aj_rock

That guy. Read more of his stuff. And the muscle gain is actually much faster than that when you start training; max protein synthesis rate in the body is about 15 grams/day, and mucle is typically only like 20% protein... First few weeks, assuming good nutrition, you can get half a kilo a week

qpop, while that is indeed very generous, and I thank you for it, my issue is more one of financial support going towards robb wolf than anything else. But thanks again; its a nice thought I have read Cordain's book, mostly because its easily found for free, and pretty much every article on paleo, nutrition, fitness, and well-being that I can get my grubby little hands on (metaphorical grubby hands; this is teh internetz after all). I can't imagine any argument that Robb could make within his book that is not already reflected to some degree on other pro-paleo literature. That being said, if you can think off-hand of anything Wolf that CAN'T be found elsewhere, please point me to it Specifically, the only things i disagree with paleo on are: - the elimination of both grains and dairy. legumes i don't really eat and don't particularly care about. Historical precendent aside (which is a funny point in the argument because in the big picture, what we used to eat is really here nor there. We have the technology to pretty much LOOK inside ourselves and determine what we can or can't eat rather than looking at what our for-fathers scraped by on), most of the problems seem to exist for people with conditions, and people with healthy livers, proper food handling, and a sane diet/activity level seem to handle lectins, gluten, etc all perfectly fine. Nothing to do with energy levels, otherwise many many many high level athletes would NOT be able to function. - a focus on types of food to eat rather than macro-nutrient profiling to determine what macros you need that suit your goals. Yes low-carb can assist an individual in losing fat. If you're above a certain size, pretty much any form of calorie deficit is going to make you lose weight. Farther on, yes ketosis is inherently protein sparing and will keep you from losing muscle mass. But the scientific long term effects of ketosis are largely unknown, and it is highly recommended NOT to stay in a state of ketosis for too long, simply because we don't actually know how the human body will respond. Carbs also aren't necessary per se, but for anyone looking for a decent build of muscle/ any mid-range cardio endurance (soccer anyone?), an abundance of carbs is pretty much needed. - last one, cuz this is starting to get wordy; just the insane fanaticism. why is it that so many pro-paleo people just seem to be crazy?

What I find least attractive about Wolf's book is that I have to buy the damn thing. I don't care how inexpensive it is, I really don't feel like supporting him. Cordain's book has been shown to say some very inaccurate things. Apparently he and Wolf have since split on such issues, but I would not count The Paleo Diet as being a text to quote from. That being said, having done my own research and getting the opinions of many people active in the fitness industry, without going into a lot of detail, as ETF said unless you have a sensitivity or allergy to gluten or have ciliac disease, the general opinion seems to be that, while hardly anyone should expect to eat loaves of bread everyday and feel awesome, a person with a well balanced diet, limiting (but NOT eliminating) confections and refined sugar, combined with a decent exercise program, will reap all the benefits of improved mobility, quality and length of life. The problem is, a lot of people tend to show the same fanaticism for paleo type dieting/lifestyle as seen in over-the-top religious cults. Two-three articles of Mark Sisson bashing grains based on mis-information, biasing, and general fear-mongering is about all I can stomach from him.

Psst Andygates! Would you kindly place your google spreadsheet on your initial post so we don't have to search for the damn thing should we decide to gaze upon its wonders?

Sorry to hear bud. I'd say as long as you still feel great and aren't getting weaker, that tire will only keep getting smaller. Personally, I'd think that adding a larger base of muscle would at least make you look less ill proportioned, but it all depends on what your real goals are

Niacin's neutral in effect, because it also blocks the breakdown of fatty acids. The number of agonist/antagonist pairings in the body is absolutely astounding. So many compounds have been pushed forward as a 'cure' for one thing or another, only to cause worse effects elsewhere, or do the opposite of what you want, just at a different point in the process. So here, we have improved fat mobilization, but worse breakdown in the blood stream. At best, niacin could re-distribute where the fat deposits are, and/or prevent stubborn fat deposits from forming in the first place.

The 'lady at the gym' will always tell you there's room for improvement; that's how they get you to come back later I will say that average adult females generally have around 36% muscle mass (from wikipedia), so I think that is actually your first step. I think I remember you saying you used to be into running a lot, which contributes to lower muscle masses (the type of muscle fiber involved weighs less). Now, to get from 32.5% to 36%, running some numbers, you need gain about 7lbs, assuming it's all muscle mass. That alone will take your composition down a % point or two. Since you're only increasing muscle mass from low-normal to normal, gaining that muscle while losing some fat shouldn't be too difficult

You can see my progress pics over the last two months on my challenge link. I think it's much more closely linked to genetics though. Every single guy in both sides of my family over the age of 35 have a spare tire, and that's using nice words for it. The real deciding factor though is blood flow to the area in question. Poor blood flow = some fat goes in over time, very little comes out. So, yeah, the longer you go without removing it, the more it accumulates. Stubborn fat like that usually isn't actually a big deal though, unless you're looking for that six pack and you've been overweight for an extended period of time. le sigh. The only good thing is that, once its gone, good weight maintenance will prevent it from coming back

step five: ??? step six: profit!

lulz. But really, the amount of cardio you do should depend on your goals. General fitness doesn't require all that much cardio ability. If you're training with an event with a cardio aspect in mind, or for mixed training sports (football, soccer, etc), then your cardio is obviously much more important. You should really focus on improving one thing at a time though. Strength and cardio tend to be antagonistic in terms of improvement.

