The Biggest Loser DGN Style

[prick]

My basement gym is being used again and it feels great.

[kat (1)]

Okay here is a before pic of me in October of 2007: and here is now: I want to lose 15-20 more so I think I am either gonna go back to the gym or do pilates at home.

[victoriavengeance (1)]

150 situps, 25minutes of cardio.

this is occurring constantly until I fricking lose fifteen pounds.

[Destroit]

150 situps, 25minutes of cardio.

this is occurring constantly until I fricking lose fifteen pounds.

If you're ONLY doing sit-ups, this is a weight-training no-no and will cause you abdomen to stick out significantly farther than the rest of your muscle groups (creating the illusion of having a tummy when you don't)

Cardio - The only thing that will help you lose weight on a significant level

Weight Training (sit-ups are in this category) - Must be done on a consistent regimen that allows variance in weight training techniques (i.e. machines vs. free weights, high rep count / low weight count vs. low rep count / high weight count). Weight training is the most misunderstood aspect of exercise, imo. It is NOT primarily for burning categories. Doing sit-ups does NOT burn fat on your stomach (fat burns evenly from your body, any cardio will burn fat anywhere). Doing only one aspect of weight training makes you look awkwardly proportional, is unhealthy, ineffective, and makes you prone to injury.

If this is stuff you already know, tell me to STFU. If you'd like tips from one of the manliest weight trainers I know...ask me for some tips

If you're ONLY doing sit-ups, this is a weight-training no-no and will cause you abdomen to stick out significantly farther than the rest of your muscle groups (creating the illusion of having a tummy when you don't)

Cardio - The only thing that will help you lose weight on a significant level

Weight Training (sit-ups are in this category) - Must be done on a consistent regimen that allows variance in weight training techniques (i.e. machines vs. free weights, high rep count / low weight count vs. low rep count / high weight count). Weight training is the most misunderstood aspect of exercise, imo. It is NOT primarily for burning categories. Doing sit-ups does NOT burn fat on your stomach (fat burns evenly from your body, any cardio will burn fat anywhere). Doing only one aspect of weight training makes you look awkwardly proportional, is unhealthy, ineffective, and makes you prone to injury.

If this is stuff you already know, tell me to STFU. If you'd like tips from one of the manliest weight trainers I know...ask me for some tips

[victoriavengeance (1)]

stfu <3

see, if I had boobs I'd worry about this, but my stomach is the same size as my miniscule chest so I'm not ALL too worried hahahaha.

I'm doing the situps mostly until I at least have a flatter stomach, quitting eating like ummmm ....calories hahaha. okay not calories. but bad stuff. and and and running like hell. I'll probably cut down the situps in like a day anyways, I don't wanna kill my back. I get lazy after like a couple days of hardcore work and then start half assing it. besides, I need to start eating gluten free for my health anyways, so I think I may just end up starting now... bye carbs, I loved youuu

Edited November 15, 2010 by victoriavengeance

[Destroit]

I'm doing the situps mostly until I at least have a flatter stomach

As I said, sit-ups = bulkier stomach, not flatter stomach. Buttttt, I'll STFU as you wished. Hey, it's your figure, not mine, why should I give a shit?

Also, you want carbs as your main source of energy because that is the most conductive to weight loss. Buttttttt...what do I and most scientists know, right?

Continue on then...

As I said, sit-ups = bulkier stomach, not flatter stomach. Buttttt, I'll STFU as you wished. Hey, it's your figure, not mine, why should I give a shit?

Also, you want carbs as your main source of energy because that is the most conductive to weight loss. Buttttttt...what do I and most scientists know, right?

Continue on then...

[torn asunder]

As I said, sit-ups = bulkier stomach, not flatter stomach. Buttttt, I'll STFU as you wished. Hey, it's your figure, not mine, why should I give a shit?

disagree. weighted situps/crunches will cause muscular hypertrophy, but unweighted? not likely at all. it takes a hell of a lot of resistance to cause growth in abdominal muscles.

Also, you want carbs as your main source of energy because that is the most conductive to weight loss. Buttttttt...what do I and most scientists know, right?

Continue on then...

again, disagree. from where are you drawing this conclusion? there are many ways to lose weight, even the 'atkins' diet works well *when followed correctly*. anyway, my point is that ideally, aiming for getting calories in any ratio between 33c/33p/33f and 50c/25p/25f should be fine. unless your goal is also losing muscle, you should be getting roughly 0.8-1 gram of protein per lb of lean body mass to maintain muscle(total weight minus body fat). and don't eliminate fat, your body needs a certain amount of fat in order to perform many functions. too low on fat content & you'll actually start becoming *less* healthy. i'll see if i can dig up some of my old links on this topic in a bit here...

[Destroit]

disagree. weighted situps/crunches will cause muscular hypertrophy, but unweighted? not likely at all. it takes a hell of a lot of resistance to cause growth in abdominal muscles.

again, disagree. from where are you drawing this conclusion? there are many ways to lose weight, even the 'atkins' diet works well *when followed correctly*. anyway, my point is that ideally, aiming for getting calories in any ratio between 33c/33p/33f and 50c/25p/25f should be fine. unless your goal is also losing muscle, you should be getting roughly 0.8-1 gram of protein per lb of lean body mass to maintain muscle(total weight minus body fat). and don't eliminate fat, your body needs a certain amount of fat in order to perform many functions. too low on fat content & you'll actually start becoming *less* healthy. i'll see if i can dig up some of my old links on this topic in a bit here...

