Advice on removing stomach flab.

militiacore

Surf-Matt wrote:

Ermmm - me and Mrs Matt eat a lot of pasta, bread, stuff that is often called bad.

I just won a triathlon, she (7 months after having our baby boy) came 2nd out of the ladies in hers.

Which proves to me that many try and over complicate stuff and don't actually see results.

Sounds like you are on the right path BFG.

Which simply proves that you're not exactly the average over weight person with a slow metabolic rate. You pretty much need calories where you can get them. For someone wanting to lose weight, they need to take a slightly more realistic and picky approach. I'd also be willing to bet if you traded days of pasta for non wheat carb sources you'd perform even better. Also you can still be fit but not healthy. If you got some blood work done i bet you'd both be pretty surprised.

Surf-Matt

We have recently had blood tests - all fine.

We eat sensibly (get a weekly organic fruit and veg box, get locally sourced meat, etc) but do chomp on lots of carbs (pasta, brown rice, bread) and the like and have a reasonable amount of beer and wine.

I'd say we are pretty healthy - very rarely get ill, never feel lethargic (apart from the odd night when the baby won't sleep), etc, etc.

I just see too many people getting too into/obsessed about diet with very little results.

When I started weight training, I gorged on power shakes/powders, etc and saw little in the way of results. Then I changed the routine into a much more intense workout and found the appetite just naturally rocketed - 18 months later, 3 stone of healthy extra weight.

I have also done a fair bit of military training - what struck me is that the soldiers (mostly Royal Marines but also SAS and similar) don't have mega healthy diets yet are very fit - probably as fit as many athletes.

The lesson it taught me now that I could be classed (apparently) an "athlete?" Exercise first, diet second.

Oh and I think playing the "metabolism" card is wrong - it's an excused used by too many. You either do enough exercise or you don't.

Why are we as a nation getting so fat? Lame excuses and not enough common sense.

ratty2k

XxxBFGxxX wrote:

Dam so the fact i live on pasta aint good. But i have still lost over 15kg in the last 9 month on a chicken and pasta dieat along with other veg and fruit.

I am relay think of seeing a diettishan to see if they can point me in the direction of a healthyer eating habits

If it works for you.... Pasta aint so bad, and if you are doing a lot of biking will need the carbs it supplies.
I've just had a great big curry... But it had a load of mushrooms- 3-4 cals each, 3 small onions
@ 10 cals each (all fried in a small amount of sunflower oil) so a little higher than stated which is for raw.... and a breast of chicken at around 50 cals... HUGE amount of food with a low calorie count. 2/3rds can of beans on 3 rounds of toast for breakfast and a banana for lunch.
Snacks tonight will be an apple and another banana.. with a 30 mile ride today there is quite a big calorie deficit.

drumon

Great discussion, lots of good information.

Exercise, and exercise some more, eat enough, dont over eat.... seems to be a general gist of it all!

more is welcome....

ratty2k

^^^^ Its that simple... Eat less move more, lose weight. 8)

XxxBFGxxX

yer but i like food. lol.But i ride about 20 ile aday so need the calories that the excuse i use lmfao

there is alot of good info being thrown around in here.

cee

militiacore wrote:

the average over weight person with a slow metabolic rate.

don't fall into the metabolic rate trap....the average overweight persons metabolic rate will be within normal variance....again, something from that 10 things to know about weightloss programme.......the lady in the example shown was sure that she had tried everything, but had in fact under reported the number of calories whe had in fact eaten.

now she didn't lie...she thought she was being honest, but forgot to add dressings, portion sizes were too big...etc..

Remember...the Metabolic rate is basically the number of calories it takes to keep the body functions going..heartbeat, breathing, brain activity etc.....without any extra movement....

bigger hearts, more fat, etc means that it costs more calories to keep those functions going....

Surf-Matt

Cee - totally agree. There is SO much cr4p spouted about metabolism. So often used as an excuse.

militiacore

Surf-Matt wrote:

We have recently had blood tests - all fine.

Out of interest, what did they test for?

We eat sensibly (get a weekly organic fruit and veg box, get locally sourced meat, etc) but do chomp on lots of carbs (pasta, brown rice, bread) and the like and have a reasonable amount of beer and wine.

I'd say we are pretty healthy - very rarely get ill, never feel lethargic (apart from the odd night when the baby won't sleep), etc, etc.

I just see too many people getting too into/obsessed about diet with very little results.

When I started weight training, I gorged on power shakes/powders, etc and saw little in the way of results. Then I changed the routine into a much more intense workout and found the appetite just naturally rocketed - 18 months later, 3 stone of healthy extra weight.

I have also done a fair bit of military training - what struck me is that the soldiers (mostly Royal Marines but also SAS and similar) don't have mega healthy diets yet are very fit - probably as fit as many athletes.

