Losing fat, maintain strength/muscle (for a fat kid)

[Gregor]

I think the whole point against typical cardio is:

1. it takes a lot of time

2. LongSlowDistance hasn't showed to increase gH at all. In fact, it tends to be muscle wasting.

3. HIT has been shown to produce more fat loss than LSD.

4. It's boring and lame.

1.everything takes time and do you think half an hour is alot time?

2.muscle wasting...if you are using BCAA, NO

4.I thought the same, but when you are in it could be magical.

[Blairbob]

1. 10-20mi runs, approxiamately at least an hour+ to 2 hours. 30m is fine which should would be about 4 miles for me. I prefer 10-20m of 1.5-3mi at most.

2/4. Yes, there is something sick about runner's high if you can get past the spacing out.

[Ortprod]

I think the whole point against typical cardio is:

1. it takes a lot of time

2. LongSlowDistance hasn't showed to increase gH at all. In fact, it tends to be muscle wasting.

3. HIT has been shown to produce more fat loss than LSD.

4. It's boring and lame.

I have read/experienced the same...

[Blairbob]

As well, I have a disgust of LDS from my days as a failed XC runner. I tried doing XC over the summer after being a sprinter in spring. Besides lagging back, not knowing the runs and getting chased by wild dogs; my body did not take to it well, especially my ankles. At one point, I used to like to do long runs occasionally but 1.5-3mi fits the bill anymore. Ipod helps and woulda been great in the old days.

[Gittit Shwartz]

I've tried the Taubes approach (keep the carbs down and let the rest take care of itself). It sounds great in theory but doesn't work in the modern world and it certainly doesn't work for someone who is already fairly lean or has been dieting for a long time.

Why? Here's my theory:

Taubes has two major points about what happens when you keep the carbs low:

1. The hormonal environment will be "favorable" for fat burning. This is true in general - but fat storage is still possible even in a very low insulin environment. There is no such thing as NO insulin in a non-diabetic (type I) and there are other hormones involved. It's just not that simple.

2. Your body will sense the extra available fuel floating around and urge you to burn it off by fidgeting, extra activity etc. thus "defeating" the static calories in-calories out model. This is true to some extent, but the problem is, in this modern world you will have fewer opportunities to expend energy AND you will be less likely to RESPOND to the urge to move because of work, schoolwork etc. and because of lifestyle habits (if your way of spending time with friends is sitting at a bar, you are not likely to suddenly drag them outside to play basketball, whereas in a hunter-gatherer society most social activity and chores are pretty darn active anyway). Also keep in mind that you're not working for your food. A hunter gatherer would have to walk all day to gather a bag of nuts (which he would then share with his family). These days low-carb but energy dense food is available with no effort involved. The balance is too much in favor of energy intake to balance it out with expenditure.

Bottom line - if you're stuck, start counting your calories. Add some metabolic work to that and you're golden.

[Ortprod]

I've tried the Taubes approach (keep the carbs down and let the rest take care of itself). It sounds great in theory but doesn't work in the modern world and it certainly doesn't work for someone who is already fairly lean or has been dieting for a long time.

Why? Here's my theory:

Taubes has two major points about what happens when you keep the carbs low:

1. The hormonal environment will be "favorable" for fat burning. This is true in general - but fat storage is still possible even in a very low insulin environment. There is no such thing as NO insulin in a non-diabetic (type I) and there are other hormones involved. It's just not that simple.

2. Your body will sense the extra available fuel floating around and urge you to burn it off by fidgeting, extra activity etc. thus "defeating" the static calories in-calories out model. This is true to some extent, but the problem is, in this modern world you will have fewer opportunities to expend energy AND you will be less likely to RESPOND to the urge to move because of work, schoolwork etc. and because of lifestyle habits (if your way of spending time with friends is sitting at a bar, you are not likely to suddenly drag them outside to play basketball, whereas in a hunter-gatherer society most social activity and chores are pretty darn active anyway). Also keep in mind that you're not working for your food. A hunter gatherer would have to walk all day to gather a bag of nuts (which he would then share with his family). These days low-carb but energy dense food is available with no effort involved. The balance is too much in favor of energy intake to balance it out with expenditure.

