General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ? Rss Feed  
Moderators: jmk-brooklyn, Ron Reply
Show Per page
 
 
of 2
 
 
2013-05-06 6:00 PM
in reply to: #4729116

User image

Champion
9072
5000200020002525
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
davidfedez - 2013-05-06 12:10 PM

I apologize if I got you to misunderstand this point, but a lot of people get obsessed with calorie intake rather to look at what those calories are made of (sugar, fat, carbs, protein, etc.). Getting the correct calorie intake coming from the right type of food, proved amazing to me.

What I meant to go for little to non-fat products was related to your food choices. For example, if you are going to eat protein, go for a lean steak, chicken or turkey rather than pork or lamb. Favor white fish over red fish, eat 1-2 times a week red fish, since it has other great benefits for you, although it is higher on fat. Dairy products? Skim milk over whole milk. Natural yogurt rather than yogurts containing processed fruits (more sugar), etc. Obviously, most products have fat on them and I didn't mean to stop eating everything that has fat, just make the "smarter" choice when deciding between two products, if your goal is to reduce your body fat.

I am not following any of those crazy/miraculous nutrition diets that people come up with that you have to stop eating carbs/fat/sugars, etc. in order to get X results. I just eat 5 times a week mixing dairy, veggies, fruit, carbs, and proteins and limiting processed food as much as possible. Now that I achieve my desired body fat level, I am increasing my calorie intake as well as the mix of carbs, protein, and lipids to help me sustain a higher training volume.



You mention a couple of times the idea having some balance of marco nutrients (carbs, fats and proteins) but then the idea that someone consuming fat is something to be avoided so I'm still confused. Yes there are fats that are probably best avoided but fats should not be avoided as a general rule as the body needs all macro nutirents in order to function properly. Missing any of the three for an extended period is not a sustainable plan.

Shane


2013-05-06 8:36 PM
in reply to: #4729116

User image

Regular
5477
5000100100100100252525
LHOTP
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
davidfedez - 2013-05-06 10:10 AM

I apologize if I got you to misunderstand this point, but a lot of people get obsessed with calorie intake rather to look at what those calories are made of (sugar, fat, carbs, protein, etc.). Getting the correct calorie intake coming from the right type of food, proved amazing to me.

What I meant to go for little to non-fat products was related to your food choices. For example, if you are going to eat protein, go for a lean steak, chicken or turkey rather than pork or lamb. Favor white fish over red fish, eat 1-2 times a week red fish, since it has other great benefits for you, although it is higher on fat. Dairy products? Skim milk over whole milk. Natural yogurt rather than yogurts containing processed fruits (more sugar), etc. Obviously, most products have fat on them and I didn't mean to stop eating everything that has fat, just make the "smarter" choice when deciding between two products, if your goal is to reduce your body fat.

Firstly, I want to say JohnnyKay has, indeed nailed it.  Thank you for providing such a great explanation on subject that many nutritionists, dietitians and medical professionals still seem so confused about.

Fat--even saturated animal fat--does not make you fat. 

I'm only an n=1 but I can assure you you do not need to avoid these foods to lose weight or to have incredibly low body fat.  I eat them regularly and I'm between 10-11% BF at the moment (I have a pic in the "Women of BT 2013" thread that can probably back that up.) Real butter, whole milk, red meat 3-4x/week on average, etc.

To the coaches: assuming they are eating a clean diet, what kind of macro nutrient ratio are you recommending for your athletes in season who want to maintain weight?

2013-05-06 9:55 PM
in reply to: #4730218

User image

Member
368
1001001002525
Miami
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
gsmacleod - 2013-05-06 7:00 PM
davidfedez - 2013-05-06 12:10 PM

I apologize if I got you to misunderstand this point, but a lot of people get obsessed with calorie intake rather to look at what those calories are made of (sugar, fat, carbs, protein, etc.). Getting the correct calorie intake coming from the right type of food, proved amazing to me.

What I meant to go for little to non-fat products was related to your food choices. For example, if you are going to eat protein, go for a lean steak, chicken or turkey rather than pork or lamb. Favor white fish over red fish, eat 1-2 times a week red fish, since it has other great benefits for you, although it is higher on fat. Dairy products? Skim milk over whole milk. Natural yogurt rather than yogurts containing processed fruits (more sugar), etc. Obviously, most products have fat on them and I didn't mean to stop eating everything that has fat, just make the "smarter" choice when deciding between two products, if your goal is to reduce your body fat.

