|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Feb 20, 2006, 7:06 PM
Post #26 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
In reply to: Well, Korntera has summoned Jay to this thread with the ultimate troll. In my opinion, at 2+ years, you're still a n00b. Welcome to my world. Believing you're not a n00b can be very dangerous. As far as Jay's advice, he's probably one of the most qualified to speak on this subject. Sure, he's a jackass and he's rude, but that doesn't mean he's an idiot. Sure, he's opinionated, but he's capable of formulating an intelligent argument. Sure, he'll follow your posts around for a few days hoping to find an opportunity to call out your inadequacies, but don't hate him for being an obsessive-compulsive egomaniac with no social skills. :P Anyway, enough razzing Jay. The right thing to do here is browse the threads within Technique & Training. This topic has been covered before. You could always PM one of the resident experts for a bit of friendly advice as well. Just don't get offended if it comes across as a little rude. Appreciate the quality of the content.
There are no such things as "qualified" experts.. If there were, there would not be SO many experts out there tauting diet plans that sound like exact opposites.
Just like everything else in life, you have to read on many different theories and opinions and decide which works best for your body and you metabolism.
That would make the OP the "qualified" expert.. wouldn't you think.
JT is simply ONE source of qualified information. I could list off 10 or 12 others that I would believe would be required reading before you even attempt to lose weight.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2006, 7:15 PM
Post #27 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Should I run 4 miles in 40 minutes or should I walk 4 miles in 1 hour. When running my heart rate it around 150-160 and when walking it is around 130. I am 22 years old. I have read that walking is better to loose fat and running is better for getting in shape. Its just time to loose weight because the people that I climb with are all much less inch per inch. Climbing partner #1 5'10" 165 Climbing partner #2 6'3" 200 Me 5'11" 193 Although strength wise I can keep up with them I feel like I will start getting huge gains and passing them If I can loose 10-20 lbs (and trust me, I am that fat right now, I once was 170 at my current height)
Based on your current weight, you can expect to burn 14.3 kcal/min by running 10 min/mi vs 8.3 kcal/min by walking 15 min/mi. Thus, running is 1.7 times as "efficient" for losing weight as walking. Running for 40 minutes results in buring 572 kcal, whereas walking for 60 minutes burns 498 kcal. So, by running, you'll not only burn more calories, you'll spend less time doing so.
Jay
P.S. Grow up.
|
|
|
|
|
chase
Feb 20, 2006, 7:19 PM
Post #28 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 15, 2006
Posts: 14
|
In reply to: I really dont' trust jays advice (if by jay you mean JT512) because the last time he posted in one of my threads in the training forum he plainly could not read, he called me a n00b because I had only been climbing a year and said that I was a gym rat that climbs v1 and said I was an idiot because thats what he read in my profile (which hasn't been updated in about a year) I now climb 5.11, don't have a clue what I boulder but have done V3's and have done lots of multipitch trad. So for his rudeness I don't trust him, plus he can't read since I posted that I can do that and that I have been climbing for 2+ years yet he reads my profile and tears me apart.
I'm with you. This site is full of arrogant pricks who get their jollies ripping on others. Never seen this level of rudeness in the other sites. Too bad too, because the site has some other great qualities. Chill with insults people.
|
|
|
|
|
sweetchuck
Feb 20, 2006, 7:36 PM
Post #29 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2005
Posts: 151
|
I VOTE FOR JT512!!
Thanks for saving the day. I have been on the JT diet (modified for laziness and lack of self control) for about a year now and lost 23lbs! That's a great little calculation you did for the OP. I weigh 165 now, and walk 4 miles on my lunch break (1 hour), I wonder how many calories I burn, I kinda have been calling it 200 but it sounds like I am way off. Also, I take bootcamp/kickboxing classes. It's aerobics, light weights, punching, kicking, pushups, running, all that. Any idea what an hour of that might burn? I have been calling it 300, but I know I am lowballing it. I figure it's better to lowball than to think you have a calorie deficit and instead have a surplus. Still a more accurate estimate may mean that I can eat more! Whoo Hoo! Hey, I may be a permanoob, but I know good advice when I hear it, and I am just thankful Jay has dedicated so much time to bringing us rc.comers up to speed on the science of diet. So far in this thread alone I have heard aerobic exercises begins burning fat in 20,30 and 40 minutes. I'll just stick with Jay's INFORMED and research backed advice, thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Feb 20, 2006, 8:24 PM
Post #30 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
Just cut the refined sugar and flour products out of your diet and it probably won't matter what kind of exercise you do.
stop eating the cookies
stop eating the doughnuts
stop eating at McDonald's
...
....
Eat more fruits, veggies and nuts.
