|
|
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
Abdominal Fat: What is the best way to lose it? Body For Life: I've been doing the Body for Life program and I seem to be stuck... Cardio: How much cardio should I do to lose body fat as quickly as possible? I'm not real 'big' on exercise. Can I lose weight with just dieting...? Morning Cardio Controversy: Does cardio in the morning on an empty stomach really burn more fat? Stubborn lower body fat -Should I just give up and chalk it up to bad genetics? Swimming: Do you recommend swimming for cardio? What do you think of Body for Life cardio? 
Q: Abdominal Fat: What is
the best way to lose it?
A: Date: Apr 17, 1999 Dear Tom, I'm pretty lean overall, but no matter what I do, I can't seem to get rid of this last little bit of fat on my lower abs. What are the best ab exercises to burn the fat off? If I hear this question one more time, I'm gonna scream! Ok, let me clear this up once and for all: You can't "spot reduce" fat from one specific part of your body! You lose fat systemically. That means you can't control where it comes from. When fat is oxidized for energy, you will draw it from all areas of the body, and the first place you tend to put it on will be the last place it comes off. Everyone has certain "stubborn" areas where the fat seems "hard to get rid of" but the fat WILL go, it will just be the last place to go. The best way to burn fat off your abs is not to do more ab work, but to do more cardiovascular work: Bike, Stairmaster, treadmill, elliptical machine or rower - they're all great fat burners. Work at about 70-85% of your age-predicted maximal heart rate (220-your age) and maintain it for 30-45 minutes 5-6 days a week for optimal results. Train your abs about twice a week, just as you would any other body part. Doing your abs every day will do almost nothing to remove the layer of fat covering the muscles. In fact, it's possible to have a great set of abs that you can't even see because they are covered up with a layer of fat! And don't forget, nutrition is half the battle when it comes to fat loss! If you're drinking beer and eating pizza on a regular basis, it doesn't matter what you do in the gym, you'll probably never get a great set of abs. Tom's formula for ripped abs: Nutrition: 50% These questions and answers were provided courtesy of Tom Venuto and www.burnthefat.com. Tom is a lifetime natural bodybuilder, personal trainer, gym owner, freelance writer and author of "Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle" (BFFM): Fat Burning Secrets of the World's Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. A:Date: Sep 27, 2000 Tom, I have been doing the "Body for Life" program for 14 weeks & while I've made good improvement, my fat loss has been agonizingly slow. I'm at 20 percent body fat with a goal of 10 percent. I've followed the plan as closely as I know how to, but I seem to be stuck. Any insight or suggestions would be GREATLY appreciated. Bill Phillip's program, Body for Life (BFL), covers every aspect of the fat-burning equation: cardiovascular training, weight training, nutrition and motivation. That's a winning combination in my book. Assuming that you're already following every part of the program, then there's one way you can accelerate your progress and get down to your final body fat goal more quickly: BFL recommends what Mr. Phillips calls "The 20 minute aerobics solution." Phillips writes: "Wouldn't it be great if there was something that produced maximum results in minimum time? Well guess what? There is. I call it the 20-minute aerobics solution. This program involves performing only 20 minutes of aerobic exercise three times per week - no more, no less." It would be great if everyone could lose fat with only 20 minutes of daily aerobic exercise just three times a week, but when things sound too good to be true, they usually are. There are six billion people on this planet and it's ridiculous to assume that everyone will respond the same to one workout program. If you're genetically blessed with a fast metabolism and the ability to burn fat easily, then three days a week for 20 minutes will work for you. In fact, I know a few people with hyperactive metabolisms that stay ripped all year round without doing any cardio at all! (Don't you just hate those people?) You should do as much - or as little - cardio as it takes for YOU to reach YOUR goal. You can only determine that amount by through trial and error. If you can lose fat from just three 20 minute workouts a week - that's GREAT! Don't do any more than you have to. However, if you've been doing 20 minute workouts three times per week and nothing is happening, you need to increase your duration and/or frequency until the fat starts coming off. If your goal is maximum fat loss, then I'd recommend 30-60 minutes 5-7 days per week. Once you reach your desired percentage of body fat, then you could drop down to just 3 - 4 days a week for 20 minutes for maintenance. Almost every competitive bodybuilder I have ever met does cardio every day before contests (and some even do it twice a day). In addition to frequency and duration, the intensity of your workouts is also important. In BFL, Phillips recommends short, high intensity cardio sessions - and he's right - moderate to high intensity cardio, such as interval training, is more effective than low intensity cardio; the higher the intensity, the more calories you burn. The problem is, you can only burn so many calories in 20 minutes no matter how hard you work out. Losing body fat all boils down to burning more calories; the more