How to diet fast 1 week

Despite their best efforts, there are all the time trying to fight against the pounds while others rush anything and remain stubbornly slim.

Justice is not always appropriate in terms of weight. But the behavior plays. Decryption.
The weight of heredity
For a long time we know that a child born of two parents of normal weight has only 10% chance of becoming obese. If its Mom or Dad, that risk increases to 40%. And if Mom and Dad, this dual risk.

Over the years, scientists have identified the genes responsible for weight gain and they are constantly finding new ones. But in practice, this does not change the problem: we can not change their genes, we have to make do.

Conclusion: if there is a big or large in your immediate family, you have no choice but to move as much as possible to increase your energy expenditure and to hold on to a balanced diet.



The obsession pounds
Thin usually ignore the scale. Sometimes they do not even have a home, and they do weigh during a medical visit.

You are among those who start their day by weighing or worse, that confront their balance several times a day? You have a super sophisticated balance that tells you the fat, muscle mass, and - horror! - Talking to you and you feel guilty from a difference of 200 g?

In one day, your weight can vary from 1 to 3 kg, and for various reasons: the degree of hydration, food composition, etc.

When your weight increases by a few hundred grams, you deprive yourself of eating, consciously or unconsciously. When he did not move or has declined, you lift your foot on deprivation.

Accordingly? You unbalance your diet and most importantly, youre listening to your feelings of hunger and satiety. This is the best way to grow. The more you are obsessed with your weight, the more you earn (badly) to take chances!

The solution? Write down your weight a morning fasting after peeing. Then store your balance at the bottom of a closet (which you need to clear to get it back). Retract it a month later and weigh yourself under the same conditions. So the difference, plus or minus, will be really valuable.
Lack of sleep
You fold late, you get up early, you have trouble falling asleep? In short, your nights are too short. And you catch your lack of sleep during the weekend.

It is not impossible that those pounds easily if you take just that. Researchers at the University of Washington found that sleeping less than seven hours a night promoted weight gain: genes for obesity begin at rest during sleep. So the more you sleep, the less they work.

On the other hand, lack of sleep, it tires. To fight against this strain was much more likely to snack on fatty and sugary stuff, drinking well sugary sodas rather than water, and all this upsets the balance and food makes you fat.

The solution? Nights of at least 8 hours! Buckle the TV, the computer, tablet, smartphone early (to calm your brain) and lie down with a book earlier.

"And yet I do not eat anything! "
This is what we often hear from the mouths of too big (or those who think they are too big) after moaning thin eating what they want.

But when subjected to a tight food situation, established day by day for a week, then you realize they multiply unconsciously feeding mistakes.

Too much oil and / or butter (depending on region) for cooking, irregular meals, a distinct lack of vegetables and fruits. They do not nibble as they watch, or else they creak occasionally in guilt.

The solution? For one week, write every day (on a notebook or a file in your smartphone) absolutely everything, that you swallow when you swallow. And then compare with a balanced 1800/2000 calories (if you have no physical activity) and 2000/2200 calorie diet, if you do a bit of sport.

Take also into account what you are buying as fat (oil, butter, margarine) and then calculate the average consumption over a week. If you exceed the 200 to 300 g per week, all combined fat is too much. And this may be one reason for your easy weight gain.
"I must make Plan"
Thats what you say and do often. For years, maybe even since you were a teenager, you have accumulated blackout periods more or less wild that made you lose 2 or 3 kg quickly resumed.

The result? You completely unbalanced your body. By dint of being pushed around and your body has lost its bearings.

He defends physiologically - it is equipped for it - by making provisions for the next famine: it slows its calorie burning when you do not bring him enough and he makes up fat during times of plenty.

The solution? Eat a balanced diet based on your height and your weight and forget this obsession pounds. You lose slowly but definitely.

eating slowly
At what speed do you eat? How long do you stay at the table?

If you swallow all round, if your meals are shipped within 15 to 20 minutes, there is a good chance that you will never feel you truly satisfied.

Twenty minutes is the time it takes your satiety center to initiate and send the positive signals of satiation. When you eat fast, you did not have time to work well and does not record what you have to swallow.

