how to burn fat

[astrov]

Alright, this sounds like spam or malware, but I want to know the "1 weird trick" to burn belly fat (or any fat).

 

Supposedly Mark Twight discusses a method for burning fat without burning through your glycogen or blood sugar in the course of a workout in his Extreme Alpinism book, but I had to take it back to the library before I found out what it was.

 

I want to use my workouts to reduce fat and my body weight, but I don't think I can bring the kind of intensity needed to train to fully deplete my glycogen stores and start burning fat reserves. Any suggestions? (And please forgive my crude analogies and undoubtedly incorrect assumptions about metabolism and fitness ... feel free to correct as necessary)

[glassgowkiss]

It will be equally important what you eat and how you exercise. If you really want to change composition of your body, you'll need to incorporate a diet reach in protein, fat ( and I mean healthy fat, not from a cheeseburger) and eliminate simple carbohydrates. You will also need to employ a lot of weight lifting (4-5 days a week). Split your time 50/50 upper and lower body. Cardio is pretty much worthless for losing weight.

Also you'll have to deal with your stress- fat around the middle part is a sure sign of cortisol access (in vast majority of cases caused by prolonged and high levels of stress).

[mike1]

If you have a heart rate monitor, work out at or below 80% of your AT to access fat stores. If you don't have a heart rate monitor then train at a level where you can hold a conversation and you'll be in the ball park.

[glassgowkiss]

If you have a heart rate monitor, work out at or below 80% of your AT to access fat stores. If you don't have a heart rate monitor then train at a level where you can hold a conversation and you'll be in the ball park.

That is totally wrong, maybe workout like that when you are 80. Interval training and weight lifting will jack up your heart rate, period.

95% of people I observe in the gyms are just time wasting wankers, who lack motivation. I just observed crossfit comp in Vegas last months. 120 wall balls (men 20 lbs, toss it above 12ft line after full squat), 90 double unders and 30 muscle-ups- 12 minutes! People don't get six pack because they work out and can talk!

Cardio is ineffective in weight loss.

[John Frieh]

If you have a heart rate monitor, work out at or below 80% of your AT to access fat stores. If you don't have a heart rate monitor then train at a level where you can hold a conversation and you'll be in the ball park.

That is totally wrong, maybe workout like that when you are 80. Interval training and weight lifting will jack up your heart rate, period.

95% of people I observe in the gyms are just time wasting wankers, who lack motivation. I just observed crossfit comp in Vegas last months. 120 wall balls (men 20 lbs, toss it above 12ft line after full squat), 90 double unders and 30 muscle-ups- 12 minutes! People don't get six pack because they work out and can talk!

Cardio is ineffective in weight loss.

 

65% of MHR is actually ideal for optimization of the fat oxidation pathway. Jacking HR isnt a requirement for fat loss.

 

Astrov needs to be more specific about his training goals (lose fat? or fat metabolism optimization?) before anyone can recommend a "best way"

[Water]

suppose that is why runners are never very fit

must be all the stationary weightlifting and yoga stretching they do. not the hours of cardio.

 

come on now, I willingly defer that you probably have much more knowledge of human physiology but speaking in absolutes such as that cardio does nothing for fat loss is bull. maybe you mean 20 minutes a day cardio? or you're just going to say cardio at large? i had the least body fat of my life after walking 1800 miles.. exclusively cardio. wasn't the strongest I've been, but certainly the leanest.

 

 

[matt_warfield]

There is plenty of cardio in proper crossfit. Any method is only as good as your dedication to it. The world is full of people who want it to be easy. Their expectations are low and they are easily met.

[mike1]

If you have a heart rate monitor, work out at or below 80% of your AT to access fat stores. If you don't have a heart rate monitor then train at a level where you can hold a conversation and you'll be in the ball park.

That is totally wrong, maybe workout like that when you are 80. Interval training and weight lifting will jack up your heart rate, period.

95% of people I observe in the gyms are just time wasting wankers, who lack motivation. I just observed crossfit comp in Vegas last months. 120 wall balls (men 20 lbs, toss it above 12ft line after full squat), 90 double unders and 30 muscle-ups- 12 minutes! People don't get six pack because they work out and can talk!

Cardio is ineffective in weight loss.

 

65% of MHR is actually ideal for optimization of the fat oxidation pathway. Jacking HR isnt a requirement for fat loss.

 

Astrov needs to be more specific about his training goals (lose fat? or fat metabolism optimization?) before anyone can recommend a "best way"

OP was referencing Twight's Extreme Alpinism. 80% AT to access fat stores is from that book. A bit dated I guess. I'd follow John's advice

[glassgowkiss]

 

65% of MHR is actually ideal for optimization of the fat oxidation pathway. Jacking HR isnt a requirement for fat loss.