Do more manual labor in your daily life
wash your own car, cut your own grass, do some building projects....
Then you won't have to participate in so much extra-carricular activities to keep your wieght in check.
|
|
|
|
|
korntera
Feb 20, 2006, 8:47 PM
Post #31 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2004
Posts: 422
|
Thank you for the kind reply JT512. Thats what I was looking for in the first thread and it looks like you just became the bigger man by replying kindly to my question. Thank you for your help.
As for diet I know that I have to burn more than I take in. I have that part down and eat a balanced diet. Generally oat meal and milk for breakfast with no suger added and a bannana. For lunch I generally have a sandwhich with chicken and ham and some cheese and spinach and red onions on it or Chili. For Dinner generally a salad and some sort of meat dish like chicken and cous cous or pasta with meat sauce (all lean meat). I try to eat at least 2 servings of vegetables and 2 servings of fruit per day and drink only water (and the occasionaly beer), no sugary fruit juice, generally no candy/ heavily fatty stuff. And for a snack I generally have whole wheat pita's with organic hummus. I eat everything whole wheat that I can and organic if possible.
As of right now my workout consists of M/W/F/sat or sun walking for 1 hour and M/W/F or sat climbing with the occasional bike ride thrown in. I also try to lift weights twice a week. One day chest back mid section, the other day arms and shoulders. (I do my legs about once a month but feel that they get enough from running/ biking and are the most toned part of my body).
I think I will try doing a bit more running but will do it on an elliptical so that I do not over exert my knees but will try adding running to my workout on maybe tues or thurs along with my walking, because as of know the walking is not tiring me out. I have done a marathon before and still have lots of endurance and power, just not much long distance speed. My marathon time was pretty slow 5:12:12 if anybody cares, and that was when I was 170, I just don't have the time to do 1.5-3 hour walks per night anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
dutyje
Feb 20, 2006, 9:36 PM
Post #32 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2004
Posts: 727
|
In reply to: There are no such things as "qualified" experts.. If there were, there would not be SO many experts out there tauting diet plans that sound like exact opposites. Just like everything else in life, you have to read on many different theories and opinions and decide which works best for your body and you metabolism. That would make the OP the "qualified" expert.. wouldn't you think. JT is simply ONE source of qualified information. I could list off 10 or 12 others that I would believe would be required reading before you even attempt to lose weight.
Most of the popular "experts" and people with all these books and crazy fad diets are selling a promise to people who are eager to believe that there is an easier way to lose weight than just eating less and exercising more. Jay's advice is consistent and promotes common sense. Likewise, he often suggests things that may not have been apparent to the person asking the question. He's well-educated on the subject matter and never gets swept up by the latest diet fad. There are no secrets in his industry -- only scams. These scams continue to work because the limited stories of short-term success are widely publicized, and the public wants to believe there's some magic formula for weight loss that allows you to eat as much as you like, and exercises as little as you like.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Feb 20, 2006, 9:50 PM
Post #33 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
In reply to: In reply to: There are no such things as "qualified" experts.. If there were, there would not be SO many experts out there tauting diet plans that sound like exact opposites. Just like everything else in life, you have to read on many different theories and opinions and decide which works best for your body and you metabolism. That would make the OP the "qualified" expert.. wouldn't you think. JT is simply ONE source of qualified information. I could list off 10 or 12 others that I would believe would be required reading before you even attempt to lose weight. Most of the popular "experts" and people with all these books and crazy fad diets are selling a promise to people who are eager to believe that there is an easier way to lose weight than just eating less and exercising more. Jay's advice is consistent and promotes common sense. Likewise, he often suggests things that may not have been apparent to the person asking the question. He's well-educated on the subject matter and never gets swept up by the latest diet fad. There are no secrets in his industry -- only scams. These scams continue to work because the limited stories of short-term success are widely publicized, and the public wants to believe there's some magic formula for weight loss that allows you to eat as much as you like, and exercises as little as you like.
I will repeat myself.
JT is ONE source of information. I can easily source 10 or 12 other qualified sources.
There are lots of qualified nutrition experts out there. All with a different twist on how there ideas affect the body. If you are looking to lose weight, you owe it to yourself to do research on understand how each "experts" methods work and how your nutritional needs line up.
I had already discounted the fad diets when writing my response earlier. I was kind of assuming that was implied
|
|
|
|
|
fishercrack
Feb 20, 2006, 9:51 PM
Post #34 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2005
Posts: 27
|
eat less and/or puke more
|
|
|
|
|
tarzan420
Feb 20, 2006, 9:51 PM
Post #35 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 678
|
on the exercise topic...
