Advise Please Intermitting Fasting vs high Protein Diet

Duplicate post

padser wrote: »

Are you referring to this course?

https://www.ucd.ie/sportandfitness/courses/personaltrainingcourse/

It's not a university course or qualification. It has no entry requirements (literally you book a place by paying online). It is taught 6 hours a week on Saturday over 2 semesters (ie 24 weeks). That's roughly the equivalent of spending 3 to 4 weeks studying something full time.

You can choose to do the same course "full time" which is three days per week and appears to the exact same content with the addition of a "pilates instructor" qualification.

I'm just curious, when you refer to your qualification, is it this or something else you are referring to?

Oops sorry ..yes it was the full time version of the course.

I am aware its not a university level qualification i stated as much.

I guess it must be rubbish then.

padser wrote: »

So...the only full time PT course I can see in UCD is the full time version of the one I just linked to.

Its 9 to 4:15, 3 days per week for 2 semesters.

Its the same content as the one I posted with the exception of the addition of a pilates qualification.

If it's not that one, would you mind sending me a link to the course you took?

Read my updated post.

Its changed since my course.

The full time one was more hrs when i did it.

Its perfectly fine if you wish to dismiss the qualification as rubbish.

And its certainly NOT a university qualification.

TBH I would have a lot of bad things to say about the course myself. And the teachers.

Anyway.

I am rather disappointed with my behavior on this forum.

Tonight has brought out my shadow side.

I apologize to Mellow and AUF..and anyone else.


I shall keep things lighter.

Dtp1979 wrote: »

Iloveyourvibes, thank you. You are the gift that keeps on giving.

Mellor wrote: »

I never said anything of the sort.
Whenever, you seem make up a lot of things that wgere never said.

I said it inserts on the patella. It does.
I didn’t say it attached without a tendon (quadriceps tendon btw) that would be silly.


Origin/Insertion site is the attachment to the bone. The muscle to tendon connection is called the musculotendinous junction.

Example: the extensor digitorum muscles joins to a tendon in the forearm. But the insertion, is the the fingers. It doesn’t have a forearm insertion

Perfecto!

16:8 is probably the most sustanable form of IF because your really only cutting out breakfast , you could have a light protein shake for breakfast if you wanted which would only be 200 calories but the lunch and dinner meals can be absolutely massive as long as you choose good wholesome food and dont go hog wild on fat macros here an example. Theres nothing magical about being in a fasted state, its just an easier way to basically eat in a deficet

7am-Light breakfast 200 cal protein shake


1PM-Lunch 2 baked potatoes 2 or 3 grilled chicken breasts and a pile of veg


8pm-Dinner 2 baked potatoes , 250g of salmon or steak pile of veg


Baked potatoes are one of the best dieting foods because they are the no 1 most satiating food on the planet

That diet above has about 2200 calories but you can adjust depending on current stats and goals

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I'm not sure if that was intended to be an example of 16:8....

In reverse...

Minime2.5 wrote: »

And ?. If there is something your unsure of It's better to ask a question as opposed to making a statement

16:8 is fast for 16 and eat during an 8 hour window. The window in your example is 13 hours, starting at 7am and last meal beginning at 8pm, so actually longer than 13 by the time you finish eating. So where does 16:8 come into it?

A protein shake of 200 calories in the morning with 2 big lunch and dinner meals of 1000 calories technically doesn't make it 16/8 but I did alure to this in what I wrote. Also I also mentioned there's no magic in being in a fast as state. You could eat 2 meals a day or 6 meals a day if calories and macros are equal than it makes **** all difference. IF is just a way to make being in a deficet easier

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

I'm unsure of your maths. Also a little unsure why the response was so narky.

7am - 8pm is 13hrs. That's all. No need to take it so seriously

Apologies. I'm always on the defensive when I post on these boards as there are quite a number of assholes

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Isn't that just the way normal people eat?

I usually stop eating around 7. Just habit and I won't sleep well on a full stomach.

Maybe but the point was in relation to a 16:8 IF.

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

ALL CALORIE DEFICITS DO RESULT IN MUSCLE LOSS....:rolleyes:

Its rare for people to lose fat without losing some if not equal parts muscle.

In even the most protein rich diet while lifting it is inevitable that you will lose some muscle.

I used to hear this a lot, some going so far as to say it was a 100% impossibility.

I remained a steady 12stone for a long time while losing fat and gaining muscle. I was on a poor diet (I did have some protein shakes) and getting drunk 3-4 times a week, and only lifting weights casually at home. I saw several others say the same (maybe not the drinking!). I started out much heavier and was lifting all along, so had reasonable muscle mass when I hit the 12stone.

As is it certainly not rare to find somebody who is overfat with below optimal muscle mass I would think this should be common enough.

Have you seen any studies showing where overfat people with lower than average muscle mass could not put on muscle and lose fat at the same time while doing resistance training? I'd be very interested to read about it.

I always wondered where this idea of it being a rare occurrence came from. If people were saying it for pro bodybuilders with stupidly high amounts of muscle and very low fat then it would make more sense, I guess the body would struggle to put on more muscle that it might not detect as being really necessary, esp. as it might be trying to put on more fat as it might be benficial. But THESE people are more rare than Beergut Johnny sitting at home all day not lifting a finger. I have absolutely no doubt that the bulk & cut cycles bodybuilders do is a more efficient way of building muscle over the course of a year or 2, that is not in question.

This page links several studies

https://mennohenselmans.com/gain-muscle-and-lose-fat-at-the-same-time/


Overweight (26% body fat) police officers starting a weight training program lost 9.3 pounds of fat and gained 8.8 pounds of lean body mass in 12 weeks.

Also more interesting it has studies on lean muscular people doing the same which I had not seen before.

One study looked at elite gymnasts. These were national level athletes with a training volume of 30 hours a week. They could do 17 pull-ups where their chest touched the bar (try doing 1). They were put on a 1,971 calorie, ketogenic diet. In case it wasn’t obvious, that’s pretty drastic for someone training over 4 hours a day. Their fat percentage of 7.6% dropped to 5% – lower than many bodybuilders in contest shape – in 30 days. Even under these conditions, they gained 0.9 pounds of lean body mass. And don’t forget they must have lost a lot of glycogen and water eating just 22 grams of carbs a day.

rubadub wrote: »

I used to hear this a lot, some going so far as to say it was a 100% impossibility.

I remained a steady 12stone for a long time while losing fat and gaining muscle. I was on a poor diet (I did have some protein shakes) and getting drunk 3-4 times a week, and only lifting weights casually at home. I saw several others say the same (maybe not the drinking!). I started out much heavier and was lifting all along, so had reasonable muscle mass when I hit the 12stone.

Well done lucky for some!

But may I ask what age you were? Also might genetics play a part?

Also might gender play a part?

And you mentioned you were lifting thus stimulating muscle growth.

A lot of people on these diets don't exercise AT ALL.

rubadub wrote: »

I don't think it's luck at all, seems it's the norm, from reading those studies I would consider myself very unlucky if it didn't happen.

It happened to me also. over a long period of steady muscle gain and fat loss.
Dexa verified.


It's obviously not optimal in terms of speed of results.

This is nothing new, I have heard loads of times before. Some said 100% impossible, like it defied some scientific law.

If you can find some study with overweight people doing resistance training, with below average or average muscle mass, cannot put on muscle while losing fat I would be interested to see it. I always wondered where this dogma came from.

The science law part is quoted by people not understanding that law, or at least how to balance equations.There's never positive of negative energy, it's always zero.

The assumption i that you can't add and take away energy simultaneously.
When you are actually taking from one, and adding to the other. Which is fine from a physics point of view.