ExRx.net

Exercise Prescription on the Net
It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 9:56 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 8:48 am 
Offline
former lurker

Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 2
Okay my legs are big now and they're a little bit weak(big probably cos I have a decent body fat % 10-15% not sure) I don't want them to be even bigger because of muscle so how can I squat only for strength?


Last edited by iksD on Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:08 am 
Offline
Exalted Seer
Exalted Seer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 11:20 pm
Posts: 2097
Location: New York City
iksD wrote:
Okay my legs are big now and they're a little bit weak(big probably cos I have a decent body fat % 10-15% not sure) I don't want them to be even bigger because of muscle so how can I squat only for strength?


Yes. Do low reps (5x5 or even 3x3) with heavy weights.

BTW - if you have fat legs, throw in some cardio and diet to your routine to remove the fat. Since muscle is more compact than fat, a muscular leg is slimmer than a fat leg of the same weight.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:57 am 
Offline
former lurker

Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 2
It's cold outside and it's always raining I can't really do cardio lol that sucks. And I just can't seem to lose weight. Whatever I do I either stay at current weight or gain some. I got rid of junk food and I don't really eat it anymore just sometimes maybe. Diet is a hard think to make lol I've never had a good diet. All I see is diets that require you to eat like 5 different foods each meal - I don't have the money for that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:07 am 
Offline
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Posts: 3129
Location: Va Beach, Va
Take a look at the stickies in the diet section, especially Berardi's guidelines. No hard fast rules, just how to make good choices.
Tim


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 11:41 am 
Offline
moderator
moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Posts: 6593
Location: Halifax, NS
iksD wrote:
It's cold outside and it's always raining I can't really do cardio lol that sucks. And I just can't seem to lose weight. Whatever I do I either stay at current weight or gain some. I got rid of junk food and I don't really eat it anymore just sometimes maybe. Diet is a hard think to make lol I've never had a good diet. All I see is diets that require you to eat like 5 different foods each meal - I don't have the money for that.


The main thing about diet is to eat real food that is nutrient dense. If you make it yourself, you know what you're getting and can save money. Eggs are cheaper than meat so make that a staple. Make meat an occational treat. Canned fish (sardines, tuna, salmon) is also economical and healthy. If you live near a coast, seek out local suppliers of fresh fish. If there is a farmer's market or a produce market nearby you can usually find locally grown produce at reasonable prices. This time of year you can get massive quantities of produce cheap due to the season. Root vegetables keep well into the winter. Others are easily prepared for storage, either by canning or freezing. Stocking up now can save money.

Read the posts Tim directed you to and ask questions if you need clarification.

Cardio is overrated as a fat loss tool. Yes it helps but it's not as important as resistance training to maintain or grow muscle, or your diet. Get your heartbeat up to the point of mildly uncomfortable a few times every day or two and your heart will thank you. You can do that without going outside. If you structure your resistance training right, you don't even need a separate workout for it.

Stu


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 8:10 pm 
Offline
Junior Member
Junior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 2:09 pm
Posts: 212
Location: China
stuward wrote:
Cardio is overrated as a fat loss tool. Yes it helps but it's not as important as resistance training to maintain or grow muscle, or your diet. Get your heartbeat up to the point of mildly uncomfortable a few times every day or two and your heart will thank you. You can do that without going outside. If you structure your resistance training right, you don't even need a separate workout for it.


Barbell complexes


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:42 pm 
Offline
moderator
moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Posts: 7578
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea
Legs being too big from squatting is rarely a problem, much to my frustration. :sad:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:58 pm 
Offline
Exalted Seer
Exalted Seer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 11:20 pm
Posts: 2097
Location: New York City
iksD wrote:
Diet is a hard think to make lol I've never had a good diet. All I see is diets that require you to eat like 5 different foods each meal - I don't have the money for that.


How about Twinkies?

Quote:
For 10 weeks, Mark Haub, a professor of human nutrition at Kansas State University, ate one of these sugary cakelets every three hours, instead of meals. To add variety in his steady stream of Hostess and Little Debbie snacks, Haub munched on Doritos chips, sugary cereals and Oreos, too.

