Alwyn Cosgrove Fat Loss Interview

[OldGuy]

When will the show be done?

[Michael Roussell]

Alwyn and I haven't set a date for the second show. Sooner than later. It depends on the quality and quanitity of questions we get.

[BjsAust]

I only got it downloaded yesterday. Need to listen to it a time or two more, then I'll have some questions no doubt .

[Cynic]

I'm willing to listen to anything he has to say. Often, I don't know a starting point, but react to what is said.

[dos]

It's funny but ask Alwyn if he thinks that someone can maintain large amounts of muscle mass while on a vegan diet (and is a little bit of a fat phobe as well...). I know that 99.9% of you guys think that someone who doesn't eat meat is freakish, frail, and sketchy at best but Alwyn PERSONALLY knows a 250lb. vegan that might challenge this notion.

I guess that this might also be a great question for nutrition experts like Cassandra and Berarido as well....

[Funk]

Originally Posted by dos

It's funny but ask Alwyn if he thinks that someone can maintain large amounts of muscle mass while on a vegan diet (and is a little bit of a fat phobe as well...). I know that 99.9% of you guys think that someone who doesn't eat meat is freakish, frail, and sketchy at best but Alwyn PERSONALLY knows a 250lb. vegan that might challenge this notion.

I guess that this might also be a great question for nutrition experts like Cassandra and Berarido as well....

I can vouche for the Vegan-Freak as well

[Lost Dog]

Originally Posted by dos

It's funny but ask Alwyn if he thinks that someone can maintain large amounts of muscle mass while on a vegan diet (and is a little bit of a fat phobe as well...). I know that 99.9% of you guys think that someone who doesn't eat meat is freakish, frail, and sketchy at best but Alwyn PERSONALLY knows a 250lb. vegan that might challenge this notion.

I guess that this might also be a great question for nutrition experts like Cassandra and Berarido as well....

99.9 might be a little high...

I know several people who don't eat meat. Not freakish or sketchy, really. Frail and pasty for sure. IMO, they don't eat enough and they still rely on crap food. Vegan cookies and crackers can still be crappy, empty calories.

I do a lot of work at the cafe of a Whole Foods market. I've never seen so many unhealthy bodies eating "healthy food." There are just as many fatties at Ralph's, the only real difference is the ones at Whole Foods think they're healthy.

I've never seen a fat vegan, though. Fat vegetarian? yes. Fat organic food nut? definately.

[kuri]

Ah Roland, are you calling one of our resident experts fat?

If so you better run n hide cuz Torrance isn't that far from Santa Clarita

[BFG]

Originally Posted by Michael Roussell

Alwyn doesn't removed carbs and then reintroduce them. He reintroduces starches after certain behavioral changes have been made. It isn't a carbs are the enemy thing - it is more about controlling blood sugar and determining a client's carbohydrate tolerance.


No one has fat loss questions for Alwyn?

Id agree with you on that and say that is sound sense, I did a similar thing to myself when I first started.

But then in the interview where he then goes and says about allowing an extra portion and the choice of slowing down fatloss. Extra calories slow down fatloss wether it be carbs or otherwise. The differential in the macro nutrient constituency is marginal in the grandscale of things anyway when talking about a portion we would be talking ounces lost a week. ie a same sized portion of fat would slow you down more as its greter calories.

What perhaps I would therefore ask you to clarify with Alwyn then is when using this ethos is he on about the total calorie intake at this point being at a calorie deficit, BMR or what level?

dont het me wrong Im not disputing him Im just trying to understand his methology in greater detail, it aint actualy that far different from my own

[flying scotsman]

Originally Posted by Michael Roussell

No one has fat loss questions for Alwyn?

Hello Michael,

I burned the interview to CD and have been listening to it going to work and coming home for several days. Great stuff.

My question for Alwyn is:

Many overweight clients usually have a sedentary lifestyle, so are deconditioned and have postural and structural issues as a result.
Given that such clients are easily over-trained, how would Alwyn structure the early phasess of a program in order to address any issues and gradually bring the client up to a level at which he could begin to consider putting them on fat loss programs such as those seen in the "New Rules Of Lifting" and "Afterburn"?

