Best way to reduce belly fat?

[Yewki]

If this were true there would be no "fad diets" because people would just simply lower their caloric intake and keep losing weight. Obviously it doesn't work because so many people are "stuck" at a weight they can't get under.

Fad diets exist for two main reasons,
1) To make money for the people selling or writing about them
2) To give people an easy and hopeful solution to latch on to in order to avoid having to work for and maintain a calorie deficit, "Oh I just need to eat this thing at this time and I'll be skinny?? Sign me up!" I mean they're called fad diets for a reason

Your method will work fine for a 300 lb obese guy who wants to get to a 250 lb still fat guy, taking body fat from maybe 40% to 25%... I'm talking about taking a person at 30% and getting them to 11-12% or lower

I'm your huckleberry.

I lost 60lbs about 6 years ago and have since maintained 8-12% body fat, depending on the time of year and what's going on. I'm 6'0 and about 170lb. What did I change? A lot. I started exercising religiously and corrected my bad eating habits by counting calories. Initially changing my lifestyle was hard, but its now completely second nature and easy.

What I eat, when I eat, and how often I eat is irrelevant. As long as I eat the correct amount of calories and keep exercising to maintain an elevated metabolism. When you work out, you burn calories during the activity itself. Afterwards, your body continues to use resources to repair itself. This results in an elevated base metabolism. It makes maintaining a deficit easier.

It simply will not work to get him from 25% to 10%. Maybe he gets down to 22-23% body fat but it's not going much lower by "eating less".

That contradicts my own experience as well as accounts of numerous people I have known. It also defies common sense. Any source?

They might actually GAIN fat at that point by burning muscle. Talk about a complete failure.

That doesn't make sense. Any source?

What I am saying will, and much quicker than most other methods. How do I know this? Because I've tried all of these methods on myself, and because numerous other trainers and fitness related people have also with clients. It's pretty clear now that simply "eating less" is as outdated as a horse and buggy.

Calorie counting probably didn't work for you because you couldn't adhere to a calorie deficit. Most people can't. The biggest reason being... it's hard. You have to really want it. People give up or fail for various reasons. They work out and burn 200 calories, then eat 500+ calories thinking they earned it. Or they have a cheat day and eat away their entire deficit for the week. Or they just gradually give up and stop. It requires long term dedication. It's a lifestyle. There are no "cheat days." It's called... every day.

And the fitness industry is a joke. Find me a trainer who says doing X is good, I can probably find you one who says it's bad. Who cares. The entire industry is oversaturated with products, scams, and mistruths that can usually be traced back to some agenda.

It's all about the basics,

Exercise + Calorie Deficit

Unless you have these two down pat, there is literally no reason to talk about anything else. None.

 

[marmel75]

Fad diets exist for two main reasons,
Calorie counting probably didn't work for you because you couldn't adhere to a calorie deficit. Most people can't. The biggest reason being... it's hard. You have to really want it. People give up or fail for various reasons. They work out and burn 200 calories, then eat 500+ calories thinking they earned it. Or they have a cheat day and eat away their entire deficit for the week. Or they just gradually give up and stop. It requires long term dedication. It's a lifestyle. There are no "cheat days." It's called... every day.

And the fitness industry is a joke. Find me a trainer who says doing X is good, I can probably find you one who says it's bad. Who cares. The entire industry is oversaturated with products, scams, and mistruths that can usually be traced back to some agenda.

It's all about the basics,

Exercise + Calorie Deficit

Unless you have these two down pat, there is literally no reason to talk about anything else. None.

I don't count calories, but I am extremely strict with what I eat for 9 months of the year. I give myself a 3 month hiatus heading into October and the holidays where I will allow much more slack in my diet. I do this for my own sanity. Its really irrelevant for the most part. I can gain and lose weight at will. Over the summer I was about 9% BF(Checked via Calipers and SKULPT which gave the same result), gained 25 lbs in my 3 month "break" I take every year, and lost 18 lbs of it in 2 weeks. Most people would say "That's impossible". It isn't, it's entirely possible, I've done something similar 4 years in a row now. Right now I'm between 11-12% BF, I'll be back to 9% when I need to be.