The Atkins diet WORKS but is extremely unhealthy for most, especially over a long period. I retrieve my information directly from professors and researchers working at the college. If someone has a doctorate in front of their name in that particular subject, I tend to take what they say more heavily than any magazine or show I see. Also, muscle does not need a huge amount of protein to build, that is another misconception. It needs a SMALL amount (a woman in her 20s should have around 12g of protein a day, anymore and you are killing your insides literally) to make the original building blocks, and then an overwhelming amount of complex carbohydrates to maintain/expand.

Case-in-point: Back in the 70s (and earlier) athletes were fed protein-laden food such as steak for muscle conditioning. It was also noted that many of these athletes died in their 40s-50s. More research was done, guess what athletes are fed now for conditioning: whole-grain pasta chocked with complex carbohydrate. You'll notice that athletes now who aren't on steroids STILL look bigger and more muscular than athletes of yesteryear (NFL is a huge example of this). It's because the NFL and other athletic associations were finally knowledgeable in how muscle actually works now, whereas the general public and magazines just trying to make money from selling protein-bars (Liver-failure in a wrapper) have yet to catch up. They're not going to be able to sell all those protein-bars the second everyone finds out they're unhealthy, don't work, and can become built quicker, healthier, and more efficiently from sweet potatoes, grapefruit, and complex carbohydrates.

But..../flex. I know. That's why I'm able to bulk up bigger than most of my male friends who, are to this day, doing it wrong.

If you want the more scientific explanation as to why protein kills, it lies in the amino acids. Amino insinuates ammonia, every time protein is consumed it is broken down and a very SMALL amount of it goes into maintaining your body. The rest of the usable shit if transformed into fat. The UNUSABLE shit...ammonia (basically Windex) is pushed through the nephrons of your liver, which then die over time from being exposed to too much of it. Hence why if someone's piss has a strong or ammonia-type smell, they're probably getting too much protein and it's destroying their body, shortening their life by up to a few decades.

I only ever get my information from people with a doctorates in the field, an .edu site, or a medical experiment database. Anything else is kinda like getting your news from MSNBC or Fox, someone is trying to say whatever they can to try to sell you something. They're actually allowed to lie to you if it is not from an accredited source, many don't realize this and think stuff like Popular Science, TLC, etc are required to be 100% factual. Anyone in these sources that is either an expert in the subject or has a doctorate is not only paid but are paid to say whatever the TV/Magazine/etc people WANT them to say. This also applies to doctors, who in some situations, receive kickbacks or benefits from pharmaceutical companies to push their product to people that it may not even need it.

The Atkins diet WORKS but is extremely unhealthy for most, especially over a long period. I retrieve my information directly from professors and researchers working at the college. If someone has a doctorate in front of their name in that particular subject, I tend to take what they say more heavily than any magazine or show I see. Also, muscle does not need a huge amount of protein to build, that is another misconception. It needs a SMALL amount (a woman in her 20s should have around 12g of protein a day, anymore and you are killing your insides literally) to make the original building blocks, and then an overwhelming amount of complex carbohydrates to maintain/expand.

Case-in-point: Back in the 70s (and earlier) athletes were fed protein-laden food such as steak for muscle conditioning. It was also noted that many of these athletes died in their 40s-50s. More research was done, guess what athletes are fed now for conditioning: whole-grain pasta chocked with complex carbohydrate. You'll notice that athletes now who aren't on steroids STILL look bigger and more muscular than athletes of yesteryear (NFL is a huge example of this). It's because the NFL and other athletic associations were finally knowledgeable in how muscle actually works now, whereas the general public and magazines just trying to make money from selling protein-bars (Liver-failure in a wrapper) have yet to catch up. They're not going to be able to sell all those protein-bars the second everyone finds out they're unhealthy, don't work, and can become built quicker, healthier, and more efficiently from sweet potatoes, grapefruit, and complex carbohydrates.

But..../flex. I know. That's why I'm able to bulk up bigger than most of my male friends who, are to this day, doing it wrong.

If you want the more scientific explanation as to why protein kills, it lies in the amino acids. Amino insinuates ammonia, every time protein is consumed it is broken down and a very SMALL amount of it goes into maintaining your body. The rest of the usable shit if transformed into fat. The UNUSABLE shit...ammonia (basically Windex) is pushed through the nephrons of your liver, which then die over time from being exposed to too much of it. Hence why if someone's piss has a strong or ammonia-type smell, they're probably getting too much protein and it's destroying their body, shortening their life by up to a few decades.

I only ever get my information from people with a doctorates in the field, an .edu site, or a medical experiment database. Anything else is kinda like getting your news from MSNBC or Fox, someone is trying to say whatever they can to try to sell you something. They're actually allowed to lie to you if it is not from an accredited source, many don't realize this and think stuff like Popular Science, TLC, etc are required to be 100% factual. Anyone in these sources that is either an expert in the subject or has a doctorate is not only paid but are paid to say whatever the TV/Magazine/etc people WANT them to say. This also applies to doctors, who in some situations, receive kickbacks or benefits from pharmaceutical companies to push their product to people that it may not even need it.

Edited November 15, 2010 by Chernobyl

[Destroit]

disagree. weighted situps/crunches will cause muscular hypertrophy, but unweighted? not likely at all. it takes a hell of a lot of resistance to cause growth in abdominal muscles.

I agree with this when it comes to males. For most females, not all but most, just their torso is heavy enough to cause this effect, even if it is a littler woman.

I agree with this when it comes to males. For most females, not all but most, just their torso is heavy enough to cause this effect, even if it is a littler woman.