I look forward to the next interview.

[Chris D]

Originally Posted by Lost Dog

99.9 might be a little high...

I know several people who don't eat meat. Not freakish or sketchy, really. Frail and pasty for sure. IMO, they don't eat enough and they still rely on crap food. Vegan cookies and crackers can still be crappy, empty calories.

I do a lot of work at the cafe of a Whole Foods market. I've never seen so many unhealthy bodies eating "healthy food." There are just as many fatties at Ralph's, the only real difference is the ones at Whole Foods think they're healthy.

I've never seen a fat vegan, though. Fat vegetarian? yes. Fat organic food nut? definately.

Not to start a battle, but I've seen this time and time again with the vegetarians that I know.

[flying scotsman]

I'm not Alwyn, but allow me to put forward my thoughts.

Originally Posted by BFG

But then in the interview where he then goes and says about allowing an extra portion and the choice of slowing down fatloss.

Alwyn's comment needs to be considered in the context that his clients' strength and nutrition programs are individually tailored to maximise fat loss as fast as possible. So in the context of his views on carb control, the extra portion will slow down fat loss.

Originally Posted by BFG

Extra calories slow down fatloss wether it be carbs or otherwise.

I think this falls into the trap of believing that a calorie is a calorie. By way of example, if you are asked to eat 300 calories derived from vegatables or drink 300 calories from a non-diet soft drink, which do you think will be best for body composition?

Originally Posted by BFG

The differential in the macro nutrient constituency is marginal in the grandscale of things anyway when talking about a portion we would be talking ounces lost a week. ie a same sized portion of fat would slow you down more as its greter calories.

Your idea of "the grandscale of things" will differ from me and Alwyn's clients. What you have to remember is that Alwyn's clients pay him very well to achieve fast fat loss; this means that Alwyn has to design a nutrition plan to take into account the clients' individual characteristics and strength program (amongst other things, e.g. are they vegan?) and utlilise whatever macronutrient combinations to achieve the fastest fat loss for that client. Therefore, on that basis, that extra portion of carbs might just slow down fat loss.

[BFG]

thanks for that Scotsman I take on board yuor points and again see what you are saying

Originally Posted by flying scotsman

I think this falls into the trap of believing that a calorie is a calorie. By way of example, if you are asked to eat 300 calories derived from vegatables or drink 300 calories from a non-diet soft drink, which do you think will be best for body composition?.

Ok now compare macro to macro. if the individual has sufficent protein intake to maintain mass and lose fat and they are still in adeficit of calories but wish to increase portions then whether you provide this via protein or carbs would make negligible difference if the calorie count came out the same ie portion size adjusted to reflect this. In that scenario which I was referring to then yes a calorie does equal a calorie if the needs of the individual have been met.

Originally Posted by flying scotsman

Your idea of "the grandscale of things" will differ from me and Alwyn's clients. What you have to remember is that Alwyn's clients pay him very well to achieve fast fat loss; this means that Alwyn has to design a nutrition plan to take into account the clients' individual characteristics and strength program (amongst other things, e.g. are they vegan?) and utlilise whatever macronutrient combinations to achieve the fastest fat loss for that client. Therefore, on that basis, that extra portion of carbs might just slow down fat loss.

100% agree with you on this and was queerying this more from the aspect does he use the same thought process when it comes to mass produced off the shelf plans as they are obviously not tailored to the individual and therefore the advice doesnt hold the same ground.

Again Im just trying to follow the process in my head as I like to understand the mechanics and philosophies.

[gobbla]

Originally Posted by Chris D

Not to start a battle, but I've seen this time and time again with the vegetarians that I know.

Let us just assume for a moment that the vast majority of vegans or vegetarians are not in the buisness of strength or looking good naked. They eat shit in order to fill whatever moral qouta that they have to help the world sheep population replenish itself.

Stupid is stupid. You can eat meat and be stupid. You can eat soy and be stupid. Bottom line if you're stupid you're stupid and your diet isn't the deciding factor. big guys can eat soy and little guys can eat pig. The animal or plant that is eaten is not the deciding factor on the persons intelligence towards eating appropriately vs goals.

