and had far more energy and am able to maintain my workouts.

I very rarely eat pasta, bread or rice these days as it makes me feel shite

[Thistle_do_nicely]

I'm fairly sure it makes literally no difference on the effects to your body when you eat meals; as long as you have all your calories and nutrients in by the end of the day, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things whether you've had 8 small meals spread throughout the day or 3 big ones.

The only difference is that you may have reduced energy levels if you've not eaten/drunk anything in a while, and if you eat pasta before bed you might struggle to sleep, but thats about it.

[BerwickMad]

I would assume its better to eat smaller meals throughout the day for digestion.

[JogaBonito]

Yep.

Gorging on 2 or 3 big meals (especially if you're bulking) might enforce negative behaviours too such as binge eating or whatever. But eating many small meals might be unsatisfying.

[Mak]

Cheers mhak.

Although, I'll have to pull you up on the Insanity/P90x thing haha. It isn't a fad, I've been doing both for over a year now, losing 5 and a half stone. They are absolutely perfect for someone like me who can't really afford the gym and has all the equipment in the house. Its people who do them half arsed and with no dietary change and expect results that give them a bad name. If you treat them like any other gym programme, you get the same results.

Fair enough, but I'd still warn against overtraining. It might give you a good psychological boost to feel like you're both hitting the weights and smashing your cardio, but bear in mind that what feels good isn't necessarily what's doing you good.

As someone who does Muay Thai three times a week, weight trains twice and does Martin Rooney's hurricane training for cardio once a week, I'm a massive hypocrite for giving this advice. I'm not training to look good or lose weight, though.

Thanks for that (even if you prefaced it by suggesting that I'm a clueless idiot ).

I did emphasise that I developed my own hybrid approach.

Sometimes you need to consider the context. It is fine to suggest that I could easily lose the same amount of weight (something I'm not actually trying to do as much as simply controlling my weight more effectively) by reducing portion size, but that isn't always easy when I sit down to a meal with two teenage daughters who are bloody faddy eaters at the best of times, and don't need me setting a dodgy example by having a baby portion while trying to persuade them that they should eat a decent meal as they aren't verging on the obese. Okay, so a bit of artistic licence employed there, but hopefully you catch my drift.

I only have myself to think about and answer to when I skip a meal during the day. It isn't really any more scientific (or unscientific) than that.

Yeah, it's about finding what works for you in your own circumstances and so on. I only really have a problem with the use of systems like intermittent fasting, six meals a day and so on when people become obsessed with them to the point where it leads to them beating themselves up if for whatever reason they don't jump through one of those arbitrary hoops that they've set themselves. Becoming too obsessed with a system leads to the development of an unhealthy relationship with food and eventually eating disorders.

I really need to have a look at this macro business, do you have a decent link that would help me calculate what I need in a day, mhak?

going to get that app as well.

This is the best link I've seen anywhere. Don't be put off by the fact that it's on a bodybuilding site; the advice can be applied to anyone, regardless of goals.

If you're looking to trim down slightly, I don't think you need to go through the arduous process of counting your macro's and stuff.

It's only required for people who want to look shredded or whatever.

I'd tend to disagree with this. If you're seriously overweight to begin with then you can drop a bit of weight just by 'cleaning up' your diet but that'll stall eventually.

I'd also disagree that it's a difficult thing to do. This guy's video explains it very well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoB01gFD7ZQ&feature=plcp

Basically, all that you need to monitor are calories, protein and fat. Once you know you've got enough protein down and have hit your fat minimum for the day, your remaining calories can come from either carbs, more fat or even more protein.

I'm eating around 3500 cals per day at the moment as trying to bulk up. 1200 of these comes from weighgain shakes. 3 of them at 395 cals each. My normal diet is below:

7.30: Ready Brek and peanut butter.

9.00: Weightgain shake with skimmed milk

10.00: 3 boiled eggs. (two full egg and one just the white), Banana

12.00: Tin of tuna, two wholemeal pitta breads.

2.30: Chicken, brown rice, broccoli.

4.30: Weight gain shake with skimmed milk, Banana

5.00 - 6.30ish: training (Gaspari size on)

6.30: Weight gain shake with skimmed milk.

7.30: Tea. Can change but usually either salmon with sweet potato an veg, or Spag bol. Depends what I can afford at the time.

Plus plenty water all day, and usually snack on something like almonds or beef jerky when sitting at my desk.

Wow, brotacular.

If you're trying to gain weight on 3,500 calories a day, why live off of boring shit? Food types don't have a direct impact on body composition, so for general health and satiety eat mainly nutritious whole foods whilst filling in your discretionary calories (of which you have loads) with stuff you actually enjoy.

Weight gain shakes are a total waste of money. Just eat food, food that tastes nice.

I try to keep with a very high protien low carbohydrate diet and find that works best for me.

You said yesterday that 'high protein / low fat' works well. What the f**k do you actually eat?

There's no need to be low carb and no need to be low fat either. And protein doesn't need to be as high as people think it needs to be.

Please stop giving people advice. You are talking total nonsense.

I'm fairly sure it makes literally no difference on the effects to your body when you eat meals; as long as you have all your calories and nutrients in by the end of the day, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things whether you've had 8 small meals spread throughout the day or 3 big ones.