I am not following any of those crazy/miraculous nutrition diets that people come up with that you have to stop eating carbs/fat/sugars, etc. in order to get X results. I just eat 5 times a week mixing dairy, veggies, fruit, carbs, and proteins and limiting processed food as much as possible. Now that I achieve my desired body fat level, I am increasing my calorie intake as well as the mix of carbs, protein, and lipids to help me sustain a higher training volume.

You mention a couple of times the idea having some balance of marco nutrients (carbs, fats and proteins) but then the idea that someone consuming fat is something to be avoided so I'm still confused. Yes there are fats that are probably best avoided but fats should not be avoided as a general rule as the body needs all macro nutirents in order to function properly. Missing any of the three for an extended period is not a sustainable plan. Shane

I think you didn't read my post well. I never said that fat is something that needs to be avoided "I didn't mean to stop eating everything that has fat, just make the "smarter" choice when deciding between two products". These point is also explained by other members with greater and better detail in later posts. 

And I think you and I are on the same page "Yes there are fats that are probably best avoided but fats should not be avoided as a general rule as the body needs all macro nutrients in order to function properly. Missing any of the three for an extended period is not a sustainable plan". Correct, some fats are good, needed, and beneficial to your body, others not and thus, you need to make a "smarter" choice when deciding between two products.

The point is not to take your diet to an extreme, just fuel your body with the calories that it needs and with the nutrients that it demands. I am sure this will result in a balance diet where carbs, protein, lipids, fat, and a long etcetera are combined in certain proportions. None of them will be neglected, since the body needs them in the long term to function properly.

2013-05-06 10:34 PM
in reply to: #4728115


670
5001002525
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?

Specific to the question, over a set period of time, you'll burn the most calories running, then biking, then swimming.  I dropped over 100 lbs and the best bang for my buck was cycling by far (4 hr bike rides are calorie burning fests) b/c you can do such a greater volume than the other two sports.

Others will disagree, but I don't trust swimming when it comes to burning calories and weight loss.  I usually end up with swimmer hunger and end up replacing half the calories

2013-05-07 6:54 AM
in reply to: #4730497

User image

Champion
9072
5000200020002525
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
davidfedez - 2013-05-06 11:55 PM

I think you didn't read my post well.


Perhaps. Or perhaps you were not clear in the point you were trying to make.

I never said that fat is something that needs to be avoided "I didn't mean to stop eating everything that has fat, just make the "smarter" choice when deciding between two products". These point is also explained by other members with greater and better detail in later posts.


What led me to believe from your first post that you were avoiding all fat when you said you would go with non-fat over the alternative. Then, in your second post, you said that you would go with low fat or lean options over a fattier option. I was simply curious as to what you were thinking since avoiding fat is not a sound nutritional strategy (of course avoiding any of the macronutrients is not sound either).

And I think you and I are on the same page "Yes there are fats that are probably best avoided but fats should not be avoided as a general rule as the body needs all macro nutrients in order to function properly. Missing any of the three for an extended period is not a sustainable plan". Correct, some fats are good, needed, and beneficial to your body, others not and thus, you need to make a "smarter" choice when deciding between two products.


Agreed, but that was not what I understood from your first two posts, hence my question.

The point is not to take your diet to an extreme, just fuel your body with the calories that it needs and with the nutrients that it demands. I am sure this will result in a balance diet where carbs, protein, lipids, fat, and a long etcetera are combined in certain proportions. None of them will be neglected, since the body needs them in the long term to function properly.



To the bolded, I have no idea what you are saying there.

Agree that it is about balance and ensuring you are providing your body with the macronutrients it needs (carbs, protein and fat).

Shane
2013-05-07 8:23 AM
in reply to: #4730157

User image

Pro
6271
500010001001002525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
GaryRM - 2013-05-06 5:13 PM

Not sure I want to get into the debate above

I'm not sure if it was much of a debate.  We both agree.

I was just being a nerd and trying to point out that a calorie is a calorie because it's just a unit of energy.  However, it's absolutely correct that the nutritional value of the food that goes along with the various calories has a big impact on your metabolism. 



2013-05-07 8:26 AM
in reply to: #4730396

User image

Pro
5346
500010010010025
Harrisburg, PA
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?

switch - 2013-05-06 9:36 PM

To the coaches: assuming they are eating a clean diet, what kind of macro nutrient ratio are you recommending for your athletes in season who want to maintain weight?

Other coaches' opinion may differ, but I use Bob Seebohar's guidelines in "Nutrition Periodization for Athletes" as a starting point.  Needs can vary significantly primarily due to differences in body mass and training volumes.