And no offense, I'm not gonna sit here arguing back and forth with a scrawny dude(6'0" 170 lbs by your admission). Get some muscle on you then we can talk theories and nutrition and supplements and whatever else you want to. You are not in my area code right now. Once again, losing "weight" is irrelevant. Losing "fat" is relevant.

According to you, if you are eating say 2000 calories and not losing weight, then simply drop it to 1900, then 1800, then 1700, etc...eventually you will be down to 1,000. How do I know this? Because I see people who follow this dumbass mindset every day and have to sit there and listen to them complain about why they can't lose weight when they are doing "everything right". Except they are closer to doing "everything wrong" than "everything right".

 

[Yewki]

Ok, to the point. In terms of fat loss, when or how often you eat is unimportant compared to understanding your caloric needs and maintaining a calorie deficit. You want to refute that? No vague article links or obscure "fat burning hour" units. Actual numbers and specifics. I'm all ears.

According to you, if you are eating say 2000 calories and not losing weight, then simply drop it to 1900, then 1800, then 1700, etc...eventually you will be down to 1,000.

If you're at a 100 deficit you will lose weight. It's not a question.

I never suggested an extreme calorie deficit, that is obviously unhealthy and unsustainable.

I don't count calories, but I am extremely strict with what I eat for 9 months of the year.

So you basically count calories.

And no offense, I'm not gonna sit here arguing back and forth with a scrawny dude(6'0" 170 lbs by your admission).

Instead of providing some type of source like I requested to your previous "facts", this is your answer.

Get some muscle on you then we can talk theories and nutrition and supplements and whatever else you want to.

We're talking about fat.

 

[marmel75]

Instead of providing some type of source like I requested to your previous "facts", this is your answer.
We're talking about fat.

The fact is, if you would have followed my program you'd be at the same bodyfat percentage(or lower) but weighing 185-190 lbs. Your way, you lost 30 lbs of muscle and 30 lbs of fat, my way you would have lost 30 lbs of fat and 10-15 lbs of muscle. That's a big difference.

 

[Yewki]

The fact is, if you would have followed my program you'd be at the same bodyfat percentage(or lower) but weighing 185-190 lbs. Your way, you lost 30 lbs of muscle and 30 lbs of fat, my way you would have lost 30 lbs of fat and 10-15 lbs of muscle. That's a big difference.

Your assumptions are absurd. Am I actually supposed to take this seriously?

 

[Tenacity]

Marmel,

I think most people would do better following a plan laid out by myself and Yewki, as your plan is very complicated. If you have to write a dissertation to explain it Marmel, most people aren't going to follow it because they don't even comprehend everything you are saying.

I still don't understand everything you are saying, to be 100% honest with you lol. You are making fun of Yewki being 6'0 and 170, but if the guy has a 6 pack showing, that's the BUILD that women go crazy over and call sexy. It's the lean and toned look with the abs showing. I'm 5'9/5'10 and between 160lbs - 165lbs. You call that skinny, but when I take my shirt off that's not what women call it, they call it sexy lol. And isn't that one of the main reasons we all workout to begin with?

But everybody has their own goals here, it's just that the plan I laid out for the overweight guy I think is much easier to follow than the complicated scientific stuff you are throwing out. My plan again is:

- Change your eating plan to where you are eating majority healthy foods and you are eating less overall as Yewki said

- Do strong HITT cardio 5 days a week

- That should be the main focus for at least 45 - 60 days if you are very overweight, once you pass those 60 days, you can reduce the cardio to maybe 3 days and add in 3 days of weight training, keeping the eating plan the same.

- Eventually, you get to the point where you no longer need to do cardio at all, just a solid 3 or 4 days of weight lifting while maintaining the eating plan.

That's it. No complicated scientific theories, no dissertations, etc.

 

[marmel75]

Your assumptions are absurd. Am I actually supposed to take this seriously?

You can take them whatever way you want to take them. Here is some simple math for you.

Monday Dec 28th I weighed 207 lbs after my holiday slack off period. 18% body fat as measured by Skulpt. Monday Jan 18th I weighed 189 lbs at 11.7% body fat. That's 18 lbs in 3 weeks. At 207 lbs I had 37.26 lbs of fat. At 189 lbs I had 22.11 lbs of fat. Out of the 18 lbs I lost, 15.15 lbs was fat, or slightly over 84%(a little shy of 90%).