Bottom line - if you're stuck, start counting your calories. Add some metabolic work to that and you're golden.

Gittit Schwartz,

Thanks for addressing that first part! Great to hear you read Taubes and have come to that conclusion, albeit harder for me to do, haha. I guess I will have to buckle down and figure out a calorie restriction diet that works.

So, Gregor, Gittit or anyone else, do you know of a formula for calories in/ calories out? I weigh about 188lb total with around 165lb LBM. Should I just go with Zone? I was planning on using Poliquin's chart for PWO carbs, and probably do 1.5g per lb BW in protein, if I don't do "omega rx zone". I am going to continue using BCAA during and post workout.

Thanks again for all the input everyone, I really appreciate it.

Sincerely,

-J

[griffdrc]

google the harris benedict equation... just remember it tends to over estimate your ree by 6-15%...

[Gittit Shwartz]

There's a lot of individual variation... If you track your intake for a week or so without modifying what you've been doing, you'll be able to figure out your maintenance. Then shoot for a 10-15% deficit keeping protein high and carbs low. Use Fitday.com.

[Scott Kane]

I'm roughly the same size and body comp as you. Like you, I am pretty sedentary most of the day. I do a lot of sitting mainly in front of the computer. I have also been down the anabolic diet road and haven't been terribly impressed even with my daily caloric intake between 2000-2200. I was also following a steady state strength routine based on Coach Sommer's book. I was never a "fat kid", so I guess that would be a difference. At my absolute heaviest (meaning after a meal) I tipped the scale at about 200lb. I was consuming ridiculous amounts of calories to maintain that.

In February 2007 I stumbled upon Crossfit. At the time I was 194lbs probably 12%BF. Over the course of 3-4 months of straight Crossfit I dropped to 178 at ~7%BF. I maintained most of my strength and LBM. I followed the Zone diet at 16-18 blocks at different times during this process. I did not increase my fat blocks at all during this time.

My current goals are to lose some BF and increase my strength to weight ratio as it seems you want to also. I will be zoning again and doing CF. Depending on how I feel, I will also do the "One Lift a Day".

Monday--Planche and Front Lever + CF

Tuesday--Squat + CF

Wednesday--Ring routine + CF

Thursday--Deadlift + CF

Friday--Planche and Front Lever

Saturday--?

Sunday--?

I may split the planche and front lever training also. Maybe do PL on Monday and FL on Friday or something along those lines. I've also been thinking of trying out P90X to simply lose BF. It also seems to be a bit easier than CF in terms of impact and load. I have back issues, so I have to be careful with the sq and dl. I haven't heard anything bad about P90X other than "Crossfit is better". Although that came from the Crossfit community so I don't believe it's too reliable. It also depends on your goals. Crossfit is free though and can be scaled using the BrandX scaled WOD, which I have been doing. I didn't think it wise to deadlift 225x21-15-9 with a less than bullet proof back.

In summary, I think metabolic conditioning will help you see results much faster than diet alone. From my experience even with pretty extreme caloric restriction 2000-2200 calories, I just wasn't seeing the results. Adding in metcon really has started to get things rolling. I will be following the Zone at 16 blocks protein and fat with only 12 blocks carbs, which should put me under 2000cal. Each zone block (P-F-C included) has about 130 calories. I'm not currently worried about performance on the metcon. I just want to lose BF, especially with summer right around the corner! It will also be good for my back.

Below is my fitday journal so you can see my daily food intake. Hope some of this is useful.

http://fitday.com/fitness/PublicJournals.html?Owner=scottkane

[Guest Ido Portal]

Dear Ortprod,

I only respond to this thread because you asked me personaly to do so.