The guidelines he suggests during the competition mesocycle are:

5-12 g/kg of carbohydrate (5-8 for athletes training less than 3 hours/day and 9-12 for those training more)

1.4-2 g/kg of protein (the lower end during tapers, and the higher end during large training blocks between races)

1-1.5 g/kg of fat (he states that most athletes in other sports only need the lower end of this range, but endurance athletes may need the higher end to maintain energy stores)

 

2013-05-07 8:48 AM
in reply to: #4730825

User image

Regular
5477
5000100100100100252525
LHOTP
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
TriMyBest - 2013-05-07 8:26 AM

switch - 2013-05-06 9:36 PM

To the coaches: assuming they are eating a clean diet, what kind of macro nutrient ratio are you recommending for your athletes in season who want to maintain weight?

Other coaches' opinion may differ, but I use Bob Seebohar's guidelines in "Nutrition Periodization for Athletes" as a starting point.  Needs can vary significantly primarily due to differences in body mass and training volumes.

The guidelines he suggests during the competition mesocycle are:

5-12 g/kg of carbohydrate (5-8 for athletes training less than 3 hours/day and 9-12 for those training more)

1.4-2 g/kg of protein (the lower end during tapers, and the higher end during large training blocks between races)

1-1.5 g/kg of fat (he states that most athletes in other sports only need the lower end of this range, but endurance athletes may need the higher end to maintain energy stores)

 

Thanks so much for your response. Body composition excluded, do you have different separate recommendations for men v. women?  In other words, all else being equal between a male and female athlete, is there a reason for different nutrition based on gender? 

2013-05-07 9:14 AM
in reply to: #4730872

User image

Pro
5346
500010010010025
Harrisburg, PA
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
switch - 2013-05-07 9:48 AM
TriMyBest - 2013-05-07 8:26 AM

switch - 2013-05-06 9:36 PM

To the coaches: assuming they are eating a clean diet, what kind of macro nutrient ratio are you recommending for your athletes in season who want to maintain weight?

Other coaches' opinion may differ, but I use Bob Seebohar's guidelines in "Nutrition Periodization for Athletes" as a starting point.  Needs can vary significantly primarily due to differences in body mass and training volumes.

The guidelines he suggests during the competition mesocycle are:

5-12 g/kg of carbohydrate (5-8 for athletes training less than 3 hours/day and 9-12 for those training more)

1.4-2 g/kg of protein (the lower end during tapers, and the higher end during large training blocks between races)

1-1.5 g/kg of fat (he states that most athletes in other sports only need the lower end of this range, but endurance athletes may need the higher end to maintain energy stores)

 

Thanks so much for your response. Body composition excluded, do you have different separate recommendations for men v. women?  In other words, all else being equal between a male and female athlete, is there a reason for different nutrition based on gender? 

I've never seen different guidelines.  The quantities would differ based on the typical differences in body mass between male and female, since the guidelines I posted are stated as g/kg.

 

 

2013-05-07 9:56 AM
in reply to: #4730932

User image

Regular
5477
5000100100100100252525
LHOTP
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
TriMyBest - 2013-05-07 9:14 AM
switch - 2013-05-07 9:48 AM
TriMyBest - 2013-05-07 8:26 AM

switch - 2013-05-06 9:36 PM

To the coaches: assuming they are eating a clean diet, what kind of macro nutrient ratio are you recommending for your athletes in season who want to maintain weight?

Other coaches' opinion may differ, but I use Bob Seebohar's guidelines in "Nutrition Periodization for Athletes" as a starting point.  Needs can vary significantly primarily due to differences in body mass and training volumes.

The guidelines he suggests during the competition mesocycle are:

5-12 g/kg of carbohydrate (5-8 for athletes training less than 3 hours/day and 9-12 for those training more)

1.4-2 g/kg of protein (the lower end during tapers, and the higher end during large training blocks between races)

1-1.5 g/kg of fat (he states that most athletes in other sports only need the lower end of this range, but endurance athletes may need the higher end to maintain energy stores)

 

Thanks so much for your response. Body composition excluded, do you have different separate recommendations for men v. women?  In other words, all else being equal between a male and female athlete, is there a reason for different nutrition based on gender? 

I've never seen different guidelines.  The quantities would differ based on the typical differences in body mass between male and female, since the guidelines I posted are stated as g/kg.

 

 

So most guidelines are based on total kg weight rather than lean body mass?  I suppose within the group of very lean athletes this doesn't impact their BMR that much, but couldn't it imapct it quite a bit the further away one gets from that group?  