calories you burn in a one-week period, the more fat you'll lose. For example, If you do a high intensity interval workout for 20 minutes a session on a Stairmaster, treadmill or bike, you might burn about 400 calories. Granted, that's a lot of calories for a 20 minute workout, but with only three sessions, it only adds up to 1200 total calories a week. If you doubled your time to 40 minutes and you did six days a week at a moderate intensity, you would burn about 600 calories per workout. Do that six times per week and that's a total of 3600 calories in a week - three times as much as the high intensity interval workout! Combine the cardio with a 500-calorie per day deficit and that's another 3500 calories for a total deficit of 7100 calories per week. There are 3500 calories in a pound of fat, so that's two pounds of fat you'd lose in one week! As an interesting side note, I've had dozens of people come into our health clubs for body fat measurements for the BFL challenge contest and I chatted with them about how they planned to win. Wanna know something? The ones who got extremely lean did in fact follow the BFL program just as instructed in the book, supplements and everything - everything except the part about just three days of cardio a week. Almost every one of them admitted to me that they took the liberty of doing more cardio than the program suggested. Try increasing your cardio, while maintaining a fairly high level of intensity. I've never seen anyone fail to get lean from doing 5-7 days of cardio for 45 minutes a session. If you're already doing this much cardio and you're still not losing body fat, then the problem is definitely your diet, not your workout program. Be persistent; this process takes time. A good goal for losing body fat is 1/2 a percent each week, so your goal of reaching 10% body fat from your current level of 20% is a 20 week project - and that's if you stick with it 100% without any set backs. Be patient and never-endingly keep at it. As long as you keep your eye on your goal and you keep working towards it diligently and patiently, you can't fail. These questions and answers were provided courtesy of Tom Venuto and www.burnthefat.com. Tom is a lifetime natural bodybuilder, personal trainer, gym owner, freelance writer and author of "Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle" (BFFM): Fat Burning Secrets of the World's Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. A:Date: Apr 20, 1999 Dear Tom, I just read an article in a bodybuilding magazine that said all you need to lose fat is three days a week on a cardio machine for twenty minutes. It said that low intensity, long duration cardio workouts are not the best way to lose fat and that a high intensity twenty-minute workout is more efficient. Is this true? I don't have a lot of time to work out so it would be great if I could get my cardio done in only twenty minutes. Yes it's true that higher intensity cardio workouts burn more calories per unit of time AND increase metabolism more after the workout than low intensity workouts. High intensity cardio, including high intensity interval training (HIIT), is very effective and time efficient, although it's not for everyone. It's well known that low intensity exercise utilizes primarily fat as fuel and high intensity exercise utilizes more carbohydrate as fuel. In the past, this was the basis for the idea that low intensity, long duration aerobic exercise was superior for fat loss. Some people were were afraid to exercise too intensely because they thought it would make them burn only "sugar" and not body fat. Today, research has proven that this belief was false. A 1995 study conducted by Grediagin, et al, and published in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association (95(6):661-5) compared fat loss in two groups over a 12 week period. One group performed exercise at 80% of VO2 max for a duration sufficient to burn 300 kcal, the other group performed exercise at 50% of VO2 max for a duration sufficient to burn 300 calories. Hydrostatic body composition testing revealed that each group lost an identical amount of fat. The authors concluded, "This study suggests that fat loss is a function of energy expended rather than exercise intensity. Therefore, if fat loss is the goal and time is limited, persons should exercise safely at as high an intensity as tolerable to expend as much energy as possible during their allotted time." A 1990 study published by Ballard, et al in the same journal (51(2):142-6) had identical findings. High (80-90% VO2max) versus low (40-50% VO2max) intensity rates were compared in two groups with duration carefully controlled to ensure each group burned the same number of calories. The high intensity group exercised for only 25 minutes and the low intensity group for 50 minutes, yet both groups lost the same amount of body fat! Although many factors are involved in exercise-induced fat loss, the most important factor appears to be the total number of calories burned, NOT whether the calories burned are fat or carbohydrate. When discussing the effects of exercise intensity on fat loss, it's also important to consider energy expenditure after the workout, not just the calories burned during the workout. Higher intensities not only burn more calories per unit of time, but they also elevate your metabolism more at rest after the workout is over. This post workout increase in metabolic rate is known as "excess post exercise oxygen consumption" or EPOC for short. It has been proposed, based on the results of several studies comparing the amount of calories burned