A couple of thoughts on this thread:

1. Nothing good comes out of a bunch of thrown out internet advice, your thread includes contradictory recommendations that includes: low carb, keto, zone, paleo, calories in vs out, and more. All sounds promising and backed up by data. Or is it?!?

2. Most people do not have success with manipulating their own diets and answering similar questions to yours- by themselfs, but somehow they will offer their non functional advice to others. People, if it was that easy, you yourself would be lean. (lean is under 8% bf male, 15% female) Unlike a weak, out of shape trainer, I would never listen to a fat nutritionist. Period.

3. Your fat storage as you indicate is not optimal, which is evidence to a less than optimal endocrine status. This should be resolved.

4. I am not a fan of counting calories, but some people are pigs, and should be shown a picture of a vacuum and a mouth and having it explained that they are not the same.

5. Too much knowledge and too little will-power are a bad combination. Consistency, stability, control and balance are to be admired. People are obsessed with smaller and smaller details, they are detail-junkies. This has little effect on the real world, from my experience. So if you are after results, start to exchange some of your detail-hungry traits with will-power, stability, consistency, hard work, etc. Leaning out is not easy, but it is simple.

6. If you fail so many times in applying different nutrition plans on your own, the ONLY conclusion is: YOU CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO RUN BUISNESS. Seek the help of a professional. Expensive? in the long run, it will be cheaper, easier and more efficient, but that is not the most important thing. The most important thing is: for many, many people, it is the only way to get there.

Harsh, but true.

Ido Portal,

Hacasa Performance Center,

Haifa,

Israel.

[Ortprod]

Thanks Ido! I do not mind the truth in your words, it's much better than ice skating uphill for the next year (or years to come) trying to do this on my own. I trust your judgment, I'll go to a pro asap. I think I have held it off for so long for fear of getting old info out of them and just spinning my wheels and wasting money.

Thanks again for taking time to write in.

[braindx]

Good article on nutrition...

http://lifespotlight.com/health/2008/06 ... -remember/

[Richard Duelley]

After tons of research I just try to eat clean (lean meats, fish, lots of veggies, moderate fruit, low processed junk) and take my supplements (multi vitamin, fish oil, olive oil - thats it besides the post workout protein). I think the main thing, as Ido pointed out, is WILL POWER. I find it extremely difficult to sit there at lunch (I am in college) and eat a salad with tuna fish while my friends are eating pizza and large (very yummy looking) bowels of pasta. But I am really enjoying the results of the past 6 months of hard work. I am more lean and stronger than I have ever been and my self confidence has gone way up with my success. I still have a little ways to go so the battle continues and I doubt it will ever end because once I reach my goals I have to stay there.

I am also one of those vacuums (used to be but sometimes relapse :roll: ) that Ido described, if I dont actively check myself I can eat for hours. My 'you are full' reflex is weak/non-existent so I can eat and eat and eat until I get physically ill (not fun) so I really have to work hard on my diet every hour of every day.

Good luck with your body composition goals! :!:

[Guest Cornfed_Iowan]

I can't believe water has not been mentioned ONCE in this post. Is it too obvious to mention or does no one drink any?

[Richard Duelley]

Water is what I drink mostly; I would estimate 4-6 nalgenes a day. Sometimes I have orange juice in the morning or a glass of milk with dinner as well. I always use milk with my protein shake after every workout.

I have always assumed drinking enough water was the one diet default that everyone knows

So I guess, at least for me, it was too obvious to mention. Great point nonetheless. 8)

[Joshua Naterman]

I'll be interested to hear what the nutritionist you visit has to say, please share with the rest of us!

