The Amazing 12 - My experience

Nervous Wreck

Blacktie. wrote: »

Ah would not be for me. Have to have spices and herbs on nearly everything I eat. That's all the flavour! I think I'd fail massively on the traditional chicken and rice bodybuilder diet

Sorry, I may have phrased that poorly. That was an example of how I eat to illustrate how a possibly restrictive diet wouldn't phase me. I've no idea if those things were allowed/off limits. I know a lot of people used herbs/spices cos I saw their meals (we posted pics of every meal on the private FB group for the first 3 weeks) but I didn't see any sauces from what I remember... but yeah, no idea if that stuff was or wasn't allowed!

I'd check for you but.... I don't have thyme right now.

Nervous Wreck

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Nice! Plain enough eater myself though more so that a lack of variety has never bothered me.

And thanks for making me want steak now

Have pancakes instead.

Nervous Wreck

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

I didn't but I'm a very plain eater so others probably would notice that more. Like I don't eat spices, herbs, sauces etc so plain chicken for example doesn't phase me.

I'll be keeping things mostly the same but possibly eating a little less tbh. I spent a FORTUNE on steak...

I'm sorry to be that person, but *faze

Nervous Wreck

bluewolf wrote: »

I'm sorry to be that person, but *faze

Were I paying closer attention, I'd be that person too, so I thank you!

cloudatlas

I was looking at some of the transformations and I don't really think the female transformations looked brilliant, far too skinny in some cases and stringy looking apart from one lady who was overweight and lost a lot

Nervous Wreck

cloudatlas wrote: »

I was looking at some of the transformations and I don't really think the female transformations looked brilliant, far too skinny in some cases and stringy looking apart from one lady who was overweight and lost a lot

In fairness, your idea of "too skinny" is likely to mean fcuk all to those women who, if they agreed to have their pics put up, are probably beyond delighted with their achievements.

cloudatlas

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

In fairness, your idea of "too skinny" is likely to mean fcuk all to those women who, if they agreed to have their pics put up, are probably beyond delighted with their achievements.

Fair enough, maybe that is a healthy weight and their bmi was taken into account, the naked eye is deceiving when it comes to a lot of pics. Just my opinion no doubt it means fcuk all but still going to exercise it no matter.

Dtp1979

cloudatlas wrote: »

Fair enough, maybe that is a healthy weight and their bmi was taken into account, the naked eye is deceiving when it comes to a lot of pics. Just my opinion no doubt it means fcuk all but still going to exercise it no matter.

Most of the women in those pics do look like an unhealthy weight and seriously low bodyfat to be fair. Some looked underweight before their transformation

cloudatlas

Dtp1979 wrote: »

Most of the women in those pics do look like an unhealthy weight and seriously low bodyfat to be fair. Some looked underweight before their transformation

Thanks, it's not my intention to body shame but after looking at the amazing pictures of the lads (albeit after they had done dumbell reps before the pics with the nice lighting it was still impressive), I wanted to see pictures of the ladies and their transformations and did not feel that the program had been tailored properly to them. If you are going to go for this kind of program you want to know that it's sustainable or at least some form of the training is sustainable in the long run especially if you are paying that amount. I wouldn't choose it myself but power to them if that's what their expectation was.

JJayoo

I hate these results pictures, stand at the right angle, use the right lighting,filter the **** out of it and make it black and white.

Shouldn't have to manipulate pictures

Nervous Wreck

JJayoo wrote: »

I hate these results pictures, stand at the right angle, use the right lighting,filter the **** out of it and make it black and white.

Shouldn't have to manipulate pictures

...

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

4. Other people. Most people were really supportive of my endeavour. But some people just want you to fail, for whatever reason. There's always some prick waving a donut in your face or trying to mock your efforts. My hack: Well, for the most part, I didn't tell people what I was doing. Couldn't hide it in work cos I went straight from the gym to work in the mornings but, as much as possible, I tried to avoid talking to much to people who tried to tear me down. I don't need that shit.

cloudatlas

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

...

Critical thought not welcome on this thread only back slapping, don't mention the war i.e. short term fixes, franchise fitness, posed photos etc..,

JJayoo

Not sure how you can be offended by my comment, I was making a general statement about before and after pics which programmes like the amazing 12 use to get business.

Nervous Wreck

JJayoo wrote: »

Not sure how you can be offended by my comment, I was making a general statement about before and after pics which programmes like the amazing 12 use to get business.