at rest after low intensity versus high intensity exercise, that HIIT is a superior method of fat loss due to its effect on post workout metabolic rate. Clearly, HIIT is the logical protocol of choice if you are already highly fit and pressed for time. However, it's also logical that time permitting, more frequent and longer duration exercise might cause even greater overall fat loss if intensity is sufficient, simply because more total calories can be burned over the course of a week. For example, if you do 20 minutes of very intense cardio, you might burn about 400 calories. That's a lot of calories for such a brief workout. But it only adds up to 1200 total calories in one week if your frequency is only three days per week. If you double your frequency to six days per week, you double your caloric expenditure to 2400 calories per week. If you also increase your duration, your intensity will decrease (so you'll burn fewer calories per minute), but the calorie expenditure for the entire workout goes up, which increases your total weekly calorie burn even further. Duration and intensity are inversely related, so the longer the workout, the lower the intensity. But that doesnt mean a 30 or 45 minute workout necessarily has to be "low" in intensity. A 30 or 45 minute steady state workout can be "moderate" or "moderately-high" in intensity, and the combination of the highest intensity you can muster with a 30-45 minute duration can create an enormous calorie burn. Some of that calorie burn will occur after the workout as well, because studies have shown that EPOC is influenced not just by intensity, but also by duration. In order to achieve optimal rates of fat loss, it's important to consider the total number of calories you burn both during and after exercise over the course of each week. You must also consider the interplay between different combinations of intensity, frequency and duration because total calorie expenditure is not just a function of intensity, but of intensity times duration and frequency. Although infrequent and very brief (15-20 minutes or less) HIIT workouts have recently gained great popularity (and deservedly so), more research needs to be done to identify the effects of various combinations of intensity, duration and frequency on body composition for various populations. Organizations such as The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) recommend longer duration exercise when an individual's goal is fat loss. The ACSM position stand titled, "The recommended quantity and quality of exercise" states, "A threshold level for total body mass and fat mass loss generally would require at least 30-45 min of exercise per session for a person of average fitness. If the primary purpose of the training program is for weight loss, then regimens of greater frequency and duration of training and moderate intensity are recommended. Shorter duration, higher intensity programs may be recommended for healthy individuals at low risk for cardiovascular disease and orthopedic injury." To avoid overtraining or injury, which become risks with higher frequency, duration and intensity, build up slowly, and also alter your volume and intensity in a "seasonal" fashion, based on your goals at the moment. If your goal is to maintain your current level of body fat and stay healthy, I'd recommend at least 20 minutes of aerobic activity 3 days per week. If your goal is maximum fat loss, then I would sometimes recommend as much as 30-60 minutes 5-6 days per week, if necessary. You can also consider the option of combining long, moderate intensity sessions with brief, high intensity sessions. Once you reach your desired percentage of body fat, then you can gradually shift back into a "maintenance" program of lesser frequency, duration and intensity. Genetics also play a role in the ideal volume of cardio for fat loss. If you're one of the few people who are genetically blessed with the fast metabolism and physical attributes to burn fat easily, then three days a week for twenty minutes often provides sufficient stimulus for results. In fact, I know a few people with hyperactive metabolisms who stay ripped all year round without doing any cardio at all. Not many people are that fortunate. I've seen very few people who can lose fat at the maximum rate with a cardio frequency of three days per week. On the other hand, I have never seen anyone do six days a week of cardio for 30-45 minutes or more per session and NOT lose a lot of body fat (assuming their nutrition was satisfactory). The bottom line is that a single prescription, such as "three days a week for 20 minutes" will not work for everyone and protocols such as HIIT are also not for everyone. Exercise programs must be prescribed on an individual basis and they are not static - frequency, duration and intensity need to be adjusted based on results. Three twenty-minute cardio sessions may or may not be sufficient, depending on your goals, your current level of fitness and your actual results, but longer and/or more frequent cardio sessions are sometimes a necessary evil. These questions and answers were provided courtesy of Tom Venuto and www.burnthefat.com. Tom is a lifetime natural bodybuilder, personal trainer, gym owner, freelance writer and author of "Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle" (BFFM): Fat Burning Secrets of the World's Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. A:Submitted by: MIke R. / Date: Oct 13, 2004 Dear Tom, I need to lose about 35 pounds, but I'm not too big on exercise. Can I lose weight with just dieting and will a program like