Archivi tag: burn the fat

How Much Weight Should You Lift To Build Muscle (And When To Lift More)

Title: How Much Weight Should You Lift To Build Muscle (And When To Lift More)

By line: By Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
URL: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com
Word count: 3255 words

How Much Weight Should You Lift To Build Muscle (And When To Lift More)

When should you increase the weight you’re lifting? How much weight should you add? How do you know if the weight is too heavy? How do you know if the weight is too light? If you’re attempting 3 sets of 8 to 12, do you have to get all 3 sets of 12 before you increase the weight, or just hit 12 on one set? If you increase the weight but then you can’t get enough reps, what then?  What if your left arm doesn’t get as many reps as your right arm, with the same weight? What if you flat-out can’t increase the weight at all? What then?

Understanding how to choose the right weight is so vital, you could be completely wasting your gym time if you don’t get this right.

That’s why I’ve created a set of guidelines that will help you choose the right weight and show you how to increase the weight and reps over time with the best results.

Please note; this is not a discussion about how to get stronger per se, only how to know if you’re using the right weight to build muscle, and when to increase it.

This is  also not an exhaustive discussion of all the methods you have available for progressive overload in your workouts (as you will find here in my overload training manual).

What you’re getting here today is a great set of guidelines for mastering the primary progression variable: Increasing the weight, also known as progressive resistance. And with that, here’s the list of my top 10 ways to choose the right weight and make more muscle gains…

1. Work in a repetition max range rather than have a single rep target.

Compared to using one rep target like “3 sets of 10 reps” or 5 sets of 5 reps,” using a rep range makes it easier for most people to choose the right weight and know when to increase it.

The most vital first step is to choose the rep range most compatible with your goals. For example, if your primary goal is strength, training exclusively with weights so light that you can do 20 reps on every set is clearly the wrong way (that’s training for muscle endurance). If your primary goal is bodybuilding, training only in the 1 to 5 rep range is not the right way either (that’s powerlifting).

Using a rep range and judging if it’s the right load by perceived exertion is simple, easy and it eliminates the need for a 1 rep max test. In the chart below, you can see the rep range associated with a particular goal or outcome:

1-5 reps:  Neural:  Strength & power, some hypertrophy
6-8 reps:   Neural & metabolic:  Strength & Hypertrophy
9-12 reps:  Metabolic & Neural:  Hypertrophy & some strength
13-20+ reps:  Metabolic:  Muscular endurance, some hypertrophy, little strength

Typically the range most often recommended for muscle growth (hypertrophy) is 6 to 12 reps (or 8 to 12 reps, depending on who you ask).

Beginners usually start by choosing one rep range, and they shouldn’t worry about rotating rep ranges at first, because beginners respond well to almost anything. As you advance, using periodization (varying the workout stimulus day to day or week to week  including the rep range), becomes increasingly beneficial.

Ultimately, for building muscle, using multiple rep ranges is ideal for advanced trainees, and this is often done by using the “heavy day – lighter day” system or a heavy-medium-light system. At this stage, the majority of your training would still fall in the 8 to 12 range, but with some heavier work below 6 reps and some lighter work above 12 to 15 reps.

Note for women: Most trainers do not like the word “tone,” because technically, there’s no such thing. However, I think it’s fine if women who are not bodybuilders or physique athletes swap out the words muscle “hypertrophy” or “growth” (size) with “toning” or “firming” and here’s why: If women believe they are going to get bigger doing sets of 6, 8, 10 or 12 reps, many may instead keep choosing tiny light weights that they could rep out all day long – but that actually gets you nowhere because it’s not enough resistance.

Women lack the testosterone to gain muscle “mass” the way men do, but when women train in the optimal hypertrophy rep range, the effect is exactly what they say they want: “muscle shaping, firming and toning” (think “better curves”). You only achieve that by training with enough weight in the right rep ranges.

2. Increase the weight if you can hit your the upper number in your rep range (or more) on all of your sets.

Once you know the rep range you’re aiming for, adjusting the weight is simple: When you hit the higher end of your rep range on all your sets – in good form – that is your signal to increase the weight at your next workout.

If you hit the upper number in your rep range target and it was super-easy, (you feel like you could have kept going for several more), you don’t even have to wait for the next workout, you could increase the weight right then and there for your second set.

Here’s an example: If your target was 3 sets of 8 to 12 reps and you hit all three sets of 12 (the upper number in your rep range target), with good form it’s time to increase the weight for the next workout.

If you only hit one set at the upper end of the target range, for example, if your three sets are 12, 11, 10 reps, yes, you can still increase the weight if you want to, because you did hit one set of 12, or you can stay at the same weight and keep working toward that goal of 3 full sets of 12. You can make your own judgement call on that.

3. Decrease the weight if you can’t hit your lower rep max number on any of your sets.

The flipside of the above also applies: An absolutely certain way to know if the weight is too heavy is when you can’t hit the low end of your rep range on any sets. If the rep range you’ve chosen is 10-15 reps and you can’t even do one set of 8 or 9 reps, it’s absolutely too heavy and you should reduce the poundage.

4. Remember that sometimes it’s normal for reps to drop with successive sets.

After you complete each set, fatigue and exercise metabolism waste-products accumulate, while energy reserves decline, and this may result in your reps dropping from set to set. This is especially true if you train to failure. The more reps you leave in the tank with each set, the easier it’s going to be to stay in your target rep range on all of your sets. Repetition drop-off also happens in your later sets if your rest intervals are too short (if you want time-efficiency, instead of cutting rest intervals between regular sets, consider the Burn The Fat antagonist superset system)

If the reps drop slightly, that’s ok, in fact, because usually it means you’re working hard on the early sets. On the other hand, losing steam with each passing set and exercise as the workout goes on can also be a sign that you’re tired, sleep-deprived, under-fueled, under-nourished, under-recovered from previous workouts or not mentally focused. The end result of all the above is that you may not always hit your intended number of reps or even your intended rep range.

If you’re doing 3 sets of 8 – 12, it might look like this: set 1: 12 reps, set 2: 10 reps, set 3: 9 reps. This is normal and okay. Just keep working to get stronger and do more reps on each set in future workouts when you feel able to do so. On the other hand, if your goal was 8 to 12 reps and you did 11 reps, 8 reps and 6 reps in each set, that’s too much dropoff and you should consider using the strategies above so you stay in your target rep range).

5. Understand that it’s normal for one arm to be stronger than another at first.

Since most of us have a dominant side, it’s perfectly normal for one arm to be a little stronger than another. It’s also quite possible that one arm may randomly get one more rep than the other.

Don’t worry about it – it’s just one rep. In fact, you might want to give yourself a plus or minus (+ / -) one rep rule on every set of every exercise you do because it helps you relieve the stress of worrying about the small stuff like this.

For example, if one day you do 12 reps with your left arm and 13 reps with your right arm, that’s fine. In this case, it is like horseshoes or hand grenades – close enough is close enough. NOTE: training with dumbbells and unilateral exercises over time can help even out your strength.

6. Increase the weights in relative increments and expect the weight increases to slow down as you get more advanced.

Common recommendations for progressive resistance are to increase the weight by 5 to 10 pounds or 5% to 10% at a time. Keep in mind, however, that this is not the same amount. Percentage is relative, while pounds are absolute. The actual amount you can increase can vary for many reasons, including the type of exercise and how many years you’ve been training.

A strong guy might curl 50 pound dumbbells for reps with strict form. A 5 percent increase would only be 2.5 pounds – increasing to a 52.5 pound dumbbell, a small and manageable absolute increase.Even adding 10% and moving up to the 55 pound dumbbells is do-able.

Compound barbell exercises like squats and deadlifts or machines like leg presses allow you to use much heavier weights, so the absolute amount of weight increase may be higher.  If a 200 pound man is squatting 400 pounds,  increasing by 5% (20 pounds – a 10 pound plate on each side) is possible, but a big jump in absolute terms. A 10% increase of 40 pounds is probably out of the question. Adding just 5 pounds on each side of the bar, jumping up to 410 lbs, a 2.5% increase is good progress.

That brings us to another point: How small of a weight increase you use is often dictated not only by the type of exercise and your training age, but also by the equipment you have available. Special equipment can make slow progression through small weight jumps possible. This is known as micro-progression.

Most dumbbell racks only  go up in 5 pound increments. But some well equipped gyms have a rack of dumbbells that goes up in 2.5 increments and these are fantastic for slow progression.

A second option is the adjustable dumbbells where you put free weight plates on the side of each dumbbell handle and secure them with collars. Weight plates are available in 2.5 and even 1.25 pound increments at fitness and sporting good stores. Also, some collars have weight and whatever the collars weigh also counts.

A third option is magnetic plates (such as PlateMates). If you are using metal dumbbells (not encased in rubber – and hopefully not those old vinyl Kmart plates), the micro-weights attach magnetically. These come in 1.25 pound increments so one on each side of a bell makes your 2.5 pound increment.

Microprogression is valuable all the time for small body part isolation exercises, but it also comes in handy for advanced lifters. After years of experience and progression, you have already captured all your rapid “newbie” gains and your rate of progress, both in muscle growth and in strength, slows down dramatically. Personal records (PR’s) come much more infrequently. Nevertheless, it remains the goal of most lifters to continue finding ways to get stronger and hit new PRs.

Of course, there is the powerlifter joke that “real men” are only allowed to add 45 pound plates on the bar, (Olympic bars loaded with 45’s go up: 135, 225, 315, 405, 495), but I’d take that one with a grain of salt if I were you. No matter where you are on the strength spectrum, never turn your nose up at small increases and keep in mind that you will not always be able to increase the weight.