The lesson it taught me now that I could be classed (apparently) an "athlete?" Exercise first, diet second.

I'm similar in that I play Rugby mainly, to a high standard in my younger days and it is total diet that makes the big changes, not relying on shakes and supplements as you have suggested. However when we were issued with a new dietition/nutritionalist, although we were very fit, not all of us would be classed neccessarily as being healthy due to certain food choices, mainly of an acid nature - too many processed carbs, wheat based foods, too much animal meat, espcially red. The links between acidic diets bases on such foods and heart disease/cancer can't be overlooked IMO.

Oh and I think playing the "metabolism" card is wrong - it's an excused used by too many. You either do enough exercise or you don't.

From the above comment I made, this is where matabolism can come into play as a higher metabolism will help to turn over toxins etc quicker but there will be an accumalitive effect but risk will naturally be lower. I don't thinkm metabolism is the be all and end all but you can't argue that individuals have different metabolic rates and that it can be manipulated to varying degrees depending on how much exercise you do.

Why are we as a nation getting so fat? Lame excuses and not enough common sense.

Completely agree!

Surf-Matt

We lost a baby at 37 weeks - it was just to a check, even though we knew the cause (true knot in his cord and cord wrapped around his neck) - we were flipping paranoid for the second pregnancy - which turned out fine.

Not sure what they tested for but nothing bad came up. Blood pressure, all vital signs, etc all fine in both of us.

We eat very little red meat and very little processed food. Not being nerdy, just don't like them much (apart from the odd lamb or beef steak - not often though).

Where do you play in rugby?

I was always in running positions - mainly scrum half but occasionally on the wing. Recurring shoulder dislocation makes rugby too risky now.

nockmeister

10 things you need to know is still available for four days..
here :- http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00ksh7c

I was told to swap normal pasta for the wholewheat veriety?!?

militiacore

Sorry to hear about that mate

Generally a nutrionists blood test will cover the basics like cell count but also go into palsma content and how clean it is in terms of parasite content, ability to absorb and trnasport nutrients etc. It's pretty interesting and a bit of an eye opener.

I play Inside Centre but sometimes get pulled into Fly Half if need be and did half a season on the Wing but don't really have the legs for it.

Very good friend of mine played Blind Side for Richmond upto when the game turned professional and was forced to retire due to putting out both his Shoulders and now having virtually no connective tissue left. He played a few time recently after 10 years or so out and managed to break his ankle in contact in his 2nd game which was rotten luck and has pretty much ruled him out so he's going into coaching.

militiacore

nockmeister wrote:

10 things you need to know is still available for four days..
here :- http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00ksh7c

I was told to swap normal pasta for the wholewheat veriety?!?

Wheat is wheat is wheat. Whole wheat has a lower GI but still turns to sugar pretty quickly anyway so if you prefer white then stick with that as it'll make little difference.

Surf-Matt

Militia - hey no worries. Awful at the time. Wasn't a nutritionists test - just general tests. I think I'd rather not know what's in my blood and cr4p!!

gaz047

hi matt,
sorry to hear about your first child mate, im a father myself and can only imagine what you went through. glad everything was fine the second time round.

with regards to a hrm, i think they can be a valuable training tool, if they are used correctly (ie properly knowing your max hr so you can use different training zones correctly).
if not used correctly thats when they become, well like you say a faff
cheers
gaz

Ditch Witch

GI is not an accurate way of measuring affect on blood sugar because it doesn't consider actual volumes eaten. For example, watermelon is a high GI food, but it's mostly water, so in fact, it's low GL, when you measure the actual amount of carbs you eat in a slice.

You need to use GL, not GI.


The trick with pasta (and most foods, really) is to eat in moderation. A portion of pasta is about the size of closed fist, not an entire plate full. The other issue with pasta is what you put on it. Steer clear of creamy sauces and keep to tomato based sauces. Full of anti-oxidants





HRM (or, at least the concept of HR training using RPE) IS valuable because most people train in too high a zone to build endurance. I think it's use is somewhat limited in MTB because you don't necessarily have the control over your HR that you would if you were, say, running, but it is still valuable for building endurance.

XxxBFGxxX

my head is busted now with all this Gi Gl stuff. so much input johny 5 is not alive......................argggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh

militiacore

Ditch Witch wrote:

GI is not an accurate way of measuring affect on blood sugar because it doesn't consider actual volumes eaten. For example, watermelon is a high GI food, but it's mostly water, so in fact, it's low GL, when you measure the actual amount of carbs you eat in a slice.

You need to use GL, not GI.

True but then the low calorific content is a bit of a give away that it's not going to cause much issue in regards to watermelon. One would make the assumption that less calorie dense foods will have a lower Glycemic Load and vice versa.

