Questions About Fat Loss

Training
742

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]King Eric wrote:
Hey Coach,

I was reading one of your earlier articles and read

“Carb-cycling is a very effective way of eating. When properly planned it’ll allow you to gain muscle while minimizing fat gain. But when it comes to rapid drops in body fat, a carb cycling approach isn’t ideal unless you’re below 10% body fat.”

I was just wondering if you still stand by this, or if your view on this has changed?

Thanks!
J[/quote]

No it hasn’t changed. If somebody is significantly above 10% (15-20%+) a low carbs approach is better. If someone is between 10-15% a targeted carbs approach (no carbs except for 30-60g pre-workout) is best.[/quote]

Hey coach,

if one were in the 10-15 range and did ZERO carbs except for just the anaconda 2 protocol (64 carbs), is that low enough carbs to have a carb up every 10-14 days?

also, since you always want to keep protein high (1.7-2g per pound)and one low day during a fat loss phase, i am guessing that when you need to start reducing calories, they would come from lowering fat?

I really apprecaite any help.

743

[quote]dayne_lathrop wrote:

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]King Eric wrote:
Hey Coach,

I was reading one of your earlier articles and read

“Carb-cycling is a very effective way of eating. When properly planned it’ll allow you to gain muscle while minimizing fat gain. But when it comes to rapid drops in body fat, a carb cycling approach isn’t ideal unless you’re below 10% body fat.”

I was just wondering if you still stand by this, or if your view on this has changed?

Thanks!
J[/quote]

No it hasn’t changed. If somebody is significantly above 10% (15-20%+) a low carbs approach is better. If someone is between 10-15% a targeted carbs approach (no carbs except for 30-60g pre-workout) is best.[/quote]

Hey coach,

if one were in the 10-15 range and did ZERO carbs except for just the anaconda 2 protocol (64 carbs), is that low enough carbs to have a carb up every 10-14 days?

also, since you always want to keep protein high (1.7-2g per pound)and one low day during a fat loss phase, i am guessing that when you need to start reducing calories, they would come from lowering fat?

I really apprecaite any help.[/quote]

  1. Yes, a carb-up every 10 days would be acceptable. But by carb-up I do not mean a feast trying to blow out your stomach… roughly 300g of carbs, mostly from clean sources.

  2. 2.0g per pound might be a tad too high… not that it is a bad thing, just a waste. I’d go more with 1.5g per pound or 1.7 at the most. I told “pumped” not to drop below 1.8 only because that’s where he had been for most of his mass gaining phase.

744

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
CT,

Have you ever worked with a vegetarian for fat loss? If so what sort of approach did you take with such an individual?[/quote]

Have them seek the help of a psychiatrist.

Seriously though. A vegetarian can probably get some results if he is willing to use protein shakes.

The key is really to illiminate pasta, bread, rice and potatoes (and obviously all sugar). Focus mainly on veggies (as many different types as possible) and fruit in the AM.

AVOID ALL SOY-BASED PRODUCTS.

Drink 3-4 protein shakes with 2 scoops of protein.

Supplement with essential fatty acids (FA3 and Flameout).

If the individual can eat dairy and eggs then include a small amount of those.

Seek the help of a psychiatrist.[/quote]

Haha I guess you don’t get many south asian clients in your part of Quebec… approximately 500 million vegetarians in India

Hard to get someone to eat an animal that they’ve been worshipping their whole life :slight_smile:

745

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]dayne_lathrop wrote:

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]King Eric wrote:
Hey Coach,

I was reading one of your earlier articles and read

“Carb-cycling is a very effective way of eating. When properly planned it’ll allow you to gain muscle while minimizing fat gain. But when it comes to rapid drops in body fat, a carb cycling approach isn’t ideal unless you’re below 10% body fat.”

I was just wondering if you still stand by this, or if your view on this has changed?

Thanks!
J[/quote]

No it hasn’t changed. If somebody is significantly above 10% (15-20%+) a low carbs approach is better. If someone is between 10-15% a targeted carbs approach (no carbs except for 30-60g pre-workout) is best.[/quote]

Hey coach,

if one were in the 10-15 range and did ZERO carbs except for just the anaconda 2 protocol (64 carbs), is that low enough carbs to have a carb up every 10-14 days?

also, since you always want to keep protein high (1.7-2g per pound)and one low day during a fat loss phase, i am guessing that when you need to start reducing calories, they would come from lowering fat?

I really apprecaite any help.[/quote]

  1. Yes, a carb-up every 10 days would be acceptable. But by carb-up I do not mean a feast trying to blow out your stomach… roughly 300g of carbs, mostly from clean sources.

