Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

my girl is having a problem losing the last 20lbs.

leaning out women is no different tast then men, same rules apply

take her current bodyweight and multiply it by 10

150*10=1500 this is how many calories per day you will have her consume

those calories should come:

60%protein
30%carbs
10%fats

1500*.6=900/4=225g of protein
1500*.3=450/4=113g of carbs
1500*.1=150/9=17g fats

thats it

throw in your t-3, do cardio, some weight training and watch her lean out within a matter of weeks
 
Fuck all the ratios of protein, carbs, fats. Just have her due what she is doing now. Forget any Anavar or t3 hormones. Just have her try a new diet, a REAL simple one for 6 weeks and she will drop 10-20 lbs. Your answer? ATKINS, with one carb up day. Period, end. Her weight WILL come off.
 
gwl9dta4 said:
Fuck all the ratios of protein, carbs, fats. Just have her due what she is doing now. Forget any Anavar or t3 hormones. Just have her try a new diet, a REAL simple one for 6 weeks and she will drop 10-20 lbs. Your answer? ATKINS, with one carb up day. Period, end. Her weight WILL come off.

so all it takes to loose weight is cutting out the carbs? NO NO NO

its energyIN-energyOUT=energyACCUMILATED, you take in less then you take out you will end up with negetive accumilation term hence you will lose weight,

YOU CAN EAT ZERO CARBS PER DAY, BUT IF YOU EAT MORE CALORIES THEN YOU BURN YOU WILL GAIN WEIGHT, NOT LOOSE IT
 
serge said:


so all it takes to loose weight is cutting out the carbs? NO NO NO

its energyIN-energyOUT=energyACCUMILATED, you take in less then you take out you will end up with negetive accumilation term hence you will lose weight,

YOU CAN EAT ZERO CARBS PER DAY, BUT IF YOU EAT MORE CALORIES THEN YOU BURN YOU WILL GAIN WEIGHT, NOT LOOSE IT

Yeah, but eating 1500 calories worth of chicken is going to fill me up a hell of a lot more than 1500 calories of rice cakes.

Gotta look at the physiology behind the diet, instead of just saying "Duh.. more calories in than out."
 
serge said:


so all it takes to loose weight is cutting out the carbs? NO NO NO

its energyIN-energyOUT=energyACCUMILATED, you take in less then you take out you will end up with negetive accumilation term hence you will lose weight,

YOU CAN EAT ZERO CARBS PER DAY, BUT IF YOU EAT MORE CALORIES THEN YOU BURN YOU WILL GAIN WEIGHT, NOT LOOSE IT


Never that simple. There are other factors, many other factors. Take insulin resistance/production as an example. 2000 calories from fat is NOT equal to 2000 calories from sugar in terms of physiciological responce from the body.
 
gwl9dta4 said:



2000 calories from fat is NOT equal to 2000 calories from sugar in terms of physiciological responce from the body.

no shit, but the fact still remain you eat more then you burn you will gain weight regardless where those cals come from
 
swimmar said:


Yeah, but eating 1500 calories worth of chicken is going to fill me up a hell of a lot more than 1500 calories of rice cakes.

Gotta look at the physiology behind the diet, instead of just saying "Duh.. more calories in than out."

yeah, and you can eat plenty of carbs everyday and as long as you take your ALA you will remain in ketosis too, RIGHT?

what a joke
 
serge said:


no shit, but the fact still remain you eat more then you burn you will gain weight regardless where those cals come from


Not necessarily, when matabolic shifts occur in your metabilism you may be burning higher ammounts of cals. I can get away with eating WAY more calories on the atkins diet then with a standard diet that includes carbs, why? Most likely insulin is the major coulprit. Also depending on the type of calories that you injest leads to different stimulating effects on your t3 levels, further shifting your metabolism to perform at different levels of efficinecy. It's all diet diet diet.

And it's never as simple as calories in = calories out, as that is really oversimplifying it.
 
Top Bottom