Ask the trainer

[Londoner]

Hi all,

Seeing as I am frequenting this forum more and more and everyone has been so great on here, I thought I would give something back.

I work as a trainer and nutrition coach. So fire away with any questions.

I know that fitness can transform lives and personalities, and where better than to help people than those struggling with AL addiction.

:l

[NoSugar]

Ask the trainer

What a nice offer, Londoner.

For most of my adult life I was an avid medium-intensity, medium to long-duration exerciser (several years as a jogger, then power walker, also cardio machines at the gym). I started lifting weights about 15 years ago. So for years, I spent 60-90 min per day exercising.

When I started cleaning up my diet a couple years ago, the same articles I was reading for that had information about high intensity interval training, also. I read some books and watched videos and have been experimenting with that approach for the last several months (you know, when you are changing your life, might as well just go for it...!).

I have found that I love getting a thorough workout in well under a half hour. I still try to walk as much as possible (but not as fast as I possibly can), ride my bike for errands, and generally be active but those things are no longer my primary form of exercise.

I've read several articles about how our bodies adapt to regular, moderate intensity exercise in the same way they adapt to restricting energy intake - by burning LESS energy. We are told that exercise increases our basal metabolic rate but in fact, the data are just the opposite! Learning that really inspired me to give up the daily hour long run/walk/ellipse/whatever.

I think I'm in equal or better shape than before (of course, giving up AL last January coincided with all of this and so undoubtedly is a factor ). Do you promote this type of exercise program? I'm a mid-50s female.

Thanks, NS

[Wine-no!]

Ask the trainer

Now that's an offer I can't refuse!!

I need to shift 35 pounds. Should I focus more on cardio? How many times a week ideally should I work out and for how long? Do you rate classes such a Zumba for weight loss? Any other classes you'd recommend? I'm also interested in HIIT as NS is above!

Thanks in advance!!

PS I'm 41!

[free at last]

Ask the trainer

I'm 55 year old female who spends too much time on planes, in meetings. Have gained 15 pounds in past five years, but in fairly ok shape. When I can, I walk the dog 5 miles a day (probably 10 times per month) but otherwise, exercise is limited to what I can squeeze into the hotel gym. I try to alternate between rowing machine, treadmill, and elliptical (half hour) with half hour of weights.

My question is like NoSugar's--should I do more intense workouts and at what frequency?

Bet you get a bunch of 50-60 year old women signing up for your online offer!

[Londoner]

Ask the trainer

NoSugar;1563652 wrote: What a nice offer, Londoner.

For most of my adult life I was an avid medium-intensity, medium to long-duration exerciser (several years as a jogger, then power walker, also cardio machines at the gym). I started lifting weights about 15 years ago. So for years, I spent 60-90 min per day exercising.

When I started cleaning up my diet a couple years ago, the same articles I was reading for that had information about high intensity interval training, also. I read some books and watched videos and have been experimenting with that approach for the last several months (you know, when you are changing your life, might as well just go for it...!).

I have found that I love getting a thorough workout in well under a half hour. I still try to walk as much as possible (but not as fast as I possibly can), ride my bike for errands, and generally be active but those things are no longer my primary form of exercise.

I've read several articles about how our bodies adapt to regular, moderate intensity exercise in the same way they adapt to restricting energy intake - by burning LESS energy. We are told that exercise increases our basal metabolic rate but in fact, the data are just the opposite! Learning that really inspired me to give up the daily hour long run/walk/ellipse/whatever.

I think I'm in equal or better shape than before (of course, giving up AL last January coincided with all of this and so undoubtedly is a factor ). Do you promote this type of exercise program? I'm a mid-50s female.

Thanks, NS

The bike riding and walking etc. is what I consider NEPA (non-exercise physical activity). Keep it up as it is important. Studies are showing how sitting all day is linked to more and more health problems.

There was an interesting article I read a while back talking about how our body adapts to our activity levels in multiple ways - it can alter metabolic output, it may alter our energy levels (so we laze about more at home if we exercise more) and change our hunger levels. This can result in a negligible change in net caloric balance.

The way I coach people is small changes planned in a gradual way that make big impacts over a longer period of time.

There are two ways you can train:

1) Hard
2) Long

You cannot train long AND hard. I think workout of 30-45 minutes are optimal for most - from a hormonal and time aspect. I normally recommend a combination of weights based workouts and energy systems workouts (both lower intensity aerobics and higher intensity intervals).

Sounds like you've got a great idea of what you are doing NS, keep it up

[Londoner]

Ask the trainer

Wine-no!;1563713 wrote: Now that's an offer I can't refuse!!