I read through this thing, and I have to say that I hope everyone read Ido Portal's post. I think the most directly relevant thing to this thread he posted is that most people have limited success at best with managing their own diet for fat lost purposes, and that the best thing for Ortprod to do was to go to a professional. The rest of what he said is also very much in line with my own thought processes. I don't really agree with the words "easy" or "hard" being used in much of any context, because I personally believe they are words of excuse. It's all about whether you get relevant information, will put the time in and be consistent. If you do, you get what you want. If you don't, you won't. But Ido's right about everything he said. Thanks for being blunt

Also, as a general note for everyone, going ketogenic is one of the most unhealthy things you can do to your body, period. It is a terrible idea.

As for the cardio, cardio doesn't do a very good job of burning fat. FAT BURNING aerobic exercise does. What's the difference? Effort level. The word cardio makes people feel like they need to work hard. Try to think of what you do for losing fat as specifically FAT BURNING, not cardio. If you're working so hard that you can't carry on a nice, casual conversation then you are working too hard to burn fat effectively as a primary energy source. Why? Here's the thing. No matter what you are doing, your body burns ATP. That's it. Protein, sugars, and fat can all be broken down into ATP. It's all about what is convenient for your body to use. You get more ATP from a fatty acid than you do from a sugar, but the process takes longer. If you're burning energy (ATP) faster than your body can produce it from fatty acids, your body is going to switch over to using more sugar. Our bodies can't produce as much ATP from sugar as it can from fat, one molecule compared to another, but it can break the sugar down into ATP a WHOLE lot faster! It gets more energy in any specified period of time, whether it's a minute or an hour, from sugar than it does from fat. The typical person has enough sugar stored to last for up to 2 hours of constant effort with sugar as the primary source of ATP. The fat can last a lot longer, but doesn't give as much energy. That's why no matter how hard you train you will only be able to keep a really high output for around 2 hours. That's why marathon times don't continue to drop dramatically, and why the athletes are so supremely exhausted when they are finished, they are pushing the limits of the energy systems our bodies have.

Anyhow, as far as weight loss goes, walking uphill without using anything for support is the best low-intensity exercise to do for losing fat. You want to walk uphill for at least 45 minutes, preferably an hour. Our bodies take time to adjust the nutrients it converts into ATP, so the first 10 minutes are really more of a "What the hell am I doing?" time. After that, our bodies steadily shift to using more and more fat in place of sugar for energy, up to the point where it reaches the limit of energy that can be produced from fat while still maintaining the present level of effort. Full adjustments are made around the 30 minute mark. That's why you hear people saying 30 minutes for losing weight, but the truth is that 30 minutes is when the magic starts to happen. An hour is plenty of time, for me walking up hill at 15 degrees for an hour burns around 1000 calories. Yea, you read that right. And my heart rate never gets above 130. I can talk your ear off the while time.

Now, I want to be clear. You can burn A LOT of fat with interval exercises. You will never hear me say you can't, or that they are in any way inferior. The problem with interval exercises is that we are already on intense programs. They burn a lot of sugar, and do significantly more muscle damage than walking does, which means that they require more recovery. That can push a lot of people who are already working hard into overtraining, which is a terrible thing to do to yourself. So, for someone like Ortprod, and I think for most of us, you are going to want to do low-intensity fat-burning. It requires minimal recovery, burns very little sugar, and gives very very good results. I tell everyone who comes to me asking about losing fat to walk uphill if the other stuff isn't working. If they're fit, aren't working out too hard, and want to do intervals I think it's great. Intervals take less time and are more fun than walking for an hour. Unfortunately you need to be able to move pretty fast and to be able to do many intervals to get decent fatloss, and that requires a certain base level of fitness. A lot of people don't have it. So for many people, whether due to being overweight, out of shape, or already close to the limits of their recovery the uphill walking tends to be the overall better solution. I definitely recommend throwing on a movie or watching the news or something else to pass the time while you walk That's what I do. The typical results I get for this are people dropping 8-12 lbs a month of bodyfat. That's walking 4 days a week. Usually when they are closer to 12 lbs they are walking 5 or 6 days a week, but I think that's just more than I will ever be willing to do It works fast though, and it doesn't waste your muscles.

