Comments on: Are Your Workouts Making You Fat?

By: Brad Campbell

Brad Campbell — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 21:25:01 +0000

Jake, that's awesome to hear - very good progress so far. Here are some recipes I have up on the site, in case you missed them: ---> Strawberry Lean Body Shake ---> Pineapple Lean Body Shake Let me know if you have any requests in terms of ingredients or anything. But anything I post on this site will promote lean muscle gains, without adding fat. -b

By: jake

jake — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 10:07:27 +0000

hey brad im doin fine ive done a lot of training and ive loss 9 kg. in 3 1/2 months now im 72 kg in weight i wanna know how can i make protein shakes to boost up my muscles??? can u give me advice and tips brad thanks im waitin for your reply…

By: Brad Campbell

Brad Campbell — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:40:06 +0000

haha, I agree with you…nice when girls don’t take offense to my pics and rather see it as motivation :)

-b

By: Nadia

Nadia — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 06:43:10 +0000

This is unrelated, but the girl in the first picture has the most amazing derriere I have ever seen!

By: Brad Campbell

Brad Campbell — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:02:19 +0000

great summary Scott – afterburn is a tactic that you’ve practically mastered by now and I know your body has changed a lot already thanks to this concept. looking forward to seeing the finished masterpiece in a few months.

-b

By: Brad Campbell

Brad Campbell — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:59:28 +0000

hey raul – i’m not sure what you are disagreeing with? a calorie deficit will lead to fat loss – like Scott summed up, the point of this study was that a 60-min low intensity workout did not produce ANY afterburn effect and may even lead to slight fat gain when the subjects “refueled” post-workout (meaning they took back in the cals they burnt off during the workout).

yes, the fat burning heart rate is more of a sales pitch and/or misused phrase (similar to people saying that muscle weighs more than fat) that the general public is confused about. good distinctions there, man.

thx for the feedback.

-b

By: Brad Campbell

Brad Campbell — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:50:42 +0000

hey Tom, it’s depressing, huh? long and slow cardio just doesn’t do a lot for you in terms of making you look better. with everything else in place it can be a nice way to burn some extra cals “during” the workout, but of course you have to maintain a nice sized calorie deficit to see the rewards of this.

-b

By: Brad Campbell

Brad Campbell — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:48:35 +0000

thx Jenna :)

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:11:44 +0000

I think the point was that there was a study done at the University of Colorado in which the results pointed to little to no afterburn effect after performing low-impact cardio and that the 300-400 calories expired for the exercise is easily negated by the intake of perhaps a sports drink, a few cookies, or some other off-diet calories coonsumed as a reward. The end result being that for your efforts you could be worse off (fatter) than having done noting at all.

Hence the value of Brad’s recommended workouts– short and promoting afterburn for a longer period of fat oxidation. Makes sense to me.

By: raul

raul — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:43:21 +0000

i disagree with this,
in my opinion its all about calorie deficit,
if you just eat less what you burn you will lose fat no matter what, you even can lose fat without even exercising,( theory)

people just want to hear the right words,

- There is no such thing as a fat-burning pulserate for losing weight

- You shouldn’t be considering your heartrate when doing a training for losing weight

- Losing weight is about achieving a calorie-deficit, not about doing cardio at a so called “fat burning pulse rate”

- The more intensive your training is, the higher your calorie-deficit will be. The so called fat burning pulse rate is too low for being efficient in generating a substantial calorie-deficit.

- The major part of losing weight is the “afterburner-effect” which lasts for hours after your training and the more intensive your training was, the more fat will be burnt in those hours after your training. Training at fat burning pulse rate burns more fat *during* training, but its “afterburner-effect” will be much lower than when you train at a pulse of 150 or even more. So the “relative amount of fat burning” will be higher when you do the fatburning pulse rate. But the “absolute amount” of burnt fat will be much higher if you exceed that pulse rate and do more intensive training.

- You have to differentiate between fat-burning and fat-reducing. Fat burning is what you achieve best if you train at the fat burning pulse rate. But actual fat reducing (which involves not only the training but also the hours after the training) is much higher if you maximise the intensity of your training beyond the fat burning pulse rate. (Anyone who is a little used to running knows that running at 120-130 bpm is not intensive. )

- Doing the 30 minutes-at-fatburning-pulserate type of training (as you can often see it in the fitness centers) is not effective if you really want to lose weight