utterly vain post about ditching beer belly

[stomper]

There's something that's been driving me mad. I need a barefoot-running style approach to the problem. But be warned, this is long and completely vain. Feel free to skip.

No, don't just feel free to skip it. YOU MUST skip it unless you are a masochist.

There, you've been warned.

It's my weight, or not even my weight, really, it's the beer belly I have. It's not terrible. I weigh about 170 lbs at 5'4" and I'm pretty muscle-y and stocky in nature, so I'd say I'm a mere 15 lbs overweight. I'm not like Billy Carter or anything.

But that particular 15 lbs isn't cute, either. It sticks out in front of me. It precedes me in life. And I'm sick of this particular companion. It causes me to slump back in chairs to hide it. Or to wear black shirts when I'm not feeling particularly like wearing black. (And really, I've chosen pictures that minimize the issue. A realistic picture is far worse.)


But here's the frustrating part: the beer belly seems to be independent of my level of fitness and diet. No matter whether I can't run a block or whether I've been training 5 days a week for a martial arts test, I always have it. Right now I can run faster and farther than I could 10 years ago, and I know I eat far FAR less than I used to, but I still have the belly. I still weigh the same. It's completely mysterious.

Right now each week I do two short but hard crossfit workouts (kettle bells, calisthenics, etc), one or two 90-minute sessions of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, and run 10-15 hilly miles, sometimes more. It seems like a lot. I also don't own a car so I do a lot of random walking and biking. I've been on this particular fitness plan for the last three or four months and in that time my shoulders and legs have started looking awesome. But the beer belly has constricted marginally at best. And my total weight hasn't changed. What gives?

I do know that my body seems to be very good at learning how to do things lazily. For example the week I switched to a single speed road bike (from a multispeed) I lost 5 pounds. But then it came back as I got used to riding it. Same deal when I started jiu jitsu.

I'm not sure what part food is playing here. I do know that I'm eating far less than I used to, but I abhor counting calories. The rule I've been using is "Only eat exactly what you want to." Which sounds very liberal, I know, but it actually has kept me from a lot of impulsive eating that I would have done 10 years ago... (when, oddly enough, I weighed exactly the same, though I must have looked... softer).

I would welcome any advice or suggestions that you could give. Just FYI, I am unlikely to follow complicated diet plans that involve counting things. Simple rules I can deal with. More exercise is possible.

Basically, I'm looking for an instinctive, informal approach to this problem that allows my body to tell me what's right. Much like BFR has worked a whole lot better for me than chi running or P*se running or any plan anybody has ever given me for running.

Input?

 

[barefootnuch]

Do some core work...haha

Do some core work...haha

 

[Blind Boy]

Be careful with serious

Be careful with serious dieting if you exercise a lot. That being said, the reason you're not seeing any big changes in the belly area is that you're either not exercising enough or you're eating too much. Both amount to the same thing. Losing weight is a very simple process really, you simply use more calories than you consume either by eating less or doing more exercise, preferably stuff like long runs or bike rides, steady effort over a long period of time. The hard part is avoiding compensating for whatever training you do by eating more. It's your body's natural response so you need to be careful there.

Informal enough for ya?

 

[Longboard]

I'm a big believer in calorie

I'm a big believer in calorie counting. Nobody likes doing it, but the facts are that calories in/calories out are all that count when it comes to weight/fat control.

Some very healthy food choices really pack in the calories, while some that sound empty and "fattening" are much lower.

You said you wanted a solution in dealing with the beer belly that is barefoot running-like in nature?

How 'bout this:

Everything we now know about barefoot running seems to defy conventional wisdom, but is in actuality correct.

Everyone "knows" that beer is empty calories, and white potatoes are bad, sweet potatoes good, right?

WRONG!!!!!

Ounce for ounce, a sweet potato is higher in calories than a plain old normal 'tater. Forget glucose spikes, etc., you want to feel full enough to quit eating before over indulging. A few plain baked Russets washed down with a six pack of light beer is the secret to six-pack abs.

Nobody of your height and build that limits themselves to 2500 calories counted ACCURATLY and exercises daily will have anything other than a washboard belly.

Eat calorie rich non-meat products like cheese, nuts, seeds, humus, whole wheat muffins, etc., and your calorie count will soar, yeilding that "beer" belly even while abstaining from the brew.

 

[Matt]

Our approach to food is much

Our approach to food is much like our addiction to shoes. Basically, we've been mis-informed a great deal the last few decades. The best book on the topic I know of is Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. Our society has increased carb consumption and lowered fat consumption the last few decades, and obesity and diabetes have skyrocketed.