And please, please, know that I am not in any way trying to be challenging--just trying to learn:)

If 1lb of muscle burns ~50cals at rest/day and fat has no metabolic activity--the g/kg equations could/should be adjusted for that too?  

The metabolic needs of two athletes that weigh 170lbs but have 8% and 25% BF will be quite different.  I'm doing a back of the envelop calc. here, but those athletes will have 156.4lbs and 127.5lbs of lean mass, respectively.  So at rest, they would have a metabolic difference of ~1445cals/day.

I know the difference between 8% and 25% is pretty big, but I'm guessing we have those kinds of differences in this forum population, and I wonder if part of the reason people sometimes have difficulty with their weight is because they think about their needs from a total weight perspective rather than a lean mass perspective.

Thoughts?

 

2013-05-07 11:36 AM
in reply to: #4728115

User image

Expert
1375
1000100100100252525
McAllen
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?

I think that it's 2013 and we should just hook ourselves up with an IV that has pre-calculated calories and vitamins/macronutrients and carry around the pole whenever we need feeding.

Honestly, eating right is too complicated. Eat clean, limit sugar, eat lots of veggies. Gonna link some of my favorite articles about diet. It translates well to triathletes as well.

http://strengthrunning.com/2011/08/perfect-runners-diet-food-lessons/

http://strengthrunning.com/2012/05/diet-for-runners/

The next article is really long but MUCH more entertaining. Also a bit more informative. Steve is a pro-paleo diet guy and encourages it but doesn't promote his information like paleo is mandatory.

http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2011/11/10/healthy-eating/#comment-464093987



2013-05-07 11:57 AM
in reply to: #4731048

User image

Pro
5346
500010010010025
Harrisburg, PA
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
switch - 2013-05-07 10:56 AM
TriMyBest - 2013-05-07 9:14 AM
switch - 2013-05-07 9:48 AM
TriMyBest - 2013-05-07 8:26 AM

switch - 2013-05-06 9:36 PM

To the coaches: assuming they are eating a clean diet, what kind of macro nutrient ratio are you recommending for your athletes in season who want to maintain weight?

Other coaches' opinion may differ, but I use Bob Seebohar's guidelines in "Nutrition Periodization for Athletes" as a starting point.  Needs can vary significantly primarily due to differences in body mass and training volumes.

The guidelines he suggests during the competition mesocycle are:

5-12 g/kg of carbohydrate (5-8 for athletes training less than 3 hours/day and 9-12 for those training more)

1.4-2 g/kg of protein (the lower end during tapers, and the higher end during large training blocks between races)

1-1.5 g/kg of fat (he states that most athletes in other sports only need the lower end of this range, but endurance athletes may need the higher end to maintain energy stores)

 

Thanks so much for your response. Body composition excluded, do you have different separate recommendations for men v. women?  In other words, all else being equal between a male and female athlete, is there a reason for different nutrition based on gender? 

I've never seen different guidelines.  The quantities would differ based on the typical differences in body mass between male and female, since the guidelines I posted are stated as g/kg.

 

 

So most guidelines are based on total kg weight rather than lean body mass?  I suppose within the group of very lean athletes this doesn't impact their BMR that much, but couldn't it imapct it quite a bit the further away one gets from that group?  

And please, please, know that I am not in any way trying to be challenging--just trying to learn

If 1lb of muscle burns ~50cals at rest/day and fat has no metabolic activity--the g/kg equations could/should be adjusted for that too?  

The metabolic needs of two athletes that weigh 170lbs but have 8% and 25% BF will be quite different.  I'm doing a back of the envelop calc. here, but those athletes will have 156.4lbs and 127.5lbs of lean mass, respectively.  So at rest, they would have a metabolic difference of ~1445cals/day.

I know the difference between 8% and 25% is pretty big, but I'm guessing we have those kinds of differences in this forum population, and I wonder if part of the reason people sometimes have difficulty with their weight is because they think about their needs from a total weight perspective rather than a lean mass perspective.

Thoughts?

 

I know you're not arguing.  This is good conversation!

The points you make are exactly why these are just guidelines, expressed in such wide ranges, and why they should only be used as starting points.  From there, it's necessary to monitor for changes in body mass, body composition, and energy/performance levels.  There are so many variables it's difficult to account for all of them.  It's more practical to make an educated guess then monitor the results and adjust nutrition until the desired results are achieved.