Not offended in the least, I just think there's probably more you could add to the conversation than "Here's something I don't like". I actually agree and disagree on your sentiment, at varying degrees.

Nervous Wreck

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Not offended in the least, I just think there's probably more you could add to the conversation than "Here's something I don't like". I actually agree and disagree on your sentiment, at varying degrees.

In hindsight, I probably jumped the gun a little on this. I've been actively defending my choices for the last 14 weeks or so (in real life, not here) and it's pretty easy to become weary when in that position. I didn't mean to come across like I was shutting you down, so apologies for that!

Alf Veedersane

These things have been done to death here. I don't think anyone us under any illusion that the before pictures aren't helped and the afters are but I don't think you can dispute the results.

Is it worth €1500? Depends what you value. Plenty will say no but obviously it was well worth it to NW and you can't question that.

Mellor

I don't think he's criticizing your choice to the the A12. But more the marketing techniques used in the after shots.
To be honest, I don't have a huge problem with those "tricks". You want to get the best possible photo as a momento, they are part of that.
But I do dislike the fact that there no comparable before/after to show progress. Keep the processed shot, but just add another normal shot afterwards to shoe progress. I doubt it would show anything other than fantastic progress you made

Zillah

After looking through a collection of their before and afters I can't help but think it seems to be about getting your body fat as low as possible. Which for some people - I won't go linking the images but you can see for yourself - is so low that their faces look like they just came stumbling out of a concentration camp (not exaggerating for at least two of them on the webpage).

What's the point of a six pack if your face looks like you're a stiff breeze away from death?

livedadream

three questions (as someone who has seen this advertising in the lifting gym i go too)
1: do you have to do the water loading and depletion for the after photos?
2: im assuming from the photos ive seen most people use A12 as a boost to an already solid training plan, ie: its only 12 weeks so you need to be pretty lean to begin with. no 4-5 stone weight lost needed
3: is it maintainable or does it drop off after a few days/weeks? ie is it a long term thing, like are the abs staying around

Nervous Wreck

Mellor wrote: »

I don't think he's criticizing your choice to the the A12. But more the marketing techniques used in the after shots.
To be honest, I don't have a huge problem with those "tricks". You want to get the best possible photo as a momento, they are part of that.
But I do dislike the fact that there no comparable before/after to show progress. Keep the processed shot, but just add another normal shot afterwards to shoe progress. I doubt it would show anything other than fantastic progress you made

I've plenty of other shots that aren't posed or what have you. They look great! Obviously gonna use the professional shots more cos they're posed to show as much muscularity as possible. You're 100% right though.

Zillah wrote: »

After looking through a collection of their before and afters I can't help but think it seems to be about getting your body fat as low as possible. Which for some people - I won't go linking the images but you can see for yourself - is so low that their faces look like they just came stumbling out of a concentration camp (not exaggerating for at least two of them on the webpage).

What's the point of a six pack if your face looks like you're a stiff breeze away from death?

Again, your goals aren't gonna be compatible with everyone else's. If their pictures are there, it's cos they're happy with how they looked. For some people, it was absolutely about getting their bf% as low as possible. For some in my group, it was about getting bigger. For some it was about getting in shape after a few years slacking off.

livedadream wrote: »

three questions (as someone who has seen this advertising in the lifting gym i go too)
1: do you have to do the water loading and depletion for the after photos?
2: im assuming from the photos ive seen most people use A12 as a boost to an already solid training plan, ie: its only 12 weeks so you need to be pretty lean to begin with. no 4-5 stone weight lost needed
3: is it maintainable or does it drop off after a few days/weeks? ie is it a long term thing, like are the abs staying around

1. No. Everything is a choice. Some people did the water manipulation, some didn't bother, some didn't bother doing photos at all.
2. I can't speak for everyone but there were at least 2 people in my group who had never lifted before. I certainly wasn't lean in the slightest, though I have been lifting for about 5-6 years. There was no one in my group with 5-6 stone to lose anyway.
3. My abs are in tact but obviously I need to keep training; you don't just get abs for life out of it. But I got down to 67.1kg and, after getting back to 'normal' life, I'm sticking around at about 68.5-69.5kg, which is better than I'd hoped for going in. So yeah, sustainable if you stay consistent, which not everyone will. It's a tough program; not everyone got to the end of it so it really comes down to the individual.

livedadream

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

. I can't speak for everyone but there were at least 2 people in my group who had never lifted before. I certainly wasn't lean in the slightest, though I have been lifting for about 5-6 years. There was no one in my group with 5-6 stone to lose anyway.