I need to shift 35 pounds. Should I focus more on cardio? How many times a week ideally should I work out and for how long? Do you rate classes such a Zumba for weight loss? Any other classes you'd recommend? I'm also interested in HIIT as NS is above!

Thanks in advance!!

The most important thing in shifting weight is nutrition. You cannot beat the simple science of calories in and calories out. If you eat more than you need you will generally gain weight and vice versa.

With regards to exercise, I would recommend a combination of:

1) Weights

2) Cardio - both low intensity steady state and intervals work very well in combination. You may look to do Zumba one day if you enjoy it, some sprints on a bike the other day after your weights and a nice long swim another day.

An over reliance on traditional cardio can cause muscle loss and excessive hunger - which is the opposite of what you want. A combo of weights and various forms of cardio works very well for most.

The problem I see with many is doing too much too soon. Make sure you build up gradually and look at how your nutrition is. Think of nutrition as your primary fat loss tool, and exercise as the tool which will turbo boost your nutrition as well as helping to shape your body.

[Londoner]

Ask the trainer

free at last;1563717 wrote: I'm 55 year old female who spends too much time on planes, in meetings. Have gained 15 pounds in past five years, but in fairly ok shape. When I can, I walk the dog 5 miles a day (probably 10 times per month) but otherwise, exercise is limited to what I can squeeze into the hotel gym. I try to alternate between rowing machine, treadmill, and elliptical (half hour) with half hour of weights.

My question is like NoSugar's--should I do more intense workouts and at what frequency?

Bet you get a bunch of 50-60 year old women signing up for your online offer!

Hey FAL.

Walking is a great restorative form of activity. It is cleansing for our minds and bodies (providing it doesn't turn into a crazy power walk).

When you can fit it in, your plan sounds pretty good. I would probably say the less frequently you exercise, the harder you want to push if you can handle it.

For most I recommend 3 workouts a week. Weights followed by cardio is great - 30 mins of each (make sure you warm up and stretch off too). Keep rest periods on the weights work to no longer than 60-90secs between each set/exercise.

You may want to do steady state cardio some days i.e. 30 mins @ heart rate of 120-140bpm and on other days do 15-20 mins of say 30secs of heart rate 150-160bpm alternated with 60secs of recovery. Both offer completely different physiological adaptations. If you are short on time, ultimately, the shorter and more intense intervals will work better.

[Wine-no!]

Ask the trainer

Londoner;1563729 wrote: The most important thing in shifting weight is nutrition. You cannot beat the simple science of calories in and calories out. If you eat more than you need you will generally gain weight and vice versa.

With regards to exercise, I would recommend a combination of:

1) Weights

2) Cardio - both low intensity steady state and intervals work very well in combination. You may look to do Zumba one day if you enjoy it, some sprints on a bike the other day after your weights and a nice long swim another day.

An over reliance on traditional cardio can cause muscle loss and excessive hunger - which is the opposite of what you want. A combo of weights and various forms of cardio works very well for most.

The problem I see with many is doing too much too soon. Make sure you build up gradually and look at how your nutrition is. Think of nutrition as your primary fat loss tool, and exercise as the tool which will turbo boost your nutrition as well as helping to shape your body.

When you say nutrition - can I ask your view on carbs? I have cut out bread (and all baked goods) and wheat but do have potatoes and rice. I did Atkins for a long time and did lose most of the weight (despite drinking a great deal...) but when I recently tried it again, I just couldn't stomach it any more. Now I concentrate on balanced eating (protein/carbs/veg) 1500-1700 calories per day. I walk a lot now and average around 12000 steps a day. Would you keep the diet very low fat? Thanks for your advice! :l

[Londoner]

Ask the trainer

Wine-no.

Most people see good results with low carb initially is due to the water loss/glycogen loss. Oh and it is far too easy to slam down loads of refined carbs in one sitting. Let alone one day. Ultimately the calories in/calories out is the most important part of the equation.

I tend to advocate a moderate carb/moderate fat/ moderate protein diet to most people. Target the starches more so around workouts and aim to get fruits/veg at other times.

Each macronutrient has it's place in your diet. Fats are important for many, many processes in your body.

I think where a lot of people go wrong is they consume too much fat and too many carbs in combination with each other. A gram of fat has 9 calories and a gram of protein/carbohydrate has 4 calories. So if someone were to eat 100g of fat, 100g protein and 200g of carbs per day that would equal 2100cals.

I like to keep protein (0.8-1g per lb of bodyweight) a constant and then incorporate an inverse relationship between fats and proteins - that is either moderate fat and carb some days, or higher fat/lower carbs other days and higher carb/lower fat on others. Does that make sense?