[torn asunder]

The Atkins diet WORKS but is extremely unhealthy for most, especially over a long period. I retrieve my information directly from professors and researchers working at the college. If someone has a doctorate in front of their name in that particular subject, I tend to take what they say more heavily than any magazine or show I see. Also, muscle does not need a huge amount of protein to build, that is another misconception. It needs a SMALL amount (a woman in her 20s should have around 12g of protein a day, anymore and you are killing your insides literally) to make the original building blocks, and then an overwhelming amount of complex carbohydrates to maintain/expand.

Case-in-point: Back in the 70s (and earlier) athletes were fed protein-laden food such as steak for muscle conditioning. It was also noted that many of these athletes died in their 40s-50s. More research was done, guess what athletes are fed now for conditioning: whole-grain pasta chocked with complex carbohydrate. You'll notice that athletes now who aren't on steroids STILL look bigger and more muscular than athletes of yesteryear (NFL is a huge example of this). It's because the NFL and other athletic associations were finally knowledgeable in how muscle actually works now, whereas the general public and magazines just trying to make money from selling protein-bars (Liver-failure in a wrapper) have yet to catch up. They're not going to be able to sell all those protein-bars the second everyone finds out they're unhealthy, don't work, and can become built quicker, healthier, and more efficiently from sweet potatoes, grapefruit, and complex carbohydrates.

But..../flex. I know. That's why I'm able to bulk up bigger than most of my male friends who, are to this day, doing it wrong.

If you want the more scientific explanation as to why protein kills, it lies in the amino acids. Amino insinuates ammonia, every time protein is consumed it is broken down and a very SMALL amount of it goes into maintaining your body. The rest of the usable shit if transformed into fat. The UNUSABLE shit...ammonia (basically Windex) is pushed through the nephrons of your liver, which then die over time from being exposed to too much of it. Hence why if someone's piss has a strong or ammonia-type smell, they're probably getting too much protein and it's destroying their body, shortening their life by up to a few decades.

I only ever get my information from people with a doctorates in the field, an .edu site, or a medical experiment database. Anything else is kinda like getting your news from MSNBC or Fox, someone is trying to say whatever they can to try to sell you something. They're actually allowed to lie to you if it is not from an accredited source, many don't realize this and think stuff like Popular Science, TLC, etc are required to be 100% factual. Anyone in these sources that is either an expert in the subject or has a doctorate is not only paid but are paid to say whatever the TV/Magazine/etc people WANT them to see. This also applies to doctors, who in some situations, receive kickbacks or benefits from pharmaceutical companies to push their product to people that it may not even need it.

i don't have anywhere near the time to debunk everything you said, but i can't believe you found evidence of any of this. only 12g protein? you're insane. i'm not even sure i can stand to debate this with you. from all the research i've done, i think you're doing a huge disservice to anyone you choose to give advice to.

all i can say right now, until i get time to gather a ton of links, is that anyone who reads any health advice online, should not take any of it (mine included) as gospel but do your own research.

oh, and "protein-bars (Liver-failure in a wrapper)"!? can anyone say "drama-queen"? i'm sorry if this sounds rude/harsh, but i really think you have no idea what you're talking about. i'm just... dumbfounded.

[Destroit]

i don't have anywhere near the time to debunk everything you said, but i can't believe you found evidence of any of this. only 12g protein? you're insane. i'm not even sure i can stand to debate this with you. from all the research i've done, i think you're doing a huge disservice to anyone you choose to give advice to.

all i can say right now, until i get time to gather a ton of links, is that anyone who reads any health advice online, should not take any of it (mine included) as gospel but do your own research.

oh, and "protein-bars (Liver-failure in a wrapper)"!? can anyone say "drama-queen"? i'm sorry if this sounds rude/harsh, but i really think you have no idea what you're talking about. i'm just... dumbfounded.

Where, might I ask, do you get your research? Keep in mind if it is not from an accredited source I don't always buy it (Tv/magazine/news-sources/online-non.edu-sites). I mean from someone who has been properly educated by scholars regarding biology and nutrition in an academic setting and doesn't get information from "links" such as yourself, yeah it's both rude and harsh. Unless nutrition and biology has done a drastic 180 in the past five years I figure what I learned should still be pertinent. Also, 12% energy from protein for a female weighing 110-130? Sounds right to me.

Every class I've ever taken, from anatomy and physiology to nutrition itself says 12% from protein, 32-35% from fat and the rest from carbs daily.

Personally, I don't really care if people just buy into fad dieting found in magazines, internet links, and shit like Atkins, their loss, not mine.

Where, might I ask, do you get your research? Keep in mind if it is not from an accredited source I don't always buy it (Tv/magazine/news-sources/online-non.edu-sites). I mean from someone who has been properly educated by scholars regarding biology and nutrition in an academic setting and doesn't get information from "links" such as yourself, yeah it's both rude and harsh. Unless nutrition and biology has done a drastic 180 in the past five years I figure what I learned should still be pertinent. Also, 12% energy from protein for a female weighing 110-130? Sounds right to me.

Every class I've ever taken, from anatomy and physiology to nutrition itself says 12% from protein, 32-35% from fat and the rest from carbs daily.

Personally, I don't really care if people just buy into fad dieting found in magazines, internet links, and shit like Atkins, their loss, not mine.

Edited November 15, 2010 by Chernobyl

[torn asunder]

Also, 12% energy from protein for a female weighing 110-130? Sounds right to me.

