can't get rid of my pot-belly :( help

yosser hughes

Roger Marbles wrote: »

The title of the thread is titled "can't get rid of my pot belly" maybe?

Running up to 15 miles a week? I think the exercise side of thing here has been already taken care of tbf.

You can run 15 miles a week and not exert yourself at all.It depends.

TommyKnocker

yosser hughes wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong,but the OP wrote that he didn't need to lose weight. He says he is 5ft 6" and weighs 10st 11lbs. I actually think that IS overweight to be honest.

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

I am also 5' 6" tall, male, 48 yrs old and 12 st 7 lb with 12% BF and a 31" waist and although I don't have a 6 pack I do have a flat, tight, hard stomach. And I am FAR from over weight

Mellor

TommyKnocker wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

I am also 5' 6" tall, male, 48 yrs old and 12 st 7 lb with 12% BF and a 31" waist and although I don't have a 6 pack I do have a flat, tight, hard stomach. And I am FAR from over weight

Being over weight has nothing to do with your actual bodyweight. Althoguh it can be a good indicator

At 5'6" and 175lbs, TK above is prab in good shape. 12% bf is a good clue.
But somebody else could be this weight at be carrying lots of excess fat.

unless there are grossly overweight, you can't reall tell with out seeing pictures, or a BF% measurement

yosser hughes

TommyKnocker wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

I am also 5' 6" tall, male, 48 yrs old and 12 st 7 lb with 12% BF and a 31" waist and although I don't have a 6 pack I do have a flat, tight, hard stomach. And I am FAR from over weight

Good for you Tommy:D Congratulations:)
You don't have a pot -belly though so it's not relevant.

Roger Marbles

yosser hughes wrote: »

You can run 15 miles a week and not exert yourself at all.It depends.

If 15 miles walking, let alone jogging or running isn't enough exercise to lose weight then I don't know what is.

Some of the responses in this thread are :eek: tbh.

It's clear the OP is stressed out and is eating a very poor diet (carb centred, processed food, very little natural food (veg/meat/fish).. some proper dietary advice (eat meat, veg, ditch the grains) and relaxation advice would be faaaaaar more suitable than you gotta run more or at greater intensity (great, more stressful running) and would actually lead to the OP losing the pot belly completely and make the OP happier with himself.

noworries

Roger Marbles wrote: »

If 15 miles walking, let alone jogging or running isn't enough exercise to lose weight then I don't know what is.

According to my trusty auld Garmin

15 miles walking at a leisurely pace of 3mph is 1,300 cals burned (approx)
15 miles cycled is approx 800cals
15 miles jogged is approx 2,100 cals

A pound of body fat is approx 3,500 cals.

Depending on your goals 15 miles a week aerobic is sfa in exercise terms.


Move more, lift more, eat right. All your dreams will come true. ;-)

Roger Marbles

noworries wrote: »

According to my trusty auld Garmin

15 miles walking at a leisurely pace of 3mph is 1,300 cals burned (approx)
15 miles cycled is approx 800cals
15 miles jogged is approx 2,100 cals

A pound of body fat is approx 3,500 cals.

Depending on your goals 15 miles a week aerobic is sfa in exercise terms.


Move more, lift more, eat right. All your dreams will come true. ;-)

The whole pound of body fat = approx 3500 calories is nonsense given that human beings aren't closed systems and thus cannot be considered in similar ways to other thermodynamic closed systems where calories in actually does equivocate to calories out.

Even using your calorie argument, the OP should have seen some success by now given he's been "running 15 miles for a few weeks".

Discussion of how many calories or what exercise shouldn't even be the main issue here. It's clearly dietary and stress (cortisol and other hormones could be out of sync here and worth noting)

Eat right and relax>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lift heavy stuff>>>>>>>chronic cardio

noworries

Roger Marbles wrote: »

The whole pound of body fat = approx 3500 calories is nonsense given that human beings aren't closed systems and thus cannot be considered in similar ways to other thermodynamic closed systems where calories in actually does equivocate to calories out.

Even using your calorie argument, the OP should have seen some success by now given he's been "running 15 miles for a few weeks".

