How to lose fat without messing up energy for training?

I'm a pure sprinter and, 6'2 190 pounds. 6% body fat. Want to reduce body fat, the best way is to break up your eals. Instead of big breakfast big dinner big lunch have little meals constantly throughout the day. Eventually your body will get used to it and you will trim down and get cut. Eliminating fat is stupid. Go to 12-15 reps, you dont want power you want strength endurance.

MAX219 wrote:

Don't decrease your fat intake! The best way to lose fat would be to limit the juice and any excess carbs/sugar you don't need.

Natural bodybuilders will tell you the same thing.

According to Hugo Rivera, percent fat by calorie should be as close to exactly 20 percent as possible because

) more than 20 percent leads to fat being stored

) less than 20 percent leads to low testosterone.

And carbohydrate should be less than 60 percent by calorie. If you burn a lot of glucose it can be above 60, but it takes a lot of exercise to do that, and the side effects of a carb-heavy diet still can occur.

There's no such thing as carbo-loading, excess carbs are simply turned into fat. Even if you've got depleted glycogen, excess carbs will still spike your blood glucose and get turned into fat. Eat many small meals, not a big bowl of pasta.

Max, you are absolutely wrong, and the guy you are arguing with is absolutely right.

max219 wrote:

How is that possible that far makes you fat? Haven't we thrived on eating meat for thousands of years. Did we just toss away the fat on the animals and only eat the lean sections? Eating fat from natural sources is great for you, and does not make you fat. How can eating fatty meat cause fat gain? Before we had high sugar drinks and junk we ate a lot of fatty meat, eggs, and fish, and thrived on it. Fat helps the absorption of vitamins and minerals, and it provides energy. Limiting it will make him hungry while training.

Look, you have bought 100% into the paleo/atkins type fad logic that is out there. It is NOT accurate.

1) people were not fat in the good ol' days, because a) they were often starving, and not taking in enough calories, and b) they were incredibly active. If you run a calorie deficit, it doesn't matter what you eat, you will not get fat. Which brings us to point 2...

2) no matter what most pseudo-experts like Gary Taubes will tell you, 99% of what makes someone gain weight/fat, is STILL absolutely about calorie in/calories out. (there are certain effects of macro and micronutrients that do play a role, but overall, in the big picture, a small one). So one can eat a high fat diet (%-wise), or a very high carb diet, and both remain thin if they are active and run a calorie deficit. Period.

3) you say that people in the past often ate high fat diets and didn't get fat, but did people immediately get fat after agriculture began to provide much of the world corn, rice, wheat ?? No, of course not. People have been eatings lots of these things for THOUSANDS OF YEARS without getting fat. People today in many poorer parts of the world, and even in richer parts, eats LOTS of grains and don't get fat. So can you blame carbs/grains for making us fat?? No, of course not. What has really changed in the (only) last 50 years or so (when obesity has exploded in the US and some other parts of the world)? People are much more sedentary, food is incredibly cheap, people eat MORE CALORIES than they used to, especially high fat, high sugar foods. THAT is what is making people fat. High calorie diets that involved lots of high Fat and high refined sugar (especially liquid soda calories) foods combined with no activity is why people are fat.

4) You say people thrived on a high fat diet. Well, most of our ancestors died young, so we don't know how their high fat diet would have served them if they were trying to live to 90. A High sat fat diet, no matter what your pseduo-experts tell you, is likely to cause atherosclerosis in the long run.

5) Once again, excess calories in the form of carbs or fat (these two more than protein) will lead towards fat gain, but....

a) excess fat is more readily stored as fat compared to excess carbs. Why would this surprise you? The idea of fat being stored as fat surprises you??? You're really in too deep with the paleo crowd. I will repeat: the body more efficiently/easily stores excess dietary fat calories as body fat, than it does convert excess carb calories into body fat. In fact, the MAIN ROUTE of carb storage is glycogen, and then immediate energy use. What eating excess carbs really does that is disadvantageous to someone trying to lose weight, more than turning to fat, is that at some point it down regulates fat burning, which leads to storing all your excess fat calories as fat, and no fat loss.