Every class I've ever taken, from anatomy and physiology to nutrition itself says 12% from protein, 32-35% from fat and the rest from carbs daily.

only possible way i could buy into this is as a guideline for a sedentary individual. 12% cal. from protein for someone doing any amount of exercise is only going to result in them losing muscle mass from being in a catabolic state, thus decreasing metabolism. as i said before, i'll try to find links in the next day or two (remember, i still can't access dgn from home), but the gist of what i'm saying is that the majority of studies that are/have been done in the recent past have focused either on non-exercised groups, or cardio-only, and have little/nothing to do with weight-trained individuals, which many people tend to go with, and typically, only focused on one specific topic at a time. they are highly specific, and therefore inadequate to *directly* guide someone. they have value, but only within stringent guidelines.

sorry for coming across like a jerk.

[KatRN05]

12gm of protein is too little. The average female needs around 60gm.

[victoriavengeance (1)]

I don't care how scientific you're going to get, there is no possible way that if I do situps and cardio and lose weight that my stomach will get BIGGER than it is at the moment. It just isn't logical, practical, nor possible for my stomach to be BIGGER than what fat I have chillin' there right now.

resources: myself, seeing as I've done this before plenty of times and lost weight.

And when I say bye carbs, I meant BAD carbs. Eating gluten-free is EXCELLENT for you.

I just know what works for me, and this is the next best thing to pulling an anorexia card for my body. If I don't work out like hell and eat like 1200 calories TOPS a day, I won't lose weight. I'm on several medications that make it REALLY hard for me to lose weight.

Edited November 16, 2010 by victoriavengeance

[StormKnight (1)]

Gradually picking up speed running since I had sat out for a bit. 24-minute 3 mile run and going back down. Been kind of bummed for a bit.

Waiting for some paperwork before working, so watching my anime collection. During the opening, closing and commercial breaks, you can get in a few sets of crunches or push ups.

Duty with boredom relief. Seems to be going good.

[Destroit]

I don't care how scientific you're going to get, there is no possible way that if I do situps and cardio and lose weight that my stomach will get BIGGER than it is at the moment. It just isn't logical, practical, nor possible for my stomach to be BIGGER than what fat I have chillin' there right now.

resources: myself, seeing as I've done this before plenty of times and lost weight.

And when I say bye carbs, I meant BAD carbs. Eating gluten-free is EXCELLENT for you.

I just know what works for me, and this is the next best thing to pulling an anorexia card for my body. If I don't work out like hell and eat like 1200 calories TOPS a day, I won't lose weight. I'm on several medications that make it REALLY hard for me to lose weight.

Well, not going to lie but you don't have any chub on your body. Saw your pictures as Poison Ivy. It's cases like this that make me really hate the media and how they tell women they're supposed to look. I had bones jutting out and all of my ribs were visible and I thought I was fat...messed up! So yeah, I had the same silly notions when I was your age, hopefully like I did you'll grow out of them in your 20s.

You also didn't specify bad carbs, you just said goodbye carbs so I thought maybe you were one of the poor fools under the impression that all carbs are bad and you're supposed to have nothing but bacon and burgers (like Atkins advocates). Getting rid of refined carbs and replacing it with complex carbohydrates checks out with my leanings .

Also, my thing with the sit-ups is that it can make your stomach bigger because instead of having just "fat" you'd have the same amount of fat but on top of muscle, creating the appearance of being bigger. My simple solution would be to either up the cardio to wear down the fat (not as healthy) or to start up a weight training regimen so that your whole body gets evenly toned up and your stomach appears to be less prominent (more healthy). Or a combo of both. If you insist your way works for you though, hey, I'm not in your skin so go for it.

Well, not going to lie but you don't have any chub on your body. Saw your pictures as Poison Ivy. It's cases like this that make me really hate the media and how they tell women they're supposed to look. I had bones jutting out and all of my ribs were visible and I thought I was fat...messed up! So yeah, I had the same silly notions when I was your age, hopefully like I did you'll grow out of them in your 20s.

You also didn't specify bad carbs, you just said goodbye carbs so I thought maybe you were one of the poor fools under the impression that all carbs are bad and you're supposed to have nothing but bacon and burgers (like Atkins advocates). Getting rid of refined carbs and replacing it with complex carbohydrates checks out with my leanings .

Also, my thing with the sit-ups is that it can make your stomach bigger because instead of having just "fat" you'd have the same amount of fat but on top of muscle, creating the appearance of being bigger. My simple solution would be to either up the cardio to wear down the fat (not as healthy) or to start up a weight training regimen so that your whole body gets evenly toned up and your stomach appears to be less prominent (more healthy). Or a combo of both. If you insist your way works for you though, hey, I'm not in your skin so go for it.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Chernobyl

[torn asunder]

So yeah, I had the same silly notions when I was your age, hopefully like I did you'll grow out of them in your 20s.

wow, way to be dismissive of someone.

Also, my thing with the sit-ups is that it can make your stomach bigger because instead of having just "fat" you'd have the same amount of fat but on top of muscle, creating the appearance of being bigger.

do you understand how muscle hypertrophy works? it requires added resistance *and* a surplus of calories *and* sufficient amounts of protein. you're advocating 12g of protein a day (which, btw, you can get in only half a serving [1/2 cup] of fava beans, or only 3/4 cup of skim milk), which i can guarantee will result in a decrease of muscle mass unless you're engaged in a heavy weight/low rep strength routine. under caloric deficit, the body will get rid of the most metabolically costly tissue, which is muscle. the only way to retain it is to force the body to retain it by using it in a strength routine.