Consider how large the range of guidelines is that I posted.  Using your example of a 170 lb athlete, that's approximately 77 kg:

  • At the lowest end of the guide, that's (5 g/kg x 4 cal/g x 77 kg) + (1.4 g/kg x 4 cal/g x 77 kg) + (1 g/kg x 9 cal/g x 77 kg) = 2,664 cal / day.
  • At the highest end, it's (12 g/kg x 4 cal/g x 77 kg) + (2 g/kg x 4 cal/g x 77 kg) + (1.5 g/kg x 9 cal/g x 77 kg) = 5,352 cal / day.

That's a huge difference, so it's easy to see why these sort of guidelines are just that, and not exact prescriptions.

I think you make an excellent point with the bold part.  When somebody says "I burn X calories, and consume X-500 calories per day, and I'm not losing weight, so it must be more complex than calories in vs. calories out", most of the time the issue is that they're both overestimating X and mis-measuring what they're consuming.  Allowing for body composition when estimating RMR could help get that starting point a little closer to what they're actually burning, but it's still not going to be exact.

 

2013-05-07 11:59 AM
in reply to: #4729822

Regular
147
10025
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?

Every good information given.  I will add one thing that I don't think has been covered...avoid energy drinks if you are running less than 90 minutes or biking less than 2 hrs.  You body simply does not additional caloric intake nor do you need energy drinks to recover.  Just drink water for re-hydration and eat a healthy balanced diet.

Energy drinks are loaded with calories and sabatoge your weight loss.  All of the recommendation for using these drinks are primarily designed to increase the sales of the respectvie companies. 

2013-05-07 1:17 PM
in reply to: #4731334

User image

Regular
5477
5000100100100100252525
LHOTP
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
TriMyBest - 2013-05-07 11:57 AM
switch - 2013-05-07 10:56 AM
TriMyBest - 2013-05-07 9:14 AM
switch - 2013-05-07 9:48 AM
TriMyBest - 2013-05-07 8:26 AM

switch - 2013-05-06 9:36 PM

To the coaches: assuming they are eating a clean diet, what kind of macro nutrient ratio are you recommending for your athletes in season who want to maintain weight?

Other coaches' opinion may differ, but I use Bob Seebohar's guidelines in "Nutrition Periodization for Athletes" as a starting point.  Needs can vary significantly primarily due to differences in body mass and training volumes.

The guidelines he suggests during the competition mesocycle are:

5-12 g/kg of carbohydrate (5-8 for athletes training less than 3 hours/day and 9-12 for those training more)

1.4-2 g/kg of protein (the lower end during tapers, and the higher end during large training blocks between races)

1-1.5 g/kg of fat (he states that most athletes in other sports only need the lower end of this range, but endurance athletes may need the higher end to maintain energy stores)

 

Thanks so much for your response. Body composition excluded, do you have different separate recommendations for men v. women?  In other words, all else being equal between a male and female athlete, is there a reason for different nutrition based on gender? 

I've never seen different guidelines.  The quantities would differ based on the typical differences in body mass between male and female, since the guidelines I posted are stated as g/kg.

 

 

So most guidelines are based on total kg weight rather than lean body mass?  I suppose within the group of very lean athletes this doesn't impact their BMR that much, but couldn't it imapct it quite a bit the further away one gets from that group?  

And please, please, know that I am not in any way trying to be challenging--just trying to learn

If 1lb of muscle burns ~50cals at rest/day and fat has no metabolic activity--the g/kg equations could/should be adjusted for that too?  

The metabolic needs of two athletes that weigh 170lbs but have 8% and 25% BF will be quite different.  I'm doing a back of the envelop calc. here, but those athletes will have 156.4lbs and 127.5lbs of lean mass, respectively.  So at rest, they would have a metabolic difference of ~1445cals/day.

I know the difference between 8% and 25% is pretty big, but I'm guessing we have those kinds of differences in this forum population, and I wonder if part of the reason people sometimes have difficulty with their weight is because they think about their needs from a total weight perspective rather than a lean mass perspective.

Thoughts?

 

I know you're not arguing.  This is good conversation!

The points you make are exactly why these are just guidelines, expressed in such wide ranges, and why they should only be used as starting points.  From there, it's necessary to monitor for changes in body mass, body composition, and energy/performance levels.  There are so many variables it's difficult to account for all of them.  It's more practical to make an educated guess then monitor the results and adjust nutrition until the desired results are achieved.