If all you're doing is one set of weights, one real handstand workout and one ring workout a week with some random statics and ab work thrown in, you're definitely in the clear to do intervals. They probably won't drain you. If you're on a competitive training schedule and you are doing several tough workouts a week along with statics and skill training, you probably don't have the available recovery ability to take on intervals. They will probably hinder your progress. The harder you train, the less extra recovery ability you have. You'll build up better recovery over time, but if you're pushing yourself as it is and you want to lose fat, either back off on your workouts to just maintaining what you have build and do intervals or continue working hard and walk uphill.

The calories are kind of a mixed bad, but your general rule of thumb is that you want to use a calorie calculator that factors in your activity level. Then you want to eat for a weight 5-10 lbs less that what you are at currently, never further down than that. You want that calorie level to be the average of 7 days of eating. You'll eat more some days and less others, that's natural and you should not fight it. But you SHOULD be damn near right on that calorie level you calculate for the lighter bodyweight. If you're not, or if you don't zig-zag your diet(that's when you eat more some days and less others) then you will not experience the success you claim to crave. You never want a calorie deficit of more than 500 calories compared to your current weight, usually you want to be around 300. That's why you shoot for the 5-10 lb lighter bodyweight calorie count, it keeps you in a safe weightloss zone where you will be burning mostly fat, not losing muscle you worked your butt off to build.

And please, drink lots of water The more water you drink, the easier it will be for your body to burn the fat. Water is used to break down substances in the body. If you don't have it, your metabolism will be slower.

[Ortprod]

I actually managed to meet both Ido and Robb after I first posted this thread. I managed to go to Robb's nutrition cert in Boston.

End result: I am down to 174.4 from 185lb.

I did Zone, and then Paleo-ish/Zone (prior to going to California to the seminar). Since I switched to pure Paleo guidelines, the fat loss has been amazing to say the least. I haven't been this light in 10+ years

Many thanks to Ido and Robb!

[Jason Stein]

John,

That is effing phenomenal work, mate! I'm psyched to hear about your progress!

I'm expecting full planche by ... ?

best,

jason

[Joshua Naterman]

I actually managed to meet both Ido and Robb after I first posted this thread. I managed to go to Robb's nutrition cert in Boston.

End result: I am down to 174.4 from 185lb.

I did Zone, and then Paleo-ish/Zone (prior to going to California to the seminar). Since I switched to pure Paleo guidelines, the fat loss has been amazing to say the least. I haven't been this light in 10+ years

Many thanks to Ido and Robb!

That's awesome, man! Congratulations!

[Ortprod]

Thanks guys

I am pretty far away from a solid planche but I think I am within a year of a solid straddle (?)

*puts hands together and looks up

[Joshua Naterman]

LOL, amen to that.

[Guest cccp21]

I'll be interested to hear what the nutritionist you visit has to say, please share with the rest of us!

I read through this thing, and I have to say that I hope everyone read Ido Portal's post. I think the most directly relevant thing to this thread he posted is that most people have limited success at best with managing their own diet for fat lost purposes, and that the best thing for Ortprod to do was to go to a professional. The rest of what he said is also very much in line with my own thought processes. I don't really agree with the words "easy" or "hard" being used in much of any context, because I personally believe they are words of excuse. It's all about whether you get relevant information, will put the time in and be consistent. If you do, you get what you want. If you don't, you won't. But Ido's right about everything he said. Thanks for being blunt

Also, as a general note for everyone, going ketogenic is one of the most unhealthy things you can do to your body, period. It is a terrible idea.