7. Use the double progressive system, working up in reps, then weight, then repeating.

One reason you can’t increase the weight predictably every time is becasue almost everyone has natural up and down days. Some days you are stronger and more energetic than others. Another reason is that beginners make much faster progress than advanced trainees. The longer you’ve been training, the slower your progress typical comes.

Whatever the reason you can’t increase the weight at the moment, you can almost always do one more rep with the same weight, and one more rep is not an intimidating goal.

This is the “one step at a time” mentality, and while it may seem like it will take forever moving up one rep at a time, remember that you are going to be training for a lifetime and it’s vital to appreciate slow progression.

Below you’ll see the example of double progression that was used in the Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle book:

225 pounds X 8 reps – start at low end of rep range
225 pounds X 9 reps – Increase by one rep
225 pounds X 10 reps – Increase by one rep
225 pounds X 11 reps – Increase by one rep
225 pounds X 12 reps – Achieved rep goal — increase weight
235 pounds X 8 reps – Drop back to low end of rep range
235 pounds X 9 reps – Increase by one rep
235 pounds X 10 reps – Increase by one rep
235 pounds X 11 reps – Increase by one rep
235 pounds X 12 reps – Achieved rep goal — increase weight.
245 pounds X 8 reps – Drop back to low end of rep range.

This is a simplified, linear example. More often, progress comes in spurts, and then plateaus. You might jump three steps forward and then one step sideways (or back). Sometimes you’ll make fast strength gains and increase the weight every workout. At other times, you must be patient and move up one rep at a time. That’s the main point of the double progressive system: If you add even one more rep with the same weight each workout, that’s progress! In this example, it took 10 workouts to move up by 20 pounds. Patience, combined with good record-keeping with a training journal pays off.

8. Use other methods of progressive overload instead of using progressive resistance.

Adding more weight to the bar is the big daddy of progression methods, but it’s not the only way to challenge yourself to improve your performance. As mentioned above, doing more reps with the same weight is a form of progressive overload.

Adding volume is a method of progression as well. That means more sets and more exercises. Contrary to what the minimalist training gurus claim, increasing volume can often work shockingly well, as long as you do it within your recovery ability, within practical restraints such as time available, and you appropriately cycle between lower and higher volume workouts.

Density training is yet another method of overload. That means doing the same volume of work in less time, doing more work in the same time or even doing more work in less time.

The use of increased intensity of effort techniques or set extension techniques can also overload your muscles. Drop sets, supersets, giant sets, static holds and so on – using the same weight – all give your muscles a new challenge. You could even argue that stricter form with the same weight is also an overload of sorts.

If you can’t, or don’t want to keep adding more weight, you are free to employ one or more of these techniques (you can learn more in my Ultimate Progressive Overload for Bodybuilding and Physique Transformation Manual)

9. Take a deload or back off period, then start your progression over again.

Sometimes when you hit a sticking point and the weights or reps don’t seem to move, it doesn’t mean you’ve done something wrong, it means you have built up to a temporary peak in intensity, volume and so on. There is another potential peak with advancement and personal records ahead of you, but first your body needs a short rest before climbing that next mountain.

After your training has reached an intensity peak, your body is “stressed out” and needs a break to avoid being pushed into an overtrained state. But instead of taking a total rest week, you continue to train, and simply back off the weights and intensity for a short period. This is known as de-loading, and it allows your body a short time to recover and “reap” the gains you obtained in the previous weeks. This is a phenomenon known as “super compensation,” which means that even during that de-load week, you continue to see gains, often good ones, which is a result not of the deload week by itself, but the intensity peak that preceded it.

What often happens after a de-load is you can pick up where you left off (or take one step back to prep for 2 or 3 more steps forward), and when you do resume training full-bore, you break through to a new PR by the end of the next cycle.

10. Change the exercise.

Sometimes you reach a point where you have milked all the results out of a particular exercise routine and it’s simply time to change it. This sometimes involves changing the frequency, changing the volume, changing the set and rep parameters or changing the techniques used. Most often it involves changing some or even all the exercises.

It may not be necessary or even beneficial to change all the exercises, but changing some exercises on a regular basis is important to continue producing new progress (it also helps you avoid boredom and burnout). Because some exercises are so fundamental and effective, you might stay with those exercises, but change the other variables mentioned above.

Alternately, you keep the basic movement pattern and use an exercise variation. Examples include changing from back squat to front squat, from conventional deadlift to hex bar deadlift, from barbell press to dumbbell press or from barbell row to dumbbell row. Sometimes as little as a grip change is enough, such as moving from pull up to chin up, from supinated row to pronated row, from wide grip pulldown to close grip pulldown and so on.

ultimate-progressive-overload-200Want to learn more?

For years, I’ve been bombarded with questions about how to choose the right weight and when to increase it, and I hope this tutorial on progressive resistance has helped clear up up this often-confusing subject.

If you want to learn more about all the other progressive overload systems (not just progressive resistance), then be sure to download a copy of my new e-book, The Ultimate Progressive Overload Training Manual For Body Building and Body Transformation.

It’s brand new and and you can get your copy here:

CLICK HERE To Download Your Progressive Overload Training Manual

 


tomvenuto-blogAbout Tom Venuto

Tom Venuto is a lifetime natural (steroid-free) bodybuilder, fitness writer and author of Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle: Fat Burning Secrets of Bodybuilders and Fitness Models and the national bestseller, The Body Fat Solution, which was an Oprah Magazine and Men’s Fitness Magazine pick. Tom has appeared in The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Huffington Post, Oprah Magazine, Muscle and Fitness Magazine, Ironman Magazine and Men’s Fitness Magazine, as well as on dozens of radio shows including Sirius Satellite Radio, ESPN-1250 and WCBS. Tom is also the founder and CEO of Burn The Fat Inner Circle – a fitness support community for inspiration and transformation

Damage Control For Holiday Eating “Accidents” (Part 2)

 Title: Damage Control For Holiday Eating “Accidents” (Part 2)
By line: By Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
URL: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com
Word count: 596 words

Damage Control For Holiday Eating “Accidents” (Part 2)
By Tom Venuto

BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System

It’s lunchtime, and you’re trying to decide what to make today. Normally, you would have your regular chicken salad with mixed nuts, but today is different. You’re going to a party in the evening, and even though you’re not quite sure what to expect, you know there will be a ton of food in an atmosphere of very little restraint. You decide that it’s probably best to eat a lighter lunch than usual, to prepare for the evening calorie-surge.

This is commonly known as “banking calories” which is analagous to saving calories like money because you’re going to consume more later.

I usually do not recommend this. Here’s why:
If you skip meals earlier in the day to “prepare” (bank calories) for a big feast at night, you are thinking only in terms of calories, but skipping meals is also depriving yourself of protein (amino acids), carbohydrates, essential fats, vitamins, minerals and other valuable nutrients that come from healthy food, as well as the small frequent meals which help control your appetite, stabilize your blood sugar and provide a steady flow of amino acids to your muscles. Skipping breakfast is especially detrimental.
Not only that, but eating less early in the day in anticipation of overeating later in the day is much more likely to increase your appetite, causing you to binge or eat even MORE than you thought you would at night when the big meal does arrive.
In fact, eating healthy, high fiber and lean protein food, as usual, earlier in the day is likely to make you LESS hungry for the holiday party meal and you’ll be more likey to eat only a harmlessly small amount of “party” foods.
I dont like the concept of “banking calories” if it means skipping meals or if it’s used as justification for binge eating.
Even if it worked the way you wanted it to, the starving and bingeing pattern may cause more damage than an occasional oversize meal, even if only on a psychological level. Some dieticians might even argue that this kind of behavior borders on disordered eating.
A better approach is to stay on your regular menu of healthy foods and small meals through the entire day – business as usual – and then go ahead and enjoy yourself at your party by treating yourself to a SMALL amount of “BAD” food.
This is supported by the 2nd Corollary of the law of calorie balance:
“Small amounts of ANYTHING – even junk food- will probably not be stored as fat as long as you are in a calorie deficit where you are eating fewer calories than you burn.”
It should be a big relief for you to know that when you’re at a party, a banquet, dining out or eating at a relative’s house for a special occasion, you can eat whatever you want with little or no ill effect on body composition, as long as you respect the law of calorie balance ans as long as it is done infrequently.
However, you CANNOT starve and binge and expect not to reap negative consequences.
If you sincerely want to burn fat and be healthy, then you have to have the discipline to stick with your nutrition plan consistently and control your portion sizes.
Train hard and expect success

Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System

P.S. If you’re interested in burning fat naturally in a healthy, sensible way, then be sure to take a look at Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle – it’s the best place to start your journey: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System



About the Author:Tom Venuto is a natural bodybuilder, certified strength and conditioning specialist Tom Venuto 8(CSCS) and a certified personal trainer (CPT). Tom is the

author of “Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle,” which teaches

you how to get lean without drugs or supplements using

methods of the world’s best bodybuilders and fitness

models. Learn how to get rid of stubborn fat and increase

your metabolism by visiting: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com

Damage Control For Holiday Eating “Accidents” (Part 1)

 Title: Damage Control For Holiday Eating “Accidents” (Part 1)
By line: By Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
URL: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com
Word count: 709 words

Damage Control For Holiday Eating “Accidents” (Part 1)
By Tom Venuto

BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System

We’ve all been at the holiday get-togethers, and have quickly devoured something devilishly delicious with little thought. Some feel little shame for eating a cake or drinking half the bowl of punch, but others find themselves feeling guilty afterwards and can’t help but think, “oops, I shouldn’t have eaten that.” I have to admit I do get a little chuckle out of the “accidental” part! Do you ever really “accidentally” eat anything? I think we are all responsible for everything we eat and how much we eat and until you consciously realize and accept this, and take the time to do some proactive meal planning, you will probably continue to have lots of “overeating accidents!”

