Practical Pick Up Forums
Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - Printable Version

+- Practical Pick Up Forums (http://www.practicalpickup.com/forum)
+-- Forum: General Forums (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Lifestyle, Career and Health (/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) (/showthread.php?tid=269)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - matty - 04-30-2011 11:00 PM

(04-30-2011 06:32 PM)Happy Wrote:  
(04-30-2011 12:58 PM)matty Wrote:  I will tell you that if you attempt this endeavour, you should heed Sisson's advice about keeping your fat intake high. If you attempt to keep both your fat intake low while only eating Veggie's and Fruit for carbs, your going to be absolutely miserable. I did this the first time I tried the Primal Blueprint, and by day three I was so miserable and depressed, i had to go off it. Tried it again with the fat intake bumped up....much more pleasant Smile

Yes, that can matter. But it depends on what you mean with "low fat" intake. 0.8-1.2 g/kg is a good guideline for many. Sufficient Protein and some carbs with a kcal deficit and you'll be sure to reach your fat loss goals.

I'm not sure exactly what my fat intake amounted to. On my second go around on the Primal Blueprint, I was eating my eggs with all the yolks, cooking with butter, using olive oil and never trimming fat off my meat, which made the fact that my carb intake was low much more pleasant. On the other hand, I know people who use the high protein, moderate carb plan you describe with fantastic results and they do great on it. Millage probably varies from person to person. All I know is that for me, bumping the fat up yielded significant results, and had no negative implications for weight loss.


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - Happy - 04-30-2011 11:12 PM

(04-30-2011 11:00 PM)matty Wrote:  
(04-30-2011 06:32 PM)Happy Wrote:  
(04-30-2011 12:58 PM)matty Wrote:  I will tell you that if you attempt this endeavour, you should heed Sisson's advice about keeping your fat intake high. If you attempt to keep both your fat intake low while only eating Veggie's and Fruit for carbs, your going to be absolutely miserable. I did this the first time I tried the Primal Blueprint, and by day three I was so miserable and depressed, i had to go off it. Tried it again with the fat intake bumped up....much more pleasant Smile

Yes, that can matter. But it depends on what you mean with "low fat" intake. 0.8-1.2 g/kg is a good guideline for many. Sufficient Protein and some carbs with a kcal deficit and you'll be sure to reach your fat loss goals.

I'm not sure exactly what my fat intake amounted to. On my second go around on the Primal Blueprint, I was eating my eggs with all the yolks, cooking with butter, using olive oil and never trimming fat off my meat, which made the fact that my carb intake was low much more pleasant. On the other hand, I know people who use the high protein, moderate carb plan you describe with fantastic results and they do great on it. Millage probably varies from person to person. All I know is that for me, bumping the fat up yielded significant results, and had no negative implications for weight loss.

I do get what you are saying.

There can be negative implications for some who take this "fat is good" message, that is widespread amongst the paleo community, too far and hamper their progress. Your fat intake was obviously low enough to allow an energy deficit, so the diet worked well. I did not describe a no fat approach btw, but an intake range that covers the sweet spot of fat intake for most (be it fat loss, maintenance or muscle gain).

Seen that far too often so I just wanted to provide some overall context.


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - matty - 04-30-2011 11:45 PM

(04-30-2011 11:12 PM)Happy Wrote:  
(04-30-2011 11:00 PM)matty Wrote:  
(04-30-2011 06:32 PM)Happy Wrote:  
(04-30-2011 12:58 PM)matty Wrote:  I will tell you that if you attempt this endeavour, you should heed Sisson's advice about keeping your fat intake high. If you attempt to keep both your fat intake low while only eating Veggie's and Fruit for carbs, your going to be absolutely miserable. I did this the first time I tried the Primal Blueprint, and by day three I was so miserable and depressed, i had to go off it. Tried it again with the fat intake bumped up....much more pleasant Smile

Yes, that can matter. But it depends on what you mean with "low fat" intake. 0.8-1.2 g/kg is a good guideline for many. Sufficient Protein and some carbs with a kcal deficit and you'll be sure to reach your fat loss goals.

I'm not sure exactly what my fat intake amounted to. On my second go around on the Primal Blueprint, I was eating my eggs with all the yolks, cooking with butter, using olive oil and never trimming fat off my meat, which made the fact that my carb intake was low much more pleasant. On the other hand, I know people who use the high protein, moderate carb plan you describe with fantastic results and they do great on it. Millage probably varies from person to person. All I know is that for me, bumping the fat up yielded significant results, and had no negative implications for weight loss.

I do get what you are saying.

There can be negative implications for some who take this "fat is good" message, that is widespread amongst the paleo community, too far and hamper their progress. Your fat intake was obviously low enough to allow an energy deficit, so the diet worked well. I did not describe a no fat approach btw, but an intake range that covers the sweet spot of fat intake for most (be it fat loss, maintenance or muscle gain).

Seen that far too often so I just wanted to provide some overall context.