No, diet is. btw, inside the cell, you don't burn fat anyway. It's a simpleton physiology.

[Kimmo]

I want to know the "1 weird trick" to burn belly fat

 

man, it'd be pretty cool if there was some easy "trick" to burning fat from one specific section of the body, but i just don't think mammalian physiology works that way....your body won't, i don't think under any circumstances, magically utilize just belly fat for its deficit energy needs.

 

people love to complicate things, but the concept of losing fat is pretty simple: burn more calories than you consume.

 

doesn't matter how you burn them: sitting on your butt and breathing in front of the computer, running 20 miles a day, or lifting 1,000 lbs over your head 100 times.

 

the equation remains the same: burn more calories than you consume, consume less calories than you burn.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Kimmo

[astrov]

What's AT?

[rob]

http://www.rice.edu/~jenky/sports/anaerobic.threshold.html

[layton]

there are a LOT of factors and I apologize I don't have time to comment more than but wanted to chime in on the whole fat burning range.

 

You burn more percentage fat than when utilizing your aerobic metabolism the most but burn more total fuel when you spend more energy. So although you may burn the most fat at rest (theoreticaly) you are expending the least amount of calories. At high levels of exertion you are expending more calories, but burning a lower percentage of fat. How much fat you burn in total and what % fat you burn are the same thing.

 

The trick is to train your body to utilze fat at higher outputs, nutrient timing, increased caloric expenditure, and reducing caloric intake.

 

Focus on eating well, being fit, and being healthy in all forms of wellness gradually, instead of losing weight.

 

...or just turn the A/C on full blast in your t-shirt, take a lot of cold showers, eat carbs in the a.m. and not at dinner, don't go out for lunch, don't drink calories, keep a journal, and have one cheat day a week, exercise at least 30-60min every single day, and keep track of your daily weight but only compare by the month.

 

[rob]

For burning fat running is best exercise.

 

Citation please

[Kimmo]

The trick is to train your body to utilze fat at higher outputs, nutrient timing, increased caloric expenditure, and reducing caloric intake.

 

is it possible to "train" the body to utilize fats at "higher outputs"? my understanding is that the body will utilize what's available and the easiest to use. meaning: first glycogen, then fats, and finally and last (starvation), lean body tissues. I don't think it's as static and defined as that, but in general....

 

I think it's generally understood that the quickest way to "fat utilization" as the primary energy source for humanoids is to stop all consumption of carbs (actually fasting is, but not realistic if wishing to continue to train). it's hard, and the body goes through an adaptation period, but after a few days, primarily turns fat into ketone bodies for energy. fascinating stuff, really. if i remember right, ketones are an acetate, similar to acetone you buy at the store for cleaning paint etc., very volatile, with some lost through the breath because of its volatility (that's why someone who's fasting for a few days, or eating no or really low carbs, gets a chemical smell in their breath). extreme northern clime peoples were almost always in a ketogenic state, since their diet was what, 95% animal fats and protein....

 

but again, if you eat more calories than you use, generally speaking, you store it as fat. doesn't really matter where the calories come from.

 

 

 

[glassgowkiss]

There are a lot of factors, all interacting with each other. One of the biggest obstacles people struggle with is lack of muscle tissue.

 

"Glycolysis involves breaking glucose (sugar) into two pyruvate molecules, with the corresponding release of ATP. Also as a result of the reaction, high energy electrons are produced that must be picked up by a special compound (NAD) that carries electrons around in the cell. What happens next depends on whether oxygen is available or not. If no oxygen is available (anaerobic), the NAD eventually becomes saturated with electrons and the cell must find a way to get them off the NAD. It can do this either by converting pyruvate to ethyl alcohol (yeast cells) or to lactic acid (many animal cells, including human muscle cells). The result is that NAD is regenerated, more glucose is split in half, and more ATP is produced. Anaerobic glycolysis occurs in muscle cells when oxygen can't be delivered fast enough. But this is only a temporary solution to the energy needs of the cell. Both lactic acid and ethyl alcohol can interfere with cell function when they reach high concentrations--leading to fatigue of muscles and death of yeast cells. If oxygen is available, then the pyruvate is transported to the mitochondria where it is burned to produce ATP during aerobic respiration.

 

Aerobic respiration involves stripping high energy electrons (associated with carbon-hydrogen bonds) from organic compounds (including carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids) and using the energy to make ATP. Aerobic respiration takes place inside the mitochondria.

Pyruvate is converted, through a complex cycle of reactions (called the Kreb's cycle) into carbon dioxide (CO2) and NADH (a compound carrying the high energy electrons). These reactions take place in the middle of the mitochondria (the matrix) and results in the production of lots of high energy NADH.

 

The electron transport system is a system of molecules found in the inner membrane of the mitochondria that convert the energy of NADH into ATP..