so do you agree or no? that this isnt a plan for dealing with a significant amount of weight to lose that its more about getting to the lowest body fat you can and get edited photos out of?
like i said i go to a gym where they do it, ive seen people get seriously ripped, none of those people are in the same state 3-4 or more months after. is it essentially a tool to get some nice moody photos and abs?
.

from what you say above it looks like you dropped around 5kgs?  do you feel you could have done that without the A12?
i get it you wanted abs and to get stronger but i dunno so much is put into the abs and the mood lighting and the oiled up body's id does set an unrealistic expectation for alot of people. i wonder if i was to rock up to the gym and say hey i have 10 stone to lose obviously not in 12 weeks but can i go a moody photo shoot after would they allow it? for 1500 youd be better off investing in something long term that doesnt leave you looking like another poster said a breath away from death.

it just seems very extreme to me.

Nervous Wreck

livedadream wrote: »

from what you say above it looks like you dropped around 5kgs?  do you feel you could have done that without the A12?
i get it you wanted abs and to get stronger but i dunno so much is put into the abs and the mood lighting and the oiled up body's id does set an unrealistic expectation for alot of people. i wonder if i was to rock up to the gym and say hey i have 10 stone to lose obviously not in 12 weeks but can i go a moody photo shoot after would they allow it? for 1500 youd be better off investing in something long term that doesnt leave you looking like another poster said a breath away from death.

it just seems very extreme to me.

I dropped 10.1kgs. In general, I am back around 68.5kg and, on days where I did at a load of cake, i go up to around 69.5kg. Which would be 7.7kg loss from where I started to where I'd now be on a bloated day. There was not only fat loss but significant muscle gain.

If you read my first post, you'll see that no, I was not able to achieve this on my own. I don't really give a shít about other people's expectations of abs and strength; I did A12 for myself not for anyone else's expectations. Pretty sure I don't look anywhere near "a breath away from death". Actually never been as fit or healthy as I am now.

livedadream

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

livedadream wrote: »

from what you say above it looks like you dropped around 5kgs?  do you feel you could have done that without the A12?
i get it you wanted abs and to get stronger but i dunno so much is put into the abs and the mood lighting and the oiled up body's id does set an unrealistic expectation for alot of people. i wonder if i was to rock up to the gym and say hey i have 10 stone to lose obviously not in 12 weeks but can i go a moody photo shoot after would they allow it? for 1500 youd be better off investing in something long term that doesnt leave you looking like another poster said a breath away from death.

it just seems very extreme to me.

I dropped 10.1kgs. In general, I am back around 68.5kg and, on days where I did at a load of cake, i go up to around 69.5kg. Which would be 7.7kg loss from where I started to where I'd now be on a bloated day. There was not only fat loss but significant muscle gain.

If you read my first post, you'll see that no, I was not able to achieve this on my own. I don't really give a shít about other people's expectations of abs and strength; I did A12 for myself not for anyone else's expectations. Pretty sure I don't look anywhere near "a breath away from death".  Actually never been as fit or healthy as I am now.

dude honestly its not a personal attack... i did mention another poster said a few of the women looked like that, and from the photos ive seen in my own place i can say the same. but my point is most people need to be leanish or at least 'normal' size to begin with. ie theres not many fatties rolling around doing it which makes it very inaccessible. I jsut wanted your thoughts on it thats all.

Nervous Wreck

livedadream wrote: »

dude honestly its not a personal attack... i did mention another poster said a few of the women looked like that, and from the photos ive seen in my own place i can say the same. but my point is most people need to be leanish or at least 'normal' size to begin with. ie theres not many fatties rolling around doing it which makes it very inaccessible. I jsut wanted your thoughts on it thats all.

Honestly, I don't know what the criteria for signing up is. Like I wasn't lean in the least but I certainly didn't have 5 stone to lose so I dunno what the story would have been if I had... you may indeed be right though, maybe they don't take people who are out of shape to a certain degree. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me. I think 18 people signed up at the start and only about half that were there for photos in the end. It was about 80% male at the start but by the end there was only one woman left. So that'll give you an idea of the drop-off rate. So I dunno, maybe getting people who are of a certain weight on the program would be unrealistic. What I do know is I had to meet with them first to discuss my goals, capabilities etc so maybe thy screen that way and don't take people on board if the 12 week thing is unrealistic.