The result? You will never feel really good, you have all the time want to eat something. You resist but you often crack.

Thin eat slowly, they take the time to appreciate what they have on their plate (or sandwich lunch), they are naturally in tune with their feelings, they stop spontaneously when satiated. Thus, they do not eat beyond their energy needs.

The solution? Force yourself at all costs to eat slowly. This will ask you for a big effort, but it will annoy you, whether or not genetically predisposed to weight gain, its the right solution to not get fat

Have a fantastic day. I hope you enjoy the new site, and thank you deeply for your love and support-- it means so very much. xoxo steph

p.s.: if you find any site snafus/weirdness, please email me at contact@stephanieodea.com

What happens to your muscle, when you train on a low protein diet?

With the publication of Alan Aragons and Brad Schoenfelds excellent paper "Nutrient timing revisited: is there a post-exercise anabolic window?" (Aragon. 2013), the over-estimated importance of the so-called window of opportunity after a workout has been knocked back into reasonable shape. Neither of the two would yet probably tell you to copy the experimental design of a recently published study that was conducted by a team of researchers from the Maastricht University in The Netherlands, the McMaster University in Canada and the University of Nottingham in the UK.

Protein "starvation" and growth potential

Much contrary to the average "window of opportunity study", Snijders et al. did not look at the benefits of post-workout protein supplementation, but at the detriments of not consuming any protein before and after a workout.
To this ends, the scientists put their 21 ± 2 year old male subjects on iso-caloric (=same amount of total kcal) diets with highly different protein content. While

• Table 1: Subject data (Snijders. 2013)

  the normal protein group (NPD) feasted on 1.2g protein/kg ↳ 88/474/60g PRO/CHO/FAT

the poor guys in

• the low protein group (LPD) received only 0.1g of protein/kg ↳ 11/502/56g PRO/CHO/FAT

over the course of the 4 day tightly controlled study period. After following this diet for one day the subjects had to perform a single bout of resistance exercise which consisted of two different exercises, each of which was performed for six:

• horizontal leg press machine - 6 sets x 10 reps @ 75% of the 1RM
• leg extesions - 6 sets x 10 reps @ 75% of the 1RM

The equipment they used were standard Technogym machines and thus as representative of what the average trainee may find in his gym as the antroprometric, body composition and fitness data of the study participants (see Table 1) was representative of the average novice trainees stats.

Figure 1: Total number of myostatin(+) satellite cells per type II fiber - left; rel. change (% of baseline) in type I+II fiber SC number and size 72h after the workout - right; (Snijders. 2013)

It is thus not unrealistic to assume that the data the scientists got from muscle biopsies of the vastus lateralis that were collected before and 12, 24, 48, and 72 h after the workout are representative of what would happen to any young, normally trained individual, on a quasi no-protein fast:

• A note on satellite cells: As Snijders et al. point out. Mere protein synthesis appears to be enough for short term growth, in the longer run, however, "SCs are required to provide additional myonuclei to allow muscle fiber hypertrophy". Thats old news. The thing the study at hand adds, though, is the fact that the exercise induced recruitement of satellite cells "does not affect the increase in muscle fiber SC". The study at hand is thus the first to show that "the SC response to exercise is essentially dissociated from dietary protein intake and is likely evolutionary conserve" (Snijders. 2013).
  No acute differences in the net reduction in myostatin(+) satellite cells (SCs) - The fast wont have any effects on the number of myostatin(+) satellite cells (SC), in general. In other words, the training will acutely losen the "protein synthesis brake" irrespective of whether you consume or dont consume enough protein.
• Persistent decreases in myostatin(+) satellite cells only in the LPD group - The restoration of the number of myostatin(+) SCs in the fast twitch type II muscle fibers of the vastus will however be blunted - or, put differently, the myostatin expression will remain suppressed for at least 72h.
• Overall increases in total satellite cell content and size around the muscle fibers - The crowding of satellite cells around type I and type II fibers (Figure 1, right) is a crucial step in postworkout recovery, because the SCs "are thought to be the sole source for providing new myonuclei, thereby supporting skeletal muscle reconditioning" (Snijders. 2013).

