Localized fat loss supplement?

[Nutty]

The thing is...

I've been working out for about a year now. I began with the Testosterone Advantage plan. Tried to stick to it's guidelines both on nutrition and workouts, meaning I sometimes skip one or two workouts and eat what I wish on an off day.

Since then I’ve managed to gain 10 pounds, 3/4 inch on my biceps, 3 inches in my chest (for the first time since I can remember my chest out measures my waist) and my waist line remains the same. This is where the problem lies. I think the results are quite good. I feel better looking at my self and I aim to go a bit further but not that much. But... my abs aren't noticeable!

And now I come to you for help. What can I do to reduce the fat localized on my waist?

When it comes to calories, I’m eating around 1900 give or take 100. I try to eat according to a 30% protein;50% carbs; 20% fat; plan. I'm 29, 5'9", 165 pounds and therefore I think my math is neatly done.

And as for workouts, a minimum of two per week together with 2 hours of soccer through the week.

So, what can i do to see my ab muscles?

Thanks

[Mountain_marc]

I think most people will tell you to lower your carbs and raise your fat. That should help alot. Also make sure to eat boatloads of those veggies!!

You can also take a look at this thread which I read today. Seems to be very informative. Abs Are Over-Rated

[BFG]

Increase carbs to 60% protein to 20% and fat to 20% aim to drink 4 litres of ice cold water a day

Static calories dont do you any favour, now obviously I dont know what your gym routine is but try cycling the calories weekly ie 1900 down 200 up 100 but it all depends on yuor energy expenditure.

have a read of these:

www.admfitness.com/bfg.doc
www.admfitness.com/diet.doc

funnily enough it embraces most of what is referred to in the article marc referred to except interval training which is overated anyway


Hope they help

[Lost Dog]

Good job on the weight gain! Sounds like you put on some muscle.

Have you been eating that level for the whole year? It seems strange to have gained 10lbs on a calorie deficit like that.

That being said, if you've eaten that same amount (basically) for a long length of time, you body can become aclimated to those levels. Your metabolism compensates.

Also, your TAP calculations are a bit off. At 2000 calories, you should be at 35% C (175g and 700 calories) and 35% F (78g and 700 calories), since 165lbs gives you 150g of P (600 calories).

[Lost Dog]

I forgot to answer your most basic question...

There's nothing you can do to effect localized fat deposits. You have to continue to lose fat all over. Some areas are the last to go. You can get leaner and leaner over the body and still have some areas that trouble you.

Aside from your 10lbs gain, how was the fat loss, overall?

[BFG]

meant to say on your training goals if you wanna bulk then bulk if you wanna cut and see those abs the train to cut dont expect to achieve both at the same time its like robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Its not impossibe but very tricky and needs extreme monitoring

[Ogedei]

I'm gonna say "nothing".

All the things listed will certainly reduce fat from your body, but none will target your gut fat specifically. Men typically store fat in their gut and so it's going to be the last place to go.

Following a reduced calorie diet is gonna reduce fat.

Also check out these threads for other fat loss options.

My ketosis update
"Adam's Diet" Thread

Og.

[jax]

the only thing that i've heard "may" help with spot reducing fat is yohimbe.

i wouldn't bother though, just get your diet together and you'll lose the fat.

[Nutty]

Thanks for all the imput. You basically said what i had expected you to say.

In response to Lost Dog, i have to say that for the greater part of the last 10 months i ate nearly 2400+ calories a day. That explains the gain of weight. For the last 2 months i've been trying to cut, ence the 1900 calories.
I was not aware of the math you made. Still, and this is for all you guys, you seem to disagree on the regime i should embrace. I've heard 60-20-20, 30-35-35, raise fat... So? Where do we stand?

As for my 30-50-20 diet, i got it from TAP where i understood the role of protein, fat but not carbs. I'm under the impression that this is where i should cut. True?

PS: I've omited an important fact, i think, I only drink about 10 oz of water a day if much. Could this be slowing me down also?

[Lost Dog]

Personally, I think you can do slightly better shifting the carbs down and the fat up, but you can do it with low calories alone.

There are people that do okay on lower fat, higher carb diets. I'm not one of them. The higher the carbs, the hungrier I stay. There's a limit, of course. I tend to eat lower carb, but with tons of vegetables, moderate fat.

I used TAP for over two years, with great success. But I feel like a full disclosure is necessary. I do not, nor have I ever, had a six pack. I've had two and the shadow of the next two showing. That's it. I used to be fat, now I'm not. Like you, I'm pretty lean, but my flabby areas are annoyingly still around.