your "Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle" be suitable for someone like me? I've been reading a lot of your articles and I admire your honesty, so please tell me the truth. Mike R., In a word, the short honest answer, would be "no", the Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle program would not be suitable if you're "not big on exercise"... However, let me qualify that answer and explain why you may want to consider changing your outlook on exercise and why exercise is superior to diet for permanent fat loss. The entire premise behind my program is that conventional diets don't work and that it's better to BURN THE FAT than it is to starve the fat. There's only ONE WAY to lose fat - and that is to create a calorie deficit. However, there are two ways to create a calorie deficit - one is to decrease your food intake so you are eating less than you burn, the other is to increase your exercise and activity so you are burning more than you eat. Of the two ways to create a calorie deficit, burning the fat is far superior to starving it. You see, cutting calories too much causes weight loss at first, but it also causes muscle loss and it eventually leads to a decrease in metabolism, so the weight loss stops. This is very common on conventional diets, right? You lose weight in the beginning, but then you hit a plateau that you just can't break through. Cutting calories even more at this point only digs you even into a deeper "metabolic hole." Eating more of the right foods (up to a certain point) actually increases your metabolic "heat" like putting wood on a fire. Food is energy; food is fuel, and it produces (metabolic) heat. Exercise burns calories and creates a calorie deficit, but the real advantage of exercise over diet is that exercise increases your metabolism, dieting slows it down. Exercise also has major health benefits, while starvation can only create health problems. So if you eat more (healthy foods) and exercise more, you get a double increase in metabolism. If you eat less and exercise less you get a double decrease in metabolism. That makes complete sense doesn't it? So, if you're "not big on exercise," you can certainly lose body fat with diet alone, as long as you have a calorie deficit, but you're stacking the odds against you because ultimately, restrictive low calorie diets always cause metabolic damage. No matter how hard you try, you'll almost always hit a plateau before you reach your long term goal and you're likely to gain all the weight back (not fun!) I'd suggest you re-examine your definition of "exercise." Fitness means different things to different people. Sitting on a bicycle in a health club might not be your idea of fun and you might not be big on that, but if you think hard enough, I'm sure that you can come up with some type of physical activity that burns calories which you can enjoy. The IDEAL exercise program for fat loss has a combination of cardiovascular (aerobic) training and strength training. But ultimately, you're not likely to stick with exercise long term unless you choose activities you enjoy - so pick something you enjoy, even if it doesn't follow the guidelines of "traditional" fat loss programs. It's better to do something than nothing, and all exercise counts. Some people may have orthopedic problems which limit the type of exercise they can do. But nearly everyone can walk. So if you can walk, then walk. And almost everyone can do some type of strength training. Instead of focusing on what you can't do or what you don't like to do, direct your attention to what you CAN do and what you would like to do. Maybe you don't like being couped up inside all the time. Maybe you'd prefer hiking or jogging outside. Or maybe boxing or martial arts sounds cool to you. Maybe you like basketball or tennis. Maybe you'd enjoy classes, or yoga or pilates. Your options are nearly unlimited, but you have to do something or your body will begin to deteriorate. The human body does not stay the same or "maintain" when you don't use it, the body falls apart from disuse. Anti aging researchers today are even admitting that genetics is only responsible for 30% of the effects of aging and that aging would be better described as the "disuse syndrome." Use it or lose it. The biggest factor that causes people to go downhill as they get older is the loss of muscle that occurs over time from inactivity, a process called "sarcopenia." However, that muscle loss is 100% preventable with strength training. Strength training is extremely important and you can get results from as little as two or three workouts per week, with each session lasting 30-60 minutes. Most people don't think of weight training as a fat burning exercise, and technically, it's not. Strength training is anaerobic and your primary fuel source while lifting weights is carbohydrates. However, strength training workouts increase your metabolism for a short period of time after the workout. This is know as "excess post exercise oxygen consumption" (EPOC) and it means that you continue burning calories from body fat even after the workout is over. As you increase your lean muscle mass, you'll also get a permanent increase in your resting metabolic rate. Muscle is what drives your metabolism, keeps you young and makes you look more physically attractive. Others will notice how good you look, and you'll feel better about yourself too. Yes, you may lose weight from diet alone, but you're likely to end up a "skinny fat person" with a slow metabolism and very little lean body mass (not to mention, you'll probably gain back all the