I cant believe he still had strengh to exercise at this weight.
Shit like this inspires me to get in shape, but then I realize I'm too lazy to change my lifestyle and as a university student I'm just going to eat whatever is fast and cheap without caring if it's healthy or not.
[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;44670795]Shit like this inspires me to get in shape, but then I realize I'm too lazy to change my lifestyle and as a university student I'm just going to eat whatever is fast and cheap without caring if it's healthy or not.[/QUOTE]
good luck with your short life goals of 2014
Honestly I'm 263 lbs, 6"0 right now and I lost like ten pounds in the past week from eating less, healthier, cutting soda and fast food out of my diet and adding walking 30 mins and doing some airsoft in the woods. If you got the willpower, you can lose weight, it's just you're going to have to change your lifestyle permanently and it takes the capacity to do that, but once you're used to it it's no big deal. I used to weight 170-190 and be able to sprint a mile barefoot, trying to get back to that again. So this proves that just a few changes in your diet and getting active can actually cause drastic changes.
Also I lift weights and bench like 20 reps of 150 lbs. So that helps too.
I lost over 150lb through diet and excercise. Every night I would go for jogs. Only drank water and ate a single grilled chicken sandwich every day.
The pain in my legs was almost unbearable, felt like everything below my knees was breaking. Lost 100lb in 6 months and the rest came off by itself kind of.
But fell back into an inactive life style and am up to 230+ now. The hardest part is doing it alone and starting.
Edit. I still have my old fatty drivers license where I had no neck. Luckily I have a neck still.
[QUOTE=false prophet;44671128]I lost over 150lb through diet and excercise. Every night I would go for jogs. Only drank water and ate a single grilled chicken sandwich every day.
The pain in my legs was almost unbearable, felt like everything below my knees was breaking. Lost 100lb in 6 months and the rest came off by itself kind of.
But fell back into an inactive life style and am up to 230+ now. The hardest part is doing it alone and starting.
Edit. I still have my old fatty drivers license where I had no neck. Luckily I have a neck still.[/QUOTE]
You really shouldn't starve yourself.
[QUOTE=Masterofstars;44671205]You really shouldn't starve yourself.[/QUOTE]
and not only because it's unhealthy, but there's no way a person can maintain the lifestyle either, so they will end up gaining weight again eventually.
The amount of self control and will power this guy had to have had to go and do that is amazing in itself.
[QUOTE=Masterofstars;44671205]You really shouldn't starve yourself.[/QUOTE]
People say this, and they have no concept of how nutrition actually works.
Average, stable intake is about 2000 calories a day. If you imagine the human body is a bucket, when you put food in the bucket, the bucket fills up, no ifs-ands-or-buts. Exercise burns a percentage of that off, but it depends on how much and how rigorous that exercise is.
To lose weight, it's needed to go lower in consumption, anywhere from 1000 to 1500.
"But you can always just work out more/harder!" I hear you saying. Bullshit. Working out is strenuous and takes time. In terms of efficiency and cost-benefit, it's worth "more" to just eat less than it is to work harder.
If you break down the calories of an average American meal, in one sitting it's really easy to take down anywhere from 1000 to 2300 calories [I]in one sitting[/I] without trying. You don't need to be a lardy fuckass to do it. A typical 20$ dinner (some main item, a side, drink, possibly appertizer or bread) is definitely in the thousands.
Pile on soda, or alchohol or milk. All of these items add calories to the bucket at the same rate, or even higher than the food does, since most of us drink them as an alternate to proper hydration.
A single grilled chicken sandwich and water is sustainable. It is not comfortable or luxurious, but it is healthier than a bigmac and fries. If your goal is weight loss, it is the superior choice to "three square meals of [insert frimpy 'healthy food here]".
Source: I lost 100lbs after plenty of research. I have also put most of it back on lately.
That's the other one, recidivism is huge for people who have lost weight, because the things that cause you to gain are generally things in your life rather than simple food choices.