My simple solution would be to either up the cardio to wear down the fat (not as healthy) or to start up a weight training regimen so that your whole body gets evenly toned up and your stomach appears to be less prominent (more healthy). Or a combo of both. If you insist your way works for you though, hey, I'm not in your skin so go for it.

where do you get the idea that cardio is not as healthy as weight training? that's an entirely subjective determination, based on the goals of the individual. it may be true for you, but there's no way you can definitively say that. in fact, most of the medical professionals i've interacted with have warned me (and most of my weight-lifting friends) against heavy lifting due to the higher risk of injury (which isn't necessarily true - it's dependent on proper form/technique, not the exercise itself).

now, i wouldn't take issue with most of this if you stated these things as your *opinion*. you're not doing that, you're claiming them as fact, which is irresponsible.

[KatRN05]

Muscle burns fat. Lift weights. Cardio is good but will not burn as much fat as weight-training will.

Edited November 16, 2010 by KatRN05

[torn asunder]

Muscle burns fat. Lift weights.

again, it depends on goals. sure muscle burns fat, but so does walking. for that matter, one doesn't even have to lift weights to build up muscle... pushups, situps, pullups, "prisoner" (body-weight) squats, hill sprints, etc. hell, yoga is a great way to strengthen muscle without growing them much. as i said, it all depends on goals.

there is no one way to fitness. there are many paths, just pick the one you like the most, make sure it's healthy based on your own research and the input of others, and go for it. it doesn't get much more simple than that...

Edited November 16, 2010 by torn asunder

[Destroit]

Muscle burns fat. Lift weights. Cardio is good but will not burn as much fat as weight-training will.

Weight lifting is an anaerobic exercise and will burn some calories, but not as much as a regimen of intense cardio will. What weight training WILL do is raise your BMR and strengthens bones so efficiently that it can even help prevent things like osteoporosis. Personally, anyone not doing both is doing a disservice to their fitness goals, imo. An extreme regimen of cardio on say, an elliptical, can burn anywhere from 500-800 calories depending on weight, intensity, and overall heart rate. DDR on heavy mode? You're burning a minimum of 800 an hour, easy. The only thing I can think of that would be tied with DDR (that is feasible for most people to do) is swimming since you're working everything on your body intensely and in unison.

It's unlikely that you're going to weight train for an hour. Imo if you do you're either going to wear yourself out fast or not weight train as efficiently as you could if you just isolated certain groups. Again, this is just my method.

Weight lifting is an anaerobic exercise and will burn some calories, but not as much as a regimen of intense cardio will. What weight training WILL do is raise your BMR and strengthens bones so efficiently that it can even help prevent things like osteoporosis. Personally, anyone not doing both is doing a disservice to their fitness goals, imo. An extreme regimen of cardio on say, an elliptical, can burn anywhere from 500-800 calories depending on weight, intensity, and overall heart rate. DDR on heavy mode? You're burning a minimum of 800 an hour, easy. The only thing I can think of that would be tied with DDR (that is feasible for most people to do) is swimming since you're working everything on your body intensely and in unison.

It's unlikely that you're going to weight train for an hour. Imo if you do you're either going to wear yourself out fast or not weight train as efficiently as you could if you just isolated certain groups. Again, this is just my method.

[torn asunder]

Weight lifting is an anaerobic exercise and will burn some calories, but not as much as a regimen of intense cardio will. What weight training WILL do is raise your BMR and strengthens bones so efficiently that it can even help prevent things like osteoporosis. Personally, anyone not doing both is doing a disservice to their fitness goals, imo. An extreme regimen of cardio on say, an elliptical, can burn anywhere from 500-800 calories depending on weight, intensity, and overall heart rate. DDR on heavy mode? You're burning a minimum of 800 an hour, easy. The only thing I can think of that would be tied with DDR (that is feasible for most people to do) is swimming since you're working everything on your body intensely and in unison.

It's unlikely that you're going to weight train for an hour. Imo if you do you're either going to wear yourself out fast or not weight train as efficiently as you could if you just isolated certain groups. Again, this is just my method.

you are correct in a lot of this! weight training will improve BMR and increase bone strength/density. running/sprinting can do this as well, as can yoga, tai chi, etc... low impact cardio will not improve bone strength much, unless you're doing something to build muscle with it, like climbing hills or something. many studies show that cumulative caloric expenditure daily is as beneficial as one long session, too, so people shouldn't feel that have to make some herculean effort. 10-15 minutes walks, 2-3 times a day, can be as beneficial as one 30-45 minute walk. the key is to be consistent, watch your caloriesin vs. calories out, and keep your diet reasonable and fairly balanced.

as for the hour-long weight training, i can assure you that one hour is not difficult to do. the last strength routine i was on would take me a minimum of 1.5 hrs (sometimes up to 1.75 hrs of heavy lifting), after which, i would run(jog) for 30 minutes or so. as i've mentioned several times, it's all dependent on what you're looking to do.

[Destroit]

wow, way to be dismissive of someone.

do you understand how muscle hypertrophy works? it requires added resistance *and* a surplus of calories *and* sufficient amounts of protein. you're advocating 12g of protein a day (which, btw, you can get in only half a serving [1/2 cup] of fava beans, or only 3/4 cup of skim milk), which i can guarantee will result in a decrease of muscle mass unless you're engaged in a heavy weight/low rep strength routine. under caloric deficit, the body will get rid of the most metabolically costly tissue, which is muscle. the only way to retain it is to force the body to retain it by using it in a strength routine.

where do you get the idea that cardio is not as healthy as weight training? that's an entirely subjective determination, based on the goals of the individual. it may be true for you, but there's no way you can definitively say that. in fact, most of the medical professionals i've interacted with have warned me (and most of my weight-lifting friends) against heavy lifting due to the higher risk of injury (which isn't necessarily true - it's dependent on proper form/technique, not the exercise itself).

now, i wouldn't take issue with most of this if you stated these things as your *opinion*. you're not doing that, you're claiming them as fact, which is irresponsible.