Unfortunately, exercise only makes you hungrier.

It's not the number of calories, it's the type of calories that count. Here's the bad stuff -- sugar, refined grains, and starches. If you eliminate those, you will feel much less hungry, and your insulin levels will moderate.

It all comes down to insulin. It's the hormone that regulates fat regulation. More insulin, and your body deposits more fat. And what causes insulin levels to go up? Carbs, especially refined carbs.

I cut my carb consumption way down. Not because of weight, though I did have a decent sized beer belly, but because of inflammation. Not only did my inflammation go way down, my belly shrunk on it's own. The other benefit of cutting down on refined carbs is that I'm no longer hungry all the time.

I think there are a lot of parallels between this and running shoes. It's amazing how we've been lead to believe things that are totally wrong.

 

[Abide]

I think it just takes time

I think it just takes time too. If you can keep up that workout routine give it a full year and then reassess. I think there are some parts of our bodies that get results fast and other parts that take a little more.

 

[Longboard]

Matt wrote:Our approach to

Our approach to food is much like our addiction to shoes. Basically, we've been mis-informed a great deal the last few decades....It's not the number of calories, it's the type of calories that count. Here's the bad stuff -- sugar, refined grains, and starches. If you eliminate those, you will feel much less hungry, and your insulin levels will moderate....It all comes down to insulin. It's the hormone that regulates fat regulation. More insulin, and your body deposits more fat. And what causes insulin levels to go up? Carbs, especially refined carbs....I think there are a lot of parallels between this and running shoes. It's amazing how we've been lead to believe things that are totally wrong.

I hear or read all of the above daily, and my personal opinion is that those theories are the orthotics of the 21'st century.

Low fat turned out to be wrong, low carb works for some because it reduces their total calorie count, and insulin spikes/refined carb will go down in history just like all the other fad diets did....debunked.

The true barefoot approach to weight control? Too simple to write a book about: calorie control, meaning portion control and not eating for recreation.

Whether or not a diet rich in refined carbs is HEALTHY for you is another story, but as far as weight control? It's just the current fad to differentiate "good" from "bad" carbs and thinking insulin and glucose spikes are important regarding hunger and weight control.

Of course, just my opinion.................

 

[Barefoot TJ]

I think you will lose weight

I think you will lose weight with the less calories you take in each day, meaning burn more than you eat. The reason for eating this or that or avoiding this or that is so that the calories you DO take in are healthy ones. But seriously, if all I ate was one Big Mac everyday, nothing else, I would lose weight.

 

[Longboard]

Barefoot TJ wrote:  But

But seriously, if all I ate was one Big Mac everyday, nothing else, I would lose weight.

I tried that once, and it worked!

One drive-thru Egg Muffin no cheese/no Canadian bacon for breakfast w/ black coffee or diet coke: 250 calories

One quarter pounder no cheese for lunch 425 KCAL (these days it would be a double hamburger, @$1.00 a fraction of the price)

Dinner: Wendy's grilled chicken sandwich w/o the sauce. This was back in the early eighties, with the old style bun, total 375 KCAL. One Wendy's baked potato plain, 200 calories

Up to a six pack back then of Miller Lite, 575 calories.

Total for the day?

1825 calories. I dropped the pounds in no time. Probably built atherosclerotic plaque, but maybe the beer negated it.

Total time spent food shopping, preparing, cleaning, eating per day? 30 minutes at best, leaving plenty of time for other pursuits.

When I decided to start eating healthy instead, it took all day and became a hobby in itself.

Still undecided as to which approach is better all around!

 

[stomper]

Hey, thanks for all the

Hey, thanks for all the thoughtful input, Longboard, Blind Boy, TJ, Matt, etc.

I read carefully, and then wrote a really long response full of mathematical functions, and then just erased it, because I recall I asked for a barefoot running type approach. I think Abide nailed it.

I think it just takes time too. If you can keep up that workout routine give it a full year and then reassess. I think there are some parts of our bodies that get results fast and other parts that take a little more.

I'm gonna go with that.

"The Dude abides. I don't know about you but I take comfort in that." -- the stranger.

 

[LavaRunner]

I do not believe it is just a

I do not believe it is just a matter of calories in, calories out. There is a massive body of knowledge out there about how our bodies trigger fat storage and it is very clear that when you eat if your level of insulin increases, you store fat and if you keep the level down you don't. That alone trashes calories in/ calories out theory and introduces hormones into the mix. Try reducing your intake of high glycemic index foods when not running, that would be the other 22 hours a day we live and see if you start reducing that spare tire. Use gels or whatever running but cut back on the sugars, the sodas, the pasta, the white breads for a short while.