After you overindulge, I definitely do NOT recommend skipping your next meal or skipping meals the next day to make up for it. I usually don’t even recommend cutting back either, although there may be exceptions where you could manipulate your meal size or macronutrient composition.

I generally recommend returning immediately to your “regularly scheduled meal programming,” because this continues to encourage the maintenance of positive habits such as eating 5-6 small meals every day.

I do suppose whether you cut back could depend on whether you’ve been on low calories a long time, how lean you were already, and on whether you were in a caloric deficit already. If you were in a calorie deficit for the day, then the extra calories might only bring you up to maintenance, not “over” your daily limit, which might not be as damaging as if you were in a calorie surplus.

If you were already very lean or had been dieting strictly for a long time (as in a bodybuilder coming off a competition), a large meal or entire high calorie day might not have any negative effect either. Your metabolism has a way of slowing down if you keep your calories too low 100% of the time.

With occasional (planned) higher calorie days, you’d be using the BURN THE FAT “zig-zag” or “cycling” principle, so eating more in this context can be a positive thing. (Note: You can learn more about this technique in the BURN THE FAT program at BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System). However, there’s a big difference between a planned “cheat meal” or a planned high carb, clean food “re-feed” day and a binge on junk food. Regardless of total 24 hour calorie intake for the day, you could still store body fat after heavy eating if it’s done at certain times and in a certain metabolic state.

Although I do prescribe calorie levels based on daily (24 hr) needs, I believe you should also pay attention to 3 hour “windows” when you’re thinking about adjusting your caloric intake. Calories and macronutrients (protein/aminos, carbs/sugar and fat) are partitioned into glycogen, muscle or fat tissue or burned immediately depending very much on present moment energy and recovery needs and on what’s going to happen over the next 3 hours or so as the food enters your system.

So, if you’re going to be plopping down on the couch to watch football games for the rest of the day and night after that big holiday meal, beware – you might just want to cut back on that next meal a little, especially starches and sugars.

Bottom line: It’s okay to eat small amounts of your favorite junk foods once in a while as planned “free meals,” and it’s a good idea to eat more in general from time to time to keep your metabolism humming along. However, your best bet if you’re really serious about fat loss is to avoid huge meals and avoid bingeing in the first place. ALWAYS practice portion control – even on holidays.

If you ever do slip, don’t beat yourself up, just get right back on the wagon with your next meal and remember, the past is behind you and today is a new day.

Your friend and coach,
Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System

P.S. If you’re interested in burning fat naturally in a healthy, sensible way, then be sure to take a look at Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle – it’s the best place to start your journey: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System

About the Author:

Tom Venuto is a natural bodybuilder, certified strength and conditioning specialist Tom Venuto 8

(CSCS) and a certified personal trainer (CPT). Tom is the

author of “Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle,” which teaches

you how to get lean without drugs or supplements using

methods of the world’s best bodybuilders and fitness

models. Learn how to get rid of stubborn fat and increase

your metabolism by visiting: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com

 

Orthorexia and the New Rules of Clean Eating (Part 2)

 Title: Orthorexia and the New Rules of Clean Eating (Part 2)
By line: By Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
URL: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com
Word count: 2326 words

 

In part one, I described the growing obsession many people have with eating only the purest, healthiest foods, aka “clean eating.” You’d think that nothing but good would come from that, but some experts today dislike the concept of clean foods because it implies a dichotomy where other foods, by default, are “dirty” or forbidden – as in, you can never, ever eat them again (imagine life without chocolate, or pizza… or beer! you guys). Some physicians and psychologists even believe that if taken to an extreme, a fixation on healthy food qualifies as a new eating disorder called orthorexia.

Personally, I have no issues with the phrase “clean eating.” Even if you choose to eat clean nearly 100% of the time, I don’t see how that qualifies as a psychological disorder of any kind (I reckon people who eat at McDonalds every day are the ones who need a shrink).

However, I also think you would agree that any behavior – washing your hands, cleaning your house, or even exercise or eating health food – can become obsessive-compulsive and dysfunctional if it takes over your life or is taken to an extreme. In the case of diet and exercise, it could also lead to or overlap with anorexia.

It’s debatable whether orthorexia is a distinct eating disorder, but I’m not against using the word to help classify a specific type of obsessive-compulsive behavior. I think it’s real.

The truth is that many people are quite “enthusiastic” in defending – or preaching about – their dietary beliefs: no meat, no grains, no dairy, only organic, only raw, only what God made, and on and on the rigid all-or-nothing rules go.

What people choose to eat is often so sacred to them, it makes for tricky business when you’re a nutrition educator. Sometimes I don’t feel like telling anyone what to eat, but simply setting a personal example and showing people how I do it, like, “Hey guys, here is how natural bodybuilders eat to get so ripped and muscular. It may not suit you, but it works for us. Take it or leave it.”

On the other hand, I can’t help feeling that there’s got to be a way to better help the countless individuals who haven’t yet formulated their own philosophies, and who find nutrition overwhelmingly confusing. For many people, even a simple walk down the aisles of a grocery store, and trying to decipher the food labels and nutrition claims is enough to trigger an anxiety attack.

That’s where I hope this is useful. I can’t draw the line for you, or tell you what to eat, but I can suggest a list of “new rules” for clean eating which simplifies nutrition and clears up confusion, while giving you more freedom, balance, life enjoyment and better results at the same time.

New Rule #1: Define what clean eating means to you

Obviously, clean eating is not a scientific term. Most people define clean eating as avoiding processed foods, chemicals and artificial ingredients and choosing natural foods, the way they came out of the ground or as close to their natural form as possible. If that works for you, then use it. However, the possible definitions are endless. I’ve seen forum arguments about whether protein powder is “clean.” Arguments are a waste of time. Ultimately, what clean eating means is up to you to define. Whether your beliefs and values have you restrict or expand on the general definition, define it you must, keeping in mind that your definition may be different than other’s.

New Rule #2: Always obey the law of energy balance

There’s one widely held belief about food that hurts people and perpetuates the obesity problem because it’s simply not true. It’s the idea that calories don’t matter for weight loss, as long as you eat certain foods or avoid certain foods. Some people think that if you eat only clean foods, you’re guaranteed to lose weight and stay lean. The truth is that eating too much of anything gets stored as fat. Yes, you can become obese eating 100% clean, natural foods. There’s more to good nutrition than calories in versus calories out, but the energy balance equation is always there.

New Rule #3: Remember that “foods” are not fattening, “excess calories” are

There’s a widespread fear today that certain foods will automatically turn into fat. Carbohydrates – particularly refined carbohydrates and sugars – are still high on the hit list of feared foods, and so are fatty foods, owing to their high caloric density (9 calories per gram). Foods that contain fat and sugar (think donuts) are considered the most fattening of all. But what if you ate only one small donut and stayed in a calorie deficit for the day – would you still say that donut was fattening?

If you want to say certain foods are fattening, you certainly can, but what you really mean is that some foods are calorie dense, highly palatable, not very satiating and eating them might even stimulate your appetite for more (betcha can’t eat just one!). Therefore, they’re likely to cause you to eat more calories than you need. Conversely, “non-fattening” foods have no magical properties, they’re simply low in caloric density, highly filling and non-appetite stimulating.

New Rule #4: Understand the health-bodyfat paradox

Two of the biggest reasons people choose to eat clean are health and weight loss. Health and body composition are intertwined, but dietary rules for health and weight loss are not one in the same. Weight gains or losses are dictated primarily by calorie quantity. Health is dictated primarily by calorie quality. That’s the paradox: You can lose weight on a 100% junk food diet, but that doesn’t mean you’ll be healthy. You can get healthier on an all natural clean food diet, but that doesn’t mean you won’t gain weight… and if you gain too much weight, then you start getting unhealthy. To be healthy and lean requires the right combination of calorie quantity and quality, not one or the other.

New Rule #5: Forbidden foods are forbidden.

Think of you on a diet like a pressure cooker on a burner. The longer you keep that pot on the heat, the more the steam builds up inside. If there’s no outlet or release valve, eventually the pressure builds up so much that even if it’s made of steel and the lid is bolted down, she’s gonna blow, sooner or later. But if you let off a little steam by occasionally having that slice of pizza or whatever is your favorite food, that relieves the pressure.

Alas, you never even felt the urge to binge… because you already had your pizza and the urge was satisfied. Since the “cheat meal” was planned and you obeyed the law of calorie balance, you stayed in control and it had little or no effect on your fat loss results. Ironically, you overcome your cravings by giving in to them, with two caveats: not too often and not too much.

New Rule #6: Set your own compliance rule

Many health and nutrition professionals suggest a 90% compliance rule because if you choose clean foods 90% of the time, it’s easy to control your calories, you consume enough nutrients for good health, and what you eat the other 10% of the time doesn’t seem to matter much. Suppose you eat 3 meals and 2 snacks every day, a total of 35 feedings per week. 90% compliance would mean following your clean eating plan for about 31 or 32 of those weekly feedings. The other 3 or 4 times per week, you eat whatever you want (as long as you obey rule #2 and keep the calories in check)

You’ll need to decide for yourself where to set your own rule. A 90% compliance rule is a popular, albeit arbitrary number – a best guess at how much “clean eating” will give you optimal health. Some folks stay lean and healthy with 80%. Others say they don’t even desire junk food and they eat 99% clean, indulging perhaps only once or twice a month.