You sound like you are on the right track. It is far harder to overeat on a diet made up mostly of whole, natural foods. And it also provides far more nutrients than a processed diet.

[Wine-no!]

Ask the trainer

Thank you for the reassurance Londoner. I really appreciate the advice and will pop back and tell you how I'm getting along x

[NoSugar]

Ask the trainer

Londoner;1563729 wrote: The most important thing in shifting weight is nutrition. You cannot beat the simple science of calories in and calories out. If you eat more than you need you will generally gain weight and vice versa.

.Hi, Londoner

Thanks for your response about the exercise. Sometimes I don't feel like I'm doing "enough" because what I'm doing just doesn't take very long. On the other hand, I think I was formerly spending too much time exercising.

Regarding calories in/ calories out, I don't think it is a simple math problem. The energy content of food is measured in a bomb calorimeter, not a living body. 100 calories of sugar or any carbohydrate is metabolized differently (and has different metabolic effects) than 100 calories of protein or 100 calories of fat, which also differ greatly from one another. Sugar in a fruit is absorbed differently that sugar in a cookie due to the presence of fiber in fruit. Further, a person's total ad libitum calorie intake will vary depending on the proportions of macronutrients because of the different effects of each of those nutrients. It is just plain hard to restrict calorie intake on a high carb, low fat diet because every cell is telling you that you are starving and need to eat! (It doesn't sound like that is what you recommend - it is just what so many people try to do to lose weight).

What you suggested I like to keep protein (0.8-1g per lb of bodyweight) a constant and then incorporate an inverse relationship between fats and proteins - that is either moderate fat and carb some days, or higher fat/lower carbs other days and higher carb/lower fat on others.

makes sense to me if higher carbs are consumed only on high activity days.

So while at some point the number of calories a person consumes matters, the sources of those calories is critical. There are many studies supporting a low (or lower) carb, moderate protein, and high (or higher) fat diet. Robert Lustig's recent book, Fat Chance, explains it pretty well as does Gary Taubes' Good Calories Bad Calories and Why We Get Fat.

[Londoner]

Ask the trainer

Really good post NS. It is hard to adjust the mindset that you don't need to be exercising every day for hours on end to get results. Do the minimum you need to for the maximum results

Everything you say is correct, but everything does boil down to the calories in calories out equation. But, I do not advocate calorie counting - it is neither accurate nor efficient.

A very high carb diet or consuming refined carbohydrates (as per the no sugar thread) will have a very different hormonal impact on your body than a nice nutritious plate of vegetables, quality protein and good fats.

Most people would do well with eating more higher fiber/water content foods. Again all down to a nutrition and hormonal aspect - they will fill fuller for longer and obtain more nutrients.

Basically, the more active a client is, the more starch I will have them eat as it is harder to obtain the carbs needed from low starch foods alone. And saying that, most clients are coached to eat most of their starches only post workout.

Most coaching boils down to getting the client to eat less calories in a way that doesn't make them feel restricted.

[free at last]

Ask the trainer

Thanks, Londoner, for this advice. I am going to follow you advice "minimum you need for maximum results." I think I had this attitude that I had to spend hours at the gym to make up for all the time I don't get there. Will try to be more regular and to push myself harder for shorter periods of time.

That said, it's time to have a nutritious breakfast and start my work day. Thank you!

[NoSugar]

Ask the trainer

Hi, Londoner

I think we generally agree with one another .

The problems arise when people try to simply count the number of calories they consume without regard for the source (so I think there is some calculus involved in that in/out calories equation!). Which is why people like you will always be needed.

I hope you are feeling better. Maybe next time you're inclined to go out and party you could talk to yourself just as you would to one of your struggling clients - with kindness, encouragement, and an emphasis on long-term goals. You could even share your pep-talk here - I'm sure it would benefit others, as well.

Take care, NS

[Chief Bromden]

Ask the trainer

NoSugar;1563762 wrote: Robert Lustig's recent book, Fat Chance, explains it pretty well as does Gary Taubes' Good Calories Bad Calories and Why We Get Fat.

Fat Chance and Why We Get Fat are absolutely great books, well worth reading.

I don't remember who said it, but the calorie sum game is a bit like saying "this play had 500 spectators because 500 more people came into the theater then people who left."

It's not a dig BTW, but it's an important distinction. A calorie is not a calorie. Glycemic index/glycemic load, insulin levels, other hormones, I'm sure you agree there's a lot more to it than calories in/out.

Of course, we may also be guilty of "nutritionism", as explained by Michael Pollan in In Defense of Food - another good read that makes it clear that you still need to enjoy your food.