fat) Last, but not least, be careful what you say to yourself over and over because that tends to program your subconscious mind and create your self image. If you've been repeating to yourself for years, "I'm not big on exercise" or "I'm not an exercise person", that eventually becomes a part of your identity. You always tend to behave in alignment with your identity in order to stay "true to yourself." If you've never exercised consistently before, then HOW DO YOU KNOW you're not an exercise person? Did you "try" once briefly and quit? How can you be sure you won't start to like it? It's often hard in the beginning and sometimes doesn't feel so good - especially if you haven't worked out in years or you've let yourself slip physically. But it gets easier and starts feeling better the more you do it. Maybe when you look in the mirror after just a few weeks and see your body start to change you'll begin to like enjoy exercise a LOT. It can get addictive, you know. The endorphins that are released when you exercise are like opiates. Ever hear of "runners HIGH?" Ever hear of an "exercise addict?" What would YOU rather be hooked on? Forget about popping pills, Your body is the most exquisite pharmacy on the planet. Exercise is a better fat burner, health creator, energy producer and anti-depressant than any man-made drug will EVER be. Exercise can be fun and FEEL GOOD too. Human beings were meant to move. Bodies don't lose their function by being used too much and "wearing out", they lose their function by not being used enough and "rusting out." So if the positive benefits of exercise don't motivate you enough, then just picture yourself 10, 20 years from now and imagine what will happen to you if you DON'T start exercising today. Just before you're about to "blow off" a workout, run a movie in your mind of what your life will be like when you're sick, wheelchair-bound, in pain and unable to enjoy your grandchildren... if you ever even get to meet them. Now... blank out that screen and imagine how amazing your life could be when you have all the energy, strength and vitality you ever dreamed of because you set aside a few minutes every day to take care of yourself first. Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle has a TON of nutrition information, but it's not a "diet," it's a new lifestyle centered on exercise and nutrition together. As Jack Lalanne likes to say, "Exercise is King, nutrition is queen. Put them together and you have a Kingdom." The BURN THE FAT e-book lays it all out for you and will help you get started, even if you're completely clueless about nutrition and exercise. The cardio and strength training recommendations are explained in detail in chapters 16 and 17, including sample workouts. But even if you don't use the exercise programs listed in the book and you decide to use your own workouts, you'll find immense value in the e-book anyway, because Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle is also the most detailed, "one-stop" guide to fat burning nutrition you'll ever find. To order the e-book now, or get more information on BURN THE FAT, FEED THE MUSCLE, visit www.burnthefat.com These questions and answers were provided courtesy of Tom Venuto and www.burnthefat.com. Tom is a lifetime natural bodybuilder, personal trainer, gym owner, freelance writer and author of "Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle" (BFFM): Fat Burning Secrets of the World's Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. A:Submitted by: Bill Gillin / Date: Jun 24, 2002 Dear Tom, I've read a few of your articles on About.com. Of particular interest is the one about doing cardio in a fasted state in the morning. I enjoy doing that, as I am a morning person anyway. However, I've run across an article on the 24 hour fitness website under "fitness myths" that is contradictory to your thoughts as well as Body-For-Life (which I follow). The article claimed that cardio in a fasted state causes the body to go into survival mode and save the fat - which means you burn muscle. Both theories sound right to me depending on the angle I look from. Any thoughts? Thanks and keep up the very good writing. Bill Gillin First of all, let me say that the fasted cardio in the morning theory IS controversial, and everything I write about it is strictly my personal opinion. However, I think my opinion is probably worth something because it's founded on 20 years of experience - both academic and "in the trenches" experience. You're right that both theories have merit. Muscle loss could be an issue depending on the intensity and duration of your morning cardio session as well as your nutritional status. But why worry about it or sit around a table and argue about it? Why not tackle the issue of muscle loss head on? Simply measure your body fat and calculate your lean mass, then you'll know if you're losing muscle or not. Why guess? Any discussion of muscle loss from cardio is strictly academic, UNLESS YOU ARE ACTUALLY MEAUSURING IT!!!! Does morning cardio burn a greater amount of fat than cardio done at other times? Well, the bottom line when evaluating any training or nutritional practice is results - period! I don't care what any "expert" says or what any research study says - I measure my results carefully and if I'm getting results training or eating in a certain manner, I'm going to keep doing it. And so should you. I suggest you base all your decisions about your training and nutrition on results and results alone and forget about all these "gurus" arguing back and forth about who is right and wrong. You can't argue with