A) She's not fat even slightly. So yeah, it is silly, sorry, just how I feel about it. I used to have the same notions when I was that age so I was comparing it to life experience. If you're walking around below your recommended weight and bones are sticking out of your body, you miiiiight have gone a little too far. Not saying she has bones sticking out, but I did, and was trying to give her an eye-opener before she turns out like I did, unhappy and struggling with some fictitious "perfect model" of what we're all supposed to "look like". Many girls fresh out of high school have this notion instilled by classmates' unrealistic views on bodies and what is seen in the media.

B) I thought I said 12%. I don't know why everyone keeps putting "g" after it. You'll notice in the last post I made where I made a breakdown, I clearly stated 12% protein, 35% fat, and rest to come from carbs. If I said "12g" on accident anywhere else, my bad, but I clearly have been saying 12% for at least the last few posts. I can understand adding a LITTLE more if you're doing weight training, but most bodybuilders go CRAZY with protein and in the long run do much more damage to themselves. Also, most women, in my experience, aren't looking to "bulk up" just get a little more toned, I'm just a rare case. Protein builds the muscle, it's carbs that sustain that built muscle.

C) It's not that cardio isn't as healthy as weight training, I was insinuating that if you add in a WT regimen you don't have to wear yourself down doing a HUGE amount of unreasonable cardio to reach your desired results. To up your cardio and spend 2-3 hours on a treadmill a day is not only time consuming but probably a little over doing it. Hence why adding in a WT regimen, which will help raise your BMR and also burns additional calories (albeit, maybe not as much as intense cardio, but still a decent amount especially with the BMR advantage in there) is usually a smarter idea than JUST cardio. Having either JUST cardio or JUST weight training is like making a PB&J without either the jelly or the peanut butter, you're missing half of the equation.

D) You also state everything in this thread like fact and then try to rally everyone against me (telling everyone, basically in a tactful way that I'm full of shit) when I've been formally educated in the subject and don't get my info from non-regulated "self-research". And yes, the last part was opinion. Usually everything I say is opinion unless I state otherwise (much like the post regarding calorie energy, I cited the fact that it was something that was taught to me by scholars and researchers and shit, hence "citing" it).

A) She's not fat even slightly. So yeah, it is silly, sorry, just how I feel about it. I used to have the same notions when I was that age so I was comparing it to life experience. If you're walking around below your recommended weight and bones are sticking out of your body, you miiiiight have gone a little too far. Not saying she has bones sticking out, but I did, and was trying to give her an eye-opener before she turns out like I did, unhappy and struggling with some fictitious "perfect model" of what we're all supposed to "look like". Many girls fresh out of high school have this notion instilled by classmates' unrealistic views on bodies and what is seen in the media.

B) I thought I said 12%. I don't know why everyone keeps putting "g" after it. You'll notice in the last post I made where I made a breakdown, I clearly stated 12% protein, 35% fat, and rest to come from carbs. If I said "12g" on accident anywhere else, my bad, but I clearly have been saying 12% for at least the last few posts. I can understand adding a LITTLE more if you're doing weight training, but most bodybuilders go CRAZY with protein and in the long run do much more damage to themselves. Also, most women, in my experience, aren't looking to "bulk up" just get a little more toned, I'm just a rare case. Protein builds the muscle, it's carbs that sustain that built muscle.

C) It's not that cardio isn't as healthy as weight training, I was insinuating that if you add in a WT regimen you don't have to wear yourself down doing a HUGE amount of unreasonable cardio to reach your desired results. To up your cardio and spend 2-3 hours on a treadmill a day is not only time consuming but probably a little over doing it. Hence why adding in a WT regimen, which will help raise your BMR and also burns additional calories (albeit, maybe not as much as intense cardio, but still a decent amount especially with the BMR advantage in there) is usually a smarter idea than JUST cardio. Having either JUST cardio or JUST weight training is like making a PB&J without either the jelly or the peanut butter, you're missing half of the equation.

D) You also state everything in this thread like fact and then try to rally everyone against me (telling everyone, basically in a tactful way that I'm full of shit, literally calling me "insane" and a "drama-queen" ON BOARD and saying "sorry if I came across as a jerk". You don't openly down someone and then say "sorry for coming across as a jerk" or "don't mean to be rude/harsh" right after, doesn't work that way) when I've been formally educated in the subject and don't get my info from non-regulated "self-research". And yes, the last part was opinion. Usually everything I say is opinion unless I state otherwise (much like the post regarding calorie energy, I cited the fact that it was something that was taught to me by scholars and researchers and shit, hence "citing" it).

Edited November 16, 2010 by Chernobyl

[Destroit]

you are correct in a lot of this! weight training will improve BMR and increase bone strength/density. running/sprinting can do this as well, as can yoga, tai chi, etc... low impact cardio will not improve bone strength much, unless you're doing something to build muscle with it, like climbing hills or something. many studies show that cumulative caloric expenditure daily is as beneficial as one long session, too, so people shouldn't feel that have to make some herculean effort. 10-15 minutes walks, 2-3 times a day, can be as beneficial as one 30-45 minute walk. the key is to be consistent, watch your caloriesin vs. calories out, and keep your diet reasonable and fairly balanced.

as for the hour-long weight training, i can assure you that one hour is not difficult to do. the last strength routine i was on would take me a minimum of 1.5 hrs (sometimes up to 1.75 hrs of heavy lifting), after which, i would run(jog) for 30 minutes or so. as i've mentioned several times, it's all dependent on what you're looking to do.