So pleas stop saying "eating fat does not make you fat." It is a ludicrous statement not backed by any science. Yes, eating fat won't make you fat if you don't take in excess calories and exercise, but neither will eating anything else under those circumstances make you fat.

To summarize (and add in a few more facts):

1) fat has over twice the calories per gram than does carbs or protein, therefore, one is more likely to get excess calories on a high fat diet because per portion size, one is getting more calories

2) dietary fat is less satiating than carbs (especially high fiber ones) or protein, therefore people will more likely continue to eat in excess on a high fat diet

3) fat , especially sat fat, is more efficiently stored as body fat than either carbs or protein

The paleo/atkins logic is no worse than the lowfat BS.

"High calorie diets that involved lots of high Fat and high refined sugar (especially liquid soda calories) foods combined with no activity is why people are fat."

This is certainly not what Max was arguing against.

As far as your summary Rexing,

#1 might be true but unless you know how much fat the OP is eating now, a blanket statement to eat less fat is much worse than a blanket statement to drink no juice.

#2 and #3 the OP's problem carbs are from JUICE not a high fiber source. You can also imagine good sources of dietary fat like nuts. So it's not just fat vs. carbs its which fat and which carbs.

I think the bodybuilding post before me about balance is the best answer.

I want to clarify that I am in cross country and training for the 5K right now. I am very bad at distance, though I have done some pretty impressive progression runs. My 2mile PR is 10:05. I ran a 54 400m as a sophomore.

0953insd wrote:

The paleo/atkins logic is no worse than the lowfat BS.

"High calorie diets that involved lots of high Fat and high refined sugar (especially liquid soda calories) foods combined with no activity is why people are fat."

This is certainly not what Max was arguing against.

As far as your summary Rexing,

#1 might be true but unless you know how much fat the OP is eating now, a blanket statement to eat less fat is much worse than a blanket statement to drink no juice.

#2 and #3 the OP's problem carbs are from JUICE not a high fiber source. You can also imagine good sources of dietary fat like nuts. So it's not just fat vs. carbs its which fat and which carbs.

I think the bodybuilding post before me about balance is the best answer.

No, the blanket statement to eat less fat is not much worse than the blanket statement to eat less sugar. Eating less fat is inconsequential to his running. Eating less sugar may or may not be. So eating less fat is in general the better choice (since he doesn't want to hurt his running).

There's no such thing as bad carbs. Simple sugars are great for running just as much as complex sugars.

[quote]Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

Max, you are absolutely wrong, and the guy you are arguing with is absolutely right.

The OP is not sedentary though. Sure the amount of inactivity today, as well as overeating is a big problem with obesity. However you are saying that real foods from natural sources (like saturated fat) are going to make people gain weight.

Although paleo seems to make A LOT of sense, I do agree that eating excessive amount of calories will lead to weight gain. But if someone listens to their hunger and eat a majority of real foods, they should be able to eat a lot more without gaining weight, compared to someone who is eating sugary junk food cooked in crap oils (all vegetable oils).

The main problems today in addition to the sedentary lifestyle are

1)excess sugar and simple carbohydrates

2)excess omega 6 intake causing an imbalance of omega 6 and omega 3 (found in polyunsaturated fat). This is caused by the false belief that vegetable oils are good for you, when in reality they are rancid at room temperature and prone to oxidize under heat and pressure. Not to mention trans fat, which are just these oils turned into solid, which a lot of junk food are cooked in today.

3)Excessive gluten intake, for many people have some sort of intolerance and spend each day eating a lot of it.

I'd just like to point out that no one "bulks up" in a couple of weeks...ever. It just doesn't work that way.

I don't understand how no one has said anything about this yet.

I have no idea what kind of lifting you are doing but I actually think you should lift heavier, twice a week, compound movements. Nothing crazy, and don't spend too much time on it. More neuromuscular benefit and it will probably tire you out less for running anyway.

Also, you probably don't have a typical runner's body. 6 foot 2 and 170 isn't "very skinny" like someone said earlier. That doesn't mean you can't run fast.