Unfortunately we do not have the corresponding protein synthesis data, but I would bet that the ostensibly "negative" increase myostatin the subjects in the normal protein group experienced after 48h (+86%) and 72h (+88%) is actually a good indicator that the muscular protein pool was replenished (or even supercompensated) at this time point.

From the Intermittent Thoughts on Building Muscle you will probably remember that the increase in myostatin and the corresponding reduction in protein synthesis would be a perfectly normal - in fact, a very healthy response. A response that prevents the development of huge, but dysfunctional skeletal muscle (learn more). Consequently, we would have to interpret the myostatin reduction in the low protein group as a reaction to the loss, or at least constantly low skeletal muscle protein, a status the consequences of which are similar to those that occur, when you empty your glycogen stores: The muscle cells will do their best to replenish the said nutrient. In this case, this means that lower myostatin and generate an anabolic potential that cannot be fulfilled, though, as long as there is no protein to be "pumped" into the muscle.
References:

• Aragon, A. A., & Schoenfeld, B. J. (2013). Nutrient timing revisited: is there a post-exercise anabolic window?. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 10(1), 5.
• Snijders, T., Verdijk, L. B., McKay, B. R., Smeets, J. S., van Kranenburg, J., Groen, B. B., ... & van Loon, L. J. (2014). Acute Dietary Protein Intake Restriction Is Associated with Changes in Myostatin Expression after a Single Bout of Resistance Exercise in Healthy Young Men. The Journal of nutrition, jn-113.

In general, you have to count and limit your weekly HIIT sessions. Doing as much as humanly possible, could yet make sense, when youre preparing for Olympia 2016 and realize 5 weeks before the event that you have been lingering for too long ;-)

I think as a SuppVersity reader you know by now that "more wont yield more" - no matter if we are talking about supplements or exercise. Now, while weve had countless examples of the "more aint more" principle thats also at the heart of the "Three Simple Rules of Supplementation" (read article) for supplements (e.g. zinc, chromium, etc.) and the simple notion that eating less wont always result in greater weight loss, evidence for the pro-anabolic / adaptive effects of exercise in general, and non-steady state cardio, in particular is scarce. Against that background its all the more important for us to cherish the publication of a paper from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology and the St Olav University Hospital in Trondheim Norway, Roy told me about by messaging me via the SuppVersity Facebook Page.

"More HIIT doesnt help more, either"

I guess the above would be the elevator pitch for the mythical "turbo lift" in Star Trek. For someone like yourself who has learned never to swallow "expert" wisdom just like that, the statement "more HIIT doesnt hep more, either" obviously wont be satisfying.

Figure 2: Illustration of the training in the low frequency (LF) and high frequency (HF) group.

If you look at the illustration above, you will already know somewhat more about the "more" in the previous sentence. As you can see, the parameter that has been modified is not the volume, its the frequency!  - and thus one of the parameters of which many gymrats think that it could hardly be high enough (AM + PM training, 7 days a week - does that ring a bell?). What this people ignore is the simple truth that ...

... adapatation takes time and training more often does not accelerate this process!

In the end, I am actually quite surprised to see that the net VO2 "gain" the scientists measured in the subsequent detraining phase (see Figure 2) was identical. Or, more explicitly, that packing 24 training sessions into three weeks did not blunt the mitochondrial adaptation processes that are responsible for the increase in VO2max, altogether.

Figure 2: VO2max and heart rate values of the 16 healthy subjects before / after high vs. low frequency HIIT (Hatle. 2014)

If we are brutally honest, though, there is obviously an advantage for the 24 sessions in 8 weeks version of this training protocol (see Figure 3, as well). The VO2max scores were after all identical only in the "catch-up" up period in week 11 and due to the rapid decline after week 12 the benefits faded equally rapid in both groups when the 19 healthy, normalweight, but non-athletic subjects returned to their usual laziness (detraining = not training at all).
References:

• Hatle H, Støbakk PK, Mølmen HE, Brønstad E, Tjønna AE, et al. "Effect of 24 Sessions of High-Intensity Aerobic Interval Training Carried out at Either High or Moderate Frequency, a Randomized Trial." PLoS ONE 9(2). (2014): e88375. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0088375