BFG, on the other hand, has had quite the six pack.

Strangely, many of us here convince ourselves that he's an anamoly. That despite being wrong about everything fitness and nutrition related, he's somehow managed to go from fat to lean. He still succeeds where many of us fail, despite doing it all wrong.

I'm exagerating a bit. He's not all wrong. Most of what he says, works. Most of what most of the people here say, also works. I think he and I agree on that point. Our points of discussion usually focus on which method is better. He's outnumbered, but he has the trump card; it worked for him!

Back to you. TAP is an excellent program. It's moderate carb, so it can make me and BFG happy (He just doesn't know it yet). As with any program, it needs to be tweaked a bit for the individual. But, since you've been at 2400, and now dropped down to 1800-2000, you can probably stick with that level for a while.

The TAP ratios are .91g of P per lb of body weight. So, at your set calorie level of 2000 calories, that's 150g of P, or 600 calories. Take the remainder of calories (1400) and divide it in half (700). 700g of C (at 4 cals per gram) is 175g. 700g of F (at 9 cals per gram) is 78g. It gets confusing.

However, BFG's idea of moving the calorie level a bit from week to week is probably sound. I think he typically would suggest something like. 2000, 1900, 1800, 2000, 1900, 1800, repeat. I don't know if those jumps are big enough. Hopefully, he'll pipe in.

Drink more water, too. 10 oz is not much. Hopefully you drink other, non-calorie drinks, but more water would certainly help.

[BFG]

Originally Posted by Lost_Dog

I'm exagerating a bit. He's not all wrong. Most of what he says, works. Most of what most of the people here say, also works. I think he and I agree on that point. Our points of discussion usually focus on which method is better. He's outnumbered, but he has the trump card; it worked for him!

However, BFG's idea of moving the calorie level a bit from week to week is probably sound. I think he typically would suggest something like. 2000, 1900, 1800, 2000, 1900, 1800, repeat. I don't know if those jumps are big enough. Hopefully, he'll pipe in.

Drink more water, too. 10 oz is not much. Hopefully you drink other, non-calorie drinks, but more water would certainly help.

You know I will pipe in ha ha ha ha. The thing is and Im just writing an article on this.

In the US the training philosophy seems to be Carbs are the enemy (sugar is most definitely evil) eat more fat eat more protein let the body work harder to convert it to energy, throw in a load of running and hiit to burn it all up. Its alot of effort.

Most serious trainers in the UK are now of the philosophy that running sucks! Why do it? Reduce your total calorific intake, and your fat intake and let the body work in your favour as its designed to do. Also stop basing your protein needs on severely overinflated figures.

As for me being outnumbered? Nah not at all there have been far more people off of the UK site follow what I did, in fact 3 other contenders alongside me on the first challenge, a multitude of guys who did it off board and achieved and posted and treble that for guys that never posted but emailed me direct, so Im confident that this works :-)

Calorie cycling for me from 22% body fat to 9.5% was 200 down 100 up so:

2000 /1800 / 1900 / 1700 / 1800 / 1600 / 1700 / 1500 / 1600 / 1400
back to start

My gym work lasted roughly 35 mins burns only 350 cals approx so anything expended over and above this needs to be compensated for and allowed for on that day (especialy if taking it down to 1400)

You chose what method you want, they both work as LD says and are both PROVEN methods

[BFG]

Originally Posted by Nutty

PS: I've omited an important fact, i think, I only drink about 10 oz of water a day if much. Could this be slowing me down also?

without a doubt as you cant metabolise fat without at bare minimum adequate hydration, but suprhydration allows the liver and kidneys to work effectively in the process

[Lost Dog]

I only meant you were outnumered HERE. On this site. I'd be interested to hear or read a debate (or mere conversation) on the subject of these somewhat conflicting philosophies.

I'd love to see the article when it's finished, by the way.

[BFG]

http://www.menshealth.co.uk/talk/thr...d140349/page1/

hope you are sitting comfortable if you are gonna read through that lot

[Lost Dog]

I will. Thanks for the link (and warning).

[BFG]

thats the original challenge, the article isnt finished yet will take me a couple of weeks on this one as want to cross reference lots
:-)

luckily we have a top sports accademy uni in Bedford and I can get free access to all the literature

[Nutty]

BFG...

Could you provide me with a few directions on how to lower carbs that much? How do you manage that? What is your diet like?
I don't see how i could pull that off...

Thanks