The only difference is that you may have reduced energy levels if you've not eaten/drunk anything in a while, and if you eat pasta before bed you might struggle to sleep, but thats about it.

The first part of the post's spot on; meal timing is a myth.

The second part...well, it'll depend on the individual. Anecdotally, a lot of people report that energy levels are better on a lower meal frequency / while intermittent fasting, and a lot of people actually specifically feel that a high carb meal before bed helps them sleep (myself included).

I would assume its better to eat smaller meals throughout the day for digestion.

Wrong. Normally, it'll be supplement companies telling you this so that you'll think 'hmm, don't want to carry loads of food around with me, might be easier just to use supps'.

Gorging on 2 or 3 big meals (especially if you're bulking) might enforce negative behaviours too such as binge eating or whatever. But eating many small meals might be unsatisfying.

This is true. Fewer large meals might work for some people, while more small meals might work better for others; it's just about finding what works best for you as an individual and sticking to it, because the fact is that it makes no fucking difference anyway.

Personally I normally eat four proper meals a day, plus a small thing pre and post-workout (pre/post-workout nutrition actually isn't that important either, but I'm in the habit now). As I've mentioned before, I like to go lowish carb through the day before carbing up at night time. This isn't some kind of magical formula, though; it just works well for me in terms of satiety, energy levels, sleep quality and the fact it lets me eat massive portions of carbs at a time.

[Thistle_do_nicely]

I'm eating around 3500 cals per day at the moment as trying to bulk up. 1200 of these comes from weighgain shakes. 3 of them at 395 cals each. My normal diet is below:

Have a quick gander at this;

http://scoobysworksh...rie-calculator/

I've read that, as a rule of thumb, if your aim is to bulk up, figure out your basal metabolic rate (number of calories your body uses each day based on age/weight/height/activity level) and eat about 500 calories more than that along with your resistance training. Any more than that and you'll be putting on too much fat along with muscle.

Conversely, if you're looking to lose weight, again figure out your basal metabolic rate and eat about 500 calories fewer than that, while still doing resistance training to burn calories/retain muscle mass. Any more than that and you're losing too much muscle along with fat.

As mhak says, as long as you're getting all your nutrients from your diet and getting the right amount of calories for your goals (the laws of thermodynamics are great because of how simple they make the whole process!) you're on the right track.

Edited October 18, 2012 by Thistle_do_nicely

[Mak]

Have a quick gander at this;

http://scoobysworksh...rie-calculator/

I've read that, as a rule of thumb, if your aim is to bulk up, figure out your basal metabolic rate (number of calories your body uses each day based on age/weight/height/activity level) and eat about 500 calories more than that along with your resistance training. Any more than that and you'll be putting on too much fat along with muscle.

Conversely, if you're looking to lose weight, again figure out your basal metabolic rate and eat about 500 calories fewer than that, while still doing resistance training to burn calories/retain muscle mass. Any more than that and you're losing too much muscle along with fat.

As mhak says, as long as you're getting all your nutrients from your diet and getting the right amount of calories for your goals (the laws of thermodynamics are great because of how simple they make the whole process!) you're on the right track.

Without wanting to seem like I'm constantly picking everyone up on everything, you mean TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) rather than BMR. BMR is the amount of energy you burn just in order to remain alive, but even the most sedentary individual burns more than their BMR over the course of a day. The calories I'm burning typing this post will take me above BMR. I'm not saying this to be pedantic, but because it could lead to problems if someone was to look up a BMR calculator and start making estimates based on that.

The 500 kcal thing is okay, but I'd say that 15% of TDEE is a better amount to add/subtract. Depending on how quickly you want to gain or lose the weight, 10-20% is the figure normally given; at 20% gain or loss will be quicker but less efficient, whereas at 10% it'll be slower but more efficient.

It's also worth noting that any equation calculating TDEE will still only give an estimate which is never going to be 100% accurate. You can only really find out your TDEE by weighing yourself regularly to see how your body responds to different caloric intakes.

[Thistle_do_nicely]

Without wanting to seem like I'm constantly picking everyone up on everything, you mean TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) rather than BMR. BMR is the amount of energy you burn just in order to remain alive, but even the most sedentary individual burns more than their BMR over the course of a day. The calories I'm burning typing this post will take me above BMR. I'm not saying this to be pedantic, but because it could lead to problems if someone was to look up a BMR calculator and start making estimates based on that.

The 500 kcal thing is okay, but I'd say that 15% of TDEE is a better amount to add/subtract. Depending on how quickly you want to gain or lose the weight, 10-20% is the figure normally given; at 20% gain or loss will be quicker but less efficient, whereas at 10% it'll be slower but more efficient.

It's also worth noting that any equation calculating TDEE will still only give an estimate which is never going to be 100% accurate. You can only really find out your TDEE by weighing yourself regularly to see how your body responds to different caloric intakes.

Another one I always forget is fat impact; saturated fat (often found in large quantities in processed/fast food) raises bad cholestarol, dietary fat (often found in natural sources like olive oil) raises good cholestarol. It's something like CDL and LDL cholestarol but I can never remember it for the life of me, just that saturated fat = bad and should generally be cut down/consumed in low quantities, dietary fat = good.