[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;44671332]People say this, and they have no concept of how nutrition actually works.[/QUOTE]
there's a big difference between eating less and eating healthier at the same time and actually starving yourself though
seriously, dieting is almost the very first thing we should have in mind.
We are only our bodies at the end, no matter how many degrees or fame you get, if you eat like shit your lifestyle is going to suffer.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;44669703]if he can lose that much in that period of time, there's no reason that i can't lose 30 pounds in less time.[/QUOTE]
I like sitting and drinking and eating too much to stop and get skinny
The cons outweigh the pros man
i always wondered how people could afford these 50000000 calorie diets
i want to lose weight but I have no motivation for it. anyone want to come work out with me for motivation?
[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;44671332]People say this, and they have no concept of how nutrition actually works.
Average, stable intake is about 2000 calories a day. If you imagine the human body is a bucket, when you put food in the bucket, the bucket fills up, no ifs-ands-or-buts. Exercise burns a percentage of that off, but it depends on how much and how rigorous that exercise is.
To lose weight, it's needed to go lower in consumption, anywhere from 1000 to 1500.
"But you can always just work out more/harder!" I hear you saying. Bullshit. Working out is strenuous and takes time. In terms of efficiency and cost-benefit, it's worth "more" to just eat less than it is to work harder.
If you break down the calories of an average American meal, in one sitting it's really easy to take down anywhere from 1000 to 2300 calories [I]in one sitting[/I] without trying. You don't need to be a lardy fuckass to do it. A typical 20$ dinner (some main item, a side, drink, possibly appertizer or bread) is definitely in the thousands.
Pile on soda, or alchohol or milk. All of these items add calories to the bucket at the same rate, or even higher than the food does, since most of us drink them as an alternate to proper hydration.
A single grilled chicken sandwich and water is sustainable. It is not comfortable or luxurious, but it is healthier than a bigmac and fries. If your goal is weight loss, it is the superior choice to "three square meals of [insert frimpy 'healthy food here]".
Source: I lost 100lbs after plenty of research. I have also put most of it back on lately.
That's the other one, recidivism is huge for people who have lost weight, because the things that cause you to gain are generally things in your life rather than simple food choices.[/QUOTE]
Or you could watch your calories and eat healthier so you actually have energy to exercise.
Starving yourself makes your body use your own muscles as an energy source. Losing that muscle lowers your metabolism, which means your body will start storing fat to use as energy since it's not getting enough. You'll lose weight, but gain it all back when you start eating normally again.
[QUOTE=thepwnwar;44669718][b]Doctor[/b] hate him![/QUOTE]Just one
[QUOTE=Bumbanut;44671888]Just one[/QUOTE]
The one who had to do his prostate exam.....
im 130lb an i eat like a pig. metabolism >.<
[QUOTE=Masterofstars;44671205]You really shouldn't starve yourself.[/QUOTE]
honestly as accurate as this is for a healthy individual, to a morbidly obese person it's hardly a problem
the sort of health issues you'll save yourself from by dropping the weight and maintaining a healthy weight once you're down to it is generally worth doing it in an unhealthy way, as you'll substantially reduce your risk of heart disease stroke etc etc
when i lost 100lbs i ate roughly 1000 calories per day coupled with 3hours of exercise every day. i'm effectively bulimic. but now that i'm on the other side (down to 200atm) i've pretty much all but eliminated my risk for diabetes, heart disease, and stroke, all of which run in my family. i'm not 100% safe of course, but i'm significantly more safe than I was at 300lbs.
everyone says dumb shit like "put down the fork fatty" but don't realize how drastic of a change you need to make to your lifestyle in order to drop that kind of weight. i ate practically nothing and did extreme amounts of exercise for months on end in order to get down to a healthy weight with a reasonable amount of muscle mass.
for fatties like myself food is a fundamental portion of what your identity is, it's a vice, and it's pervasive. there's no going halfway for many obese people. you've got to effectively go cold turkey and keep it that way for months on end. and it works.
i honestly don't know any person in my own life that's lost more than 50 pounds by eating anything over 1300 calories per day. i'm sure they exist. but i've just never met one.