One thing is for certain – the majority of your calories should come from natural nutrient-dense foods – not only for good health, but also because what you eat most of the time becomes your habitual pattern. Habit patterns are tough to break and what you do every day over the long term is what really counts the most.

New Rule #7: Have “free” meals, not “cheat” meals

Cheating presupposes that you’re doing something you’re not supposed to be doing. That’s why you feel guilty when you cheat. Guilt can be one of the biggest diet destroyers. Consider referring to these meals that are off your regular plan as “free meals” instead of “cheat meals.” If having free meals is part of your plan right from the start, then you’re not cheating are you? So don’t call it that. What can you eat for your free meals? Anything you want. Otherwise, it wouldn’t truly be a free meal, would it?

People sometimes tell me that my bodybuilding diet and lifestyle are “too strict.” I find that amusing because I love eating clean 95-99% of the time and I consider it easy. I had a butter-drizzled steak, a glass of wine, and chocolate sin cake for dessert to celebrate my last birthday. I had a couple slices of pizza just four weeks before my last competition (and still stepped on stage at 4.5% body fat). Oh, and I’m really looking forward to my mom’s pumpkin pie and Christmas cake too. Why? How? Because as strict as my lifestyle might appear to some people, I’ve learned how to enjoy free meals and I will eat ANYTHING I want – with no guilt. Meanwhile, my critics are often people with rules that NEVER allow those foods to ever cross their lips.

New Rule #8: For successful weight control, focus on compliance to a calorie deficit, not just compliance to a food list

Dietary compliance doesn’t just mean eating the right foods, it means eating the right amount of food. You might be doing a terrific job at eating only the foods “authorized” by your nutrition program, but if you eat too many “clean” foods, you will still get fat. On the fat loss side of health-bodyfat paradox, the quantity of food is the pivotal factor, not the quality of food. If fat loss is your goal and you’re stubbornly determined to be 100% strict about your nutrition, then be 100% strict about maintaining your calorie deficit.

Lesson #9: Avoid all or none attitudes and dichotomous thinking

If you make a mistake, it doesn’t ruin an entire 12 week program, a whole week and not even an entire day. What ruins a program is thinking that you must either be on or off your diet and allowing one meal off your program to completely derail you. All or nothing thinking is the great killer of diet programs.

Even if they don’t believe that one meal will set them back physically, many “clean eaters” feel like a single cheat is a moral failure. They are terrified to eat any processed foods because they look at foods as good or bad rather than looking at the degree of processing or the frequency of consuming them.

Rest assured, a single meal of ANYTHING, if the calories don’t exceed your energy needs, will have virtually no impact on your condition. It’s not what you do occasionally, it’s what you do most of the time, day after day, that determines your long term results.

New Rule #10: Focus more on results, less on methods

I’m not sure whether it’s sad or laughable that most people get so married to their methods that they stop paying attention to results. Overweight people often praise their diet program and the guru that created it, even though they’ve plateaud and haven’t lost any weight in months, or the weight they lost has begun to creep back on. Health food fanatics keep eating the same, even when they’re sick and weak and not getting any stronger or healthier.

Why would someone continue doing more of the same even when it’s not working? One word: habit! Beliefs and behavior patterns are so ingrained at the unconscious level, you repeat the same behaviors every day virtually on automatic pilot. Defending existing beliefs and doing it the way you’ve always done it is a lot easier than changing.

In the final analysis, results are what counts: weight, body composition, lean muscle, performance, strength, blood pressure, blood lipids, and everything else you want to improve. Are they improving or not? If not, perhaps it’s time for a change.

Concluding words of wisdom

We need rules. Trying to eat “intuitively” or just “wing it” from the start is a recipe for failure. Ironically, intuitive eating does not come intuitively. Whether you use my Burn The Fat.com – Body Transformation System program or a different program that suits your lifestyle better, you must have a plan.

After following your plan for a while, your constructive new behaviors eventually turn over to unconscious control (a process commonly known as developing habits). But you’ll never reach that hallowed place of “unconscious competence” unless you start with planning, structure, discipline and rules.

Creating nutritional rules does NOT create more rule breakers. Only unrealistic or unnecessary rules create rule breakers. That’s why these new rules of clean eating are based on a neat combination of structure and flexibility. If you have too much flexibility and not enough structure, you no longer have a plan. If you have too much structure and not enough flexibility, you have a plan you can’t stick with.

To quickly sum it all up: Relax your diet a bit! But not too much!

Tom Venuto, author of: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com

 

About the Author:

Tom Venuto is a natural bodybuilder, certified strength and conditioning specialist Tom Venuto 8

(CSCS) and a certified personal trainer (CPT). Tom is the

author of “Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle,” which teaches

you how to get lean without drugs or supplements using

methods of the world’s best bodybuilders and fitness

models. Learn how to get rid of stubborn fat and increase

your metabolism by visiting: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com

Orthorexia and the New Rules of Clean Eating (Part 1)

Title: Orthorexia and the New Rules of Clean Eating (Part 1)
By line: By Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
URL: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com
Word count: 1345 words

 

Clean eating has no official definition, but it’s usually described as avoiding processed foods, chemicals, preservatives and artificial ingredients. Instead, clean eaters choose natural foods, the way they came out of the ground or as close to their natural form as possible. Vegetables, fruits, legumes, 100% whole grains, egg whites, fish, and chicken breast are clean eating staples. Clean eating appears to be a desirable, sensible, even noble goal. Eating clean is what we should all strive to do to achieve optimum health and body composition isn’t it? Arguably the answer is mostly yes, but more and more people today are asking, “is it possible to take clean eating too far?”

Physician Steven Bratman thinks so. In 1997, Bratman was the first to put a name to an obsession with healthy eating, calling it orthorexia nervosa. In his book, Health Food Junkies, Bratman said that whether they are trying to lose weight or not, orthorexics are preoccupied with eating healthy food and avoiding anything artificial or “toxic.”

Orthorexics are not only fanatical about eating the purest, healthiest, most nutritious (aka “clean”) foods available, says Bratman, they often feel a sense of righteousness in doing so.

Whether orthorexia should be officially classified as an eating disorder is controversial. The term appears in pub med indexed scientific journals, but it’s not listed in the DSM-IV as are anorexia and bulimia. Opponents wonder, “Since when did choosing a lifestyle that eliminates junk food become a disease?”

Media coverage and internet discussions about orthorexia have increased in the past year. Websites such as the Mayo Clinic, the Huffington Post and the UK-based Guardian added their editorials into the mix in recent months, alongside dozens of individual bloggers.

In most cases, mainstream media discussions of orthorexia have focused on far extremes of health food practices such as raw foodism, detox dieting or 100% pure organic eating, where some folks would rather starve to death than eat a cooked or pesticide-exposed vegetable.

But closer to my home, what about the bodybuilding, fitness, figure and physique crowd? Should we be included in this discussion?

In their quest for adding muscle mass and burning fat, many fitness and physique enthusiasts become obsessed with eating only the “cleanest” foods possible. Like the natural health enthusiasts, physique athletes usually avoid all processed foods and put entire food groups on the “forbidden” list. Oddly, that sometimes includes rules such as “you must cut out fruit on precontest diets” because “fruit is high in sugar” or “fructose turns to fat”.

According to Bratman’s criteria, one could argue that almost every competitive bodybuilder or physique athlete is automatically orthorexic, and they might add obsessive-compulsive and neurotic for good measure.

As you can imagine, I have mixed feelings about that (being a bodybuilder).

If I choose to set a rule for myself that I’ll limit my junk food to only 10% of my meals, does that make me orthorexic or is that a prudent health decision?

If I plan my menus on a spreadsheet, am I a macronutrient micromanager or am I detail-oriented?

If I make my meals in advance for the day ahead, does that mean I’m obsessive compulsive, or am I prepared?

If I make one of my high protein vanilla apple cinnamon oatmeal pancakes (one of my favorite portable clean food recipes) and take it with me on a flight because I don’t want to eat airline food, am I neurotic? Or am I perhaps, the smartest guy on the plane?

Some folks are probably shaking their heads and saying, “you bodybuilders are definitely OCD.” I prefer to call it dedicated, thank you, but perhaps we are obsessive, at least a wee bit before competitions. But aren’t all competitive athletes, to some degree, at the upper levels of most sports?

Athletes of all kinds – not just bodybuilders – take their nutrition and training regimens far beyond what the “average Joe” or “average soccer mom” would require to stay healthy and fit.

What if you don’t want to be average – what if you want to be world class? What then? Is putting hours of practice a day into developing a skill or discipline an obsessive-compulsive disorder too?

Okay, now that I’ve defended the strict lifestyle habits of the muscle-head brother and sisterhood, let me address the flipside: being too strict.

Where does the average health and bodyweight-concerned fitness enthusiast draw the line? How clean should you eat? Do you need lots of structure and planning in your eating habits, or as Lao Tzu, the Chinese philosopher said, does making too many rules only create more rule-breakers?

Debates have started flaring up over these questions and as inconceivable as it seems, there has actually been somewhat of a backlash against “clean eating.” Why would THAT possibly happen? Eating “clean” is eating healthy, right? Eating clean is a good thing, right?

Well, almost everyone agrees that it’s ok to have a “cheat meal” occasionally, but some experts – after watching how many people are becoming neurotic about food – are now clamoring to point out that it’s not necessary to be so strict.