  2. 2.0g per pound might be a tad too high… not that it is a bad thing, just a waste. I’d go more with 1.5g per pound or 1.7 at the most. I told “pumped” not to drop below 1.8 only because that’s where he had been for most of his mass gaining phase.[/quote]

thanks alot for the quick response!

i am guessing off days (zero carbs except for green veggies) is when you would utilize the 1.7 grams per bodyweight, and training days would be best with 1.5?

746

[quote]dayne_lathrop wrote:

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]dayne_lathrop wrote:

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]King Eric wrote:
Hey Coach,

I was reading one of your earlier articles and read

“Carb-cycling is a very effective way of eating. When properly planned it’ll allow you to gain muscle while minimizing fat gain. But when it comes to rapid drops in body fat, a carb cycling approach isn’t ideal unless you’re below 10% body fat.”

I was just wondering if you still stand by this, or if your view on this has changed?

Thanks!
J[/quote]

No it hasn’t changed. If somebody is significantly above 10% (15-20%+) a low carbs approach is better. If someone is between 10-15% a targeted carbs approach (no carbs except for 30-60g pre-workout) is best.[/quote]

Hey coach,

if one were in the 10-15 range and did ZERO carbs except for just the anaconda 2 protocol (64 carbs), is that low enough carbs to have a carb up every 10-14 days?

also, since you always want to keep protein high (1.7-2g per pound)and one low day during a fat loss phase, i am guessing that when you need to start reducing calories, they would come from lowering fat?

I really apprecaite any help.[/quote]

  1. Yes, a carb-up every 10 days would be acceptable. But by carb-up I do not mean a feast trying to blow out your stomach… roughly 300g of carbs, mostly from clean sources.

  2. 2.0g per pound might be a tad too high… not that it is a bad thing, just a waste. I’d go more with 1.5g per pound or 1.7 at the most. I told “pumped” not to drop below 1.8 only because that’s where he had been for most of his mass gaining phase.[/quote]

thanks alot for the quick response!

i am guessing off days (zero carbs except for green veggies) is when you would utilize the 1.7 grams per bodyweight, and training days would be best with 1.5?[/quote]

Honestly, in the grand scheme of things it wont make a difference at all. Simply shoot for anywhere between 1.5 and 1.7 per day 6 days a week. Don’t overcomplicate things.

747

Thanks for the reply coach…always appreciated!!! GO HABS!!!

748

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]dayne_lathrop wrote:

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]dayne_lathrop wrote:

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]King Eric wrote:
Hey Coach,

I was reading one of your earlier articles and read

“Carb-cycling is a very effective way of eating. When properly planned it’ll allow you to gain muscle while minimizing fat gain. But when it comes to rapid drops in body fat, a carb cycling approach isn’t ideal unless you’re below 10% body fat.”

I was just wondering if you still stand by this, or if your view on this has changed?

Thanks!
J[/quote]

No it hasn’t changed. If somebody is significantly above 10% (15-20%+) a low carbs approach is better. If someone is between 10-15% a targeted carbs approach (no carbs except for 30-60g pre-workout) is best.[/quote]

Hey coach,

if one were in the 10-15 range and did ZERO carbs except for just the anaconda 2 protocol (64 carbs), is that low enough carbs to have a carb up every 10-14 days?

also, since you always want to keep protein high (1.7-2g per pound)and one low day during a fat loss phase, i am guessing that when you need to start reducing calories, they would come from lowering fat?

I really apprecaite any help.[/quote]

  1. Yes, a carb-up every 10 days would be acceptable. But by carb-up I do not mean a feast trying to blow out your stomach… roughly 300g of carbs, mostly from clean sources.

  2. 2.0g per pound might be a tad too high… not that it is a bad thing, just a waste. I’d go more with 1.5g per pound or 1.7 at the most. I told “pumped” not to drop below 1.8 only because that’s where he had been for most of his mass gaining phase.[/quote]

thanks alot for the quick response!

i am guessing off days (zero carbs except for green veggies) is when you would utilize the 1.7 grams per bodyweight, and training days would be best with 1.5?[/quote]

Honestly, in the grand scheme of things it wont make a difference at all. Simply shoot for anywhere between 1.5 and 1.7 per day 6 days a week. Don’t overcomplicate things.[/quote]

Thanks for the info coach :slight_smile:

749

Hello Coach,

  1. If your athlete is able to train twice a day, for fat loss, would you GENERALLY prefer them lifting heavy in the AM and full body metabolic work in the PM OR lactic acid work for the same muscle in the PM?