[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;44671332]People say this, and they have no concept of how nutrition actually works.
Average, stable intake is about 2000 calories a day. If you imagine the human body is a bucket, when you put food in the bucket, the bucket fills up, no ifs-ands-or-buts. Exercise burns a percentage of that off, but it depends on how much and how rigorous that exercise is.
To lose weight, it's needed to go lower in consumption, anywhere from 1000 to 1500.
"But you can always just work out more/harder!" I hear you saying. Bullshit. Working out is strenuous and takes time. In terms of efficiency and cost-benefit, it's worth "more" to just eat less than it is to work harder.
If you break down the calories of an average American meal, in one sitting it's really easy to take down anywhere from 1000 to 2300 calories [I]in one sitting[/I] without trying. You don't need to be a lardy fuckass to do it. A typical 20$ dinner (some main item, a side, drink, possibly appertizer or bread) is definitely in the thousands.
Pile on soda, or alchohol or milk. All of these items add calories to the bucket at the same rate, or even higher than the food does, since most of us drink them as an alternate to proper hydration.
A single grilled chicken sandwich and water is sustainable. It is not comfortable or luxurious, but it is healthier than a bigmac and fries. If your goal is weight loss, it is the superior choice to "three square meals of [insert frimpy 'healthy food here]".
Source: I lost 100lbs after plenty of research. I have also put most of it back on lately.
That's the other one, recidivism is huge for people who have lost weight, because the things that cause you to gain are generally things in your life rather than simple food choices.[/QUOTE]
You can't say that for sure, each person is different however eating below 1600 calories as a male daily is moronic and you're going to end up sending your body in a mode where it will save fat and you're just going to have your willpower falter if you do it over a prolonged time and end up binge eating. The best way I've found to cut after my bulk is to slowly ease my diet into it rather than cutting cold turkey.
[QUOTE=Lone Wolf807;44672205]You can't say that for sure, each person is different however eating below 1600 calories as a male daily is moronic and you're going to end up sending your body in a mode where it will save fat and you're just going to have your willpower falter if you do it over a prolonged time and end up binge eating. The best way I've found to cut after my bulk is to slowly ease my diet into it rather than cutting cold turkey.[/QUOTE]
Honestly, it all depends on WHEN you cut those calories.
You should never cut calories when it comes to breakfast. It's the most important meal of the day because it gives you the calories that your body uses until (if not beyond) lunch time. Skipping breakfast will send your body into a mode where it tries to save fat.
Lunch is kinda iffy. If you didn't have a large enough breakfast, you should eat a decent sized lunch. It gives you the calories that bring you through the rest of your day. On the other hand, a large breakfast means you can have a smaller lunch and be O.K.
Supper should be small. You won't be doing much activity while you're sleeping, and don't need as many calories as you would during an active day.
Cutting back on calories is fine, as long as you know when and which calories to cut. Protein is something you should never cut, and you should always have SOME starches. across the board cuts at the wrong meals is a bad thing to do. But if you do it in a smart way, it's not a bad thing to do...
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;44672338]Honestly, it all depends on WHEN you cut those calories.
You should never cut calories when it comes to breakfast. It's the most important meal of the day because it gives you the calories that your body uses until (if not beyond) lunch time. Skipping breakfast will send your body into a mode where it tries to save fat.
Lunch is kinda iffy. If you didn't have a large enough breakfast, you should eat a decent sized lunch. It gives you the calories that bring you through the rest of your day. On the other hand, a large breakfast means you can have a smaller lunch and be O.K.
Supper should be small. You won't be doing much activity while you're sleeping, and don't need as many calories as you would during an active day.