The diet pendulum has apparently swung from:

“Eat a balanced diet with a wide variety of foods you enjoy.”

To:

“You MUST eat clean!”

To:

“Go ahead and eat as much junk as you want, as long as you watch your calories and get your essential nutrients like protein, essential fats, vitamins and minerals.”

Talk about confusion! Now we’ve got people who gain great pride and a sense of dedication and accomplishment for taking up a healthy, clean-eating lifestyle and we’ve got people who thumb their nose at clean eating and say, “Chill out bro! Live a little!”

The current debate about how clean you should eat (or how much you should “cheat”) reminds me of the recent arguments over training methods such as steady state versus HIIT cardio. Whatever the debate of the day, most people seem to have a really difficult time acknowledging that there’s a middle ground.

Most dieters, when they don’t like a certain philosophy, reject it entirely and flip to its polar opposite. Most dieters are dichotomous thinkers, always viewing their endeavors as all or nothing. Most dieters are also joiners, plugging into one of the various diet tribes and gaining their sense of identity by belonging.

In some cases, I think these tribes are more like cults, as people follow guru-like leaders who pass down health and nutrition commandments that are followed with religious conviction. Seriously, the parallels of diet groups to religious groups can be downright scary sometimes.

Whether the goal is to optimize health, to build muscle or to burn fat, there’s little doubt that many individuals with all kinds of different motivations sometimes take their dietary restrictions to extremes. Obviously, an overly restrictive diet can lead to nutrient deficiencies and can adversely affect health, energy and performance.

In some cases, I can also see how swinging to any extreme, even a “healthy obsession” with pure food could lead to distorted views and behaviors that border on eating disorders. If you don’t believe it’s a real clinical psychological problem, then at the very least, you might agree that nutritional extremes could mean restricting social activities, creating inconvenience or making lifestyle sacrifices that are just not necessary.

I believe there’s a middle ground – a place where we can balance health and physique with a lifestyle and food plan we love and enjoy. Even more important, I believe that your middle ground may not be the same as mine. We all must find our own balance.

I believe that going back to BALANCE, but this time with a better definition of what balance means, is the approach of the future.

I also believe that some new rules would help us find that balance.

If you’d like to learn the rules that bodybuilders and fitness models follow to “eat clean” and stay lean, then visit BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com
About the Author:

Tom Venuto is a natural bodybuilder, certified strength and conditioning specialist Tom Venuto 8

(CSCS) and a certified personal trainer (CPT). Tom is the

author of “Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle,” which teaches

you how to get lean without drugs or supplements using

methods of the world’s best bodybuilders and fitness

models. Learn how to get rid of stubborn fat and increase

your metabolism by visiting: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
www.Burnthefatinnercircle.com

Nutrition Label Lies & Loopholes: Serving Size Sleight of Hand

Title: Nutrition Label Lies & Loopholes: Serving Size Sleight of Hand
By line: By Tom Venuto
URL: BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System
Word count: 1432 words

Nutrition Label Lies & Loopholes: Serving Size Sleight of Hand By Tom Venuto BurnTheFat.com – Body Transformation System

For years, concerned consumers and watchdog organizations have been screaming that the U.S. labeling laws are full of loopholes and in need of serious revision. After years of talk, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says they’re planning to so something about it. But will it be enough?

There are many food labeling issues we could complain about, but one of the biggest problems (due to its direct relationship to the obesity crisis) is serving sizes.

I’m not just talking about supersizing. What’s worse is that the actual calories are being disguised with serving size sleight of hand.

Let me show you some examples:

Tostitos touch of lime. Calories per serving: 150. Not too bad for tortilla chips, eh? Not so fast. Check that serving size: 1 ounce. That’s a whopping 6 chips. There are 10 servings per container. That’s 1500 calories in the bag.

Most guys could knock off half that bag for a cool 750 calories. Ok, suppose you have some restraint and you only eat a third of the bag (20 chips). You still get 500 calories. But who stops at 6 chips?

Vitamin Water. While I could rant about how sugar water is being marketed as health food, I’ll stick with the serving size sleight for now.

The label says there are 50 calories per serving. Wow, only 50 calories! Plus they add all those vitamins. Must be good for you and perfect for dieters, right? Think again. Look at the serving size and servings per container: 8 oz per serving and 2.5 servings per container.

Excuse me, but is there ANY reason for making it 2.5 servings other than to disguise the actual calorie content?

When you see that the entire bottle is 20 ounces, you realize that it contains 125 calories, not 50. Although 20 ounces is a large bottle, I don’t know many guys who wouldn’t chug that whole thing.

Sobe Lifewater? Same trick in their 20 oz bottles.

Healthy Choice soup, country vegetable. They make these in convenient little microwavable containers with a plastic lid. Just heat and eat.

It says 90 calories and 480 mg of sodium per serving. Wow, less than a hundred calories. Wait a minute though. Turn the container around and you see the serving size is 1 cup and the servings per container says “about 2.”

Huh? It looks pretty obvious to me that this microwave-ready container was designed for one person to eat in one sitting, so why not just put 180 calories per container on the label (and 960 mg of sodium). I guess 90 calories and 480 mg sodium sounds… well… like a healthier choice!

Ben and Jerrys chocolate fudge brownie ice cream.

This infamously delicious ice cream with its own facebook fan page has 270 calories per serving.

We all know ice cream is loaded with calories and should only be an occasional treat, but 270 calories per serving, that’s not too terrible is it?

Look a little closer at the label. The serving size is ½ a cup. Who eats a half a cup of ice cream? In fact, who hasn’t polished off a whole pint by themselves? (the “comment confessional” is below if you’d like to answer that)

According to Ben and Jerry, there are 4 servings in that one pint container. 270 calories times 4 servings = 1080 calories! That’s about half a days worth of calories for an average female.

I could go on and on – crackers, chocolate chip cookies, muffins, pasta, boxed cereals (who eats ¾ cup of cereal), etc. But I think you get the point.

What’s the solution to this mess? News reports in the last week say that the FDA may be cracking down. Count me among those who are pleased to hear this news. One of their ideas is to post nutritional information, including the calories, on the FRONT of the food labels.

The problem is, this move by itself could actually make matters worse. Suppose Tostitos started posting “150 calories per serving” right on the front of the bag. Most people would assume the chips were low in calories. Putting calorie info on the front of the label would help only if it clearly stated the amount of calories in the entire package or in a normal human-sized serving!

Ah, but the FDA says they’re on top of that too. They also want to standardize or re-define serving sizes. Sounds great, but there are critics who say that consumers would take it as approval to eat larger servings so the strategy would backfire.

Suppose for example, the government decides that no one eats ½ a cup of Ben and Jerry’s so they make the new serving size 1 cup, or half the pint-sized container. Now by law the label says 540 calories per serving instead of 270. Is that like getting official permission to eat twice as much?

I’m not against the FDA’s latest initiative, but what we really need is some honesty in labeling.

Food manufacturers should not be allowed to manipulate serving sizes in a way that would trick you into thinking there are fewer calories than there really are in a quantity that you’re likely to eat.

It would be nice to have calories for the entire package listed on the label at a glance. A new rating scale for caloric density would be cool too, if it could be easily interpreted. It would also be nice to have serving sizes chosen for quantities that are most likely to be commonly eaten. But standardization of serving sizes for all types of foods is difficult.

My friends from Europe tell me that food labels over there are listed in 100g portions, making comparisons easy. But when you consider how much each individual’s daily calorie needs can vary (easily 3-fold or more when you run the gamut from totally sedentary to elite athlete, not to mention male and female differences), standardization that applies to everyone may not be possible.

I think the recent laws such as requiring calories on restaurant menus are a positive move that will influence some people’s behavior. But no label changes by themselves will solve the obesity crisis. A real solution is going to have to include personal responsibility, nutrition education, self-discipline, hard work and lifestyle change.

Changes in the labeling laws won’t influence everybody because the people most likely to care about what labels say are those who have already made a commitment to change their lifestyles (and they’re least likely to eat processed and packaged foods – that have labels – in the first place). Actually, for those who care, all the info you need is already on the labels, you just have to do a little math and watch out for sneaky label tricks.

There’s one true solution to this portion distortion and label lies problem: Become CALORIE AWARE. Of course that includes educated label reading, but it goes much further. In my Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle – Body Transformation system, here is how I define “calorie counting:”

1. Get a good calorie counter book, chart or electronic device/software and get to know the calorie counts of all the staple foods you eat on a daily basis. Look up the calorie values for foods you eat occasionally.

2. Always have a daily meal plan – on paper – with calories printed for each food, each meal and the day. Use that menu as a daily goal and target.

3. Educate yourself about average caloric needs for men and women and learn how to estimate your own calorie needs as closely as you can based on your activity, weight, body composition, height, gender and age.

4. Get a good kitchen food scale and use it.

Keep counting calories and doing nutrition by the numbers until you are unconsciously competent and eating the right quantities to easily maintain your ideal weight becomes second nature.

Obviously, saying that calories are all there is to nutrition is like saying that putting is all there is to golf. Calorie quality and quantity are both important. However, it’s a mistake to ignore the calorie quantity side of the game. Serving sizes matter and even healthy foods get stored as fat if you eat too much..