Discussion of how many calories or what exercise shouldn't even be the main issue here. It's clearly dietary and stress (cortisol and other hormones could be out of sync here and worth noting)

Eat right and relax>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>lift heavy stuff>>>>>>>chronic cardio

What part of the abbreviation 'approx' do you have a problem with?:rolleyes:For a general discussion on an internet forum, just go with me here, 3,500 is a close enough approximation.

My post was to illustrate that 15 miles of cardio a week, in the grand scheme of things, is not that much - I would hardly call it 'chronic cardio'

Diet will be the major element in sculpting the OP but not the only element - I think we can all agree there.

Roger Marbles

A close approximation to what actually? :rolleyes:

The figure is a myth based on unsound scientific reasoning and serves no purpose to this or any weight loss debate

noworries

Roger Marbles wrote: »

A close approximation to what actually? :rolleyes:

The figure is a myth based on unsound scientific reasoning and serves no purpose to this or any weight loss debate

OK , say I decrease my calorie intake by 500 cals a day. What will happen in a week?

Roger Marbles

noworries wrote: »

OK , say I decrease my calorie intake by 500 cals a day. What will happen in a week?

What relevance has this got to do with your original assumption that 3500 calories = 1 pound of body fat?

Where did you pull the 3500 out of? Why is it just one pound of fat and not any lean body mass if you deduct 3500 cals from your diet every week? Where's the scientific evidence here?

The point is that counting calories or points etc needlessly overcomplicates what can be an already daunting process for people who wish to lose bodyfat.

I agree in general with your original post (body fat loss is a combination of eating less, lift more and moving more), but this thread is about a particular person and their advice should be tailored for them. They are already moving enough, but their diet clearly needs some work. Hence, the advice of run harder etc to someone who is stressed and hasn't seen any results from running so far (and for good reason) is terrible advice.

yammycat

Roger Marbles wrote: »

The whole pound of body fat = approx 3500 calories is nonsense given that human beings aren't closed systems

You could say that about any food, coca cola, big macs, brocolli, if we don't know how many calories are in fat we also don't know how many calories are in any other food, so any talk about diet is out the window.

Roger Marbles

yammycat wrote: »

You could say that about any food, coca cola, big macs, brocolli, if we don't know how many calories are in fat we also don't know how many calories are in any other food, so any talk about diet is out the window.

Not at all. You misunderstood, we don't know how many calories "burning one pound of bodyfat" requires. It's also needless when it comes to bodyfat loss as manipulation of the body's own biochemistry through particular dietary measures is much more important.

Btw, are you going to avoid the issue completely or provide evidence to back up your own previous line of argument below?

yammycat wrote: »

a protein heavy diet is not a healthy diet.

Transform

yammycat wrote: »

his diet was decent, he is eating at maintenance, he doesn't need a protein heavy diet he isn't a weightlifter, carbs are brilliant, only obese people eating greater than maintenance need to worry about carbs which is not the case here.

Glaring reasons such as he was having the odd biscuit, again there's nothing wrong with biscuits if you are not eating above maintenance.


spoken as if exercise was some kind of torture, again I have to check if I am on a fitness board.

I also wouldn't acknowledge that eating two rolls of tp a day to reduce calorie intake without worrying about satiety would do the same trick. He does not need lots of protein and really eating tp would be just as useful as large amounts of protein but a lot cheaper.


the single most objectionable thing I have ever read on a fitness forum, and I've been on a few.

if you had been on a few you would understand by now that for the average person its sort your flippin' nutrition out FIRST!!

SECOND - did you sort your nutrition out yet?

THIRD - NO you dont need slimming pills, weight watchers points, power plates or protein shakes. Why? Because you didnt sort your diet out yet.

FOURTH - take some exercise you enjoy. A weights program done for 20-30mins 2-3 days a week and some walking/jogging/cycling, playing a sport would be ideal

FIFTH - no coming back after one week wondering why you are not in beach body shape. It took time to put it on so its not coming off in a week.

yammycat

Btw, are you going to avoid the issue completely or provide evidence to back up your own previous line of argument below?

The negative side effects of a low to no carb diet are well known, google it, and include lethargy, bad breath, constipation, impaired brain function, kidney problems, brittle bones, high cholesterol, heart disease etc

Roger Marbles

yammycat wrote: »

The negative side effects of a low to no carb diet are well known, google it, and include lethargy, bad breath, constipation, impaired brain function, kidney problems, brittle bones, high cholesterol, heart disease etc

Firstly, I would like to see studies of this proof. If you are going to debate nutritional issues as tiresomely as you do with spurious claims, then have the courtesy to your fellow forummers by backing up your claims rather than telling people to go 'google' it.