First paragraph hits in right on. My golden rule is to get at LEAST 30 minutes of cardio in at LEAST five days a week. I'm just now getting back into getting serious about weight loss and tone, especially because the profession that I'm going into absolutely requires me to be A) He-Man and B) Intimidating. One hour isn't hard to do if you're doing your whole body at one time, which I used to. Pestilence still does this. I DON'T for several reasons, usually time and I end up losing motivation after a minute. Also, I don't like for my WHOLE body to be jacked up the next day.

This is how I do it:

The goal, imo, of effective weight training should combine variety, such as free weights vs machines and High Reps / Low Weight (goes good with tone, chiseling, stamina, etc) and Low Reps / High Weight. Also trying to NOT kill myself while getting an effective workout is key.

Day 1: Arms (when I say "arms", I don't mean JUST arms, but any muscle groups associated with arm movements like pec-dec, deltoids, trapezius, etc)

~ Machines

~ Low Reps, High Weight Load

Day 2: Core (Lower back, upper ass, mid back, ab/back obliques, abs, etc)

~ Machines (SOME free weights no matter what because my gym doesn't have a machine for ALL these groups, so I make due)

~ Low Reps, High Weight Load

Day 3: Legs (Quads, hamstring, soleus, gastrocnemius (rofl, sp?), calves, lower ass)

~ Machines

~ Low Reps, High Weight Load

Days 4, 5, 6: Same as above except on free weights instead of machines

Days 7, 8, 9: Same order of groups and on machines except now doing high reps with a low weight load.

Days 10, 11, 12: Same order of groups, but doing free weights with high rep counts and a low weight load.

Repeat.

I find it the best for my goals, time, and motivation. I try atm to do as much intense cardio as I can because I'm trying to drop all my weight. THIS time, however, I'm smart enough to do WT all along and get big into it so I don't look like a saggy baggy sullen sunken in elephant when my lbs are gone. This regimen allows for both free weights/machines and HR,LW/LR,HW, so basically chiseledness/tone/"long"-looking-yoga-type-muscles (free weights and HR,LW) and machines/LR,HW are what gives them strength and bulk. Doing a different core group everyday makes it so I'm not walking around 100% pissed off in soreness the following day, but rather 33.33% pissed off. It also keeps it "fresh" for me and makes it easier to stay motivated and actually follow through with my fitness goals.

I've had two fitness classes at the college, based from what I've learned, this seems like a sound enough regimen. If anyone has input, questions, or wants to add any tips though, I'm open. I know a decent amount about weight training, but know much more in nutrition and took much more rigorous upper-level biology courses regarding nutrition and how the entire human body works on a molecular level.

First paragraph hits in right on. My golden rule is to get at LEAST 30 minutes of cardio in at LEAST five days a week. I'm just now getting back into getting serious about weight loss and tone, especially because the profession that I'm going into absolutely requires me to be A) He-Man and B) Intimidating. One hour isn't hard to do if you're doing your whole body at one time, which I used to. Pestilence still does this. I DON'T for several reasons, usually time and I end up losing motivation after a minute. Also, I don't like for my WHOLE body to be jacked up the next day.

This is how I do it:

The goal, imo, of effective weight training should combine variety, such as free weights vs machines and High Reps / Low Weight (goes good with tone, chiseling, stamina, etc) and Low Reps / High Weight. Also trying to NOT kill myself while getting an effective workout is key.

Day 1: Arms (when I say "arms", I don't mean JUST arms, but any muscle groups associated with arm movements like pec-dec, deltoids, trapezius, etc)

~ Machines

~ Low Reps, High Weight Load

Day 2: Core (Lower back, upper ass, mid back, ab/back obliques, abs, etc)

~ Machines (SOME free weights no matter what because my gym doesn't have a machine for ALL these groups, so I make due)

~ Low Reps, High Weight Load

Day 3: Legs (Quads, hamstring, soleus, gastrocnemius (rofl, sp?), calves, lower ass)

~ Machines

~ Low Reps, High Weight Load

Days 4, 5, 6: Same as above except on free weights instead of machines

Days 7, 8, 9: Same order of groups and on machines except now doing high reps with a low weight load.

Days 10, 11, 12: Same order of groups, but doing free weights with high rep counts and a low weight load.

Repeat.

I find it the best for my goals, time, and motivation. I try atm to do as much intense cardio as I can because I'm trying to drop all my weight. THIS time, however, I'm smart enough to do WT all along and get big into it so I don't look like a saggy baggy sullen sunken in elephant when my lbs are gone. This regimen allows for both free weights/machines and HR,LW/LR,HW, so basically chiseledness/tone/"long"-looking-yoga-type-muscles (free weights and HR,LW) and machines/LR,HW are what gives them strength and bulk. Doing a different core group everyday makes it so I'm not walking around 100% pissed off in soreness the following day, but rather 33.33% pissed off. It also keeps it "fresh" for me and makes it easier to stay motivated and actually follow through with my fitness goals.