You can play “blindfolded archery” by guessing your calories and food portions if you want to. Hey, you might get lucky and guess right. Personally, I wouldn’t recommend depending on luck – or the government – for something as important as your body and your health. I would recommend the personal responsibility, nutrition education, self-discipline, hard work and lifestyle change…

Tom Venuto, author of Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle Body Transformation system

Founder & CEO of Burn The Fat Inner Circle Burn the fat inner circle

About the Author: Tom Venuto 8

Tom Venuto is a fat loss expert, lifetime natural (steroid-free) bodybuilder, freelance writer, and author of the #1 best selling diet e-book, Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle Now Burn the Fat Body Tansformation System : Fat-Burning Secrets of The World’s Best Bodybuilders & Fitness Models (e-book) which teaches you how to get lean without drugs or supplements using secrets of the world’s best bodybuilders and fitness models. Learn how to get rid of stubborn fat and increase your metabolism by visiting:

Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle- Body Transformation system

or

BurnTheFatInnerCircle.com

It’s Not About the Body Fat

Title: It’s Not About the Body Fat                                                                                                               By line: By Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
URL: www.BurnTheFat.comWord count:  860 words

 

It’s Not About the Body Fat By Tom Venuto www.BurnTheFat.com

How they lost 100 lbs or more is a topic that always gets a lot of attention and is very popular  in the media.  Whenever someone loses a lot of weight, there is always buzz from those who were inspired by hearing about these huge body fat losses and before/after transformations. I was inspired, too. But sometimes I think we focus too much on the almighty scale and body fat percentage and forget about something even more important…

Your Health.

Health is what psychologist Abraham Maslow called a deficiency need, which means that when you’ve lost it, getting it back is the only thing in the world that matters.

Unfortunately, two corollaries to this theory of human motivation are:

1.  Most people won’t lift a finger to improve their health until something bad happens (they have to hit “rock bottom” to change), and

2. When you’ve got your health, you tend to take it for granted.

That’s why we need constant reminders to keep our focus on health and keep health right on top of our list of life values.

As you remind yourself of the importance of your health every day, it also pays to consider how you define it.

Fitness and transformation icon Shawn Phillips, author of Strength for Life, says that if your definition of health is merely the absence of disease, then subconsciously, the mere absence of disease means you’ve achieved your “goal.”

Therefore, you feel no motivation and no need to move above and beyond that and strive towards…

“A life of ABUNDANT energy, vitality and strength.”

We NEED these reminders.

That’s why I get such a thrill when people send me success stories that are not just about the scale and body fat percentage, but ALSO about health and what that new-found health has done for a person’s life.

A Before and After Success Story You Don’t See Every Day (But Should)

For example, this success story comes from Burn The Fat reader Craig B:

 

“Tom, I visited my Dr. today and he was stunned at the change in my blood results. Check out this before and after:Cholesterol/Total 232 before 121 after

Triglycerides 185 before 87 after

HDL (good cholesterol) 32 before 41 after

VLDL (bad cholesterol) 40 before 17 after

Total cholesterol/HDL ratio 5.63 before 3.0 after (I dropped from 2X average risk to less than HALF average risk!)

TSH 4.8 before 2.1 after

CRP 3.90 before 1.02 after (I moved from High risk to Low risk.)

I have burned 34lbs of fat and put on 7lbs of lean muscle.

I have moved from 40% body fat to 32.9% (My scale may be off, but I am hoping to verify those  body fat % measurements with a dunk test during my next visit to S.F. or Portland.)

The doctor, in short, was blown away with the results.

I have tried Atkins, Protein Power, Lindora (medical weight control), each of these over the years and probably too many others to mention. Never have I felt this empowered and well  armed with information and insight.

When I was not getting the results the math would have me believe, I had the tools and community support to explain what Beta Blockers do to cardio and metabolism then took that insight to my doctor and he has reduced and changed those meds.

I am now off statins all together as of today!

I have a ways to go to reach my final goal of 10% body fat,  but I have the tools and I can accomplish it. I am, as you suggested, putting the date when I achieve it in pencil,  but the 10% BF is in ink. I will get there.

It is amazing how empowering feeling good and controlling  your blood chemistry through nourishment (both physiological and physical) and being consistent with the hard work in  the gym and changing to a new lifestyle.

Thanks Tom – you are helping a lot of people, clearly. I will be telling anyone about the book and the Burn the Fat website that has any questions or looking for answers.”

Gaining muscle and losing fat is nice, but what could be better than gaining muscle, losing fat AND feeling your health, energy and vitality skyrocket!

As Craig shows us, tracking your health improvements, not just what you weigh, gives you another source of tremendous motivation and a feeling of empowerment.

You realize that you are in control of your body.  You are the maker and master.

One final thought: It’s a misconception that the “bodybuilding” lifestyle is in some way not healthy or doesn’t dramatically IMPROVE your health

Nothing could be further from the truth, as Craig’s results prove. Craig was not just doing aerobics – he was pumping iron and feeding the muscle, not starving himself.

If you do ANY kind of resistance training, you ARE a “body-builder” and a “health-builder.”

When you do NATURAL bodybuilding, it’s about looking great AND getting healthier. That’s how I do it – naturally – and that’s how I encourage others to do it in my Burn the Fat programs.

Train hard and expect success!

Tom Venuto, author of Burn The Fat Feed The Muscle
Now Burn the Fat Body Tansformation System www.BurnTheFat.com
Founder & CEO of Burn The Fat Inner Circle Burn the fat inner circle

About the Author:

Tom Venuto is the author of the #1 best   seller, Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle:   Fat Burning Secrets of the World’s Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. Tom   is a lifetime natural bodybuilder and fat loss expert who achieved an   astonishing 3.7% body fat level without drugs or supplements. Discover how to   increase your metabolism and burn stubborn body fat, find out which foods burn   fat and which foods turn to fat, plus get a free fat loss report and mini course   by visiting Tom’s site at: www.BurnTheFat.com

3500 Calories To Lose A Pound: Is This Formula All Wrong?

Title: 3500 Calories To Lose A Pound – Is This Formula All Wrong?
By line: By Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
URL: www.BurnTheFat.com
Word count: 1256 words

3500 Calories To Lose A Pound – Is This Formula All Wrong? By Tom Venuto, NSCA-CPT, CSCS www.BurnTheFat.com

Most fitness conscious people have heard that there are 3,500 calories in a pound of fat, so if you create a deficit of 3500 calories in a week, you lose a pound of weight. If you create a deficit of 7000 calories in a week, you lose two pounds, and so on. Right? Well, not so fast…

Dr. Kevin Hall, an investigator at the National Institute of Health in Bethesda has done some interesting research about the mechanisms regulating human body weight. He recently published a new paper in the International Journal of Obesity that throws a wrench in works of the “3500 calories to lose a pound” idea.

Some of the equations in his paper made my head hurt, but despite the complex math he used to come to his conclusions, his article clearly prompts the question, “3500 calories to lose a pound of WHAT?” His paper also contained a lot of simple and practical tips you can use to properly balance your caloric intake with output, fine tune your calorie deficit and help you retain more muscle when you diet.

Below, I’ve distilled some of the information into a simple bullet-point summary that any non-scientist can understand. Then I wrap up with my interpretation of how you can apply this data in your own fat loss program:

Calculating the calories required to lose a pound and fine-tuning your caloric deficit

  • 3500 calories to lose a pound has always been the rule of thumb. However, this 3500 calories figure goes back to research which assumed that all the weight lost would be adipose tissue (which would be ideal, of course).
  • But as we all know (unfortunately), lean body mass is lost along with body fat, which would indicate that the 3500 calorie figure could be an oversimplification.
  • The amount of lean body mass lost is based on initial body fat level and size of the calorie deficit
  • Lean people tend to lose more lean body mass and retain more fat.
  • Fat people tend to lose more body fat and retain more lean tissue (revealing why obese people can tolerate aggressive low calorie diets better than already lean people)
  • Very aggressive low calorie diets tend to erode lean body mass to a greater degree than more conservative diets.
  • whether the weight loss is lean or fat gives you the real answer of what is the required energy deficit per unit of weight loss
  • The metabolizable energy in fat is different than the metabolizable energy in muscle tissue. A pound of muscle is not 3500 calories. A pound of muscle yields about 600 calories.
  • If you lose lean body mass, then you lose more weight than if you lose fat.
  • If you create a 3500 calorie deficit in one week and you lose 100% body fat, you will lose one pound.
  • But if you create a 3500 calorie weekly deficit and as a result of that deficit, lose 100% muscle, you would lose almost 6 pounds of body weight! (of course, if you manage to lose 100% muscle, you will be forced to wear the Dieter’s Dunce cap)
  • If you have a high initial body fat percentage, then you are going to lose more fat relative to lean, so you may need a larger deficit to lose the same amount of weight as compared to a lean person
  • Creating a calorie deficit once at the beginning of a diet and maintaining that same caloric intake for the duration of the diet and after major weight loss fails to account for how your body decreases energy expenditure with reduced body weight
  • Weight loss typically slows down over time for a prescribed constant diet (the “plateau”). This is either due to the decreased metabolism mentioned above, or a relaxing of the diet compliance, or both (most people just can’t hack aggressive calorie reductions for long)
  • Progressive resistance training and or high protein diets can modify the proportion of weight lost from body fat versus lean tissue (which is why weight training and sufficient protein while on calorie restricted diets are absolute musts!)

So, based on this info, should you throw out the old calorie formulas?

Well, not necessarily. You can still use the standard calorie formulas to figure out how much you should eat, and you can use a 500-1000 calorie per day deficit (below maintenance) as a generic guideline to figure where to set your calories to lose one or two pounds per week respectively (at least that works “on paper” anyway).

