One of our most stubborn challenges is to control the dawn phenomenon. Buffalo Pug & Small Breed Rescue,Inc. Click on Maizy's picture to see more of her! Click here to display Maizy's intake record. Bulky Muscles and Female Training. Inked by Leigh(This article has been updated since it’s original publication. I have made general editorial edits but also added new information. This article is not about knocking the “skinny girl” or “bulky lifters.” The purpose of this article is to provide a “definition” based on current dialogue of what the average population believes to be bulky; not a lifters population. What you choose your personal journey.)In New York during the beginning of the 1. They met privately in a rundown gym after closing hours. The janitor would let them in and they would train with tremendous intensity and passion. They would leave and return to their families and husbands, never saying a word about what they did in their off time. It is no secret weight lifting for women was not only unpopular, but severely looked down upon by society during those times. Does heavy equal bulk? Women lift weights all the time now in many countries. The amount of weights they lift is the subject of interest and controversy for this particular article. In the commercial gym circuit, we often see women lifting 3- 5lb weights or preforming non- weighted floor exercises. These exercises are extremely low in challenge towards the maximum strength abilities of women. You do not achieve a 5. You must steadily increase in the load amount of the weight you are lifting, over time. While there are arguments towards what rep range is the best for hypertrophy (size with strength), it should be agreed upon that going heavy means adding mass.
What is questionable and undefined is – what determines “bulky?” When a woman moves out of the 5lb dumbbell range, she internally asks the question, “Will lifting this heavy weight make me bulky?” “Am I going to add mass I do not want?”What defines bulky? When I got into the health and fitness industry, and more specifically my job now, I started off like most people when looking at bodybuilders and figure competitors. I am not going to lie, at first I was massively uninterested in looking at any of them and was turned off. As time went by, and I looked at these bodies more and more, trained them, and helped people achieve those bodies, my view changed. My perception of what fat, lean, large mass, and small mass is, is completely different now. I have a broader view of what is attractive, strong, and pretty to me. You can get so comfortable seeing a certain type of look and style that it starts to alter your perception. Thankfully I have a decent head on my shoulders because, due to my job, I have to be highly critical of body fat levels, muscle build, etc. I could be so easily screwed, like so many others are. The Poll. I took it to a poll of 2. I asked the following questions. It included both single and married women. Some statics vary for being skipped over.)How many times a week do you exercise? None- 2. 3%1- 2- 1. Do you lift weights that you consider to be heavy? Yes- 2. 1%No- 7. 9%Do you think that muscles on women are attractive? No, never- 4. 1%Sometimes, in small amounts- 2. Sometimes, depends on the body- 1. Yes, most of the time- 1. Yes, always- 4%Do you think that men like muscle on a women? Yes- 1. 8%No- 7. 2%Do you think that women like muscles on other women? Yes- 1. 3%No- 7. 7%Of the listed women, whose body do you like looking at the most? Paris Hilton- 1. 2%Angelina Jolie- 1. Jessica Alba- 3. 5%Jessica Biel- 1. Kate Winslet- 2. 2%Of these women who do you feel defines muscular/bulky on the terms that you are thinking for this survey? Jessica Alba- 2%Jessica Biel- 3. Madonna- 1. 9%Hilary Swank (Million Dollar Baby)- 4. Would you rather appear to be? I personally think it does, and it is almost what I would predict in this situation. Are these women wrong about what makes you bulky? What does this mean for women who have even more muscle and more definition than the women above? Will lifting heavy weights equal bigger muscles? If these women state that bulky muscles is considered to be Jessica Biel or Hilary Swank, then the answer is yes, they do. To throw in an additional note Jessica Biel has since that picture atrophied to a lesser size for her career. The Outback Jack Conclusion. Maybe I was lucky, or maybe it was fate that brought the “Outback Jack” marathon to my door on a Sunday afternoon. To give you a brief summary, “Outback Jack” was one of many dating shows. The premise was a group of girls were dropped off in the middle of the Outback to endure nature and meet the man of their dreams. If that isn’t entertainment, I don’t know what is. During the course of these episodes, a challenge was brought forth to the remaining 5 girls. These girls were nicknamed the “Amazons” due to their “bulging muscles” and “butch” bodies. The Conflicting Advice. The problem with most trainers is they don’t make any sense. They tell you that “lifting heavy won’t make you bulky,” but then say the magical phrase “don’t worry that the scale hasn’t dropped, you’ve had fat loss, you’ve just had some muscle gain too!” They say “Women can’t gain muscle! They don’t have the testosterone or genetics,” but then say “On my programs women can make great gains in muscle and strength!”My favorite contradiction is that the majority of the male trainers telling you to lift heavy and not be afraid of weights, are the same guys putting up pictures of models and actresses that are “smokin,” when most have never touched a real weight in their life. After that point, it takes a long time of effort, eating, and dedication, to achieve that next level of gain. Beyond that, it takes drugs. The problem is that years of training can