results. I Don't consider morning cardio an absolute necessity. I just consider it one aspect of your training program that you can experiment with to see if it produces better results for you. Speaking of results, I've reached 3.4% body fat with no drugs and almost no supplements and part of my strategy on "cutting" programs has always been morning cardio. My clients have also achieved great results. The Body for Life program (which also recommends early morning cardio), has also gotten great results for many people (and Bill Phillips is no slouch in the physique department himself). Although most academic types don't believe in the morning cardio theory, there's plenty of research that supports it. I found it especially interesting that Dr. Mel Siff, Author of Facts and Fallacies of Fitness and moderator of the Supertraining Yahoo forum, included a brief section in his book called "Slim Before Breakfast." He quoted a study lending support to the a.m. cardio theory. Dr. Siff wrote; "A study carried out at Kansas State University (Wilcox, Harford & Wedel Medicine & Science in Sports and Exercise, 17:2, 1985), indicates that a kilogram of fat will be oxidized sooner when exercising in the fasted condition in the morning than when doing the same exercise in the afternoon. By measuring respiratory gas exchange, caloric expenditure, and carbohydrate and fatty acid metabolism, these researchers showed that the mass of fat burned during aerobic exercise amounts to 67% of the total energy expenditure achieved when the same exercise is done later in the day or in the fed state." The reason I mention this is because Dr. Siff wasknown as one of the most logical and scientific minded (skeptical) experts in the field These questions and answers were provided courtesy of Tom Venuto and www.burnthefat.com. Tom is a lifetime natural bodybuilder, personal trainer, gym owner, freelance writer and author of "Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle" (BFFM): Fat Burning Secrets of the World's Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. A:Date: Oct 20, 1999 Dear Tom, Please help me! I am a 27 year old female. I have been consistently weight and cardio training for over a year and although my upper body is looking good with nice definition, I have fat around my butt and the back of the top of my legs that just won't budge! I am doing a (very intense) 20 minute cardio session three days a week. I follow a vegan diet, low fat, with a protein supplement. I eat small amounts every 2-3 hours. Is it possible that not eating animal protein could be affecting my body fat? My body fat is currently at about 23%. Please tell me if there is anything I can do to help get rid of this fat area, or should I just accept it as genetics and focus on other parts of my body! Thank you in advance for your advice. Do not just "accept it as genetics." Your genetic makeup will dictate how difficult it's going to be for you to lose fat or gain muscle; some people definitely have it easier than others. However, anyone can lose fat, even in the most stubborn and resistant areas. It's just a matter of adjusting your training and nutrition to your body type. Unfortunately, some people have inherited metabolisms and body types that tend to favor fat storage. These people are called "endomorphs." Endomorphs may possess the following characteristics: 1) Slower metabolism If you have this type of body, you must adjust your training and nutrition accordingly and you may have to work harder than other people (I know - it's not fair!) First of all, three days of cardio a week for 20 minutes should be a bare minimum. For an endomorph, you'll need that much cardio just to maintain. To lose fat, you'll probably need 5 - 6 days per week of cardio at a minimum of 30-45 minutes per session. Go back to three days a week for maintenance only after you reach your goal. Your nutritional strategy must lean towards higher protein (and slightly higher fat) with more moderate carbs. (Kind of like a "Zone" type diet.) This is necessary because most endomorphs tend to be carbohydrate sensitive. People with normal carbohydrate metabolisms can consume as much as 60% of their total calories from carbohydrates and stay lean, while endomorphs will tend to get fat eating this much carbohydrate, irrespective of caloric intake. If you have already "cleaned up" your diet and you're eating low fat, low sugar, low calorie natural foods and it's still not working, then the next step would be to reduce your carb intake. Start by eating five small meals per day with the starchy carbs like oatmeal, whole grains, yams, potatoes, rice, etc eaten early in the day and only fibrous carbs like green vegetables and salads late in the day. (less carbs at night) Every meal should contain a complete source of lean protein. You can definitely create complete proteins by combining complementary vegetable sources (rice and beans, etc), but my experience has shown that it is a little more challenging for vegetarians (especially pure vegans) to achieve that rock-hard, fat free look without the animal proteins. Why don't you start by simply increasing your cardio first - that alone may do the trick. If not, then you may have to increase the protein and the "good" fats (Essential fatty acids like flaxseed oil, unprocessed vegetable oils, fish oil, nuts, seeds, peanut butter, etc). Personally, I do favor the animal proteins such as egg whites, chicken, turkey and fish, but any increase in protein and "good" fats at all will help you control insulin better and that in turn may help you lose that last bit of stubborn lower