do I need a workout routine and all that fancy mem gear and shit and powder jew drinks.
or getting Veeky Forums is simply doing cardio and lifting heavy shit.
like I can get fit if I work in construction or going to the river and start lifting rocks or helping people at the supermarket by carrying their groceries and do cardio?
how did ancient people get fit then without modern shit?
I know you guys already know real science and fit is too retarded to ask.
1. Download Mark Rippetoe's "Starting Strength" 2. Start GOMAD 3. ??? 4. New Zyzz has born.
Landon Taylor
Do SL with Pullups on your dead lift days. Walk on your off days. Progress to Texas method or mad cow after your progression slows. Move on to 5/3/1(training max based training) or a bb routine.
Ryan Barnes
This post is so full of popular catches phrases it's honestly hard to make out a legitimate thought.
I don't know what you mean by "mem gear", but if you're strength building then you need to be lifting heavy weights. Whether you're lifting 200 kg of gold plated tungsten carbide dildos or 200 kg bail of hay doesn't really matter, though one of those is probably easy to carry around. Better educate individuals can give you more specific guidelines, but generally for strength building doing 3 sets of 5 reps is a good gauge. That means You should be lifting the maximum weight possible to the point where after 5 repetitions you physically cannot lift it again. Take a 1 minute break and repeat again for a total of 3 sets.
"powder jew drinks." You need protein. Supplement can held. You cannot build a brick hosue without bricks. You cannot build muscle if you do not have the protein to do so. Whetehr you get this wholely through high protein foods, supplements or a combination of both doesn't matter. In general you will need to eat more when you intend to build than you would normally.
For cardio, I don't know guidelines. It should be for an intensity and duration that challenges your body. You can't cheat workouts. If it feels easy, then you are making fewer gains.
>how did ancient people get fit then without modern shit? Ancient people probably didn't care so much about getting fit as they did not starving to death. They were probably more physically fit than the typical American fatass because they did more manual labor and had more physical activity. Yes, you can get fit if you want to subsistence farm for 10-12 hours every day, but you can also do it in less time by deliberately exercising.
Cooper Murphy
If you don't eat a balanced diet your body won't have the resources to build muscle and strength
If you don't work out your muscles correctly then they won't grow.
Two very simple answers, from here you can research the kind of diet you need, and the different kinds of exercise that exist and how they affect your muscles.
Parker Brown
I have never been on fit, so i dont know what they suggest, but i do know that becoming fit is 75% diet and 25% exercise.
You can become fit by only doing bodyweight exercises, even. You will not be ripped like arnold and it will take longer but you can certainly become muscularly defined that way.
Though if you want the biggest gains in the shortest amount of time you'll need to use some machine equipment simply because of how well it isolates the muscle to be worked.
Also protein is important, but it doesnt have to be in a shake. Again, 75 diet 25 exercise.
how did ancient people get fit then without modern shit? Bodyweight exercises, labor intensive work and a lack of access to the unhealthy food we currently have avaible
Liam Mitchell
1) CICO: calories in, calories out. You need to consume a caloric surplus depending on your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure, there are calculators for this online) to gain weight/muscle, or lower your caloric intake compared to your TDEE to lose weight, i.e. a man who wants to gain muscle with a TDEE of 3000 might eat 3500 calories or so, a fatass trying to lose weight might eat 1500 daily. 2) macronutrients: you need protein, fats, and carbohydrates in a good ratio, but protein is literally required and it's what repairs your damaged muscle fibers and fills in the tears so that your muscles get bigger. 3) Those tears are accomplished by lifting heavy weights. By far the most efficient way to do this is with free weights, i.e. barbell exercises. Smith machines like Bowflex are a fucking meme to get women to buy gym memberships, do not use them. Why? Because they only allow isolated movements, not compound exercises. Smith machines do not mimic the way your body actually moves and they exercise less muscles at a time, this has many drawbacks. USE BARBELLS. 4) Read about proper form. You need to know what the fuck you're doing so that you do the right exercises, and do them correctly, so that you gain muscle efficiently and more importantly so that you don't snap your shit up. You can't just walk into the gym and start lifting things, you need an actual plan. This is what programs like SS and 5x5 are for. 5) No you do not need to take a bunch of supplements or any gay shit a fitness magazine is trying to sell you, that stuff is snake oil 99% of the time. Diet and exercise are the only things you literally need, the only supplements worth a shit are protein shakes (which are basically just overpriced drinkable protein and more of a luxury) and creatine. Creatine is the only well studied supplement worth a shit but again, it's not necessary at all. You might want to consider taking a multivitamin to get micronutrients as well.
Read the Veeky Forums sticky.