Good point. While a don't really measure or track these, I strongly suspect your right about the calorie deficit, as I usually felt quite satiated and wasn't needing to eat as much.


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - Altitude - 05-09-2011 08:49 AM

(04-30-2011 06:41 PM)Happy Wrote:  
(04-30-2011 07:05 AM)Altitude Wrote:  
(04-30-2011 02:20 AM)Happy Wrote:  The really interesting part isn't that much what is bad for you, but what "too much" exactly is and why. And how to get people to change their behaviour.

As for what the real experts are, that depends on your goals and circumstances.
Regarding Nutrition I'd listen to Alan Aragon. Great guy, smart and knowledgeable.
Lyle Mcdonald has fantastic material as well, but he can be hard to listen to (because of his mental problems with depression, anger and the like).
Martin Berkhan has good stuff, as does Coach Hale, Emma-Leigh, James Krieger and Børge Fagerli.
But of course you don't have to know every detail to get the major benefits personally. Just do the most important things (the fundamentals) right and results will astonish you.

I think I posted some links at some point.


Hey man you sound like you know your shit when it comes to fitness. I would really really appreciate it if you can help me. I'm a skinny guy and would like to get the lean look. I think it's called ottermode or something. There's just too much info out there so if you can tell me any methods/blogs/books that'll give me the right information to get the lean look I would be very grateful.

something like this is what i'm talking about: http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/28/fightclub.php
Tongue Never heard that one before. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ottermode

It depends on where you are know and whether or not you know how to lift. How about you open a new thread with information on age, weight, bodyfat (or better a picture of your body, because many underestimate their bodyfat), strength levels, injuries/posture issues, training experience and very briefly on what you plan to do now.

Just don't forget that for most it's hard to look good with that little amount of muscle mass (and imbalanced distribution) and such low bodyfat. Brad Pitt is a special case, as he has the genes (bone+ muscle structure) to look good despite this. Thanks to make-up, lightening and the fact that it's a picture (people look more massive in pics/on screen) he looks pretty good as well.
But of course you should try abs out if you like.

Sorry for late reply broheim. I've realised I can't focus on fitness that much for the next 3 or so months because of examsSad. Anyway I found something useful for skinny guys. http://jcdfitness.com/2009/11/the-muscle-building-guide-for-skinny-guys-part-one/. This guy, I believe, is legit. And what do you mean by 'try abs out'?


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - Happy - 05-10-2011 12:59 AM

Try having abs and how your life changes when you have them. (hint: very little, but it looks neat) Many overestimate the impact that getting fit, rich etc. makes to their lives. (Still worth doing it though)

JC is one of the good guys.


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - Jon - 05-10-2011 01:07 AM

(05-10-2011 12:59 AM)Happy Wrote:  Many overestimate the impact that getting fit, rich etc. makes to their lives. (Still worth doing it though)

I agree with this if you mean guys overestimate how much more success they will get with women just because they see a washboard stomach - that said, I think many guys underestimate the benefits in life in general about being fit: more energy, get sick less, have a healthier general look, more fashion options, you do not project laziness, more self-confidence, can lead to better body language, etc.


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - Brian - 05-10-2011 08:29 AM

Actually, imo, most community guys underestimate the benefits of becoming fit.

I've looked at bodybuilding.com and it seem the guys there on average gets laid with more women than most pua...and hotter women too.


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - Happy - 05-11-2011 02:32 AM

(05-10-2011 08:29 AM)Brian Wrote:  Actually, imo, most community guys underestimate the benefits of becoming fit.

I've looked at bodybuilding.com and it seem the guys there on average gets laid with more women than most pua...and hotter women too.

Yes.

Somebody on bodybuilding.com is getting laid? Tongue

There is some truth in the stereotype of the shy, socially incompetent bodybuilder.


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - Jon - 05-11-2011 02:48 AM

What is kind of funny is that it seems like women's preference is not primarily for big and ripped. It seems to either be: big guys who are trim but not super lean, and don't have super-defined six packs (hugh jackman, javier bardem, john Hamm), or relatively lean guys who are really ripped but don't have huge muscles (ryan reynolds, brad pitt). Guys, for the most part, tend to be oblivious to this fact.


RE: Mark Sisson's blog(fitness and nutrition) - Happy - 05-11-2011 03:55 AM

I don't think being ripped will be a deal breaker. Tongue Look at Bale in American Psycho.
IMO it got more to do with the fact that movie stars have not enough time to cut down before the filming.

You can't gain the insane amounts of muscle you see in most muscle/fitness magazines without great genes AND drugs anyway. Even if you do everything right, few will be "too big" sans drugs.
Men overestimate how attractive a lot of muscle mass is (fitness mags are targeted towards men after all) and girl overestimate how thin we like them (cosmo, vogue etc.).

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/haselton/webdocs/frederickbodyimage.pdf

But when do people see your abs anyway? On the beach or only after she already chose you.

Being ripped looks pretty neat though. Wink