Now, following ANY other method that has been studied and researched the same 18 lbs lost by a person would have resulted at BEST, 9 lbs of fat lost, along with 9 lbs of muscle. Fat loss is key, not weight loss.

Bottom line, I lost 6+ lbs more fat and kept 6+lbs more muscle than what would be expected by other methods of weight loss.

And trust me, I have a hell of a lot more muscle to spare than most people, so it would benefit others to hold onto their muscle more than it would me.

This has been well studied going back to the 1940s with pretty much all the studies finding the same thing. If you understood the effects of significantly elevated growth hormone on a regular basis this would come as no shock.

 

[marmel75]

Marmel,

I think most people would do better following a plan laid out by myself and Yewki, as your plan is very complicated. If you have to write a dissertation to explain it Marmel, most people aren't going to follow it because they don't even comprehend everything you are saying.

I still don't understand everything you are saying, to be 100% honest with you lol. You are making fun of Yewki being 6'0 and 170, but if the guy has a 6 pack showing, that's the BUILD that women go crazy over and call sexy. It's the lean and toned look with the abs showing. I'm 5'9/5'10 and between 160lbs - 165lbs. You call that skinny, but when I take my shirt off that's not what women call it, they call it sexy lol. And isn't that one of the main reasons we all workout to begin with?

But everybody has their own goals here, it's just that the plan I laid out for the overweight guy I think is much easier to follow than the complicated scientific stuff you are throwing out. My plan again is:

- Change your eating plan to where you are eating majority healthy foods and you are eating less overall as Yewki said

- Do strong HITT cardio 5 days a week

- That should be the main focus for at least 45 - 60 days if you are very overweight, once you pass those 60 days, you can reduce the cardio to maybe 3 days and add in 3 days of weight training, keeping the eating plan the same.

- Eventually, you get to the point where you no longer need to do cardio at all, just a solid 3 or 4 days of weight lifting while maintaining the eating plan.

That's it. No complicated scientific theories, no dissertations, etc.

No dissertation needed, and no offense I think my method is far easier not to mention more effective. No counting calories, no need for endless cardio, and you get to pig out and eat as much of whatever you want one day a week.

You don't need to understand it for it to work, I just explain it so people have an understanding of why they are doing something.

So you have one cheat day, followed by 3 cycles of 1 fast day and 1 normal day. Then repeat. Seems pretty simple to me.

And I don't need to take my shirt off for people to know I work out. They can see my abs through my shirt, not to mention some big ass traps and a back the size of a barn door.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

You can take them whatever way you want to take them. Here is some simple math for you.

Monday Dec 28th I weighed 207 lbs after my holiday slack off period. 18% body fat as measured by Skulpt. Monday Jan 18th I weighed 189 lbs at 11.7% body fat. That's 18 lbs in 3 weeks. At 207 lbs I had 37.26 lbs of fat. At 189 lbs I had 22.11 lbs of fat. Out of the 18 lbs I lost, 15.15 lbs was fat, or slightly over 84%(a little shy of 90%).

Now, following ANY other method that has been studied and researched the same 18 lbs lost by a person would have resulted at BEST, 9 lbs of fat lost, along with 9 lbs of muscle. Fat loss is key, not weight loss.

Bottom line, I lost 6+ lbs more fat and kept 6+lbs more muscle than what would be expected by other methods of weight loss.

And trust me, I have a hell of a lot more muscle to spare than most people, so it would benefit others to hold onto their muscle more than it would me.

This has been well studied going back to the 1940s with pretty much all the studies finding the same thing. If you understood the effects of significantly elevated growth hormone on a regular basis this would come as no shock.

Sounds great.

I also found a bunch of evidence of huge growth hormone increases with the alternate day fasting concept. My question for you is this.

You gave us your weight. What is your caloric intake on your eating days, and what is the protein/carb/fat grams if you keep track of that.

Is one of your eating days a cheat day, or are you consistent with your food intake?

How much workout time are you doing in the week? How much is split between weights and cardio? How much of the workout time is consumed on the fasting days?

Thanks!

 

[mrgoodstuff]

Marmel,

I think most people would do better following a plan laid out by myself and Yewki, as your plan is very complicated. If you have to write a dissertation to explain it Marmel, most people aren't going to follow it because they don't even comprehend everything you are saying.

I still don't understand everything you are saying, to be 100% honest with you lol. You are making fun of Yewki being 6'0 and 170, but if the guy has a 6 pack showing, that's the BUILD that women go crazy over and call sexy. It's the lean and toned look with the abs showing. I'm 5'9/5'10 and between 160lbs - 165lbs. You call that skinny, but when I take my shirt off that's not what women call it, they call it sexy lol. And isn't that one of the main reasons we all workout to begin with?

But everybody has their own goals here, it's just that the plan I laid out for the overweight guy I think is much easier to follow than the complicated scientific stuff you are throwing out. My plan again is:

- Change your eating plan to where you are eating majority healthy foods and you are eating less overall as Yewki said

- Do strong HITT cardio 5 days a week

- That should be the main focus for at least 45 - 60 days if you are very overweight, once you pass those 60 days, you can reduce the cardio to maybe 3 days and add in 3 days of weight training, keeping the eating plan the same.

- Eventually, you get to the point where you no longer need to do cardio at all, just a solid 3 or 4 days of weight lifting while maintaining the eating plan.

That's it. No complicated scientific theories, no dissertations, etc.

I know the size you are talking about and a lot of women love that size especially with abs. Personally I believe the NFL wide receiver/defensiveback NBA point guard size is the size most women are hottest for and this size is typically male strippers as well. They are this size, because it gets the greatest cross section of sexual attraction from females.

 

[marmel75]

Sounds great.

I also found a bunch of evidence of huge growth hormone increases with the alternate day fasting concept. My question for you is this.

You gave us your weight. What is your caloric intake on your eating days, and what is the protein/carb/fat grams if you keep track of that.

Is one of your eating days a cheat day, or are you consistent with your food intake?

How much workout time are you doing in the week? How much is split between weights and cardio? How much of the workout time is consumed on the fasting days?

Thanks!

Caloric intake on a normal eating day honestly depends on the day. I use a rotational diet, which isn't necessary to get results, but there are days where I eat more calories than others, simply because of the foods I eat on those days. I'd say anywhere between 2000-3000 on a "normal" day. I don't keep track of any of that stuff. I simply make sure I eat enough protein and fats, then backfill in the carbs. At this point, I really don't need much more than about 125 g of protein a day, possibly even less. As you become more muscular and further along in your training, you actually need LESS protein, not more, for a few reasons. First, your body becomes much more efficient at using the protein you are taking in. Second, you are closer to your genetic potential, so you are not building as much muscle as a person who just started, and third you are breaking down less muscle each workout so there isn't as much to rebuild.

Yes, the first day each week(for me, Sunday) is a cheat day. "No holds barred" as I put it, other than no alcohol consumption, as that has detrimental effects on Leptin production, which would defeat the purpose of what I am trying to accomplish. If you want to eat a huge bowl of ice cream for breakfast, pig out at Taco Bell until you can't eat anymore for lunch and eat a whole pizza and an order of wings for dinner, go for it. There have been days I have taken in more than 10,000 calories. It's irrelevant. Your bodies fat storing ability has been so downregulated during the rest of the week, it can't really store much as fat, not to mention the body doesn't really store fat until you've been over-eating for about 3 days straight.

I have 3 gym workouts during the week(Monday, Wednesday, Friday) which vary in intensity and body parts depending on what my trainer decides to give me that week. Some days I will do 5 minutes of 30 second on/30 second off HIIT sprints after my workouts to further spike growth hormone. Saturday I do Pilates for about 30 minutes in the morning. Sunday I do yoga. Each morning I do either "foundation training" which helps force proper form/posture/posterior chain usage(excellent if you have any lower back issues, like I used to) which is a 12 minute program, or Tai Chi which is about 15 minutes. Typically I will alternate the two.

I do no cardio other than the 5 minutes of HIIT after I workout. Cardio is unnecessary and in my opinion a waste of time in the fat burning process(other than HIIT, but most people do steady state cardio). Most people will see very little difference between doing cardio and changing their diet versus simply changing their diet.

Typically my fasts are from 8pm one night to 8pm the next night. I usually will eat before I go workout on fast days, although not always. If I train fasted, I make sure to take 10g of EAA's before I workout to prevent any muscle breakdown.

 

[AttackFormation]

What do you think about these articles marmel?

 

[Maximus Rex]

Change your diet, reduce portion size, and do 30 minutes a day on the Stairmaster.

 

[marmel75]

What do you think about these articles marmel?

I would say if I was a cyclist then maybe I'd have an opinion. Since I don't do cycling nor any form of "endurance" training I can't really comment on the studies.

As far as some of the other things, they don't really concur with the results I've gotten either this year or any other year I've done it. I rarely do fasted training, but in the past some of my best workouts have been fasted including doing heavy squats and HIIT...

If you can tell me of another way to lose 18 lbs in 3 weeks with almost 85% of it being fat, I'm all ears.

 

[marmel75]

Change your diet, reduce portion size, and do 30 minutes a day on the Stairmaster.

Once again. Steady state cardio does not burn fat effectively.

 

[Yewki]

That's 18 lbs in 3 weeks. At 207 lbs I had 37.26 lbs of fat. At 189 lbs I had 22.11 lbs of fat. Out of the 18 lbs I lost, 15.15 lbs was fat.

Wow. This is laughable.

No. It's physically impossible to lose 15.15 lbs of fat in 3 weeks.

If you chained yourself to a bed ate absolutely nothing and starved yourself with no food for 3 weeks, you still wouldn't lose this much fat. And you'd probably be dead.

Like, are you just hoping no one here actually knows what they're talking about? Dumb dumb dumb.

No, the vast majority of whatever weight you did lose in that 3 week period was water weight and food that was still in your stomach from binge eating.

I've lost 10lbs on the bike in an hour, but it's 97% water weight. I'm not foolish enough to say I lost 10lbs of fat/muscle, then make up random numbers for fat and muscle.

Now, following ANY other method that has been studied and researched the same 18 lbs lost by a person would have resulted at BEST, 9 lbs of fat lost, along with 9 lbs of muscle. Fat loss is key, not weight loss.

So no other method that has been scientifically researched is as good as your method huh? Alright for funsies let's take a look at your "method",

So you have one cheat day, followed by 3 cycles of 1 fast day and 1 normal day. Then repeat. Seems pretty simple to me.

Typically my fasts are from 8pm one night to 8pm the next night. I usually will eat before I go workout on fast days, although not always.

No counting calories, no need for endless cardio, and you get to pig out and eat as much of whatever you want one day a week.

So... you "fast" 3 days out of the week, eat whatever you want one day, have three "normal" days (???), and you don't count calories or eat based on anything that is quantifiable? That's it?

Right. I would ask for perhaps some type of source backing your claim that this "method" is superior to anything else, if it wasn't so obvious this was a complete joke.

Please, no one take any advice from this guy seriously. Unbelievable.

 

[marmel75]

Wow. This is laughable.

No. It's physically impossible to lose 15.15 lbs of fat in 3 weeks.

Actually it isn't. Your body can lose a tremendous amount of fat in a short period of time if you simply create an optimal fat burning environment. Most people's fat burning environment is average to poor at best. For instance, following the way you advise people to do things by simply lowering calories will lead to a rapid decline in Leptin by Day 6(down to 50% of normal levels). Leptin is the master fat burning hormone. When leptin is high, the body burns more fat. When its low, the body burns less fat. Not to mention its effect on your thyroid, which will also decline. The thyroid is the master metabolism switch for the body, which controls how fast things run.


Here are the 4 most important factors in burning fat from a hormonal standpoint, listed in no particular order :

1) Leptin Levels
2) Thyroid Levels
3) Growth Hormone Levels
4) Lessening the time Insulin is active in the body

So the way you advise will lower both leptin and thyroid, two of the most important factors in effective fat burning, do nothing for GH levels or possibly reduce them by being in a constant caloric deficit, and increase the amount of time insulin is active in your body. All 4 of those create a worse environment for burning fat, but yet somehow you want to think this is a good thing? That is what I find laughable.

If you chained yourself to a bed ate absolutely nothing and starved yourself with no food for 3 weeks, you still wouldn't lose this much fat. And you'd probably be dead.

Of course not because by day 3 your growth hormone levels would plummet, your leptin and thyroid levels would plummet and your body would do everything it could to hold onto fat, burning muscle instead.

Like, are you just hoping no one here actually knows what they're talking about? Dumb dumb dumb.

No, I'm actually hoping some DOES know what they are talking about. Obviously that isn't you.

I didn't make this up. This is simply a modified version of a program designed by John Romaniello, an extremely well respected and sought after trainer. After running his version the first year, I didn't like some of the things in it because I felt "flat" and had lost some strength doing it, so I modified it slightly and it took care of those issues for me. For the most part 90-95% of what I am doing is outlined in his program, I lowered the fast days to 24 hours from 36 hours and use a workout program designed by my trainer rather than his workouts, but they are similar in scope and duration.

http://romanfitnesssystems.com/articles/intermittent-fasting-101/

Martin Berkhan, another extremely well respected and sought after trainer runs similar type of programs except his is more geared toward full-year useage while the modified one I use is more geared towards rapid fat loss in a short period of time.

http://www.leangains.com/

The warrior diet is another method similar to these where you eat a small meal early in the day and then eat one big meal at night.

http://www.muscleandfitness.com/nutrition/gain-mass/become-modern-day-warrior-diet-broke-all-rules

Brad Pilon's "Eat Stop Eat" is widely respected as being one of the first books to bring this type of thinking to the masses and most of these are offshoots from that, which they readily admit as they respect his work so much

http://www.eatstopeat.com/?utm_expid=7760520-27.-zWuQngQSgyD1T698Jfg7g.0&utm_referrer=https://www.google.com/

No, the vast majority of whatever weight you did lose in that 3 week period was water weight and food that was still in your stomach from binge eating.

I've lost 10lbs on the bike in an hour, but it's 97% water weight. I'm not foolish enough to say I lost 10lbs of fat/muscle, then make up random numbers for fat and muscle.

Well, considering I stay extremely well hydrated at all times, drinking at minimum a gallon of water a day, I'd have to say that is silliness to compare the two. I'm not "sweating" it out at any point, nor am I taking any type of diuretics--I don't drink coffee or alcohol. In fact making sure you are properly hydrated is a big key to any fat loss as the body burns fat much better when hydrated...think of water as the "oil" in the body's machine that keeps things running smoothly.

Its not a made up number, its based on using both SKULPT, the closest thing to a DEXA measurement you can get and Calipers, which since I have been using them for 5+ years I have gotten really good at measuring. They typically come out relatively close to each other, so its an easy way to cross-check, but the SKULPT is pretty much the gold standard of personal fat/muscle measurements.

So no other method that has been scientifically researched is as good as your method huh? Alright for funsies let's take a look at your "method",

Go read the studies. Every other method they have tried in studies leads to pretty much 50/50 fat loss/muscle loss except this way.

So... you "fast" 3 days out of the week, eat whatever you want one day, have three "normal" days (???), and you don't count calories or eat based on anything that is quantifiable? That's it?

Right. I would ask for perhaps some type of source backing your claim that this "method" is superior to anything else, if it wasn't so obvious this was a complete joke.

The source is that I used it for 4 years, any one who follows that program from John Romaniello, Ori Hofmekler(warrior diet), Martin Berkhan, or Brad Pilon has used it, and other people I have given my program to have used it, and they all have gotten good results with it.

The joke is that you are 6'0" 170 lbs trying to give advice to a guy who used to weigh 255 lbs, at one point got down to 175 lbs, and routinely sits under 10% BF in the summer and is extremely muscular, who has used himself as a personal guinea pig for the last 6 years and has tried many different ways of doing things, be it eating, workouts, supplements, etc.

I have tried pretty much everything at one point or another, including doing long bouts of steady state cardio AND what you are suggesting as a diet. What have you done? Based on your stats, not much of anything except workout your mouth and fingers on the keyboard.

Since obviously you have never actually tried this before, you are unqualified to have any opinion about it. I have tried the way you advise, along with many other methods, nearly all of them in search of the most efficient method(best results in the least amount of time). Trust me, if another method worked better, I would be using it---I have tried pretty much all of them at one point or another.