I would venture that Insulin Index is by far the most important with regards to monitoring blood sugar over GI and GL as this a far more accurate idea of the effect on Blood Insulin from foods. For example it may surprise you that depsite potatos having a lower GL score than rice, it's Insulin response is a fair bit higher.

Goes to show that none of these food Indexes are perfect.

militiacore

XxxBFGxxX wrote:

my head is busted now with all this Gi Gl stuff. so much input johny 5 is not alive......................argggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Heh, sorry mate.

Like others have said already, you're doing good as you are.

Ditch Witch

You WOULD think that people would consider calorific content over GI, but they don't GI diets regularly ban watermelon, in the same way that low fat diets ban avocado. It's stupid and pointless

TimesLikeThese

Matt - really sorry for your loss mate but wish you both every happiness with the new addition to your family.

Right... Diet schmiet. Hate that bleeding word. People say they are going 'on a diet' all the time. Try the latest fad, fail after a week to lose the 20 gazillion pounds that had been promised and go back to eating junk food and gain 40 gazillion more. Its the desire for a quick fix and blame it on the metabolism or anything else mentality which is really the problem.

At the end of the day its as been said before... Eat less.. Move more.

And as for what to eat - to hell with these diets... unless you have some blood sugar problem, allergies or some such. Really it should be fairly obvious whats good and bad in general... Eat fresh. Dont eat processed (or at least foods that are minimally processed). Eat a balanced variety. Drink water. Stop junk food. Eat your oily fish.

Sure if you want to be a top level athlete you'll want to be a bit more picky about ratios, meal timing, etc, but for the rest of us mortals the basics would make the biggest difference in our lives.

Ditch Witch

Amen to that, brother.

Surf-Matt

Times - agreed!

Sorry to put a downer on the topic with mention of our loss (it was on Nov 07) - feel a bit bad now. Currently typing while watching our little one (nearly nine months old) as he tried to destroy our office - he's recently learned to crawl!!

Thanks for the kind words though.

Anonymous

supersonic wrote:

Unfortunately stomach exercises don't shift the flab.

Eat less, move more, tis the only way!

Tried that and doesn't shift it. I lose weight, but the belly remains regardless. Not huge, but I can pinch an inch and a few more than that, yet I'm 10 1/2 stone at 5'7" (and I'm 36) and generally okay build over the rest of the body, just too much on the belly.

supersonic

Sounds like me lol. Stomach flab is one of the first places it accumulates - so is unfortunately the last bit to go!

mea00csf

I've generally found that the recommended portion size on the packet works.......
75g of pasta or 75g of rice is plenty of carbs, eat with as many vegs as you like and and normal size piece of meat or fish.

BigJimmyB

XxxBFGxxX wrote:

same as water makes you full if ya drink enoug of it.

soup is not adrink it s food liquidsed. sort of. it still has all you need in it.

Indeed. A pint of water with a meal will make you feel fuller for longer, BUT it slows the digestive/metabolic rate, so (in some cases) doesn't help.

ride_whenever

I find portion control is the best way forward, and taking your time over meals, both the prep and the eating. Eat what you want, but in small amounts...

do a huge amount of exercise.

Snelly

Surf-Matt wrote:

We have recently had blood tests - all fine.

We eat sensibly (get a weekly organic fruit and veg box, get locally sourced meat, etc) but do chomp on lots of carbs (pasta, brown rice, bread) and the like and have a reasonable amount of beer and wine.

I'd say we are pretty healthy - very rarely get ill, never feel lethargic (apart from the odd night when the baby won't sleep), etc, etc.

I just see too many people getting too into/obsessed about diet with very little results.

When I started weight training, I gorged on power shakes/powders, etc and saw little in the way of results. Then I changed the routine into a much more intense workout and found the appetite just naturally rocketed - 18 months later, 3 stone of healthy extra weight.

I have also done a fair bit of military training - what struck me is that the soldiers (mostly Royal Marines but also SAS and similar) don't have mega healthy diets yet are very fit - probably as fit as many athletes.

The lesson it taught me now that I could be classed (apparently) an "athlete?" Exercise first, diet second.

Oh and I think playing the "metabolism" card is wrong - it's an excused used by too many. You either do enough exercise or you don't.

Why are we as a nation getting so fat? Lame excuses and not enough common sense.

Well said - I agree with you totally.

If you are fat, stop eating so much and exercise more and you will get thinner. It really is that simple.

The reason that the gullible think it is more complex is down to the fact that there is now a £ billion industry that revolves around the science of diet and exercise which has millions of marketing dollars that are used to convince people that it is about their glands, metabolism or some other such bollox.. Surf Matt is right - these are just excuses. As Peter Kay said, "It isn't your glands that sneak down to the fridge at midnight and eat a pie!"

If a certain approach works for you then great but the fact remains, eat less + do more equals less lard on your arse. FACT.

Don't overcomplicate this issue is my advice too.