aj_rock

Dear lord stay off the MFP forums. They are a cess-pool of dr oz and broscience mixed in with a lot of older people that don't know how the internetz is supposed to work. I used to post there, but after being drowned out time and time again by ZOMG WATER OMFG NOT LOZING WAT ROFFL LETS PLAY FORUM GAMES, I figuratively threw my hands in the air, figuratively punched my laptop in the face, and then axed myself. ... figuratively.

You should endeavor to stretch every day, if possible, at least for a few minutes. Do a short warm up, and just right into some static stretches. If its an exercise day, do dynamic stretches instead. Think stretching a rubber band and holding it as static, and bouncing the rubber band as dynamic.

I'd say the continuum lies more along the line of preservation rather than all 'processing'. I mean, loosely defined, coring an apple and adding all-natural honey into the middle is technically 'processing'. But preservation? That's the real problem. Why? Because in order to preserve food, you need to make it inedible to other forms of life. You want bacteria/fungus to stay away, you want the enzyme reactions to slow down; generally, you perform a bunch of actions that generally make something less edible for you. Mind you, not all preserving techniques are terrible for you. Canning, besides the salt, is effective yet does little chemically to the food. Same with freezing, dehydrating (even if it increases caloric density) and vacuum sealing. It's when you add chemicals or tons of salt or store it in some medium that is generally non-conducive to life that you get problems. Generally, the longer you make it so tiny life-forms are unwilling to eat it, the less likely that whatever preservatives were added aren't also toxic to you at some level. That's why it makes sense to try and get local foods, rather than import your strawberries from california when they're out of season.

I probably won't get mod because all I did was make fun of Steve for mis-spelling norris with noriss. Or something like that.

For your goals lib, you're better off looking at concepts like 'free meals' and 'refeed', where you allow yourself a larger number of calories for a day or week in order to a) reverse metabolic adaptations and keep yourself from going insane. Generally speaking, you should have just a free meal around once or twice a week, and refeed once every 6-8 weeks. Carb cycling only really makes a difference if you're already fairly lean and want to get even leaner.

Best part was the chewbacca-esque yell. Besides the crotch shot of course. Massive lift though man!

Well here's the thing; BMR as I define it is not consciously controllable. You control other aspects of your caloric expenditure, but the energy spent 'being' isn't changeable except by chemical interactions. You CAN create an artificially high BMR; like I said, it takes drugs to do it and, biochemically at least, involves tricking the brain into thinking hormone signals are normal. I can't really explain it all here, but you should really read into hormone interactions and how they effect these sorts of things. It's really interesting.

Just don't shoot the messenger The key take-away messege here though is that as long as you maintain a proper activity level, metabolism shouldn't be a problem. Also, this is where building a solid muscle foundation is key; it IS more metabolically active than fat. Say you start at an un-healthy weight. You then, over the course of a few months, build ten pounds of muscle and lose 20 pounds of fat. While your metabolism will be slightly lower, during exercise it will be about the same, because the muscles perform more work. Just never consign to the couch again. Revel in the freedom that is a functional, fit body until the day you die (hopefully at 100+ years of age).

A) Doesn't KFC have grilled chicken as an option? That would be a start... If you don't like 'em, don't force yourself to eat them. The variety of good food is such that you can probably pick things you already like and just eat them more often. C) MirGSS got it. D) A lot of the home exercisers around here follow Convict Condition. Look it up for a variety of bodyweight exercise progressions. E) You got it right for the most part, as did ross. If you follow a program, they'll give recommendations for rep, set, and rest numbers. Another not-oft used variable is length of set. Performing ten push-ups as quickly as possible is not the same as doing them agonizingly slowly, and indeed a lot of people punch reps out much faster than they should. Good luck! And welcome aboard

Thanks for clearing it up. Hit the nail on the head. I mean, we all know you're on a budget man. So why would you even consider expensive muscle stacks? Of which, the legal ones don't work. Just, I don't think you're in a good spot to be making decisions like this man. Just, final warning, don't buy any BS called DARK RAGE, or ANACONDA, or MUSKEL BILDING 133tN355!!! . It's not worth anything.

If you wanted to 'clean up' the diet more, i'd eliminate the legumes/grains before dairy. Besides the no-no it recieves from hardline paleos, dairy calcium has been tentatively linked to fat loss, the exact mechanism I am not sure of. As for HIIT, it's only really a good idea if you've already built up a decent aerobic base so to speak. If you can run at least 5 k continuously, then by all means. Just make sure you don't hit the legs too hard between cardio, pilates, and strength training. Really, at your weight to height ratio, continued fat loss shouldn't be a huge problem. Take a look at quantities of food consumption as well. Figure out your BMR, and then just adjust your intake down 10-20% from there.