Mellor

livedadream wrote: »

i wonder if i was to rock up to the gym and say hey i have 10 stone to lose obviously not in 12 weeks but can i go a moody photo shoot after would they allow it? for 1500 youd be better off investing in something long term that doesnt leave you looking like another poster said a breath away from death

If somebody as 10 stone to lose. They need to overhaul their whole life for the maybe 2 years, not a 12 week program. It's realistically going to cost them a lot more that €1500 too.
If somebody that size came to them I'd imagine they could offer traditional PT services to suit their needs.

I don't think not being suitable for people who have that kind of weight to lose is a valid criticism. A lot of things aren't going to be suitable.

livedadream

Mellor wrote: »

livedadream wrote: »

i wonder if i was to rock up to the gym and say hey i have 10 stone to lose obviously not in 12 weeks but can i go a moody photo shoot after would they allow it? for 1500 youd be better off investing in something long term that doesnt leave you looking like another poster said a breath away from death

If somebody as 10 stone to lose. They need to overhaul their whole life for the maybe 2 years, not a 12 week program. It's realistically going to cost them a lot more that €1500 too.
If somebody that size came to them I'd imagine they could offer traditional PT services to suit their needs.

I don't think not being suitable for people who have that kind of weight to lose is a valid criticism. A lot of things aren't going to be suitable.

wheres the criticism? no need to get your knickers in a twist coz you dont know that deep fat frying something makes it more calorific mate ;-)

i was simply making the point that their pictures are also their ads... and a person who lost two stone and 10 inches in the 12 weeks but is still fat at the end of it isnt going to be an advert like the OP's photos are... and its alot of money to pay, my post did also say investing in something long term would be better, but you must have missed that eh?
the pics in my gym are all over the place, big pop ups in the corners etc. and while some of them look amazing, a few of them look unwell.

cloudatlas

Mellor wrote: »

If somebody as 10 stone to lose. They need to overhaul their whole life for the maybe 2 years, not a 12 week program. It's realistically going to cost them a lot more that €1500 too.
If somebody that size came to them I'd imagine they could offer traditional PT services to suit their needs.

I don't think not being suitable for people who have that kind of weight to lose is a valid criticism. A lot of things aren't going to be suitable.

What is on offer is a bikini competition, fitness model type template so of course they don't want overweight people who won't achieve the promo photo at the end. Most of those folks who do those contests don't maintain that kind of body out of prep and go on a bulk for a while before cutting. It's not sustainable in that sense.

Mellor

livedadream wrote: »

wheres the criticism? no need to get your knickers in a twist coz you dont know that deep fat frying something makes it more calorific mate ;-)

Saying it's "theres not many fatties rolling around doing it which makes it very inaccessible" is a criticism. Not everything is suitable for everyone.
People who are morbidly obese go on liquid VLC diets, baritric treatments etc. They aren't suitable for people with a little weight to lose. But no less weight.

The passive aggressive comment about chicken is frankly bizarre. I've no idea why you are so salty. Hangry today?

cloudatlas wrote: »

What is on offer is a bikini competition, fitness model type template so of course they don't want overweight people who won't achieve the promo photo at the end. Most of those folks who do those contests don't maintain that kind of body out of prep and go on a bulk for a while before cutting. It's not sustainable in that sense.

I've no idea what their screening process is, nor do I care. But there's nothing stopping them running a similar program with somebody overweight, and simply not using the promo photo at the end. Why turn away business. I imagine the PTs have lots of other hours in the day to fill with clients.

Somebody who is very overweight has a higher capacity to burn fat. So they could likely achieve greater total losses in 12 weeks. Somebody losing 36lbs in 12 weeks is impressive (to me at least), regardless of whether they look like a fitness model or not.

Dtp1979

@nervous wreck,
I'm curious, you lost 7kg weight, gained a lot muscle and did all this on a deficit id imagine?
You're not a newbie to lifting yourself, so how did you gain muscle when you didn't eat a calorie surplus?

Nervous Wreck

Dtp1979 wrote: »

@nervous wreck,
I'm curious, you lost 7kg weight, gained a lot muscle and did all this on a deficit id imagine?
You're not a newbie to lifting yourself, so how did you gain muscle when you didn't eat a calorie surplus?

If you mean practically, I trained my balls off, only ate what I was told and got.plenty of rest. If you mean scientifically, I really don't know I'm afraid.I've never been a believer in the "you can't build muscle while on a deficit" school of thought (I think people saying this are often conflating muscle with mass) but, although I've plenty of practical lifting experience, my actual knowledge of the science behind all of it isn't great (which is why this kind of training suits me).