[flying scotsman]

Originally Posted by flying scotsman

I think this falls into the trap of believing that a calorie is a calorie. By way of example, if you are asked to eat 300 calories derived from vegatables or drink 300 calories from a non-diet soft drink, which do you think will be best for body composition?.

Originally Posted by BFG

Ok now compare macro to macro.

Ok, what if my example compared ingesting 300 calories of lovely brocolli (carbs) or 300 calories of lard (fat). Which is better for body composition?

Originally Posted by BFG

if the individual has sufficent protein intake to maintain mass and lose fat and they are still in adeficit of calories but wish to increase portions then whether you provide this via protein or carbs would make negligible difference if the calorie count came out the same ie portion size adjusted to reflect this. In that scenario which I was referring to then yes a calorie does equal a calorie if the needs of the individual have been met.

If you fully understood that a calorie isn't a calorie, you wouldn't be suggesting that the source of calories makes no difference to your efforts in fat loss. By the way, I know that sounds off, but I couldn't think of a better way of working it

Understand also that it is Alwyn's observation that a lower carb diet is more conducive to fat loss. If you accept that, then you will appreciate why he is careful to monitor client intake of carbs to ensure that fat loss is maxmimised, not compromised.

I believe that the timing of carb intake is important. It has certainly been my experience that the body is better able to handle carbs in the mornings and during and after workouts. I also believe that combining my carb intakes with protein is better for me than combining carbs with fat and this seems to be the macronutrient organisiation of choise for many other people too.

Originally Posted by flying scotsman

Your idea of "the grandscale of things" will differ from me and Alwyn's clients. What you have to remember is that Alwyn's clients pay him very well to achieve fast fat loss; this means that Alwyn has to design a nutrition plan to take into account the clients' individual characteristics and strength program (amongst other things, e.g. are they vegan?) and utlilise whatever macronutrient combinations to achieve the fastest fat loss for that client. Therefore, on that basis, that extra portion of carbs might just slow down fat loss.

Originally Posted by BFG

100% agree with you on this and was queerying this more from the aspect does he use the same thought process when it comes to mass produced off the shelf plans as they are obviously not tailored to the individual and therefore the advice doesnt hold the same ground.

I guesss it depends on what the "mass produced off the shelf plans" are and how they are structured.

My view is that provided the principle remains the same (e.g. low carb, high protein) and the method remains the same (e.g. concentration on veggies, quality protein, good source of fats) then all else being equal there is good reason to believe that a mass produced plan can be effective, but nothing is more effective than an individualised plan.

[BFG]

Originally Posted by flying scotsman

Ok, what if my example compared ingesting 300 calories of lovely brocolli (carbs) or 300 calories of lard (fat). Which is better for body composition?.

Jeeze big portions where you come from Mr! using that example it would depend on the structure and macro nutrient split the individual is tryinbg to maintain.

Nutritionaly speaking the broccoli is far better and healthier than a lump of lard.

Now compare 300 calories of brocolli to 300 cals of fresh salmon or extra lean turkey, and the issue is far from clear cut which I was getting at ie comparison of healthy sources not bad nutritional sources

Originally Posted by flying scotsman

If you fully understood that a calorie isn't a calorie, you wouldn't be suggesting that the source of calories makes no difference to your efforts in fat loss. By the way, I know that sounds off, but I couldn't think of a better way of working it ?

I didnt say that or at least didnt mean to imply that you could eat crud or a diet of high fat and Maccy D's but then again maybe I assumed wrongly that you would take this as a given.

But when it comes to clean sources of food then no I think that it is the overall philosophy of diet and the way it is implemented rather than the crazy never ending argument of my protein is better than your carbs! fact is if you get that philosophy right at best you will be making ounces differences in weightloss to the individual over the period of planned weightloss.

yes I agree its Alwyns preference to take on this aproach and he employs his mode extremely well and I dont doubt that; hence the nature of my question was that is this his method for all clients.
Alwyn feels it is most conducive in line with his way of operating, but as you know theres thousands of approaches from all angles that will get as equaly good a result in the same time frame

yeh totaly agree with plans i think they are a good starting point but individualised will take it to the next stage