Thomas Myers
>how did ancient people get fit then without modern shit?
the short answer is they were less fit. powerlifter records from even the 21st century make early 20th century stats look DYEL. back then people believed all kinds of dumb shit and but getting strong has always been acheived the same way.
Easton Moore
Eat healthy, and get plenty of protein (protein powder is very convenient), but you don't need the ungodly amount that Veeky Forums suggests. Different routines are going to give different results, but you can get massive on SS, maybe adding in a few more accessories. You don't need cardio to get big, but it is all around helpful for your health. You don't need meme preworkouts or equipment, but straps are very helpful for deadlifiting, and using some stimulant for extra energy works very well.
If you don't feel like putting in a lot of work, run test and do SS with curls.
Zachary Butler
Working out properly means ensuring that you progress after each training session, training with a proper routine will get you results. Walking around with grocery bags definitely won't.
Whey is pretty useful unless you can afford eating half a chicken every day.
Kevin Mitchell
Performance enhancing drugs ftw
Jaxon King
>or getting Veeky Forums is simply doing cardio and lifting heavy shit. The standard recommended routines actually call for just lifting heavy shit. Different exercises performed on different days just make sure you train different muscles, and the ones that aren't trained have time to rest. Also steroids.
Adam Martin
>1) CICO: calories in, calories out. So sick of this half baked -meme- nutritional philosophy.
you don't know your caloric expenditure, nor do you know your caloric intake. Furthermore if you eat a large meal, especially with a lot of fructose, that shit is going to go to adipose whether you like it or not. I'm going to make this very clear, you cannot burn through your glycogen reserves and blood sugar fast enough, nor can you beat the insulin spike. You are not a car, and your food is not gas.
Yes, your body needs energy and resources to accomplish a given task, but it's a lot more complicated than you think. "CICO" (or "energy balance") is such a naive and faulty heuristic it's borderline worthless. Belongs in the trash.
Dylan Bailey
>nor do you know your caloric intake. You can estimate it from nutrition labels and databases. >Furthermore if you eat a large meal, especially with a lot of fructose, Then don't eat meals that are too large. Without a caloric surplus carbs aren't going to be converted to fat: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981 >"CICO" (or "energy balance") is such a naive and faulty heuristic it's borderline worthless. Belongs in the trash. It's surely an oversimplification, but still true in the long run (unless you have a perpetual motion machine in your gut) and does BTFO some outlandish claims of HAESfags that supposedly eating less doesn't make one lose weight.
Christian Flores
A lot of over complicated bullshit written by meat heads. If you want to become stronger and build muscle you need to lift heavy, eat a good amount of lean protein. 3 days a week after my main workout what I do is just put weights in a backpack and do pushups with it at home. 5 months ago I could barely do 6 pushups. Now I can do 15-20 with an extra 20lbs on my back. It might not sound like much but I definitely notice my skinny fatness slowly going away. I certainly have at least another 8-12 months before I see seriously noticeable results, but getting Veeky Forums does not happen overnight, it is a mindset and will take time. Also if you want to be "toned" and have your muscles/abs more defined all you can do is eat a caloric deficit while continuing to lift to lose fat and retain as much muscle as possible. SS is a good routine.
John Wood
>You can estimate it from nutrition labels and databases. You can. I'd argue doing so is a waste of time and energy though, and a symptom of a core fault in your overall approach.
>Then don't eat meals that are too large. My mind is in the realm of weight loss here, which best shows it's as much about content as quantity. Fructose much go through fructolysis in the liver and has a delayed insulin response and bypasses other satiety signalling mechanisms. Couple this with artificially elevated leptin signalling etc, and you have an obvious problem with judging meal size. At this point yes, it's good to have a rough measure of your caloric intake, but nothing so invested as counting calories strictly. Too much psychological overhead for almost no meaningful gain. It puts people in a mindset as though they "starving" "giving up" and "going without", which just ain't the case.
>Without a caloric surplus carbs aren't going to be converted to fat Not so. If your blood sugar is elevated, and your glycogen reserves are full, it's going to get turned into triglycerides and probably go to adipose.
>It's surely an oversimplification, but still true in the long run It's net false and very oversimplified. My biggest problem with it is that it's disingenuous and deliberately engineered that way by corporate thinktanks, then pushed out via their front groups. This is the poison that has wormed its way into American nutritional education in schools. "Hey kids, eat whatever trash you want, and as much as you want (buy buy buy!), as long as you remember to get up and get moving! Get active! Work it off!" Yeah... right. Despite that it's physically impossible to work it off and we've known this for decades.
There are better heuristics out there.