You're right about EPOC, but the magnitude of EPOC is much smaller than you would like to believe. It's generally higher after cardio than weight training, but regardless it's never more than 100 calories or so. Spread out over 16 hours, that's like maybe 9-10 calories extra an hour. I wish I wasn't serious I think it has something to do with oxygen debt and the repair/removal of lactate and pyruvate levels. You're also right that there is a 'trigger', per say, in that your body is able to maintain weight levels as long as your daily caloric intake is within 3-4% of your expenditure. It takes a chronic reduction of 5% or more to trigger weight loss. There is also lots n lots of anecdotal evidence that if you force the calorie balance waaaay down, like starving yourself and running for hours on end, metabolism essentially shuts down. Needless to say, that's a big no-no Think of it this way: if you continued losing a pound a week forever, eventually you die. So within some amount of time, realistically, your body will begin to show obvious and visible signs of slow-down. Double the rate of weight loss, and the time to feel the effects is halved. If you pay closer attention to the effects, you could probably notice it follows a similar pattern. As for your final question, you're gonna love the answer: due to set-point theory, it's strongly believed in the medical community that your BMR will NEVER get back to 'normal' levels. Your BMR at 10% less than whatever weight you maintained for years and years is gonna be about 15% lower and there's not much besides expensive bodybuilding drugs and/or illicit perscription drugs that will fix that. Even with drugs, you'd still have to take them for the rest of your life. That's why it's gotta be a lifestyle change. You can't ever give up the fight, because your body will fight back forever That was kinda depressing, so here's some kittehs. [ATTACH=CONFIG]1779[/ATTACH]

If you want better recommendations, it's easier if you tell us height, weight, and current strength levels. From there, we can assess whether you could potentially add more strength while dropping fat, or if you've built a big enough muscle base to concentrate more heavily on just fat loss.

Given your recent mentality Bruce, you're asking for the wrong reasons. Let your head clear and then re-read what people are saying here.

I would like to add that if lifting is a chore for your wife, maybe its not meant to be. Plenty of people manage to get into shape without forcing themselves to do exercise they clearly do not enjoy. Maybe you guys can explore alternate avenues of exercise for her while you maintain your progression?

Also maybe try super-setting? Do deadlift, rest 2-3 minutes, do Bench, rest and repeat. By alternating muscular systems used, you can allow proper rest for each system while working another.

Very good strategies there Waldo. I still feel like I just cheat by consuming lots of coffee. Can't have a few a day and NOT feel like getting up to walk every 30 seconds.

If you're in a calorie deficit, metabolic slowdown will occur. No ifs, ands, or buts sir. It's inevitable Mr. Anderson. What you think of as metabolism is really the net energy expenditure by the body's varied systems and processes. Sure the metabolism 'appears' higher when participating in exercise, but slowdown still occurs in other systems. EG, you still tend to feel cold more easily when losing weight. Your immune system is also slightly compromised.

Well what do you WANT to do? Do you just want to weigh less, or do you want to get stronger? Once you reach a plateau, it helps a lot to focus on one aspect at a time. Welcome to NF btw

Also helps if the air is humid. Be careful. I've known people to get lung infections when you combine exhausting cardio workouts with dry air. The fact that you're irritating your lungs AND likely compromising your immune system creates a bad environment in there.

I... huh... what? That... has not happened to me whilst eating cornflakes. Thankfully.

Well I'll be damned. It does make sense though. I mean, a team's ability to be competitive against every team they face for 20+ games sounds like a reasonable marker for success. My next question, after seeing that, would to find the variance and weighting that would probably be involved if you look at strength of schedule. Obviously losing to the Patriots or Packers by 3 points isn't the same as losing to the Rams

Honestly, my coffee consumption skyrockets when trying to lose weight. You're safe up to 600mg a day, so go ahead and have 3, 4, 8 cups... If it takes you 8 cups to get that much caffeine though, you need a better brew...

Sir random-list-of-numbers: lookin good bud! You got some pretty long arms though.

The human body contains exactly 0 light switches so it's not like undereating for a day will cause survival mode (more commonly called starvation mode) to instantly slam the brakes on your metabolism. That being said, any diet in which you eat less calories than you expend is going to slowly decrease your metabolism over time. The bigger the deficit, the faster it sets in. It will never go to zero though; it merely slows the rate of weight loss. There is no magic number that causes problems. When people suggest a minimum number of calories a day, it deals more closely with issues that arise from insufficient vitamin/mineral intake; point being that if you don't eat enough, its very difficult to get the required nutrients. Minimum fat intake for a day is around 50g, as you need to replenish certain types of fat to accommodate proper hormone transport. My suggestion is to just take your average calorie expenditure (BMR + exercise) and subtract 20% from that. Eat that every day and you should see steady weight loss.