As for the cardio, cardio doesn't do a very good job of burning fat. FAT BURNING aerobic exercise does. What's the difference? Effort level. The word cardio makes people feel like they need to work hard. Try to think of what you do for losing fat as specifically FAT BURNING, not cardio. If you're working so hard that you can't carry on a nice, casual conversation then you are working too hard to burn fat effectively as a primary energy source. Why? Here's the thing. No matter what you are doing, your body burns ATP. That's it. Protein, sugars, and fat can all be broken down into ATP. It's all about what is convenient for your body to use. You get more ATP from a fatty acid than you do from a sugar, but the process takes longer. If you're burning energy (ATP) faster than your body can produce it from fatty acids, your body is going to switch over to using more sugar. Our bodies can't produce as much ATP from sugar as it can from fat, one molecule compared to another, but it can break the sugar down into ATP a WHOLE lot faster! It gets more energy in any specified period of time, whether it's a minute or an hour, from sugar than it does from fat. The typical person has enough sugar stored to last for up to 2 hours of constant effort with sugar as the primary source of ATP. The fat can last a lot longer, but doesn't give as much energy. That's why no matter how hard you train you will only be able to keep a really high output for around 2 hours. That's why marathon times don't continue to drop dramatically, and why the athletes are so supremely exhausted when they are finished, they are pushing the limits of the energy systems our bodies have.

Anyhow, as far as weight loss goes, walking uphill without using anything for support is the best low-intensity exercise to do for losing fat. You want to walk uphill for at least 45 minutes, preferably an hour. Our bodies take time to adjust the nutrients it converts into ATP, so the first 10 minutes are really more of a "What the hell am I doing?" time. After that, our bodies steadily shift to using more and more fat in place of sugar for energy, up to the point where it reaches the limit of energy that can be produced from fat while still maintaining the present level of effort. Full adjustments are made around the 30 minute mark. That's why you hear people saying 30 minutes for losing weight, but the truth is that 30 minutes is when the magic starts to happen. An hour is plenty of time, for me walking up hill at 15 degrees for an hour burns around 1000 calories. Yea, you read that right. And my heart rate never gets above 130. I can talk your ear off the while time.

Now, I want to be clear. You can burn A LOT of fat with interval exercises. You will never hear me say you can't, or that they are in any way inferior. The problem with interval exercises is that we are already on intense programs. They burn a lot of sugar, and do significantly more muscle damage than walking does, which means that they require more recovery. That can push a lot of people who are already working hard into overtraining, which is a terrible thing to do to yourself. So, for someone like Ortprod, and I think for most of us, you are going to want to do low-intensity fat-burning. It requires minimal recovery, burns very little sugar, and gives very very good results. I tell everyone who comes to me asking about losing fat to walk uphill if the other stuff isn't working. If they're fit, aren't working out too hard, and want to do intervals I think it's great. Intervals take less time and are more fun than walking for an hour. Unfortunately you need to be able to move pretty fast and to be able to do many intervals to get decent fatloss, and that requires a certain base level of fitness. A lot of people don't have it. So for many people, whether due to being overweight, out of shape, or already close to the limits of their recovery the uphill walking tends to be the overall better solution. I definitely recommend throwing on a movie or watching the news or something else to pass the time while you walk That's what I do. The typical results I get for this are people dropping 8-12 lbs a month of bodyfat. That's walking 4 days a week. Usually when they are closer to 12 lbs they are walking 5 or 6 days a week, but I think that's just more than I will ever be willing to do It works fast though, and it doesn't waste your muscles.

If all you're doing is one set of weights, one real handstand workout and one ring workout a week with some random statics and ab work thrown in, you're definitely in the clear to do intervals. They probably won't drain you. If you're on a competitive training schedule and you are doing several tough workouts a week along with statics and skill training, you probably don't have the available recovery ability to take on intervals. They will probably hinder your progress. The harder you train, the less extra recovery ability you have. You'll build up better recovery over time, but if you're pushing yourself as it is and you want to lose fat, either back off on your workouts to just maintaining what you have build and do intervals or continue working hard and walk uphill.