I've had two fitness classes at the college, based from what I've learned, this seems like a sound enough regimen. If anyone has input, questions, or wants to add any tips though, I'm open. I know a decent amount about weight training, but know much more in nutrition and took much more rigorous upper-level biology courses regarding nutrition and how the entire human body works on a molecular level.

[torn asunder]

...B) I thought I said 12%. I don't know why everyone keeps putting "g" after it. You'll notice in the last post I made where I made a breakdown, I clearly stated 12% protein, 35% fat, and rest to come from carbs. If I said "12g" on accident anywhere else, my bad, but I clearly have been saying 12% for at least the last few posts. I can understand adding a LITTLE more if you're doing weight training, but most bodybuilders go CRAZY with protein and in the long run do much more damage to themselves. Also, most women, in my experience, aren't looking to "bulk up" just get a little more toned, I'm just a rare case. Protein builds the muscle, it's carbs that sustain that built muscle.

here's where you said 12g of protein.

It needs a SMALL amount (a woman in her 20s should have around 12g of protein a day, anymore and you are killing your insides literally) to make the original building blocks, and then an overwhelming amount of complex carbohydrates to maintain/expand.

C) It's not that cardio isn't as healthy as weight training, I was insinuating that if you add in a WT regimen you don't have to wear yourself down doing a HUGE amount of unreasonable cardio to reach your desired results. To up your cardio and spend 2-3 hours on a treadmill a day is not only time consuming but probably a little over doing it. Hence why adding in a WT regimen, which will help raise your BMR and also burns additional calories (albeit, maybe not as much as intense cardio, but still a decent amount especially with the BMR advantage in there) is usually a smarter idea than JUST cardio. Having either JUST cardio or JUST weight training is like making a PB&J without either the jelly or the peanut butter, you're missing half of the equation.

if you control the amount of calories you take in, there's *absolutely* no need for 3 hrs of cardio.

D) You also state everything in this thread like fact and then try to rally everyone against me (telling everyone, basically in a tactful way that I'm full of shit) when I've been formally educated in the subject and don't get my info from non-regulated "self-research". And yes, the last part was opinion. Usually everything I say is opinion unless I state otherwise (much like the post regarding calorie energy, I cited the fact that it was something that was taught to me by scholars and researchers and shit, hence "citing" it).

i'm not rallying anyone against you. i'm asking you to be a little more clear when you make statements about this kind of thing. qualify your remarks with something, because the way you approach this, it's like you're stating irrefutable fact, when that's nowhere near the case. in fact, nothing any one of us says can be considered irrefutable, as there's no definitive evidence one way or another. the fact that you stated something to the affect that "high protein intake is *killing* you from the inside" is ridiculous. i directly challenge you to come up with one study that proves that an adult with healthy organ function and adequate hydration will be harmed by high protein intake. i have several certified trainers/dietitian friends who have been asking for this proof for years, and they'd love to see the evidence. i'll forward it to them as soon as i see it.

i'd also be interested in seeing your sources that show protein only helps in building muscle, but that to maintain it requires high amounts of carbs. i'll forward that to them as well.

Edited November 16, 2010 by torn asunder

[torn asunder]

The goal, imo, of effective weight training should combine variety, such as free weights vs machines and High Reps / Low Weight (goes good with tone, chiseling, stamina, etc) and Low Reps / High Weight. Also trying to NOT kill myself while getting an effective workout is key.

Day 1: Arms (when I say "arms", I don't mean JUST arms, but any muscle groups associated with arm movements like pec-dec, deltoids, trapezius, etc)

~ Machines

~ Low Reps, High Weight Load

Day 2: Core (Lower back, upper ass, mid back, ab/back obliques, abs, etc)

~ Machines (SOME free weights no matter what because my gym doesn't have a machine for ALL these groups, so I make due)

~ Low Reps, High Weight Load

Day 3: Legs (Quads, hamstring, soleus, gastrocnemius (rofl, sp?), calves, lower ass)

~ Machines

~ Low Reps, High Weight Load

Days 4, 5, 6: Same as above except on free weights instead of machines

Days 7, 8, 9: Same order of groups and on machines except now doing high reps with a low weight load.

Days 10, 11, 12: Same order of groups, but doing free weights with high rep counts and a low weight load.

Repeat.

I find it the best for my goals, time, and motivation. I try atm to do as much intense cardio as I can because I'm trying to drop all my weight. THIS time, however, I'm smart enough to do WT all along and get big into it so I don't look like a saggy baggy sullen sunken in elephant when my lbs are gone. This regimen allows for both free weights/machines and HR,LW/LR,HW, so basically chiseledness/tone/"long"-looking-yoga-type-muscles (free weights and HR,LW) and machines/LR,HW are what gives them strength and bulk. Doing a different core group everyday makes it so I'm not walking around 100% pissed off in soreness the following day, but rather 33.33% pissed off. It also keeps it "fresh" for me and makes it easier to stay motivated and actually follow through with my fitness goals.

I've had two fitness classes at the college, based from what I've learned, this seems like a sound enough regimen. If anyone has input, questions, or wants to add any tips though, I'm open. I know a decent amount about weight training, but know much more in nutrition and took much more rigorous upper-level biology courses regarding nutrition and how the entire human body works on a molecular level.

all i can say to this right now (because i have to get back to work) is that machines really should only be used by individuals who have little to no weightlifting experience. untrained people are likely to lose balance & drop weights, which is why machines can be helpful, but after a while, they can actually be more harmful than anything else. they don't allow for full range of motion, and they don't allow for training of stabilizing musculature. they force the body into predetermined ROMs and can quite easily cause joint misalignments, which are much more likely to cause injury.