  2. Do you allow them carbs pre workout for BOTH sessions…I’m assuming yes, but at a smaller amount for the PM session?

Thanks for your time,
GJ

750

[quote]Gymjunkie wrote:
Hello Coach,

  1. If your athlete is able to train twice a day, for fat loss, would you GENERALLY prefer them lifting heavy in the AM and full body metabolic work in the PM OR lactic acid work for the same muscle in the PM?

  2. Do you allow them carbs pre workout for BOTH sessions…I’m assuming yes, but at a smaller amount for the PM session?

Thanks for your time,
GJ[/quote]

  1. Heavy or explosive in the AM, volume of lactic in the PM

  2. It depends on the volume of the second session. If the workout is gonna last less than 45 minutes I don’t have them use carbs (if their goal is fat loss).

751

Coach,

With all these breakthroughs in peri-workout nutrition do you believe it’s possible to bring up a weak point while still going for slow and steady fat loss, if the perfect peri-workout supplementation is used?

If so, what kind of protocol would you suggest?

Thanks!
J

752

hi Christian,

I am cuurently going through a fat loss phase using Poliquins lactic acid training. I have gone from 15% to 11.5% (82kg) in 4 weeks as of yesterday…goal is 8%. My buddy is a Poliquin BioSig student and is using the 10 site test and plugging it into the software. My umbilical is a real sticking point for me.

I have got my hands on some CLA and was wondering if you have had any success on this supplement? My buddy recommends 6-8g a day over the course of the day. I’ll give it a blast over the few 2 weeks and see if it has any effect while keeping everyday else the same.

He mentioned that this is a cortisol issue/ management issue as it seems to be with a lot of guys here (my problem is from the belly button down/ like a ridge of fat covering the lower abs). I see you are currently giving advise in another thread so I wont double up. I will follow the other one with interest. Thanks.

753

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]Gymjunkie wrote:
Hello Coach,

  1. If your athlete is able to train twice a day, for fat loss, would you GENERALLY prefer them lifting heavy in the AM and full body metabolic work in the PM OR lactic acid work for the same muscle in the PM?

  2. Do you allow them carbs pre workout for BOTH sessions…I’m assuming yes, but at a smaller amount for the PM session?

Thanks for your time,
GJ[/quote]

  1. Heavy or explosive in the AM, volume of lactic in the PM

  2. It depends on the volume of the second session. If the workout is gonna last less than 45 minutes I don’t have them use carbs (if their goal is fat loss).[/quote]

Thanks Coach!

GJ

754

Hi Coach, I see the subject of stubborn fat and yohimbine came up in the other page, now im getting ready for a show, and i’m already very lean in the upper body but my legs are still not showing any definition despite good muscular size in them and my hamstrings, hips and butt area are clearly holding quite a bit of fat still,

Im wondering what you would recomend to some one in this kind of situation, in terms of diet and training i believe i can do very well in the show as long as i can get the conditioning of my lower half the same as the upper, can some one like me ever be able to get that sought after striated glutes??
thanks in advance

755

[quote]Bobsta wrote:
Hi Coach, I see the subject of stubborn fat and yohimbine came up in the other page, now im getting ready for a show, and i’m already very lean in the upper body but my legs are still not showing any definition despite good muscular size in them and my hamstrings, hips and butt area are clearly holding quite a bit of fat still,

Im wondering what you would recomend to some one in this kind of situation, in terms of diet and training i believe i can do very well in the show as long as i can get the conditioning of my lower half the same as the upper, can some one like me ever be able to get that sought after striated glutes??
thanks in advance [/quote]

Okay, first of all let’s address the striated glutes issue.

Not everybody can get them. Even if they get rid of roughly all the subcutaneous fat in their lower body. Striations (in any muscle, not just the glutes) is dependent on several things:

  1. extremely low body fat levels (virtually no subcutaneous body fat)
  2. zero water between the muscle and skin
  3. thin skin (skin thickness can vary widely from one individual to the next and even between different areas of one body)… it can vary between 0.8mm up to 3.5mm. To show striated glutes you can’t have much more than 1.2mm in skin thickness.
  4. Fascia (tissue surrounding the muscle) thickness

No.1 and 2. you can do something for. But no.3 and 4. are out of your control. If you have thick skin and fascia in the glute area you will never have striated glutes regardless of how lean and dehydrated you can get.

And most bodybuilders (I say most because there are a few genetic exceptions) need to use DRASTIC (and dangerous) water depletion methods to get rid of enough water to have striated glutes.

Heck, even at the pro level not every body get striated glutes.