The calories are kind of a mixed bad, but your general rule of thumb is that you want to use a calorie calculator that factors in your activity level. Then you want to eat for a weight 5-10 lbs less that what you are at currently, never further down than that. You want that calorie level to be the average of 7 days of eating. You'll eat more some days and less others, that's natural and you should not fight it. But you SHOULD be damn near right on that calorie level you calculate for the lighter bodyweight. If you're not, or if you don't zig-zag your diet(that's when you eat more some days and less others) then you will not experience the success you claim to crave. You never want a calorie deficit of more than 500 calories compared to your current weight, usually you want to be around 300. That's why you shoot for the 5-10 lb lighter bodyweight calorie count, it keeps you in a safe weightloss zone where you will be burning mostly fat, not losing muscle you worked your butt off to build.

And please, drink lots of water The more water you drink, the easier it will be for your body to burn the fat. Water is used to break down substances in the body. If you don't have it, your metabolism will be slower.

************************* Just to post something odd that i do(or have found thru my own experience) is that zig-zagging of a sense(Joel Marion comes to mind) does work at least for me. Second mass development of any kind is energy "expensive" to the body

Third hormonal staus does play a role(high gh,test and thyroid,low insulin). Last i take supps that support CNS recovery and i provide for great variety even in my "beginning" to gymnastics program. In other words my workouts are 2-3 hours a day(this includes 1/2 to 1hr. of ping pong in the warmup) 5-6 days a week(with greater variety you can do more work)!

Brandon Green

[Guest cccp21]

Dear Ortprod,

I only respond to this thread because you asked me personaly to do so.

A couple of thoughts on this thread:

1. Nothing good comes out of a bunch of thrown out internet advice, your thread includes contradictory recommendations that includes: low carb, keto, zone, paleo, calories in vs out, and more. All sounds promising and backed up by data. Or is it?!?

2. Most people do not have success with manipulating their own diets and answering similar questions to yours- by themselfs, but somehow they will offer their non functional advice to others. People, if it was that easy, you yourself would be lean. (lean is under 8% bf male, 15% female) Unlike a weak, out of shape trainer, I would never listen to a fat nutritionist. Period.

3. Your fat storage as you indicate is not optimal, which is evidence to a less than optimal endocrine status. This should be resolved.

4. I am not a fan of counting calories, but some people are pigs, and should be shown a picture of a vacuum and a mouth and having it explained that they are not the same.

5. Too much knowledge and too little will-power are a bad combination. Consistency, stability, control and balance are to be admired. People are obsessed with smaller and smaller details, they are detail-junkies. This has little effect on the real world, from my experience. So if you are after results, start to exchange some of your detail-hungry traits with will-power, stability, consistency, hard work, etc. Leaning out is not easy, but it is simple.

6. If you fail so many times in applying different nutrition plans on your own, the ONLY conclusion is: YOU CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO RUN BUISNESS. Seek the help of a professional. Expensive? in the long run, it will be cheaper, easier and more efficient, but that is not the most important thing. The most important thing is: for many, many people, it is the only way to get there.

Harsh, but true.

Ido Portal,

Hacasa Performance Center,

Haifa,

Israel.

************** do you have a book that you recommend as far as dieting?

Brandon

[Guest Ido Portal]

I have many books that paint part of the picture, but not even one that contains the whole Shabang.

Here are some:

The Metabolic Diet / Mauro di Pasquale

Lights Out / Wiley

Protein Power / Eades

The Paleo Diet / Cordain

Natural Hormonal Enhencement / Faigin

Neaderthin / Audette

I can go on and on. I am an obsessed reader. I read many books at the same time and on many topics.

I also recommend to get my good friend's upcomming book - Robb Wolf on nutrition. If you are smart you will make this book a part of your library as I will.

Ido.

[ORTred]

Hey guys, lost my old passwords so I made a new account. figured I should update since I attended Coach Sommer's seminar this last weekend.

Finally getting leaner, years later: