Losing Fat - The Workout

Okay, so we've established from the last post that "losing fat" is much more important (and difficult) than simply "losing weight," which could include muscle and water.

So the question begs, how can we tweak the example workout in the previous post to be more efficient?  It's actually quite simple.  Three steps:

1.) Reverse the order - weights first, cardio second
2.) Change the muscle groups - from small muscles to large muscles, and in the right order
3.) Do 12 reps, with the 12th rep being tough to complete

Let's go over these one-at-a-time.

1.) Reverse the order - weights first, cardio second.  Why?  Because it burns fat more efficiently.  In short, lifting weights first (with large muscle groups in the right order -- see #2 in a bit) will deplete your body's stored energy (glycogen) faster than cardio itself (unless it's high intensity interval training or HIIT style of cardio).  You need to do that in order to use fat as fuel.  So, if you lift weights first, your cardio afterwards will be to burn mostly fat.  Also, after you're done, your body will continue to burn calories due to EPOC (excess post oxygen consumption) because your muscles, worked via weights, need energy to recover.  The other way around simply burns less fat.

2.) Change the muscle groups.  Why?  In short, because larger muscles, exercised in the right order, will cause you to burn more energy (glycogen) and thus more calories, and get you into your fat tank faster.  Hips ab/adductors, arms, and core are all considered Type I small muscles, and they do not require a lot of energy to work.  Contrast this with your legs (quads, hamstrings, and glutes), chest, back (lats), and shoulders.  These are primarily Type II muscles, which produce a lot of force and power, but require a lot of energy.  Weight train in this order: Legs, Chest, Back, Shoulders (LCBS).  Largest muscles first, then separate your chest and shoulders with back, so it's a Push->Pull->Push workout, better balance, and more rest for your triceps, which work in most "Push" exercise.  LCBS, don't forget that order, it's important.

3.) Do 12 reps, with the 12th rep being tough to complete.  Most folks lift either way too light (gals) or way too heavy (guys).  Do 12 reps, this is in the "Endurance" range, best for weight loss.  Don't worry, gals, you won't get big and bulky (more on that in another post).  And guys, put your ego aside, have good form, lower your weight, go through a full range-of-motion, without swinging and using momentum, and get 12 good reps.  And do that for 3+ sets.

Here's a simple program you could complete in about 1 hour, do each for 3 sets of 12 reps, progressively adding weight until the 12th rep becomes tough to complete, resting 1 minute or less between sets.  Always error on the side of caution, rest as needed, especially if you are just starting out.

• Dynamic Warmup - (5 minutes)
• Legs - Squats (3x12)
• Chest - Bench (3x12)
• Back - Lat Pulldowns (3x12)
• Shoulders - Arnold Press with Dumbbells (3x12)
• Cardio - Elliptical or Treadmill, any pace (20 minutes)
• Cooldown/Stretch - (10 minutes)

If you follow these simple changes, your "fat-loss" workout will be more optimal.

Losing Fat

Nearly 5 months into my Personal Training studies, and I've learned so much about the human body, about nutrition, about the body's energy systems, about workouts, and about a lot of other details I'd have trouble listing down.  To be sure, it's been a worthwhile journey, something I will always look fondly on, and will be a part of me forever.  It's the foundation for a lifetime of continued learning, and I want to pursue this at the highest levels next, something I will gear up for and achieve.

Probably the single most important concept I've learned is how the body uses (and loses) fat most efficiently.  Most people want to lose weight, I think that's the observation I've made when seeing people with trainers in the gym, and people in the gym in general.

You look at the layout of a gym, and it's really geared towards people who want to lose weight.  About 50% or more of a gym is filled with cardio machines, space for spinning, yoga, zumba, or other cardio or fitness classes.  About 25% is filled with weight "machines" meant more for novices to weight training and such.  And about 25% or less is filled with free weights or more advanced weight training equipment.  Of course, that's generic, and just the gyms I've visited in the past few years.  You'll always have your exceptions, like Gold's Gym, which caters towards a different crowd, and has a different layout.  But, the popular gyms like 24, ClubOne, ClueSport, or Equinox typically have this type of breakdown, catering to their clientele.

Most people think that a scale determines your weight, and hence your overall fitness.  If the scale reads lower, then that's good.  If it reads higher, that's bad.  They measure their progress strictly by how many pounds are measured on their scale.  So, "losing weight" is simply "losing pounds", and for most folks, it doesn't matter where those pounds come from, just as long as the scale is lower.

Take, for example, a typical female who wants to lose weight.  Her routine is to static stretch, then jog/run on a treadmill for 30 minutes, then do some targeted resistance training, maybe some hip ad/abductor machines, some core work, and some arms.  She'll do zumba, dance, maybe squeeze in a spinning class, a yoga class, or a body pump class to mix it up.  She'll do this for years and probably be fit, have great cardio, lose a few pounds, and probably look and feel much better than she did when she started.  So, the question is, what's wrong with that?

Well, nothing's "wrong" with that at all.  That's great!  And it's much better than another person who didn't do anything for as many years.  But, the main issue is the efficiency at which she reached her goals, and what she actually "lost" in terms of weight in the process.

Let's rewind a bit and take some measurements of the female before she started her routine.  Let's say she initially weighed 5'2", 165 lbs,was 35 years old, and had 40% body fat.  Technically, her BMI (at 30.18) and her body fat percentage (>32%) would put her in the "Obese" Category.  A good goal for her could be a BMI of 24.9, which is a "normal" BMI.  This would be 135 lbs.  That's 30 lbs. lost ... 30 lbs of FAT!

Let me say that again, 30 lbs. of FAT!  At 165 lbs and 35% body fat, she would have 66 lbs. of fat.  If she lost 30 lbs. of FAT and maintained her lean body mass (the rest minus the fat), she would weigh 135 lbs and at 26.7% body fat.  That would be an amazing accomplishment, to lose 13.3% of her body fat. To do that safely, and with everything ideal, it would take between 15-30 weeks to lose those 30 lbs. of fat.

Now, contrast this to a case where you just talked about weight.  Lose 30 lbs. sure.  But if those 30 lbs. were 10 lbs of fat, 15 lbs. of muscle, and 5 lbs. of water, would that be the same thing?  Obviously not!  Losing muscle to lose weight is not good.  Losing water to lose weight is not good.  What matters most is the fat loss, losing the excess adipose tissue, which can be so detrimental to your health.

The next question is ... how do we tweak what the female did in terms of working out to maximize the efficiency of the fat burn?  Good question ... wait for the next blog entry and I'll share that with you.