His premise: That in weight loss, pure calorie counting is what matters most -- not the nutritional value of the food.

The premise held up: On his "convenience store diet," he shed 27 pounds in two months.

For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.

His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.

But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.

Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

"That's where the head scratching comes," Haub said. "What does that mean? Does that mean I'm healthier? Or does it mean how we define health from a biology standpoint, that we're missing something?"

Despite his temporary success, Haub does not recommend replicating his snack-centric diet.

"I'm not geared to say this is a good thing to do," he said. "I'm stuck in the middle. I guess that's the frustrating part. I can't give a concrete answer. There's not enough information to do that."

Two-thirds of his total intake came from junk food. He also took a multivitamin pill and drank a protein shake daily. And he ate vegetables, typically a can of green beans or three to four celery stalks.

Haub's body fat dropped from 33.4 to 24.9 percent. This posed the question: What matters more for weight loss, the quantity or quality of calories?

His success is probably a result of caloric reduction, said Dawn Jackson Blatner, a dietitian based in Atlanta, Georgia.

"It's a great reminder for weight loss that calories count," she said. "Is that the bottom line to being healthy? That's another story."

Blatner, a spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association, said she's not surprised to hear Haub's health markers improved even when he loaded up on processed snack cakes.

Being overweight is the central problem that leads to complications like high blood pressure, diabetes and high cholesterol, she said. "


The takeaway is that calories count more than anything else for weight loss.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 5:25 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3991
The problem with that is that many people have insulin problems. So that doesn't work for everyone. It's interesting with stuff like that, they show one person doing it and then pretend that it works for everyone.

The other issue is that he could probably have kept her calories at 2600 and just dropped the carbs and lost the same amount of weight.

I've found that cutting calories is way more effective with low carb too.


If he really wants to prove something, he needs a larger sample. Have a bunch of people on a typical high carb diet with a maintenance level caloric intake. Then tweak nutrients on some at the same calorie level and have others eat the same crap, but cut the calories by 800 or so.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 9:27 am 
Offline
Exalted Seer
Exalted Seer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 11:20 pm
Posts: 2097
Location: New York City
Ironman wrote:
The problem with that is that many people have insulin problems. So that doesn't work for everyone. It's interesting with stuff like that, they show one person doing it and then pretend that it works for everyone..


Point taken. But I wasn't endorsing Huab's diet. Most people, in fact, don't have the discipline to control portions when eating junk food. I was just pointing out to iksD that he need not get too hung up over the fact that he can't "eat right." If he gets his calories under control, he can lose weight no matter what he eats.

Long term healthwise, of course, it's better to eat nutritionally dense food and cut out the junk as much as possible.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:31 am 
Offline
Junior Member
Junior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 226
Ironman wrote:
The problem with that is that many people have insulin problems. So that doesn't work for everyone. It's interesting with stuff like that, they show one person doing it and then pretend that it works for everyone.

The other issue is that he could probably have kept her calories at 2600 and just dropped the carbs and lost the same amount of weight.

I've found that cutting calories is way more effective with low carb too.


If he really wants to prove something, he needs a larger sample. Have a bunch of people on a typical high carb diet with a maintenance level caloric intake. Then tweak nutrients on some at the same calorie level and have others eat the same crap, but cut the calories by 800 or so.


much to my co-workers anger, I dismissed the twinkie diet without even reading the article, by telling them that I assumed a small sample size, a short period of time, and not a single other control to compare it too.

Turns out I was right.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:58 am 
Offline
moderator
moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Posts: 6593
Location: Halifax, NS
Stephan Guyene wrote about this here. In the comments was this link which I found to be an even better analysis.

http://hbfser.wordpress.com/2010/11/08/ ... -nonsense/

Quote:
8. The verdict
Food quantity (portion control) is an integral part of fat loss but in no way more important than food quality, especially when it comes to keeping the weight off and staying far away from the diseases of civilization.
High quality foods (even in a maintenance diet) reign supremacy over junk food (in a fat loss or maintenance or mass gain diet).
The take home from this study – “If junk food is all that is available, exercise extreme portion control.”