And this also holds true for other body parts. For example Dorian Yates could get striated glutes but his legs never had striations (separation, yes, but not striations). Jay Cutler has tons of quads striations but very little striations in the upper body. One of my friends can actually have striated glutes at 10% (far from contest shape). Pro bodybuilder Tommy Thorvilssen was also like that.

As far as your specific issue. Yohimbine might help a bit, and also any product that can lower estrogen levels. But I found that the issue with lower body fat is often one of bad vascularization. The more blood vessels you have in an area, the easier it is to mobilize (and thus burn) fat. Many individuals have low vascularization levels in their lower body (especially women) which makes it harder to lose fat there.

756

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]Bobsta wrote:
Hi Coach, I see the subject of stubborn fat and yohimbine came up in the other page, now im getting ready for a show, and i’m already very lean in the upper body but my legs are still not showing any definition despite good muscular size in them and my hamstrings, hips and butt area are clearly holding quite a bit of fat still,

Im wondering what you would recomend to some one in this kind of situation, in terms of diet and training i believe i can do very well in the show as long as i can get the conditioning of my lower half the same as the upper, can some one like me ever be able to get that sought after striated glutes??
thanks in advance [/quote]

Okay, first of all let’s address the striated glutes issue.

Not everybody can get them. Even if they get rid of roughly all the subcutaneous fat in their lower body. Striations (in any muscle, not just the glutes) is dependent on several things:

  1. extremely low body fat levels (virtually no subcutaneous body fat)
  2. zero water between the muscle and skin
  3. thin skin (skin thickness can vary widely from one individual to the next and even between different areas of one body)… it can vary between 0.8mm up to 3.5mm. To show striated glutes you can’t have much more than 1.2mm in skin thickness.
  4. Fascia (tissue surrounding the muscle) thickness

No.1 and 2. you can do something for. But no.3 and 4. are out of your control. If you have thick skin and fascia in the glute area you will never have striated glutes regardless of how lean and dehydrated you can get.

And most bodybuilders (I say most because there are a few genetic exceptions) need to use DRASTIC (and dangerous) water depletion methods to get rid of enough water to have striated glutes.

Heck, even at the pro level not every body get striated glutes.

And this also holds true for other body parts. For example Dorian Yates could get striated glutes but his legs never had striations (separation, yes, but not striations). Jay Cutler has tons of quads striations but very little striations in the upper body. One of my friends can actually have striated glutes at 10% (far from contest shape). Pro bodybuilder Tommy Thorvilssen was also like that.

As far as your specific issue. Yohimbine might help a bit, and also any product that can lower estrogen levels. But I found that the issue with lower body fat is often one of bad vascularization. The more blood vessels you have in an area, the easier it is to mobilize (and thus burn) fat. Many individuals have low vascularization levels in their lower body (especially women) which makes it harder to lose fat there.
[/quote]

Thanks a lot for your explanation coach, it certainly puts things into prespective more.

In terms of low vascularization in the lower body, would you say that doing a lot of high rep work could improve the situation, i.e. 100’s of waliking lunges, leg extensions etc…?

Have you ever had an athlete you worked with that had similar higher body fat levels in the lower body and managed to get rid of it with a bit of hard work?

757

[quote]Bobsta wrote:

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]Bobsta wrote:
Hi Coach, I see the subject of stubborn fat and yohimbine came up in the other page, now im getting ready for a show, and i’m already very lean in the upper body but my legs are still not showing any definition despite good muscular size in them and my hamstrings, hips and butt area are clearly holding quite a bit of fat still,

Im wondering what you would recomend to some one in this kind of situation, in terms of diet and training i believe i can do very well in the show as long as i can get the conditioning of my lower half the same as the upper, can some one like me ever be able to get that sought after striated glutes??
thanks in advance [/quote]

Okay, first of all let’s address the striated glutes issue.

Not everybody can get them. Even if they get rid of roughly all the subcutaneous fat in their lower body. Striations (in any muscle, not just the glutes) is dependent on several things:

  1. extremely low body fat levels (virtually no subcutaneous body fat)
  2. zero water between the muscle and skin
  3. thin skin (skin thickness can vary widely from one individual to the next and even between different areas of one body)… it can vary between 0.8mm up to 3.5mm. To show striated glutes you can’t have much more than 1.2mm in skin thickness.
  4. Fascia (tissue surrounding the muscle) thickness

No.1 and 2. you can do something for. But no.3 and 4. are out of your control. If you have thick skin and fascia in the glute area you will never have striated glutes regardless of how lean and dehydrated you can get.

And most bodybuilders (I say most because there are a few genetic exceptions) need to use DRASTIC (and dangerous) water depletion methods to get rid of enough water to have striated glutes.