lead to more muscle than some women want, especially if their diet isn’t what it should be. The body fat underneath didn’t allow them to see what they were gaining. If this is the “look” you want, great; however, if this isn’t the body you want, you probably will not be happy. The Body Fat Factor. The majority of women are not suffering from the bulky muscles they think they are. A lot of women never get lean enough to see the what is actually there. This is because your body fat levels are too high to show any definition. Mix that with a lifting program and you end up looking fatter, but firmer. I should note that some like this look. Remember nothing is “wrong” here. Take the “Amazon” women on our “Outback Jack” video, the majority of them are just higher body fat levels and have tight traps. This is what the majority of women think of when they are “bulking up” on their own bodies. They may or may not be bulking up, but they are “plumping” up. Word to the wise if you train women, most don’t like to look plump. Instead of avoiding the issue you need to confront it. If you are a trainer or the trainee, you need to clearly explain what is happening instead of feeding yourself, or your client, a bunch of hot air. The majority of the time the fix is in less body fat overall. Madonna, for example, has a decent amount of muscle for her age but has lower body fat. She was still considered less bulky than bodies Biel and Swank. Likely because their muscle was under a larger layer of body fat, giving a less desired look to the survey participants. Before you accuse the muscle of being the culprit, take a look at the body fat. What do we do now? Where do we go from here? Train for the look you want. That is what you do, period. If you don’t want to look like you lift heavy weights, don’t lift heavy weights. Don’t mistake this as this being the answer to your body problems, it isn’t. My point is, the only people that look like they lift or train aggressively are those who lift and train aggressively. Don’t be afraid to be strong, if you want to be. Don’t suppress what is inside because of society. No ones judgment is worth your dream, and the more that people get used to seeing change, the faster change happens. Don’t judge others for what they want to do. I am just as tired of those who lift bashing those who don’t. No one HAS to deadlift to be healthy. Be crystal clear about what you want from your training and how you are going to get it. Realize that no training will make you look like someone you want to look like. You have to look like the best version of yourself. If you want to say screw it to the world and go for it anyway then be prepared for a very long and hard journey. Be prepared to eat a lot of food and lift heavy weights. Be prepared to have to face scrutiny and judgment based on these decisions. Always remember that “normal” isn’t normal anyway, and everyone can have their world view changed when their world does. I do have plans in the future of releasing a program that provides everyone, “bulky” or not, the results and answers they need for these problems and questions. In the meantime, I hope this helps you be able to communicate better with others and yourself. To read my follow up article “Bulky Muscles and Women – Part Deux” click here. Before starting any new diet and exercise program please check with your doctor and clear any exercise and/or diet changes with them before beginning. I am not a doctor or registered dietitian. I do not claim to cure any cause, condition or disease. I do not provide medical aid or nutrition for the purpose of health or disease and claim to be a doctor or dietitian. This is merely an opinion blog. Read full disclaimer here - http: //www. Posted in Research & Controversy and tagged bulky muscles, female bodybuilders, female training, lifting for women, women lifting weights. What Does It Mean to Be Fat- Adapted? When describing someone that has successfully made the transition to the Primal way of eating I often refer to them as “fat- adapted” or as “fat- burning beasts”. But what exactly does it mean to be “fat- adapted”? How can you tell if you’re fat- adapted or still a “sugar- burner”? I get these and related questions fairly often, so I thought I’d take the time today to attempt to provide some definitions and bring some clarification to all of this. I’ll try to keep today’s post short and sweet, and not too complicated. Hopefully, med students and well- meaning but inquisitive lay family members alike will be able to take something from it. As I’ve mentioned before, fat- adaptation is the normal, preferred metabolic state of the human animal. It’s nothing special; it’s just how we’re meant to be. That’s actually why we have all this fat on our bodies – turns out it’s a pretty reliable source of energy! To understand what it means to be normal, it’s useful examine what it means to be abnormal. And by that I mean, to understand what being a sugar- dependent person feels like. A sugar- burner can’t effectively access stored fat for energy. What that means is an inability for skeletal muscle to oxidize fat. Ha, not so bad, right? I mean, you could always just burn glucose for energy. Yeah, as long as you’re walking around with an IV- glucose drip hooked up to your veins. What happens when a sugar- burner goes two, three, four hours without food, or – dare I say it – skips a whole entire meal (without that mythical IV sugar drip)? They get ravenously hungry. Heck, a sugar- burner’s adipose tissue even releases a bunch of fatty acids 4- 6 hours after eating and during fasting, because as far as it’s concerned, your muscles should be able to oxidize them (PDF). After all, we evolved to rely on beta oxidation of fat for the bulk of our energy needs. But they can’t, so they don’t, and once the blood sugar is all used up (which happens really quickly), hunger sets in, and the hand reaches for yet another bag of chips. A sugar- burner can’t even effectively access dietary fat for energy. As a result, more dietary fat is stored than burned. Unfortunately for them, they’re likely to end up gaining lots of body fat. As we know, a low ratio of fat to carbohydrate oxidation is a strong predictor of future weight gain. A sugar- burner depends on a perpetually- fleeting source of energy. Glucose is nice to burn when you need it, but you can’t really store very much of it on your person (unless you count snacks in pockets, or chipmunkesque cheek- stuffing). Even a 1. 