Even better however, you could use this info to fine tune your caloric deficit using a percentage method and also base your deficit on your starting body fat level, to get a much more personalized and effective approach:

15-20% below maintenance calories = conservative deficit

20-25% below maintenance calories = moderate deficit

25-30% below maintenance calories = aggressive deficit

31-40% below maintenance calories = very aggressive deficit (risky)

50%+ below maintenance calories = semi starvation/starvation (potentially dangerous and unhealthy)

(Note: According to exercise physiologists Katch& Mcardle, the average female between the ages of 23 and 50 has a maintenance level of about 2000-2100 calories per day and the average male about 2700-2900 calories per day)

Usually, we would suggest starting with a conservative deficit of around 15-20% below maintenance. Based on this research, however, we see that there can be a big difference between lean and overweight people in how many calories they can or should cut.

If you have very high body fat to begin with, the typical rule of thumb on calorie deficits may underestimate the deficit required to lose a pound. It may also be too conservative, and you can probably use a more aggressive deficit safely without as much worry about muscle loss or metabolic slowdown.

If you are extremely lean, like a bodybuilder trying to get ready for competition, you would want to be very cautious about using aggressive calorie deficits. You’d be better off keeping the deficit conservative and starting your diet/cutting phase earlier to allow for a slow, but safe rate of fat loss, with maximum retention of muscle tissue.

The bottom line is that it’s not quite so simple as 3,500 calories being the deficit to lose a pound. Like lots of other things in nutrition that vary from person to person, the ideal amount of calories to cut “depends”…

Note: The Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle program not only has an entire chapter dedicated to helping you calculate your exact calorie needs, it was designed very specifically to keep a fairly conservative approach to caloric deficits and to maximize the amount of lean tissue you retain and minimize the amount of metabolic adaptation that occurs when you’re dieting. The approach may be more conservative, and the fat loss may be slower, but it has a better long term track record… You can either lose weight fast, sacrifice muscle and gain the fat back like 95% of people do, or lose fat slow and keep it off forever like the 5% of the people who know the secrets. The choice is yours. For more information, visit: http://www.burnthefat.com

References:

Forbes GB. Body fat content influences the body composition response to nutrition and exercise. Ann NY Acad Sci. 904: 359-365. 2000

Hall, KD., What is the required energy deficit per unit of weight loss? Int J Obesity. 2007 Epub ahead of print.

McArdle WD. Exercise physiology: Energy, Nutrition, and Human performance. 4td ed. Williams & Wilkins. 1996.

Wishnofsky M. Caloric equivalents of gained or lost weight. Am J Clin Nutr. 6: 542-546.

About the Author:

Tom Venuto is a natural bodybuilder, certified strength and conditioning specialistTom Venuto 8

(CSCS) and a certified personal trainer (CPT). Tom is the

author of “Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle,” which teaches

you how to get lean without drugs or supplements using

methods of the world’s best bodybuilders and fitness

models. Learn how to get rid of stubborn fat and increase

your metabolism by visiting: www.BurnTheFat.com

The Double-Edged Sword of “Healthy” Fast Food

Title: The Double-Edged Sword of “Healthy” Fast Food
By line: By Tom Venuto
URL: www.BurnTheFat.com
Word count: 981 words

The Double-Edged Sword of “Healthy” Fast Food By Tom Venuto www.BurnTheFat.com

What’s on the menu at the big fast food chains lately? Oddly  enough, the answer is…“health food!” Even more incongruous, many are marketing  their food for weight loss. Healthy weight loss food at Taco Bell and  McDonalds? Is this a noble move to be applauded, is it a big corporate money  grab, or is it a double edged sword?

Remember Jared Fogle, the Subway guy? He lost 245 pounds  while eating at Subway regularly. He simply picked the lower calorie menu  items.  Seeing an opportunity, the local  store owner pitched Subway corporate with an idea. Before long, Jared was the company  spokesperson in their nationwide advertising campaigns which became known as  The Subway Diet.

Sales doubled to 8.2 billion. How much the increase came  from the weight loss ads is unknown, but there’s little doubt that using weight  loss as a marketing platform was a boon for the sandwich maker. Other fast food  chains picked up the weight loss torch where Subway left off.

The latest is the Taco    Bell Drive through diet, with their own skinny  spokesperson: Christine! The ads, which are admittedly conservative, perhaps  due to more stringent FTC laws, say Christine lost 54 lbs over 2 years by  reducing her calories to 1250 a day, and choosing Taco Bell’s new lower calorie  “Fresco” items.

These include “7 diet items with 150 to 240 calories and  under 9 grams of fat.” For example, there’s a chicken soft taco with only 170 calories  and 4 grams of fat.

For people who refuse to give up eating at fast food  restaurants, this is arguably a positive thing. Take my brother for example,  He’s not a total junk food junkie, but left to his own devices, he WILL make a  beeline to Taco Bell and McDonalds.

I went to McDonalds with him a few months ago (I was dragged  there), and he was about to order a bacon cheeseburger. I glanced at the menu  and said, “That’s 790 calories!” I glanced down at his belly then continued,  “Look, they have chicken wraps. Why don’t you have one of those?” Without  questioning me, he agreed, apparently happy to get any McDonalds fix.

Right there at the counter they had the nutrition  information sheets:

McDonald’s honey mustard grilled chicken wrap: 260 calories,  9 grams fat, 27 grams of carbs, 18 grams of protein.

That saved him 530 calories. Am I happy there was something  with only 260 calories on the menu? Absolutely. Do I applaud the fast food  restaurants for offering lower calorie choices? You bet. But the big question  is: are these really “healthy choices?”

A few journalists and bloggers recently answered, “These  fast food diet items are NOT healthy, they’re only ‘healthi-ER.’”

I think they’re both mistaken. I think this food is not  healthy nor is it healthier. It’s only lower in calories. If you eat lower  calorie food, that can help you lose weight and if you lose weight, that can  improve your health. But what if your definition of healthy food includes nutrition,  nutrient density and absence of artificial ingredients?

Let’s take a look at that very low calorie chicken wrap. Is  it really healthier just because it’s got 1/3 the calories of a bacon  cheeseburger?

Here’s the ingredients straight from McDonald’s website:

McDonald’s Grilled Chicken Breast Filet (wrap): Chicken  breast filets with rib meat, water, seasoning (salt, sugar, food  starch-modified, maltodextrin, spices, dextrose, autolyzed yeast extract,  hydrolyzed [corn gluten, soy, wheat gluten] proteins, garlic powder, paprika,  chicken fat, chicken broth, natural flavors (plant and animal source), caramel  color, polysorbate 80, xanthan gum, onion powder, extractives of paprika),  modified potato starch, and sodium phosphates. CONTAINS: SOY AND WHEAT.  Prepared with Liquid Margarine: Liquid soybean oil, water, partially  hydrogenated cottonseed and soybean oils, salt, hydrogenated cottonseed oil,  soy lecithin, mono- and diglycerides, sodium benzoate and potassium sorbate  (preservative), artificial flavor, citric acid, vitamin A palmitate, beta  carotene (color). (and don’t forget the 800 mg of sodium).

HOLY CRAP! Shouldn’t chicken breast be just one ingredient…  chicken breast?

This is not food. It’s more like what author Michael Pollan  would call an “edible food-like substance.”

What about the honey mustard sauce? The first ingredient  after water is… SUGAR!

The flour tortilla ingredients? Enriched bleached wheat  flour, also made with vegetable shortening (may contain one or more of the  following: hydrogenated soybean oil, soybean oil, partially hydrogenated  soybean oil, hydrogenated cottonseed oil with mono- and diglycerides added),  contains 2% or less of the following: sugar, leavening (sodium aluminum  sulfate, calcium sulfate, sodium phosphate, baking soda, corn starch,  monocalcium phosphate), salt, wheat gluten, dough conditioners, sodium  metabisulfite, distilled monoglycerides.

Trans fats? Sugar? Aluminum? Stuff you can’t pronounce and  have to look up to find out it’s preservatives and disinfectants?

Don’t confuse the issues: weight loss and health…. Calories  and nutrition. There IS a difference, and that is what makes “healthy” fast  food a double edged sword at best.

Some people, like my brother, simply aren’t going to give up  fast food completely. If I can get him to make better bad choices, that could  help him control his weight. If that works, then I’m pleased that the fast food  restaurants have such choices to offer.

But if you wanted to make a good choice – a healthy choice –  you’d forget about “driving through” anywhere on a regular basis. You’d shop  for whole, fresh, natural real food, keep a well-stocked kitchen… and learn how  to cook.

The Subway diet, the Drive Through diet, or the Weight  Watchers approved McDonalds menu (yes its true, what a pair that is!) Don’t kid  yourself – this is not only not healthy, it’s not healthier – it’s lower  calorie junk food.

“Welcome to our  restaurant sir. Would you like a large plate of dog poo or a small plate of dog  poo?”

“No thank you, I will  take neither. No matter what the serving size, crap is still crap.”

Train hard and expect success!

Tom Venuto, author of www.BurnTheFat.com

Founder & CEO of www.BurnTheFat/InnerCircle

About the Author:

Tom Venuto is the author of the #1 best   seller, Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle:   Fat

Burning Secrets of the World’s Best Bodybuilders and Fitness Models. Tom   is a Tom Venuto 8

lifetime natural bodybuilder and fat loss expert who

achieved an   astonishing 3.7% body fat level without

drugs or supplements. Discover how to   increase your

metabolism and burn stubborn body fat, find out which

foods burn   fat and which foods turn to fat, plus get a

free fat loss report and mini course   by visiting Tom’s

site at: www.BurnTheFat.com

Steady State Cardio 5 X More Effective Than HIIT????

