[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
greekdawg wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Brant_Drake wrote:
undeadlift wrote:
You won’t see the 6 pack yet (which is why I said they were developing), but when flexed, my abs are hard and I can see at least 2 packs. However, they protrude a little more than my chest, which means there must be fat underneath. This is why my skinfold measurements give me 8% BF. It doesn’t take into account my visceral fat.
What kind of stuff does Chuck eat?
Not trying to be a dick here, bit it sounds like what you have is a small chest, not a lot of visceral fat.
Agreed. At your bodyweight that seems more likely than a signifiacnt amount of visceral fat.
That may true but that is why I don’t go off skinfold measurements, doesn’t take into account internal fat. Get underwater weighing done or a DEXA scan. It’s actually cheaper than you think.
Why bother? What do you do with this info? I never quite understood why an average joe does this. (I am assuming you are an average joe, like myself)[/quote]
Visceral fat is the dangerous kind of fat that causes heart problems, so it’s important to know how much of it you have and how to get rid of the excess.
[quote]undeadlift wrote:
You won’t see the 6 pack yet (which is why I said they were developing), but when flexed, my abs are hard and I can see at least 2 packs. However, they protrude a little more than my chest, which means there must be fat underneath.[/quote]
If I were you, I would wait until all 6 packs are visible WITHOUT FLEXING before I worry about having too much visceral fat. I dunno if it leaves first or last, but it will leave during any fat loss phase.
Visceral fat is the dangerous kind of fat that causes heart problems, so it’s important to know how much of it you have and how to get rid of the excess.[/quote]
I agree but at your size I doubt you are carrying a whole bunch. Post a pic so we can tell you that you need to bulk!!! (j/k)
Well I am in the process of cutting for the first time ever, and my visceral fat is disappearing first. I am pretty sure that that is the norm, but everyone’s body is different obviously.
I also read an article once linking transfats to visceral fat.
[quote]undeadlift wrote:
Visceral fat is the dangerous kind of fat that causes heart problems, so it’s important to know how much of it you have and how to get rid of the excess.[/quote]
I think it’s enough to know that you have it, how does having an exact number change anything?
But it sounds like you’re on the right track, I would add some track running on off days and avoid rice after noon.
Maybe it is just because you are light so small chest and you do alot of deadlifting so you might have big muscles behind your 6 pack. Also practice vacums your transverse abdominals might just be weak. Search for lost secret of ab training on this website.
Visceral fat is the dangerous kind of fat that causes heart problems, so it’s important to know how much of it you have and how to get rid of the excess.
I agree but at your size I doubt you are carrying a whole bunch. Post a pic so we can tell you that you need to bulk!!! (j/k)[/quote]
Yeah, it’s not a lot of bulging. I’m just worried that it would eventually accumulate and give me heart problems, especially since my family has a history of heart problems.
[quote]Sxio wrote:
undeadlift wrote:
Visceral fat is the dangerous kind of fat that causes heart problems, so it’s important to know how much of it you have and how to get rid of the excess.
I think it’s enough to know that you have it, how does having an exact number change anything?
But it sounds like you’re on the right track, I would add some track running on off days and avoid rice after noon.
[/quote]
What do you mean by track running? Since I’m training for strength, I don’t think HIIT on off days would be a good idea, if that’s what you meant.
Yeah, I eat a lot of rice. I guess that comes with being Asian. I’ve been eating lots of rice all my life everyday, and it’s only now that I’m experiencing this problem. I’ll try avoiding rice like you said and see what happens.
from my memory, calorie deficit from calorie intake reduction results in a greater % loss of visceral fat, whereas when the deficit is caused by exercise, it is a higher percentage of subcutaneous fat.
[quote]jp_dubya wrote:
from my memory, calorie deficit from calorie intake reduction results in a greater % loss of visceral fat, whereas when the deficit is caused by exercise, it is a higher percentage of subcutaneous fat.[/quote]
Kinda figures, since I’ve been intaking less calories for a few days now and my belly’s bulge is getting a bit smaller.
You need to pick a goal dude. Are you training for strength, or training to maintain muscle and lose fat.
It is very tough (I would say impossible) to gain strength whilst losing fat.
I’m sure you’ll have better results if you gear your training towards one goal.
Don’t stress about my suggestion, if I could put it in a different way, I meant that you should add another way of using energy. Fat is stored energy, you gotta tap into it. Breaking a sweat is the best way. The easiest way I know to do this is hitting some running. HIIT is just one way of doing this.
[quote]Sxio wrote:
You need to pick a goal dude. Are you training for strength, or training to maintain muscle and lose fat.
It is very tough (I would say impossible) to gain strength whilst losing fat.
I’m sure you’ll have better results if you gear your training towards one goal.
Don’t stress about my suggestion, if I could put it in a different way, I meant that you should add another way of using energy. Fat is stored energy, you gotta tap into it. Breaking a sweat is the best way. The easiest way I know to do this is hitting some running. HIIT is just one way of doing this. [/quote]
Don’t worry. I already made up my mind (thanks to CT’s latest article) to train for strength. I just don’t wanna screw anything up and gain visceral fat. As jp_dubya said, visceral fat is function of diet, and if I can improve my diet without interfering with my strength training, that would be great.
Thanks for the advice. I really appreciate it. That goes to the rest of you as well.
Cosgrove mentions in one of his interviews that bike sprints seem to make the legs appear more ripped and that regular sprints seem to make the abdominal region come out more.
I have applied this to some of my clients and had the women do either bike sprints (HIIT style for 12-20 minutes after training) or, if they were capable, do regular sprints in the basket ball court (10 sec all out, resting 50 sec for a total of 8-15 sprints) and although it is hard to tell the results do appear to be in line with Cosgrove.
I have several men training with me who do bike and stairmaster work with very lean calves and legs but still quite a lot of abdominal fat…
I have noticed myself that my abdominal area looks much better when I train legs hard and fast with little rest between sets.
I lean out quite dramatically when I do 225lbs squats (40% of max) and do 10 sets of 10 with super fast concentric and 50 seconds rest between sets.
So to recap:
Try to incorporate 20 minutes of sprinting and when training legs do superfast reps with limited rest between sets (perhaps alternated with a maximum effort day) and of course an excellent diet.
[quote]undeadlift wrote:
jp_dubya wrote:
from my memory, calorie deficit from calorie intake reduction results in a greater % loss of visceral fat, whereas when the deficit is caused by exercise, it is a higher percentage of subcutaneous fat.
Kinda figures, since I’ve been intaking less calories for a few days now and my belly’s bulge is getting a bit smaller.[/quote]
Are you sure that you’re actually talking about visceral fat and not your stomach being full?
There are a lot of people that mistake being full with either liquid or food as being fat and having visceral fat, mainly because the food is going to push out the abdominal wall. Unless you barely exercise or eat garbage food, it’s highly doubtful you have tons of visceral fat around your organs.