Stop chugging juice and weigh yourself less often. The number doesn't even mean anything on a day to day basis.

max219 wrote:

[quote]Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

The OP is not sedentary though. Sure the amount of inactivity today, as well as overeating is a big problem with obesity. However you are saying that real foods from natural sources (like saturated fat) are going to make people gain weight.

Why do you keep saying that natural fats won't make you fat? If you eat too much of them, they will make you gain weight exactly like an excess of carbs will.

I can't keep all the scientific into straight, which seems to contradict itself, and besides, people extrapolate principles from one-off studies. When I need to get lean for a marathon, I cut out all sugar (except what's in fruit). This includes juice and white bread. I also switch to whole wheat pasta.

What I find is that by cutting out sugar, I'm able to get enough food to fuel 80-100mi training weeks just by eating more whole grains, a little more protein...putting good food in the place of bad. My advice: cut out the juice (as someone said) and lay off the junk food.

The best way to lose fat and not have it affect your training is to lose it very slowly. If you cut 250 calories a day from your normal diet, you will lose about 1/2 of a lb per week. Cutting only 250 calories a day should allow you to still have enough energy for your workouts and for your body to recover. It doesn't matter the type of food or drink you cut out in terms of how much weight you will lose, but it's better to cut out the unhealthiest foods, so you are still getting plenty of nutrients.

In addition, make sure to eat a decent amount in the 3-4 hours before your quality workouts and also to eat something in the couple hours after to help recover.

Indiana1600 wrote:

The best way to lose fat and not have it affect your training is to lose it very slowly. If you cut 250 calories a day from your normal diet, you will lose about 1/2 of a lb per week. Cutting only 250 calories a day should allow you to still have enough energy for your workouts and for your body to recover. It doesn't matter the type of food or drink you cut out in terms of how much weight you will lose, but it's better to cut out the unhealthiest foods, so you are still getting plenty of nutrients.

In addition, make sure to eat a decent amount in the 3-4 hours before your quality workouts and also to eat something in the couple hours after to help recover.

Careful.

Cutting fat will not have an adverse effect on running. Cutting out sugar and carbs will.

no sugar wrote:

I can't keep all the scientific into straight, which seems to contradict itself, and besides, people extrapolate principles from one-off studies. When I need to get lean for a marathon, I cut out all sugar (except what's in fruit). This includes juice and white bread. I also switch to whole wheat pasta.

What I find is that by cutting out sugar, I'm able to get enough food to fuel 80-100mi training weeks just by eating more whole grains, a little more protein...putting good food in the place of bad. My advice: cut out the juice (as someone said) and lay off the junk food.

The science doesn't contradict itself.

High end running relies on sugar and carbs. It does not rely on fat. So if you want to create a deficit without risking messing up your training, then cut out some fat.

Marathon training is less reliant on carbs, so it's less risky to cut them out. But you can still cut either them out or the fat. I'd still prefer to cut out the fat because sugar and carbs will allow me to run faster.

max219 wrote:

Well eating fat does not make you fat, and never has made you fat. Fat is stored through excessive carbohydrate and sugar intake. We have been eating fatty foods for thousands of years, and only had a weight problem recently when sugary drinks and processed foods (mostly junk food with a lot of crabs) became a stable in many people's diet.

Anyway lets not get off topic. The best thing for the OP to do is train right and eat real food.

Fat per se doesn't make you fat but 1g of fat has more than twice as many calories as 1g of carbs or protein.

That depends on what logic you are talking about. Some people got in their heads that they could eat *as much* low fat carb foods as they wanted to without getting fat, but no real experts actually told them that. They were told that overall, higher carb (%-wise) diets are more likely to make one weight stable than higher fat, but to eat appropriate calories, and that was the right advice. However, fat people generally eat high carbs (especially sugar) AND high fat AND don't exercise. But then people turn around and blame the USDA for recommending more carbs than fat as the being the reason for this epidemic??? That makes no sense whatsoever

Well, maybe not, but he, like most people like him (his posts are all textbook paleo/atkins stuff), seems to think that too many carbs is the reason for the obesity epidemic, and that dietary fat intake plays little role in this. This is simply not true. I was clearing that up.