Title: Steady State Cardio 5 X More Effective Than HIIT????
By line: By Tom Venuto, CSCS, NSCA-CPT
URL: www.BurnTheFat.com

Word count: 1860 words

Steady State Cardio 5 X More Effective Than HIIT????

By Tom Venuto, NSCA-CPT, CSCS www.BurnTheFat.com

High Intensity Interval Training, or HIIT for short, has been promoted as one of the most effective training methods ever to come down the pike, both for fat loss and for cardiovascular fitness. One of the most popular claims for HIIT is that it burns “9 times more fat” than conventional (steady state) cardio. This figure was extracted from a study performed by Angelo Tremblay at Laval University in 1994. But what if I told you that HIIT has never been proven to be 9 times more effective than regular cardio… What if I told you that the same study actually shows that HIIT is 5 times less effective than steady state cardio??? Read on and see the proof for yourself.

“There are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics.”

– Mark Twain

In 1994, a study was published in the scientific journal Metabolism by Angelo Tremblay and his team from the Physical Activity Sciences Laboratory at Laval University in Quebec, Canada. Based on the results of this study, you hear personal trainers across the globe claiming that “HIIT burns 9 times more fat than steady state cardio.”

This claim has often been interpreted by the not so scientifically literate public as meaning something like this: If you burned 3 pounds of fat in 15 weeks on steady state cardio, you would now burn 27 pounds of fat in 15 weeks (3 lbs X 9 times better = 27 lbs).

Although it’s usually not stated as such, frankly, I think this is what some trainers want you to believe, because the programs that some trainers promote are based on convincing you of the vast superiority of HIIT and the “uselessness” of low intensity exercise.

Indeed, higher intensity exercise is more effective and time efficient than lower intensity exercise. The question is, how much more effective? There’s no evidence that the “9 times more fat loss” claim is true outside the specific context in which it was mentioned in this study.

In order to get to the bottom of this, you have to read the full text of the research paper and you have to look very closely at the results.

13 men and 14 women age 18 to 32 started the study. They were broken into two groups, a high intensity intermittent training program (HIIT) and a steady state training program which they referred to as endurance training (ET).

The ET group completed a 20 week steady state aerobic training program on a cycle ergometer 4 times a week for 30 minutes, later progressing to 5 times per week for 45 minutes. The initial intensity was 60% of maximal heart rate reserve, later increasing to 85%.

The HIIT group performed 25-30 minutes of continuous exercise at 70% of maximal heart rate reserve and they also progressively added 35 long and short interval training sessions over a period of 15 weeks. Short work intervals started at 10 then 15 bouts of 15 seconds, increasing to 30 seconds. Long intervals started at 5 bouts of 60 seconds, increasing to 90 seconds. Intensity and duration were progressively increased over the 15 week period.

The results: 3 times greater fat loss in the HIIT group

Even though the energy cost of the exercise performed in the ET group was twice as high as the HIIT group, the sum of the skinfolds (which reflects subcutaneous body fat) in the HIIT group was three times lower than the ET group.

So where did the “9 times greater fat loss” claim come from?

Well, there was a difference in energy cost between groups, so in order to show a comparison of fat loss relative to energy cost, Tremblay wrote,

“It appeared reasonable to correct changes in subcutaneous fat for the total cost of training. This was performed by expressing changes in subcutaneous skinfolds per megajoule of energy expended in each program.”

Translation: The subjects did not lose 9 times more body fat, in absolute terms. But hey, 3 times more fat loss? You’ll gladly take that, right?

Well hold on, because there’s more. Did you know that in this oft-quoted study, neither group lost much weight? In fact, if you look at the charts, you can see that the HIIT group lost 0.1 kg (63.9 kg before, 63.8 kg after). Yes, the HIIT group lost a whopping 100 grams of weight in 15 weeks!

The ET group lost 0.5 kilograms (60.6 kg before, 60.1 kg after).

Naturally, lack of weight loss while skinfolds decrease could simply mean that body composition improved (lean mass increased), but I think it’s important to highlight the fact that the research study from which the “9 times more fat” claim was derived did not result in ANY significant weight loss after 15 weeks.Based on these results, if I wanted to manipulate statistics to promote steady state cardio, I could go around telling people, “Research study says steady state cardio (endurance training) results in 5 times more weight loss than high intensity interval training!” Or the reverse, “Clinical trial proves that high intensity interval training is 5 times less effective than steady state cardio!”

Mind you, THIS IS THE SAME STUDY THAT IS MOST OFTEN QUOTED TO SUPPORT HIIT!

If I said 5 X greater weight loss with steady state, I would be telling the truth, wouldn’t I? (100 grams of weight loss vs 500 grams?) Of course, that would be misleading because the weight loss was hardly significant in either group and because interval training IS highly effective. I’m simply being a little facetious in order to make a point: Be careful with statistics. I have seen statistical manipulation used many times in other contexts to deceive unsuspecting consumers.

For example, advertisements for a popular fat burner claim that use of their supplement resulted in twice as much fat loss, based on scientific research. The claim was true. Of course, in the ad, they forget to tell you that after six months, the control group lost no weight, while the supplement group lost only 1.0 kilo. Whoop de doo! ONE KILO of weight loss after going through a six month supply of this “miracle fat burner!”

But I digress…

Back to the HIIT story – there’s even more to it.

In the ET group, there were some funky skinfold and circumference measurements. ALL of the skinfold measurements in the ET group either stayed the same or went down except the calf measurement, which went up.

The girths and skinfold measurements in the limbs went down in the HIIT group, but there wasn’t much difference between HIIT and ET in the trunk skinfolds. These facts are all very easy to miss. I didn’t even notice it myself until exercise physiologist Christian Finn pointed it out to me. Christian said,

“When you look at the changes in the three skinfold measurements taken from the trunk, there wasn’t that much difference between the steady state group (-6.3mm) and the HIIT group (-8.7 mm). So, much of the difference in subcutaneous fat loss between the groups wasn’t because the HIIT group lost more fat, but because the steady state group actually gained fat around the calf muscles. We shouldn’t discount simple measurement error as an explanation for these rather odd results.”

Christian also pointed out that the two test groups were not evenly matched for body composition at the beginning of the study. At the beginning of the study, the starting body fat based on skinfolds in the HIIT group was nearly 20% higher than the ET group. He concluded:

“So while this study is interesting, weaknesses in the methods used to track changes in body composition mean that we should treat the results and conclusions with some caution.”

One beneficial aspect of HIIT that most trainers forget to mention is that HIIT may actually suppress your appetite, while steady state cardio might increase appetite. In a study such as this, however, that can skew the results. If energy intake were not controlled, then some of the greater fat loss in the HIIT group could be due to lowered caloric intake.

Last but not least, I’d like to highlight the words of the researchers themselves in the conclusion of the paper, which confirms the effectiveness of HIIT, but also helps put it in perspective a bit:

“For a given level of energy expenditure, a high intensity training program induces a greater loss of subcutaneous fat compared with a training program of moderate intensity.”

“It is obvious that high intensity exercise cannot be prescribed for individuals at risk for health problems or for obese people who are not used to exercise. In these cases, the most prudent course remains a low intensity exercise program with a progressive increase in duration and frequency of sessions.”

In conclusion, my intention in writing this article wasn’t to be controversial, to be a smart-alec or to criticize HIIT. To the contrary, additional research has continued to support the efficacy of HIIT for fat loss and fitness, not to mention that it is one of the most time efficient ways to do cardiovascular training.

I have recommended HIIT for years in my Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle program, using a 1:1 long interval approach, which, while only one of many ways to do HIIT, is probably my personal favorite method. However, I also recommend steady state cardio and even low intensity cardio like walking, when it is appropriate.

My intentions for writing this article were four-fold:

1. To encourage you to question where claims come from, especially if they sound too good to be true. 2. To alert you to how advertisers might use research such as this to exaggerate with statistics. 3. To encourage the fitness community to swing the pendulum back to center a bit, by not over-selling the benefits of HIIT beyond what can be supported by the scientific research. 4. To encourage the fitness community, that even as they praise HIIT, not to condemn lower and moderate intensity forms of cardio.

As the original author of the 1994 HIIT study himself pointed out, HIIT is not for everyone, and cardio should be prescribed with progression. Also, mountains of other research has proven that walking (GASP! – low intensity cardio!) has always been one of the most successful exercise methods for overweight men and women.

There is ample evidence which says that obesity may be the result of a very slight daily energy imbalance, which adds up over time. Therefore, even a small amount of casual exercise or activity, if done consistently, and not compensated for with increased food intake, could reverse the obesity trend. HIIT gets the job done fast, but that doesn’t mean low intensity cardio is useless or that you should abandon your walking program, if you have the time and if that is what you enjoy and if that is what’s working for you in your personal situation.

The mechanisms and reasons why HIIT works so well are numerous. It goes way beyond more calories burned during the workout.

Train hard and expect success,

Tom Venuto, NSCA-CPT, CSCS Fat Loss Coach www.BurnTheFat.com

Reference: Tremblay, Angelo, et al. Impact of exercise intensity on body fatness and skeletal muscle metabolism. Metabolism. Vol 43. no 7 (July). Pp 814-818. 1994..

About the Author:

Tom Venuto is a natural bodybuilder, certified personal trainer and freelance fitness Tom Venuto 8

writer. Tom is the author of “Burn the Fat, Feed The

Muscle,” which teaches you how to get lean without

drugs or supplements using secrets of the world’s best

bodybuilders and fitness models. Learn how to get rid of

stubborn fat and increase your metabolism by visiting:

www.BurnTheFat.com