Consider how large the range of guidelines is that I posted.  Using your example of a 170 lb athlete, that's approximately 77 kg:

  • At the lowest end of the guide, that's (5 g/kg x 4 cal/g x 77 kg) + (1.4 g/kg x 4 cal/g x 77 kg) + (1 g/kg x 9 cal/g x 77 kg) = 2,664 cal / day.
  • At the highest end, it's (12 g/kg x 4 cal/g x 77 kg) + (2 g/kg x 4 cal/g x 77 kg) + (1.5 g/kg x 9 cal/g x 77 kg) = 5,352 cal / day.

That's a huge difference, so it's easy to see why these sort of guidelines are just that, and not exact prescriptions.

I think you make an excellent point with the bold part.  When somebody says "I burn X calories, and consume X-500 calories per day, and I'm not losing weight, so it must be more complex than calories in vs. calories out", most of the time the issue is that they're both overestimating X and mis-measuring what they're consuming.  Allowing for body composition when estimating RMR could help get that starting point a little closer to what they're actually burning, but it's still not going to be exact.

 

Thanks Don.  I really appreciate you taking the time to answer the question so thoroughly.

2013-05-07 4:28 PM
in reply to: #4728115

User image

Veteran
346
10010010025
Houston, TX
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?

You can do either, but just keep your heart rate lower. 

At a lower effort level, your body can burn fat, which it would prefer to do since you have lots of fat stores (everyone does). When you are approaching your max effort level, your body only burns carbs because they are the easiest for the body to convert to energy. 

If you burn just carbs, you will be starving afterwards. If you dial down the effort level, but do the same distance, you might notice that you aren't really that hungry afterwards. 

I'm no expert. I just repeat the things I read written by smarter people, but it makes sense. I also see complaints from folks on FB on how they have been doing Instanity or Crossfit but not losing any weight. It makes sense as to why not.  

 

2013-05-07 4:33 PM
in reply to: #4732000

User image

Expert
1375
1000100100100252525
McAllen
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
Then what is it about high intensity efforts that are promoted when trying to lose weight?


2013-05-07 4:53 PM
in reply to: #4732000

User image

Champion
9072
5000200020002525
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
chris00nj - 2013-05-07 6:28 PM

You can do either, but just keep your heart rate lower. 

At a lower effort level, your body can burn fat, which it would prefer to do since you have lots of fat stores (everyone does). When you are approaching your max effort level, your body only burns carbs because they are the easiest for the body to convert to energy.



It is true that fat metabolism will basically shut off at certain intensities but this is going to be as an athlete is above threshold and approaching VO2max efforts.

However, while the body will burn a higher percentage of calories from fat at lower intensities, it will burn a higher number of calories from fat at higher intensities (along with more glycogen as well).

If you burn just carbs, you will be starving afterwards. If you dial down the effort level, but do the same distance, you might notice that you aren't really that hungry afterwards.


This may be true and it may not - some people will find that all exercise will make them hungry, some will find they have very little appetite after exercise and some will find that it depends on intensity. However, if one fuels properly before, during and after exercise (which may mean not eating at all) then they can avoid the overfueling that often comes with exercise.

I'm no expert. I just repeat the things I read written by smarter people, but it makes sense. I also see complaints from folks on FB on how they have been doing Instanity or Crossfit but not losing any weight. It makes sense as to why not.


I would argue this likely has more to do with overestimating the caloric expenditure of exercise (whether at high or low intensity) and then overfueling. Weight loss should generally be managed based on what one consumes with exercise as a supplement as opposed to trying to creat a caloric deficit through training alone.

Shane
2013-05-08 5:19 AM
in reply to: #4728115

User image

Member
64
2525
Lebanon
Subject: RE: Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ?
An important and often overlooked part of the calories in/calories out equation is timing. Most people have adopted the 3 meals a day lifestyle as a matter of practicality, not with health and body needs in mind. I think many people take in their highest calorie meal at dinner. This is opposed to what a body needs and a good weight control strategy. Your body should receive calories early and often in the day. This is when you are active and your body will immediately use that calorie intake as fuel for the day. Calorie intake should diminish with the last meal of the day being light in calories. Taking in big calories late in the day leads to calories being stored and not burned. It also works against best sleep practices. You don't want your body processing a big meal while you are trying to sleep. Eating 5 or 6 smaller portioned meals during the day will stimulate your metabolism and induce a more efficient calorie burn.  Eating quality food is always best practice but when you eat is important too. FWIW, that is what works for me.
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Fastest way to burn FAT ? Swim or gymbike ? Rss Feed  
Show Per page
 
 
of 2