Fair enough. It's just that you mentioned wanting to get back some muscle mass, and SFS definitely won't give you more

Hey, you mentioned SFS before, why not give UD2 a try? It's pretty good if you're feeling paranoid about gaining fat... like some of us

How tall are you bud? From your pictures, I'd guess your starting % at around 19-20, and finishing more like 13-14. Awesome progress either way!

That's pretty much what I was trying to get at. And the guys who do 5 reps of deadlift and hold their breath the whole damn time. It's all moot anyway; Jekyll over here was talking about standing veins while at rest, which is true; visible veins in the arms are a sign of lower than average body fat present in that area. Unfortunately, for some of us we can have lots of this yet stilll have a tire 'round the tummy

Booooo holiday food festivities are for DURING the holidays! Unless you celebrate something else, in which case you technically abided by the rules.

I think you'll find, as you get in better and better shape, little things like the cold or sore throats just don't bother you as much anymore +1 for fitness!!

I'm not saying to not have a big breath of air prior to a lift, but holding it and not breathing out slowly does increase blood pressure http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9189724 That part where your face turns purple? Not good for you That's all I'm stating against.

My god, if I'd started lifting properly when I first picked up a weight at the tender age of 14, I'd probably be miles ahead of where I am now. 7 years training, maybe 1 1/2 actually effective. A lot of spinning of the wheels. I wish I could get that time back Definitely would have told myself to drop the weight first. Eat healthy, tell ma n pa my goals, and don't fret the weight lifting (I definitely over-trained in highschool)

Don't hold your breath when you pick heavy things up. That's what causes the vein popping and its a dangerous increase in blood pressure as bad-ass as it looks

It actually irks me for people to say they are x% paleo... putting it that way, everyone has a %, regardless of whether they follow it or not. Honestly, the sense of failure you get from not going full paleo is peer pressure, pure and simple. So many people tout it as THE ONLY way to go, and so you inherently feel guilty for not doing it, especially when they immediately attribute all good things in their life to it. Do what works for you. You KNOW what's healthy and what's not. It doesn't take several scientists and a paleo expert to tell you that fish in any form is inherently better for you than a snickerdoodle. Chicken, fried or not, is gonna be better for you than a slice of quadruple layered chocolate Xtreme fudge cake. Good luck on your journey! 500 calories less a day will get you there, regardless of what you eat!

Funny, you don't sound sorry at all. You basically come across as being 'that guy' who got screwed over once by 'x' and now everyone has to hear you complain about how terrible 'x' is for everyone. You selectively breed for genes you did not previously have. You are changing the genetic traits of a species for what you perceive to be better. Just because it happens to align with some conservative methodology does not make it inherently better or worse. Once again, in order to make progress, some eggs have to be broken. Back to my house model, quite a few of them fell down before we got them right. Should ancient humans have created only prototypes for thousands of years before we got it right? I highly doubt it. But YOU in particular come from such a biased view point due to your personal negative experience with a progressive methodology that you would rather resort to ad hominem attacks against my knowledge, and alarmist language that fortells some terrible dystopia clockwork orange future because of genetically modified agriculture. For the record, I've studied plenty of biology in school myself, and you have made absolutely ZERO statements that make me believe your point of view. None. It doesn't sound like you're being terribly convincing to everyone else here either; at best, people agree that gmo should not be done for corporate gain, but at the same time, as a developing industry, it will take time to balance and gain enough skill. And with that, I'm done with this particular off-topic conversation. The original discussion was NOT debating the pros and cons of GMO crops as far as I remember. Anyone care to post some new thoughts?

When I feel down in the winter, I take some vitamin D. For us sickly white kids, it's pretty much a necessity to avoid SAD.

Dude, plug that into a calorie burn estimator. A ten hour hike carrying about 160 pounds (you plus 15lbs of equipment/backpack) burns upwards of 6000 calories alone. Plus CC 3x a week? PLUS another 3 hours of backpacking. PLUS 5k a couple times. I think our mystery is solved. You're burning mad energy. I retract my previous statements and insist that you either a) pig out like a sow at a trough or calm your hiking. Here's some numbers to start you off though, unrelated to that kinda... You eat 4000 a day for 28000 calories in every week. Plus a pound of weight loss every week is 31500 calories moving out. That means that with all the insane exercise you do, you need about 4500 every day to maintain weight.

It's counter-intuitive to lose MORE fat by doing LESS work, but it makes sense in the long run

Paleo doesn't break thermodynamics. If eating less than 6k calories doesn't make him gain weight, then he is either expending that much energy in a day (not impossible if you are of the nervous energetic type), or he's s***ing his calories down the toilet. Also, Phelps does about 12000. Still absurd, but less than half what you quoted ETF Just, from the evidence he's given, which is not exercising a whole lot (whole different beast compared to someone actively training most every day like you spez), probably does not have the best metabolism (if you used to be obese, your metabolism sucks. period.) but eating 4000 a day and losing weight? Where are those calories going then guys?