If I understand correctly, the optimal HR for burning fat specifically is something like 50-70% of your MHR. Above that you're burning more cals, but less of it is coming from your fat reserves.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong (valid citations are always nice, but no necessary since I don't have any myself), maybe this is just a myth to make lardasses like me feel better after for spending hours [biking,walking,etc] hardly breaking a sweat.
nutrition is a whole nother topic...
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Feb 20, 2006, 10:15 PM
Post #36 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: on the exercise topic... If I understand correctly, the optimal HR for burning fat specifically is something like 50-70% of your MHR. Above that you're burning more cals, but less of it is coming from your fat reserves. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong (valid citations are always nice, but no necessary since I don't have any myself), maybe this is just a myth to make lardasses like me feel better after for spending hours [biking,walking,etc] hardly breaking a sweat.
It's a myth. I'm not sure whether it was knowingly promulgated with the intention that it would be better for "lardasses" to at least walk, since they'll never run; or whether it was based on an innocent misunderstanding of energy metabolism.
Essentially all that matters is how many calories the exercise burns. Burning 500 kcal is better than 300 kcal, regardless of what is being burned -- fat or other fuels -- during exercise. The reason is that, if you are burning not-fat fuels during exercise, those fuels have to be replenished after exercise. Therefore, as long as you don't increase your food intake, you will burn fat after exercise while your body diverts nutrients to rebuilding the non-fat sources of energy you burned during exercise. I hope that makes sense.
The bottom line is that, for purposes of weight loss, more intense excercise is more "efficient" than less intense. See my response to korntera on the previous page for a numerical example.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
guitarclimber
Feb 20, 2006, 11:12 PM
Post #37 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 22
|
In reply to: eat less and/or puke more
I was going to say that. Good thing I read through the thread. I just barely avoided the dreaded 'READ THREAD BEFORE YOU POST n00b'. Phew. That was too close. But yes, eating disorders such as anorexia and bulemia will help you lose weight but you will also suffer side-effects such as hunger, vomiting, and possibly counseling. So, um, listen to Jay.
|
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
Feb 21, 2006, 1:35 AM
Post #38 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
In reply to: In reply to: Should I run 4 miles in 40 minutes or should I walk 4 miles in 1 hour. When running my heart rate it around 150-160 and when walking it is around 130. I am 22 years old. I have read that walking is better to loose fat and running is better for getting in shape. Its just time to loose weight because the people that I climb with are all much less inch per inch. Climbing partner #1 5'10" 165 Climbing partner #2 6'3" 200 Me 5'11" 193 Although strength wise I can keep up with them I feel like I will start getting huge gains and passing them If I can loose 10-20 lbs (and trust me, I am that fat right now, I once was 170 at my current height) Based on your current weight, you can expect to burn 14.3 kcal/min by running 10 min/mi vs 8.3 kcal/min by walking 15 min/mi. Thus, running is 1.7 times as "efficient" for losing weight as walking. Running for 40 minutes results in buring 572 kcal, whereas walking for 60 minutes burns 498 kcal. So, by running, you'll not only burn more calories, you'll spend less time doing so. Jay P.S. Grow up.
heh heh, didn't think he would bite...
on to the discussion, I agree with JT.
There's a lot of people who will contend that in order to burn fat you need to exercise less intensely as you will otherwise begin to burn carbs and protein stores rather than fat.
Well, that's only half the story; As Jt pointed out you will burn more calories at the higher intensity so obviously the benefit is greater. Additionally, while the percentage of fat burned compared to carbs and protein decreases the total amount of fat burnt increases due to the increase in total output for the same amount of time.
So:
Low intensity
50% of energy burnt from fat when you have used say 500 calories = 250 calories worth of fat.
vs
High Intensity
30% of energy burnt from fat when you have used say 1000 calories = ~333 calories worth of fat.
OK, now before you go quoting my numbers don't bother, they are fictional and intended only as an example of how a lower percentage of a higher total can be greater than a higher percentage of a lower total.
From what I understand the whole "Fat Burning Zone" thing was a bit of a gimmick to get fat people to buy heart rate monitors and to make them more likely to exercise due to a belief that it doesn't have to hurt.
In actual truth, it's about caloric debt... if you burn less than you consume you will lose weight, regardless of what you burn because your body will need to access its stores to make up the deficit,
cheers
Adam
Edited to add: Whoops, read the whole thread Adam, already answered on this page by JT
|
|
|
|
|
liquidshadow111
Feb 21, 2006, 3:04 AM
Post #39 of 39
(5225 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 80
|
walking may be a better choice than running because the extra weight will really bash your knees up. try powerwalking with 5 pound weights for a few months or until you feel that you have lost some weight. Then start running; that will really shed the pounds.
good luck :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
