Thanks, I’m glad you’re finding the site helpful. I haven’t used the BodyGem but I’ve done indirect calorimetry measurements on myself and clients using a Korr ReeVue and it seemed pretty accurate. I do not currently have indirect calorimetry measuring equipment so we estimate based on client weight and measurements and adjust based on how their body responds.

This is from the article on basic fat loss guidelines at http://baye.com/basic-guidelines-for-fat-loss/

“…multiplying ideal bodyweight (approximately 15% body fat if male, 20% if female) by 15 will provide a reasonably good estimate of daily maintenance calorie intake. Sedentary or smaller people may need to multiply by as little as 12 to 14, while very active or larger people may need to multiply by as high as 16 to 18.”

Awesome site! I have had some measurements taken using indirect calorimetry, and i was wondering how close you think these devices are to real life. By the the way, i am fairly active, and after stopping “cardio” (read lots of running) my measurement on this device went way up. Lately i measured as high as 3910 cals per day on the BodyGem calorimeter. It made me think that, if it was even close to accurate, that my 1800 calories a day was way too low, and i was probably losing muscle. By increasing my Paleo foraging I seemed to recover faster and look more defined, just as all your articles around this suggest. Do you ever rely on these devices as a starting point? I realize that the best way is trial and error, but after losing 120 pounds, keeping it off, and closing in on the body i have always wanted, sometimes you just get lost, and i felt like even after all i had done, i am still learning new things. I like the mention of how much fat your body can transfer for energy…I had never seen that before, and i read every dang reputable health blog out there. It finally clicked reading this article in the adjustment of calorie deficit as you get leaner…i am just soaking up this site!!!

During many upper body exercises the abs – including the rectus abdominus and the obliques – are under considerable load. This is especially the case during exercises like weighted chin ups, front grip pulldowns, presses, and cable tricep press downs when a heavy enough weight is used. While an exercise involving trunk flexion against direct resistance would be more effective for strengthening the abs, the primary focus of the article is ripped abs, not strong abs, and no direct abdominal exercise is required to get ripped abs.

You say that ab exercises should not get into crazy-high reps; I agree that to be productive strength training should aim for movements that induce at least 70% of Maximum Voluntary Contraction. But isn’t it the case that during heavy pull-downs and standing presses the abs are doing the equivalent of a sub-70% MVC static hold? This is not equivalent to, for example, the exercise the triceps receive as secondary participants in the bench-press and shoulder-press.

I readily concede I have found for myself that during heavy lifts the abs (well, the rectus abdominis more than the obliques) can occasionally receive a special kind of punishment that is hard to stimulate with the usual targeted ab exercises. But it does not seem reliable or controlled; I rarely ever experienced any significant recovery pains in my abs after performing such exercises.

Any movements involving hip flexion would benefit from stronger hip flexors, the most common being running and kicking. The stronger your hip flexors, the more powerful the movements they can produce and the more resistant they are to injury.

What would be a benefit to strong hip flexors from a common trainees perspective? In boot camp some years ago, they would make us do endless flutter kicks and leg raises to “toughen up” our hip flexors. They would tell us it provides more protection and power when walking with heavy rucksacks on, when we completed our God awful road marches.

Dan

Dan

I cover all of this in Basic Guidelines for Fat Loss. Nowhere do I suggest cutting out essential fatty acids.

I am just under 5’8″ and was about 152 pounds when the photo was taken. Skin fold, bio-electrical impedance and infra-red all put me at about 3 to 4% body fat at the time, although I tend to be very skeptical of the accuracy of all of those at lower body fat levels.