Heck, even at the pro level not every body get striated glutes.

And this also holds true for other body parts. For example Dorian Yates could get striated glutes but his legs never had striations (separation, yes, but not striations). Jay Cutler has tons of quads striations but very little striations in the upper body. One of my friends can actually have striated glutes at 10% (far from contest shape). Pro bodybuilder Tommy Thorvilssen was also like that.

As far as your specific issue. Yohimbine might help a bit, and also any product that can lower estrogen levels. But I found that the issue with lower body fat is often one of bad vascularization. The more blood vessels you have in an area, the easier it is to mobilize (and thus burn) fat. Many individuals have low vascularization levels in their lower body (especially women) which makes it harder to lose fat there.
[/quote]

Thanks a lot for your explanation coach, it certainly puts things into prespective more.

In terms of low vascularization in the lower body, would you say that doing a lot of high rep work could improve the situation, i.e. 100’s of waliking lunges, leg extensions etc…?

Have you ever had an athlete you worked with that had similar higher body fat levels in the lower body and managed to get rid of it with a bit of hard work?[/quote]

High rep stuff certainly can help with vascularization, but it takes months for it to take effect. Sprinting, sled work and prowler pushing are also great options, but again it takes a lot of time to build enough new capillaries.

Have I know a guy with that problem who overcame it? You will like and dislike the answer. Yes I have: one of the original IBB guys but it took him 3 years to have his leg definition catch up to his upper body definition. He didn’t train intensely all the time, had he done that he might have done it in a years and a half.

That’s if the problem is low vascularization. If it’s an hormonal imbalance it can be solved a bit quicker.

758

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]Bobsta wrote:

Thanks a lot for your explanation coach, it certainly puts things into prespective more.

In terms of low vascularization in the lower body, would you say that doing a lot of high rep work could improve the situation, i.e. 100’s of waliking lunges, leg extensions etc…?

Have you ever had an athlete you worked with that had similar higher body fat levels in the lower body and managed to get rid of it with a bit of hard work?[/quote]

High rep stuff certainly can help with vascularization, but it takes months for it to take effect. Sprinting, sled work and prowler pushing are also great options, but again it takes a lot of time to build enough new capillaries.

Have I know a guy with that problem who overcame it? You will like and dislike the answer. Yes I have: one of the original IBB guys but it took him 3 years to have his leg definition catch up to his upper body definition. He didn’t train intensely all the time, had he done that he might have done it in a years and a half.

That’s if the problem is low vascularization. If it’s an hormonal imbalance it can be solved a bit quicker.[/quote]

That’s really interesting. So, in a sense, high reps really can lead to increased fat loss…

I’ve heard something similar with sprinting bringing about increased mitochondrial density in the legs leading to increased fat burning in that area.

759

[quote]pumped340 wrote:That’s really interesting. So, in a sense, high reps really can lead to increased fat loss…

[/quote]

That’s NOT what I’m saying.

I’m saying that high volume work (high reps or more preferably stuff like prowler or sled work) can lead to adaptations that will make subsequent fat loss efforts more effective.

It’s not that high reps help lose fat, it’s more that the long term adaptations can make your body better suited to mobilize fat. It’s not a huge difference, but it’s a significant one.

760

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]pumped340 wrote:That’s really interesting. So, in a sense, high reps really can lead to increased fat loss…

[/quote]

That’s NOT what I’m saying.

I’m saying that high volume work (high reps or more preferably stuff like prowler or sled work) can lead to adaptations that will make subsequent fat loss efforts more effective.

It’s not that high reps help lose fat, it’s more that the long term adaptations can make your body better suited to mobilize fat. It’s not a huge difference, but it’s a significant one.[/quote]

I remember you talked about capilarization in your HSS-100 work. Do you think that vascularization adaptions can be created following that kind of training for a long time?

Other poing I’d like to adress is that I started at age 14, and everytime I’ve lost bodyfat my appearance has been more vascular. Is this due to normal development and aging (muscle maturity), or training age? or both?

Thanks in advance.

761

[quote]Christian Thibaudeau wrote:

[quote]pumped340 wrote:That’s really interesting. So, in a sense, high reps really can lead to increased fat loss…

[/quote]

That’s NOT what I’m saying.

I’m saying that high volume work (high reps or more preferably stuff like prowler or sled work) can lead to adaptations that will make subsequent fat loss efforts more effective.

It’s not that high reps help lose fat, it’s more that the long term adaptations can make your body better suited to mobilize fat. It’s not a huge difference, but it’s a significant one.[/quote]

Right, that’s what I meant by saying it leads to more (effective) fat loss, not necessarily that it causes it.