 

So where does the oxygen come in? Oxygen is the final electron acceptor that picks up the "energetically spent" electrons as they come tumbling out of the electron transport system. The compound produced when this happens is water. For many desert animals, this metabolic water is the primary source of water in their water balance."

Some animals have what is called "brown fat" and it can burn it in that tissue. Humans (beyond infancy) can do this process in muscle only. Hence if a person doesn't have enough muscle mass developed, the whole "eat less and exercise more" principle goes out through the window.

 

[glassgowkiss]

BTW, looking for answers on bb such as this (where everyone is an "expert") is by far the worst avenue to get answers. My advice is, find a good trainer, sit down with him/her. Make a plan, change your eating habits, and follow the plan.

[Off_White]

Yeah, but that approach costs money, and is arguably less entertaining.

 

Here's a good attempt:

 

[video:youtube]

[Kimmo]

if a person doesn't have enough muscle mass developed, the whole "eat less and exercise more" principle goes out through the window.

 

huh? not sure how your citations above really address the OP's question about "tricks to lose belly fat".

 

-firstly, i don't think there are any "tricks";

 

-secondly, you can be a skinny guy with no muscles and very low body fat (hence, low belly fat), and you can be a muscular guy with low body fat (hence, low belly fat).

 

if low belly fat is the goal, the actual goal, then it's pretty easy: consume less calories than you burn.

[jon]

BTW, looking for answers on bb such as this (where everyone is an "expert") is by far the worst avenue to get answers.

 

You paste a bunch of garbage about the molecular biology of metabolism and then say this.

[Kimmo]

BTW, looking for answers on bb such as this (where everyone is an "expert") is by far the worst avenue to get answers. My advice is, find a good trainer, sit down with him/her. Make a plan, change your eating habits, and follow the plan.

 

problem is finding a "good" trainer. most are probably busy working with high caliber athletes.

[Kimmo]

BTW, looking for answers on bb such as this (where everyone is an "expert") is by far the worst avenue to get answers.

 

You paste a bunch of garbage about the molecular biology of metabolism and then say this.

 

it is a conundrum:

 

he gives advice, then says all advice is terrible.

 

i suppose this would include not only his initial advice, but the advice about all advice being terrible?

[layton]

there are flaws in the eat less and exercise, i.e. more calories out than in, method. I think (didn't really read it) what bob is saying is that more muscle = more mitochondria to burn fuel. You can die of starvation and still be fat as fuck.

 

I think this advice "For burning fat running is best exercise. It is also good to drink lot of water in a day because water burns all calories and fat easily. With eating fruits and vegetables we can burn fat because these are best diet food." is what you could get if you wind up with an idiot for a trainer/nutritionist.

[Kimmo]

there are flaws in the eat less and exercise, i.e. more calories out than in, method.

 

the fastest way to lose fat is to not eat, and burn as many calories as you can. now that might have flaws.... but can you think of anything faster? oh, liposuction.

 

I think (didn't really read it) what bob is saying is that more muscle = more mitochondria to burn fuel.

 

yeah more muscles burn more calories, sure, but not sure how building muscles would be the fastest way to lose fat.

 

You can die of starvation and still be fat as fuck.

 

really? citation needed. i think the above would require a creative definition for "starvation"?

 

google "longest water fast". something like 300 days i think it was. obese dude, lost over 200 lbs.

 

 

[jon]

I want to know the "1 weird trick" to burn belly fat (or any fat).

 

I haven't read Mark's book but I've read some of his stuff on his site and what John and Mike1 are telling you are more or less correct based on my experience.

 

To preface, this isn't much help unless you are in moderately good shape, have cleaned up your eating, and provide sufficient recovery between workout. You also should be doing a lot other then this.

 

~1-2 hours 2x per week hard endurance effort, either running, hiking, cycling. Closer to 2 hours is better. I think 80% AT is conservative, increase to 95% over time. Cyclists call this a tempo workout. You are going to suffer a lot at first, you won't be wanting to talk to anyone. You will need to consume a lot of sugars when you first start to keep your blood sugar up. As time passes you will require less and less sugar, eventually being able to do the whole workout without much if any and that is when you know you have made serious progress because you are now able to rely on the oxidation of your fat stores to fuel yourself.

 

I suggest you do it on one or two set routes you know well, know how hard to go where. The goal it to tax your endurance system not crash it and bonk.

 

You should see a huge decrease on your route time as well. Once you have had say a 20% improvement in time without much sugar throw in some bits added intensity like spending a few minutes above AT or short sprints.

 

I call this my Catalyst workout and I swear by it. It targets your fat oxidation but also your neuromuscular and glycogen stores. When I do this I see huge gains in everything: endurance, fat loss, ability to do longer interval workouts. But you have to learn to embrace the suffering in it.