Otherwise, and I'd advise this, cease from handing out advice in threads like this as you are doing more harm than good peddling your recycled diet myths.

Secondly, we weren't debating low carb diets, we were debating your assertion that high protein diets are unhealthy and once again you've avoided it. Third time lucky?

Here I will get you started:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10578207

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12055318

yammycat

Roger Marbles wrote: »

Secondly, we weren't debating low carb diets, we were debating your assertion that high protein diets are unhealthy and once again you've avoided it. Third time lucky?

The advice given to op was stop eating carbs and eat protein, thats a low carb diet.

I never said a high protein diet was unhealthy I said a protein heavy diet was, as in all your calories are coming from protein sources, thats a low carb diet and a protein heavy one.

Given the theme of the thread I would have thought that was all fairly obvious.

Roger Marbles

yammycat wrote: »

The advice given to op was stop eating carbs and eat protein, thats a low carb diet.

I never said a high protein diet was unhealthy I said a protein heavy diet was, as in all your calories are coming from protein sources, thats a low carb diet and a protein heavy one.

Given the theme of the thread I would have thought that was all fairly obvious.

Wow. This is either a clever wind up or I don't know.

Nowhere in this thread has the OP been advised to "stop eating carbs". He's been advised to give up refined carboyhydrate sources and concentrate on natural sources such as vegetables and a moderate amount of fruit.

Are you aware that they count as carbohydrates too? So it's not low carb.

Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about at all and are just clinging to your misconceptions rather than see what's in front of your eyes. The worrying thing this doesn't stop you from peddling ill-informed advice and throwing out side-effects of "protein heavy diets" that don't actually exist. Even worse, it doesn't stop you from castigating other people's good advice either..."I've never read such an objectionable thing" etc.

I'm out.

yammycat

Roger Marbles wrote: »

Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about at all

I advised op exercise more, which we can all agree is safe.Taking advice from randoms on an anonymous messageboard about what to eat or not to eat is not a good idea and can have serious repercussions for anyone foolish enough to take the advice, regardless of whether the poster thinks he knows what he is talking about.

If they have real concerns about their diet they should see a dietitian.

I would advise OP not to change his diet based on anything he has read here and go see the dietitian if he is not willing to lose the weight by working harder.

Roger Marbles

I suggest you read the forum charter before future posting, particularly the very first point:

Please get your facts straight
A general rule that we all should try to live by, but invariably do not. However in this forum misinformation could have fairly tangible consequences. We will all make mistakes and we will all disagree with some things as the best approach, however if you post truly idiotic or dangerous advice it will be removed. In debates try to back your points with existing literature if available. Do not post unfounded allegations or state potential links if you cannot defend them.

woodchopper

Zamboni wrote: »

Your pot belly is excess fat.
Exercise will not fix this.
Diet will.
Combat the in between meal problem area and it should improve.

Complete and utter nonsense. I know many athletes who eat worse than this guy and have a stomach which is as flat as a good pancake. Whilst you may hate enduranace athletes have you ever seen them with a pot belly despite the fact that they eat twice the amount others do. Why? Because they exercise. If you exercise every day of the week than you will not have a pot belly. Running 15 miles a week will not stop it.

yammycat

Roger Marbles wrote: »

I suggest you read the forum charter before future posting, particularly the very first point:

I thought you were out ?

Couldn't help but try to get the last say in, I think concern about the op has long since passed and it's now about ego, amirite ?

Regardless of any links you can post, long after many spurious claims of your own mind, it's not your place to advice people about diet, especially from a few lines they have posted,

why not leave it to professionals, those who have actually studied the material and hold a qualification.

I think we can all agree that would be for the best.

I am out now, have a good day.

cc87

yammycat wrote: »

why not leave it to professionals, those who have actually studied the material and hold a qualification.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

As an aside of sorts, qualifications and being a professional mean sweet F.A. in this area.

Some of the most knowledgeable people I know in this area are people who have studied it out of pure interest and hobbies. Fair enough some have gone on to become professionals (and successful ones at that) but the point is experience is all that matters not college degrees or NCEFs, etc.