body fat. These questions and answers were provided courtesy of Tom Venuto and www.burnthefat.com. Tom is a lifetime natural bodybuilder, personal trainer, gym owner, freelance writer and author of "Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle" (BFFM): Fat Burning Secrets of the World's Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. A:Submitted by: Kathy Klumpp / Date: Sep 20, 2000 Dear Tom, I swim 4-5 times per week, which is great cardiovascular exercise, but is it important to do weight bearing exercise, i.e. running/jogging or power walking? Is the fitness required for swimming different from that required for running? Whenever I try and run a couple of kilometers it nearly kills me, yet I can swim laps for an hour! Kathy The type of cardiovascular exercise you choose should be something you enjoy; that way you will be motivated to stick with it. So if you enjoy swimming, by all means, continue to do it. In terms of pure aerobic conditioning for your heart and your health, swimming is right up there with the best of them. Like cross country skiing, swimming is one of the few forms of aerobic exercise that engages your entire body; arms, legs, torso, everything! From a body-building, body-sculpting, fat-burning point of view, most fitness competitors and bodybuilders, myself included, prefer the weight bearing types of exercise. I can't quote any scientific studies here, but it's my feeling that swimming doesn't have the impact on your physique that power walking, jogging, cycling, stairclimber or elliptical machines have. I was just watching the Sydney Olympics on TV yesterday, and I noticed that the physiques of the swimmers were dramatically different than the physiques of the track and field athletes. The swimmers were all very fit-looking, but none of them had the rock-hard leanness and muscularity of a Michael Johnson or a Marion Jones. Why is this? Scientifically speaking, I don't know; I've heard all kinds of theories; one is that the cold water makes you retain a thin layer of insulating body fat (kind of like sea-going mammals such as seals have). I believe it has to do with the fact that running is a weight bearing activity and weight bearing exercise simply affects the muscles differently. When you're floating in the water, the muscles just don't contract the way they do under the force of gravity. You said that "whenever I try and run a couple of kilometers it nearly kills me, yet I can swim laps for an hour!"This is because of the rule of training specificity. The principle of training specificity says that the conditioning effect of any exercise is specific to that particular type of exercise. In other words, if you swim a lot, you get proficient at swimming, but if won't make you a better runner. Likewise, running a lot won't make you a good swimmer. Either type of exercise will make you more fit, but that fitness won't necessarily carry over to another form of activity. If you want to know what type of exercise will produce the best results for you in terms of developing your body, I would suggest doing an experiment: Switch from only swimming to a weight bearing exercise such as walking, jogging, elliptical machine, or stairclimber exclusively for 3-4 weeks and see if it makes a difference. Then try a combination of both swimming and weight bearing exercise for 3-4 weeks and see how that works. Based on this little experiment, you should be able to figure out what exercise or what combination of exercises produces the best results for you. These questions and answers were provided courtesy of Tom Venuto and www.burnthefat.com. Tom is a lifetime natural bodybuilder, personal trainer, gym owner, freelance writer and author of "Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle" (BFFM): Fat Burning Secrets of the World's Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. A:Submitted by: Dominik / Date: Dec 12, 2003 Dear Tom, What is your view on Body For Life (BFL) cardio? I read in one of your articles that you recommend doing cardio for 40 minutes. Did you mean like BFL cardio: 2 minutes of warm-up, 40 minutes of interval cardio (lvl 6,7,8,9, repeat 10 times (and on the 10th time round don't stop at level 9, go flat out and hit a level 10), then a 1 minute cool-down? That equals 41 minutes of interval cardio plus the warm-up and cool down. If I want to increase my fat burning process is this the way to go? Dominik I don't believe in prescribing the same cardio, weight training, or nutrition program for everyone. Generic programs are ultimately going to limit you, although they can be a good way to start. (It's better to start something than sit around analyzing all your choices and doing nothing). I believe in customization of nutrition and training. Initially, the customization is based on your goals, experience level, body type and metabolism. That gives you a starting point. Then you launch whether you think you're ready or not. Your routine doesn't have to be perfect - you can fine tune it later. Once you've begun taking action, you must gather feedback on your progress (weight, measurements, body fat, lean body mass, photos, the mirror, etc). Once you start getting feedback, you decide whether you need to change your training and nutrition based on the results. There are plenty of scientifically based guidelines for training intensity, frequency and duration for cardiovascular fitness and weight loss (for example, the American College of Sports Medicine and other health, fitness and medical organizations have their position stands and exercise prescription recommendations). There's also