In general, for an active young runner, cutting some fat calories is probably a better solution that cutting the juice because for most endurance athletes (unless we are talking ultra-runners(joggers) ), lots of carbs are good for recovery and more important than fat. Furthermore, juice is chock full of vitamins and minerals, other hard to get phytochemicals, is a good hydration source, and not does effect the body's metabolism the same way soda does (which are true empty calories).

However, I DID ALSO STATE that he should cut all junk food, which would include cutting out lots of sugar, AND I said don't overdo it with the juice (first post. Did you miss that?). So I was not ignoring excess sugar calories as a potential problem if he wants to cut a few lbs. But I focused on the cookies, candy, soda, and bacon cheeseburgers FIRST before telling him to cut the 100% juice. In general, juice and milk are excellent recovery drinks, and he could throw out the gatorade/powerade and soda before them. Again, I would switch from whole milk (if he drank it) to skim milk before cutting a glass of juice, because of the important of carbs for endurance athletes.

The bodybuilding post said don't get over 20% of your calories from fat or it will turn to fat. That agrees MUCH more with what I am saying than what max is saying. Furthermore it states that one can get up to 60% for calories from carbs. This is for a bodybuilder! Why would you then think a distance runner would be cutting carbs before fat?

So if you liked the bodybuilding post so much, I guess you really agree with me after all. I appreciate the support.

run more.

boom done

add volume to your easy days. don't increase intensity, maybe even slow down a little bit to adjust at first. maybe a shake out run here or there- slow, easy active recovery.

Can we come up with some sort of conclusion? I am now only having a cup of orange juice in the morning, and a sip when ever I please in the afternoon. Other than that, I am continuing to chug hot tea with a little bit of milk throughout the afternoon after I run (I have been chugging tea like this for a couple of years). I think I like eating some sort of fruit, mostly peaches, to hold me off between meals.

Here is how my diet has been in the past weeks in chronological order (for further clarification):

*6:20 wake up

*6:50 Bagel Sandwich with Bacon and Eggs (Most of the time) or Oatmeal with nuts mix and fruit, if available, with brown sugar (Less common)

*Glass of OJ

*A little bit of coffee and some cream

*9:00 Start getting hungry (Maybe eat one of the sandwiches now)

*11:00 Lunch 2 sandwiches (normally 1) with lunch meat and whole grain bread, and usually a fruit (peach)

*2:10 get home Slightly hungry

*Chugg some OJ (Probably 30oz?), drink 30 oz of tea with milk

*Eat something maybe a sandwich or fruit or sometimes nothing if there's nothing to eat.

*Relax

*3:30-4:00 start practice

*6:00-6:30 get home

*Dinner Stuffed safeway pasta with meat and pesto and spinach mixed in if we have it.

*Fruit or something if I get hungry before bed.

*And about consuming carbs before a workouts, when?

*Between getting home and going to sleep multiple 30oz mugs of tea with milk (most of the time 2). And every time I go down to the kitchen I take a couple chuggs of OJ

*And this past week I ate half of a chocolate cake (left out on counter and every time I would pass I would eat some)

Tyrannosaurus Rexing wrote:

The bodybuilding post said don't get over 20% of your calories from fat or it will turn to fat. That agrees MUCH more with what I am saying than what max is saying. Furthermore it states that one can get up to 60% for calories from carbs. This is for a bodybuilder! Why would you then think a distance runner would be cutting carbs before fat?

Lemme clarify that a bit.

Testosterone is synthesized from lipids, and a deficiency of fat can lead to low testosterone. So there's plenty of reason not to cut below 20 percent either. Some bodybuilders recommend 15 percent, but I think Rivera's arguments for 20 are pretty convincing.

The 60 percent carb is a ceiling, and most bodybuilders use less. Exceeding the ceiling is fine for endurance athletes. But most endurance athletes overestimate their energy output. The OP's only training for 5k and is gaining fat, as likely a carb excess as a fat excess. How to figure out which, look at the label, count the calories and figure the percentages.

I don't consider bodybuilding real athletics. But they are the world's pickiest eaters and are experts at managing body composition.