Brian?

Yammycat and Rogermarbles, give it up the pair of you. None of that nonsense is helping the OP.

Zamboni

woodchopper wrote: »

If you exercise every day of the week than you will not have a pot belly.

You are entirely wrong.




Ps: I don't hate endurance athletes

Transform

yammycat i think you need to read the stickies

woodchopper

Zamboni wrote: »

You are entirely wrong.




Ps: I don't hate endurance athletes

Name one elite endurance athlete who has a pot belly?

Zamboni

woodchopper wrote: »

Name one elite endurance athlete who has a pot belly?

I don't need to.
Your premise is wrong.
You don't seem to understand the difference between causation and correlation.

woodchopper

Zamboni wrote: »

I don't need to.
Your premise is wrong.
You don't seem to understand the difference between causation and correlation.

No You are missing the point sunshine! You said exercise alone will not get rid of a pot belly, while I have evidence to suggest that excessive exercise ie cycling 500 mile a week will indeed get rid of a pot belly regardless of diet. Whilst the OP may not be able to this, it is still possible that exericise alone will do this.

Reading too many American fitness gurus perhaps?

TommyKnocker

woodchopper wrote: »

Name one elite endurance athlete who has a pot belly?

Elite Endurance Athletes should not be used to justify your point. An elite endurance athlete will have a whole team of support folks consisting of trainers, nutritionists, physios, possibly their own chef etc, and their physique will be as a result of a top notch dialed in diet coupled with top notch dialed in training regime.

Also Elite Competitors in any sport are genetically gifted. This is why there are only a few truly elite athletes in any sporting discipline.

A better idea would be to look at all the ordinary Joe/Jane Soaps who run the Dublin marathon every year. You need to put in quite a bit of endurance training, longs runs etc, yet a lot of them will line up on race day still with pot bellies. It will mostly only be the semi serious club runners who will be sporting six packs. The majority running for charities etc may still have less then chiseled abs, even after 4-6 months of marathon training.

Zamboni

woodchopper wrote: »

No You are missing the point sunshine! You said exercise alone will not get rid of a pot belly, while I have evidence to suggest that excessive exercise ie cycling 500 mile a week will indeed get rid of a pot belly regardless of diet. Whilst the OP may not be able to this, it is still possible that exericise alone will do this.

Reading too many American fitness gurus perhaps?

Your condescending attitude is unwarranted and immature.
You are also dragging this thread toward endurance exercise for some reason?
You can accumulate fat and have a pot belly if you are consuming excess calories even if you are an elite endurance athlete.
A caloric deficit is easier to achieve through dietary methods than through exercise. That was my simple point to the OP and I stand by it.
If you dispute that than debate me on that.

woodchopper

TommyKnocker wrote: »

Elite Endurance Athletes should not be used to justify your point. An elite endurance athlete will have a whole team of support folks consisting of trainers, nutritionists, physios, possibly their own chef etc, and their physique will be as a result of a top notch dialed in diet coupled with top notch dialed in training regime.

Also Elite Competitors in any sport are genetically gifted. This is why there are only a few truly elite athletes in any sporting discipline.

A better idea would be to look at all the ordinary Joe/Jane Soaps who run the Dublin marathon every year. You need to put in quite a bit of endurance training, longs runs etc, yet a lot of them will line up on race day still with pot bellies. It will mostly only be the semi serious club runners who will be sporting six packs. The majority running for charities etc may still have less then chiseled abs, even after 4-6 months of marathon training.

Again you are correct but you miss the point. Look at the athletes competing near the front of the Irish championships. They have no pot bellies because they train excessively. What I am saying is that excessive exercise will result in low body fat regardless of diet. Jogging 50 mile a week will do nothing to get rid of a pot belly because that is not real training. That is why those hobby joggers are fat, they do not train.

woodchopper

A caloric deficit is easier to achieve through dietary methods than through exercise.

You are correct but that is the problem in Irish society. People want to take the Easy option. Train hard or go Home I say

Mellor

You can train as hard as you like, but if you aren't in deficit you aren't losing weight.
Training only raises the maintenance level, you still need to eat below this

Hanley

This is actually the worst thread I've ever read on boards. The only good thing to come out of it is that I now know who to ignore in future.

Brian?

Thread is completely off topic at this stage. Locked.