no shortage of authors and "experts" with personal opinions on the subject. However, there's no "best" duration, frequency or duration to do cardio, except the amount it takes you to get the results you want. That amount is not determined by opinion, committee, formula or even by scientific studies. That amount is dictated by results. Results are what count. Period. You are your own lab experiment and "scientific study." I'm not an advocate of huge amounts of cardio or 40 minutes or an hour every day, or whatever. I'm an advocate of being willing to do the amount of cardio it takes for you to get the results you want. Results should come on a weekly basis if you've got it right. It makes no sense to continue with the same plan after a week of getting no results. "Do what you've always done and you'll get what you've always gotten." If what you're doing isn't working, you have to try something else. When it comes to fat loss, I like to increase cardio first. As for Bill Phillips' Body For Life (BFL) method of cardio, that is simply high intensity interval training, with an increasing peak interval as the workout progresses, ending with a maximum "10" effort (which Phillips calls the "high point"). There's nothing wrong with the BFL method. It's quite excellent actually. High intensity interval training is an effective method to get the most out of a brief workout. Another good thing about the BFL method is that it has built-in progression. Most people understand and use progression in their weight training workouts, but they completely forget to use progression in their cardio workouts. The flaw in the BFL cardio method is the single frequency and duration prescription for everyone. Phillips writes, and I quote, "20 minutes of cardio, no more, no less." That doesn't allow any personalization according to goals, experience, body type, metabolism and actual weekly results. You should adjust your training volume, frequency, intensity, and type according to your actual real world results, not by some dogmatic "formula" written in a book. What Phillips has successfully achieved by giving a single recommendation is to make things easy for his readers. He's taken the decision-making element out of the program. Most beginners are so confused by all the training methods that they become paralyzed with fear and indecision and often don't start at all. Sometimes people NEED someone to tell them EXACTLY what to do. Phillips made it black and white, leaving no grey area. That's probably a good thing for a beginner who has no concept of program design and no intuitive sense of how their body responds to exercise. However, once you develop the innate bodily wisdom and sensory acuity to realize how your body is responding to various training and nutrition protocols, then you should free yourself from rigid and inflexible regimens and learn to adjust according to your results. Regarding long interval workouts: Sure, you could do 40 minutes of intervals, but technically, they won't be "high intensity" intervals. Intensity and duration are inversely related. You can do interval training for 40 minutes - and it's a good method - but the intervals won't be as high in intensity as the 20 minute workouts. If they were, you wouldn't last 40 minutes. The article of mine you referred to was the "fat loss success series." The type of cardio I recommended in that article was not BFL-style cardio, nor was it necessarily interval training (although it could be). What I suggested was that you increase the intensity and duration of your cardio when you aren't getting results. Naturally, the longer the duration, the lower the intensity, but intensity is relative. I have seen astounding rates of fat loss (visible daily improvements, literally), by progressively pushing to the highest intensity you can sustain for up to 45 minutes. Long cardio sessions don't have to be low in intensity; they can be moderate to moderately high. Long duration and low intensity is NOT the best way to lose fat. Even though you burn a greater percentage of calories from fat with low intensity cardio, you don't burn enough total calories to put a dent in your fat stores. I also don't recommend staying at 20 minutes three days a week and only manipulating diet to get increased fat loss. I prefer increased exercise frequency, duration and intensity first, then calorie reductions second. In short BURN THE FAT, don't try to starve it. If you put yourself into a feedback loop and let your results dictate your strategy, you can become your own expert and your own coach. You will learn a lot about your own body, you will get great results continuously on a weekly basis and you will never be confused about training methods again because each method will fail or prove itself in the real world. This feedback process is covered in detail in chapter 4 of my downloadable e-book. You can get more info here: www.burnthefat.com You also might want to check out these Q & A's on the Fitness Renaissance website: How much cardio should I do to lose maximum body fat? Whats the difference between Burn The Fat, Feed the Muscle
(BFFM) and Body For Life (BFL)? These questions and answers were provided courtesy of Tom Venuto and www.burnthefat.com. Tom is a lifetime natural bodybuilder, personal trainer, gym owner, freelance writer and author of "Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle" (BFFM): Fat Burning Secrets of the World's Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. *Note - This section is constantly being updated with new content, so be sure to check back with FitnessandResults.com often!
|