BTW, I got the same issues and when I do what I am saying the tire starts to go flat. When I don't, it inflates.

 

[Matt]

Low carb has been around for

Low carb has been around for as long as people have been running barefoot. What's relatively new in our diets is refined carbs. Sugar, hfcs, refined grains, etc. If you want to keep it simple, just don't eat anything that is "manufactured". There are plenty of obsese people who eat relative low calorie diets, but they eat too much crap.

The cool thing is that these is easy enough to test yourself. It's like barefoot running. Take off your shoes, go running, and see how it goes. I did the same things with sugar and bread, and saw the results.

But if you want science, there is plenty out there. More and more, scientists are showing the underlying mechanism of metabolic syndrome.

 

[Longboard]

Matt wrote: There are plenty

There are plenty of obsese people who eat relative low calorie diets, but they eat too much crap.

If that were true we could easily feed the world!

No obese person eats a relativly low calorie diet.

That's one example of why this whole anti-refined carb/processed food craze is an overblown myth.

The underprivelaged living on crap are fat because they take in tons of excess calories in the form of refined carbs and fat, i.e potato chips, fries, prepared "baked" goodds like Twinkees, and $5 large pizzas, all washed down with liters of Coke, Pepsi, or Mountain Dew.

Despite all the current hype, calories in/calories out regardless of food quality is all that matters with regards to fat storage.

The insulin and glucose research may have found reasons for fatigue, hunger, etc., but it is foolish to believe that a person could take in a low number of calories yet conserve so much energy that they could actualy have a net gain and store it as fat.

 

[Matt]

The calories in/out myth is

The calories in/out myth is akin to thinking that people need lots of cushioning to run on hard surfaces. Calories are different. They are different in how they affect hormones and fat regulation.

 

[Matt]

Here's one short article on

Here's one short article on the topic, but if you look, there is a ton of stuff out there.

http://www.ucsf.edu/science-cafe/articles/obesity-and-metabolic-syndrome-driven-by-fructose-sugar-diet/

 

[Longboard]

Calories in/calories out is

Calories in/calories out is the barefoot running equivilent.

Storage of fat based on any other theories, i.e refined carbs/glucose spikes/insulin are the current motion control shoes.

!000 calories of Coke chasing down 1000 calories of fries with no other food intake will yield a lean body.

Not a healthy one, but lean never the less.

 

[Matt]

Obviously, we aren't reading

Obviously, we aren't reading the same science.

 

[Longboard]

Here's one short

Here's one short article on the topic, but if you look, there is a ton of stuffoutthere.[quote/]



The science your talking about is not exactly cutting edge nor new, I've been bombarded with the same stuff you currently believe for years now.

I've done my research, and tend to side with the debunkers like this guy:

http://anthonycolpo.com/?p=45

 

[Matt]

Longboard -- Thanks for the

Longboard -- Thanks for the link. I read the article and agree with a lot of what he said. Probably about 3/4 of it is covered in Good Calories Bad Calories. There is a lot of overlap there. The main point of difference is probably the calories in/calories out part.

I know from my own experience, which is my experiment of one, that cutting back on refined carbs has made a huge difference. And I've made no attempt to count calories.

 

[jschwab]

I have two words for you to

I have two words for you to google: cortisol and "wheat belly". OK, that's all I'm going to say about the wellness/nutrition aspect.



I hate to say this other part since my BMI is higher than probably anyone's here, but I think you just weigh way too much. You didn't say if you are a man or a woman (probably doesn't matter). Me and my husband are both 5'5" and I know at 170 I am still shopping in "plus sizes" and cannot even get into a regular sized 16 or 18. Hubby is stocky and muscular and weighed in the 150's when I met him and got up to 167 at one point ("baby weight"). He weighs around 130 right now and definitely still has meat on his bones - alot of meat. At 155 you would still be overweight by BMI standards. You might just have to rethink how radically you need to lose weight to make this go away. First on, last off. I only ever lose weight in my ankles, so I sympathize ALOT but I think you just need to get more radical about diet and identify everything that is a problem for you. Grains make me blow up; I can lose weight even eating sugar. Everybody has their foods that prevent them from being lean. You just have to find yours and avoid them or limit them. I am a big believer in low carb, in general. It's not the be all and end all and there are other factors, but there is a reason we call it a "beer belly".