Cutting back on calories is fine, as long as you know when and which calories to cut. Protein is something you should never cut, and you should always have SOME starches. across the board cuts at the wrong meals is a bad thing to do. But if you do it in a smart way, it's not a bad thing to do...[/QUOTE]
Thats completely wrong, I've corrected people over such outrageous claims that you need breakfast multiple times now. Google intermittent fasting. You don't need starches either or just a low amount, google Ketosis or Paleo.
[QUOTE=GammaFive;44669785]By quitting soda I lost 50 pounds(22.6kg) in the year, being 5'11" I can't really stay below 160 pounds(72.5kg) without some drastic lifestyle change like excising or something.[/QUOTE]
I drink seltzer water to help crave the sodium, carbonated addiction that is soda. So far it's been a good supplement but it goes flat after like 10 god damn minutes.
[QUOTE=false prophet;44671128]I lost over 150lb through diet and excercise. Every night I would go for jogs. Only drank water and ate a single grilled chicken sandwich every day.
The pain in my legs was almost unbearable, felt like everything below my knees was breaking. Lost 100lb in 6 months and the rest came off by itself kind of.
But fell back into an inactive life style and am up to 230+ now. The hardest part is doing it alone and starting.
Edit. I still have my old fatty drivers license where I had no neck. Luckily I have a neck still.[/QUOTE]
Dude what are you doing, this will kill you, just eat normally, you don't need to drink water, go for a jog, and eat a single chicken sandwich every day, you're killing yourself.
This is true dedication right here. Fighting your way out of depression and obesity within just a little over a year is a tremendous feat.
[QUOTE=Lone Wolf807;44672205]You can't say that for sure, each person is different however eating below 1600 calories as a male daily is moronic and you're going to end up sending your body in a mode where it will save fat and you're just going to have your willpower falter if you do it over a prolonged time and end up binge eating. The best way I've found to cut after my bulk is to slowly ease my diet into it rather than cutting cold turkey.[/QUOTE]
That's a bullshit myth that's been debunked many times, your body does not go into some sort of starvation mode where it saves fat.
[QUOTE=Lone Wolf807;44672522]Thats completely wrong, I've corrected people over such outrageous claims that you need breakfast multiple times now. Google intermittent fasting. You don't need starches either or just a low amount, google Ketosis or Paleo.[/QUOTE]
It's going to be easier for the average person to stick to a 2-3 meal system that includes breakfast than it would for them to stick to intermittent fasting. The only reason I only eat only one meal a day (late lunch) is because of my Vyvanse. Without that, I would never be able to stick to an intermittent fasting schedule. Also, you do need a small amount of starch every day. You could eat different things or whatnot to replace them, but in the end, your body needs a balanced diet, and some form of starch (small amount) is included.
I'm not trying to say that you can't go without breakfast, I'm trying to say that for the normal person not on an extensive or extreme diet plan, the side effects of skipping breakfast outweigh the few benefits. If you're not trying to drop 150 lbs in a short amount of time, it would be easier to stick to your plan by exercising and just eating better for your 3 existing meals than skipping meals.
[QUOTE=Heigou;44672738]That's a bullshit myth that's been debunked many times, your body does not go into some sort of starvation mode where it saves fat.[/QUOTE]
Can you provide sources? What I've read proves that it does exist, however I would be glad to learn and update what I know.
[URL]http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sports_body_training_performance/dieting_disasters[/URL]
1. Bryner RW, Ullrich IH, Sauers J, Donley D, Hornsby G, Kolar M,Yeater R.
Effects of resistance vs. aerobic training combined with an 800 calorie liquid diet on lean body mass and resting metabolic rate. Journal of the American College of Nutrition. 1999 Apr; 18(2):115-21.
[URL]http://exrx.net/FatLoss/WhyDietsFail.html[/URL]
[URL]http://exrx.net/Questions/StarvationEffect.html[/URL] (citations within the page)
This makes me wanna lose weight, except I can't exercise 'cause my leg muscle's possibly fucked and I can't diet too much 'cause I rapidly get dizzy if I don't eat. Life is cruel.
Trainers hate him!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