60 pound person who’s visibly lean at 1. Depending on the nature of the physical activity, glycogen burning could be perfectly desirable and expected, but it’s precious, valuable stuff. If you’re able to power your efforts with fat for as long as possible, that gives you more glycogen – more rocket fuel for later, intenser efforts (like climbing a hill or grabbing that fourth quarter offensive rebound or running from a predator). Sugar- burners waste their glycogen on efforts that fat should be able to power. Being fat- adapted, then, looks and feels a little bit like the opposite of all that: A fat- burning beast can effectively burn stored fat for energy throughout the day. If you can handle missing meals and are able to go hours without getting ravenous and cranky (or craving carbs), you’re likely fat- adapted. A fat- burning beast is able to effectively oxidize dietary fat for energy. If you’re adapted, your post- prandial fat oxidation will be increased, and less dietary fat will be stored in adipose tissue. A fat- burning beast has plenty of accessible energy on hand, even if he or she is lean. If you’re adapted, the genes associated with lipid metabolism will be upregulated in your skeletal muscles. You will essentially reprogram your body. A fat- burning beast can rely more on fat for energy during exercise, sparing glycogen for when he or she really needs it. As I’ve discussed before, being able to mobilize and oxidize stored fat during exercise can reduce an athlete’s reliance on glycogen. This is the classic “train low, race high” phenomenon, and it can improve performance, save the glycogen for the truly intense segments of a session, and burn more body fat. If you can handle exercising without having to carb- load, you’re probably fat- adapted. If you can workout effectively in a fasted state, you’re definitely fat- adapted. Furthermore, a fat- burning beast will be able to burn glucose when necessary and/or available, whereas the opposite cannot be said for a sugar- burner. It means that a fat- burning beast will be able to handle some carbs along with some fat. A fat- burning beast will be able to empty glycogen stores through intense exercise, refill those stores, burn whatever dietary fat isn’t stored, and then easily access and oxidize the fat that is stored when it’s needed. It’s not that the fat- burning beast can’t burn glucose – because glucose is toxic in the blood, we’ll always preferentially burn it, store it, or otherwise “handle” it – it’s that he doesn’t depend on it. I’d even suggest that true fat- adaptation will allow someone to eat a higher carb meal or day without derailing the train. Once the fat- burning machinery has been established and programmed, you should be able to effortlessly switch between fuel sources as needed. There’s really no “fat- adaptation home test kit.” I suppose you could test your respiratory quotient, which is the ratio of carbon dioxide you produce to oxygen you consume. An RQ of 1+ indicates full glucose- burning; an RQ of 0. Somewhere around 0. The obese have higher RQs. Diabetics have higher RQs. Nighttime eaters have higher RQs (and lower lipid oxidation). What do these groups all have in common? Lower satiety, insistent hunger, impaired beta- oxidation of fat, increased carb cravings and intake – all hallmarks of the sugar- burner. It’d be great if you could monitor the efficiency of your mitochondria, including the waste products produced by their ATP manufacturing, perhaps with a really, really powerful microscope, but you’d have to know what you were looking for. And besides, although I like to think our “cellular power plants” resemble the power plant from the Simpsons, I’m pretty sure I’d be disappointed by reality. No, there’s no test to take, no simple thing to measure, no one number to track, no lab to order from your doctor. To find out if you’re fat- adapted, the most effective way is to ask yourself a few basic questions: Can you go three hours without eating? Is skipping a meal an exercise in futility and misery? Do you enjoy steady, even energy throughout the day? Are midday naps pleasurable indulgences, rather than necessary staples? Can you exercise without carb- loading? Have the headaches and brain fuzziness passed? Yes? Then you’re probably fat- adapted. Welcome to normal human metabolism! A quick note about ketosis: Fat- adaption does not necessarily mean ketosis. Fat- adaption describes the ability to burn both fat directly via beta- oxidation and glucose via glycolysis, while ketosis describes the use of fat- derived ketone bodies by tissues (like parts of the brain) that normally use glucose. A ketogenic diet “tells” your body that no or very little glucose is available in the environment. On the other hand, a well- constructed, lower- carb (but not full- blown ketogenic) Primal way of eating that leads to weight loss generally improves insulin sensitivity. That’s it for today, folks. Send along any questions or comments that you have. I’d love to hear from you guys. Subscribe to the Newsletter. If you'd like to add.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2017
Categories |