Please, no one take any advice from this guy seriously. Unbelievable.

Again, they can choose who to take advice from. The 6'0" 170 lb skeletor, or the 5'8" 185 lb beast who lives, eats and breathes this stuff. It doesn't matter to me. They are responsible for their own results, not me.

 

[AttackFormation]

I didn't make this up. This is simply a modified version of a program designed by John Romaniello, an extremely well respected and sought after trainer. After running his version the first year, I didn't like some of the things in it because I felt "flat" and had lost some strength doing it, so I modified it slightly and it took care of those issues for me. For the most part 90-95% of what I am doing is outlined in his program, I lowered the fast days to 24 hours from 36 hours and use a workout program designed by my trainer rather than his workouts, but they are similar in scope and duration.

http://romanfitnesssystems.com/articles/intermittent-fasting-101/

Martin Berkhan, another extremely well respected and sought after trainer runs similar type of programs except his is more geared toward full-year useage while the modified one I use is more geared towards rapid fat loss in a short period of time.

http://www.leangains.com/

The warrior diet is another method similar to these where you eat a small meal early in the day and then eat one big meal at night.

http://www.muscleandfitness.com/nutrition/gain-mass/become-modern-day-warrior-diet-broke-all-rules

Brad Pilon's "Eat Stop Eat" is widely respected as being one of the first books to bring this type of thinking to the masses and most of these are offshoots from that, which they readily admit as they respect his work so much

http://www.eatstopeat.com/?utm_expid=7760520-27.-zWuQngQSgyD1T698Jfg7g.0&utm_referrer=https://www.google.com/

The source is that I used it for 4 years, any one who follows that program from John Romaniello, Ori Hofmekler(warrior diet), Martin Berkhan, or Brad Pilon has used it, and other people I have given my program to have used it, and they all have gotten good results with it.

The joke is that you are 6'0" 170 lbs trying to give advice to a guy who used to weigh 255 lbs, at one point got down to 175 lbs, and routinely sits under 10% BF in the summer and is extremely muscular, who has used himself as a personal guinea pig for the last 6 years and has tried many different ways of doing things, be it eating, workouts, supplements, etc.

Again, they can choose who to take advice from. The 6'0" 170 lb skeletor, or the 5'8" 185 lb beast who lives, eats and breathes this stuff. It doesn't matter to me. They are responsible for their own results, not me.

The critical skeptic is on your @ss again marmel

Look.... John Romaniello is a steroid user, Martin Berkhan is a steroid user, Brad Pilon is one too from the looks of it but his stats are nowhere to be found so I can't confirm... do you have anything that isn't made and/or marketed by a drug user? of course they will have "good success" and be "well respected"... Ori Hofmekler is the only one who from a quick google search is not a user at least on the pictures I saw.

Being 183 cm and 77 kg is either small or normal depending on how long he's trained, which we don't know (or at least I haven't caught it anywhere). You however are a steroid user, which makes it a given that your stats will be that of a so-called "beast", and your basis for how big someone should be is based on steroid use from what else I've read unless we are talking about a different species. Leaving that out is dishonest to the people who are not as informed about the potential of natural stats as for example I am.

I haven't done enough research on IF to really speak for or against it and I can't verify or deny your anecdotes. I'm not biased either way, but I wanted to clear this stuff up. Gonna start reading up properly on IF now. Starting with Ori Hofmekler's claims, which I've already seen disproved while reading about other things but I will do this thoroughly.

 

[amazingswayze]

@marmel75 Although I want to believe your advice to be true, I simply can't because you haven't shown us your credentials. How about a before and after picture? Most of what you say sounds too good to be true and most times, it usually is. You kind of remind me of this guy;

No hard feelings Marmel, it's just that the fat loss feats that you describe don't seem humanly possible.

 

[AttackFormation]

Mike Chang. Another good example of a steroid user posing as a dietician or natural fitness model or whatever. It works because most people are either uninformed and don't know better, uninformed but think they aren't, they want to believe that it's true and not a case of drug use (you see this a LOT with sports fans for example), or they themselves are a also drug user who deceives people (even themselves, wanting to believe they are superhuman).