The following comment was by the actual professor.

Quote:
Mark Haub permalink
November 10, 2010 6:38 am
All great points. Please remember this is/was a project for students to discuss points as raised in this blog. All the points are valid and are or will be discussed in class. The media has their agenda, which tends to be different than mine — they want to highlight the “junk”, while my intent is to highlight gaps in our understanding of diet, health, and weight. Publicly, which this was not intended to be at the onset, the intent has been to get people to discuss diet and health issues, and given this blog and others, that intent has been achieved. I applaud the discourse and encourage further discussions regarding means to move our nation and world to improved health. From my perspective, people need to find means, or paths, that work for them. There are various scientifically tested ‘paths’, one of which is not the classroom project I chose, from low carbohydrate carnivorous to vegan.

Thanks for posting the story and sparking discussion, cheers — Mark


(emphasis added by me)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 4:05 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3991
I read more on the study. Here is what I posted.

--------------------

I am VERY skeptical. This is my criticism of the piece.

Quote:
"He avoided meat, whole grains and fruits". {quote from article}


If you reduce calories by 800 and simply replace grains and fructose with HFC and sucrose, your macro ratio remains unchanged. However your total amount of carbs decrease. Therefore you release less insulin.

If he wants to prove his point, he needs to keep his carbohydrate level constant while reducing fat and protein. That's the only way to rule out hormonal involvement in this process.

Then he needs to get the same results by reducing calories mostly by fat, and then carbs and then protein. If you can get the same results doing all three of those things, THEN you may have something.

At that point you have to try it on a larger sample size of people with varied genetics.

Until then it is quite premature to declare calories as the only factor. [yes, he really did that, with only this as evidence, no joke]

Right now people start with the conclusion and then try to gather evidence to support it. This will plague you with confirmation bias. Science is supposed to be done the other way around. You make your conclusions from the evidence.

We also still have some unknowns in this field of study. They will remain unknown if people think they already have the answer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 4:13 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3991
stuward wrote:
Stephan Guyene wrote about this here. In the comments was this link which I found to be an even better analysis.

http://hbfser.wordpress.com/2010/11/08/ ... -nonsense/

Quote:
8. The verdict
Food quantity (portion control) is an integral part of fat loss but in no way more important than food quality, especially when it comes to keeping the weight off and staying far away from the diseases of civilization.
High quality foods (even in a maintenance diet) reign supremacy over junk food (in a fat loss or maintenance or mass gain diet).
The take home from this study – “If junk food is all that is available, exercise extreme portion control.”


The following comment was by the actual professor.

Quote:
Mark Haub permalink
November 10, 2010 6:38 am
All great points. Please remember this is/was a project for students to discuss points as raised in this blog. All the points are valid and are or will be discussed in class. The media has their agenda, which tends to be different than mine — they want to highlight the “junk”, while my intent is to highlight gaps in our understanding of diet, health, and weight. Publicly, which this was not intended to be at the onset, the intent has been to get people to discuss diet and health issues, and given this blog and others, that intent has been achieved. I applaud the discourse and encourage further discussions regarding means to move our nation and world to improved health. From my perspective, people need to find means, or paths, that work for them. There are various scientifically tested ‘paths’, one of which is not the classroom project I chose, from low carbohydrate carnivorous to vegan.

Thanks for posting the story and sparking discussion, cheers — Mark


(emphasis added by me)


Aha.... so things are not what they seem. It looks like the professor agrees with me more than disagrees. Perhaps some of his comments need to be taken in the context of instigating a good, heated, classroom discussion. Which he succeeded in. Nothing like a strong assertion to challenge people to dissent and others to defend.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 3:54 pm 
Offline
Junior Member
Junior Member

Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:59 pm
Posts: 298
I still have yet to understand that... how can getting stronger not result in muscle mass?? Like if you can squat 500 pounds, how do you not have more muscle then someone who cant but does more reps?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group