Joseph Jackson
>"Hey kids, eat whatever trash you want, and as much as you want (buy buy buy!), as long as you remember to get up and get moving! Get active! Work it off!" Okay, okay, wait. I'm not an American, and tbqh I've never heard this version of CICO. What I had in mind was the Veeky Forums sticky version, more or less "if you want to lose weight, you need to eat less calories WHILE making sure you have all the necessary nutrients". I also agree that eating sugar and other shit that fucks with your feeling of hunger (though I think fructose in fruit is an acceptable evil, now jams and juices, perhaps not so much) isn't a good idea. The "working it off" meme doesn't even survive a first visit in a commercial gym; one session with a treadmill or other cardio machine that tracks calories (assuming it's at least an okayish estimate) shows that even a strenuous (for an out of shape person) exercise burns a pathetically low amount of calories. So the "calories out" isn't even satisfied in that case, I don't see how does this disprove the overall heuristic.
Jaxon Myers
CICO works well enough for anyone from 40 to 10% bf. And most people that go lower are frauds so it works on 99% of the population.
Of course you also need to consider macro and micro, and if you have a medical conditions there are foods to avoid , but you shouldn't expect Veeky Forums to give you a personalized diet plan for free.
Mason Lewis
>Okay, okay, wait. I'm not an American, and tbqh I've never heard this version of CICO In America this is -the- version of CICO. That's the entirety of the logical framework, "exercise to lose weight". Sometimes you'll hear a misguided opinion about how it's all about food quantity, but that's the extent of it. No mention of food content, diet, or nutrition. No one seems to question why they got fat to begin with.
A better heuristic is a distilled down low level mechanical approach with regard to the constituent parts of food. I've created such frameworks in the past. They're easily communicated and understood, and naturally expanded with more specific elements when need be (fluid scale and granularity). Has the same utility, affords people self discovery and knowledge about their world, and lacks all the dick around. The "grind".
Also, I appreciate how reasonable this conversation has been.
Gavin Taylor
You need to do similar workouts for a really long time period to get better. Routines help you do it in a more orderly fashion, help you keep it balanced and reaching routine goals keep you determined. There isn't a recipe like if you do this after this you'll get more gains. Just that you need to allow muscles to recover and do the same things over and over for eternity.
Eli Baker
If your only objective is losing weight you can actually eat shit food as long as it fits your macros.
You won't be healthy but you could still get a 6pack from eating at mcdonalds
Camden Ramirez
>Veeky Forums Pic is last NYC meet up. You tell me
Austin Baker
>If your only objective is losing weight you can actually eat shit food as long as it fits your macros. No. I've already explained why.
Jason Torres
>In America this is -the- version of CICO. Okay, I've, on the other hand, seen people restricting themselves to "healthy" food, or going on weird diets (like keto, or low carb), without understanding what are they putting inside of them and why, and without making the commitment to control their portion sizes and cutting down on snacks. I think that having at least a basic understanding of what different foods contain (as some can be surprisingly caloric, like juices, milk, or thick condiments) is essential for that (starting with reading nutrition labels and familiarizing oneself with nutrition contents of vegetables, meats, and whatever comes without labels. also reading the ingredients lists and trying to choose food whose list is less complicated is often a good idea too), and after some point it's easier to write it down, rather than doing the calculations in head.
>A better heuristic is a distilled down low level mechanical approach with regard to the constituent parts of food. Then I don't quite get how is that accomplished if you consider reading nutrition labels a waste of time. Or did you mean that counting calories alone is pointless?
>Also, I appreciate how reasonable this conversation has been. Thank you too, it's nice to have a civil conversation here.
Zachary Brown
I know plenty of people who eat like shit and still have good bodies. I know it's not evidence but you're clearly overestimating how much fat you can get from simple carbs.
Levi Sullivan
>Can I get fit by carrying people's groceries and cardio I can't tell if this is bait or not so ill give u a 4/10
Caleb Brooks
there's no need to be a powerlifter user to be marked.
Isaac Clark
Yes, I'm no fan of most of the diets people get fixated on either. At best they're ineffective and inefficient, at worst they're outright harmful. I think when you say "nutrition labels" you're actually talking about what I'd call an ingredient list.
>Or did you mean that counting calories alone is pointless? Mainly, yes. The body's internal feedback loops and I/O is more complex than calories in, calories out. Predicting outcomes is better done mechanically, not with a naive mathematical model.
The body is a machine and must be viewed like one, down to the action of each and every dietary component, bodily state, and environmental influence. As well as their synergistic relationships when relevant. It sounds complex when described, but in practice most people have common or clustering aspects, and it's a very easy heuristic to use and stick to. This is how you create self maintaining core lifestyle changes.
The dirty little secret that Veeky Forums and the bodybuilding industry don't want you to know is that musculature is all genetic and that a guy who takes the right amount of steroids and just stays at home eating cheeseburgers will always look way better than the guy who hauls ass in the gym constantly with no steroids.
