FAT FACE...help
- Thread starter kolaios
- Start date
dorianyates
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Make sure you get your body fat down to about 10%(your whole body will look much leaner including your face)...You can't "spot" reduce. You have to work at getting your overall bodyfat level down by eating clean and working out...Try more cardio/and lifting.
Drink more water....not having enough coming in regularly will put your body on "water retention mode".
Reduce you sodium instake as salt causes you to retain water.
Increase your protein intake.
For more advice go to http://www.bodybuilding.com
Peace
Drink more water....not having enough coming in regularly will put your body on "water retention mode".
Reduce you sodium instake as salt causes you to retain water.
Increase your protein intake.
For more advice go to http://www.bodybuilding.com
Peace
younggunz177
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
I agree with this guy that loves Dorian Yates. Although I would be the last person in the world to suggest getting information from bodybuilding.com. You will end up getting advice or reading advice to others given by complete idiots that try to understand "exercise calc" when they do not understand the simpliest area of exercise science ("addition and subtraction")
dorianyates
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
younggunz177 Like anything you read on the net..it requires your own filtering methods...This hairloss site is really no differant than bodybuilding.com.
Your stating the obvious that not"all" info found on the net may be factual...that being said there is plenty of great info on that site.....
Just like there is on this one.
Cheers
Your stating the obvious that not"all" info found on the net may be factual...that being said there is plenty of great info on that site.....
Just like there is on this one.
Cheers
younggunz177
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
dorianyates said:
I agree that not all info found on the net is factual, but I find the vast majority of the info given at bb.com to be the furthest from the truth in most cases. Far too much emphasis is given to things such as supplements, when few there know the science of exercise and how to properly apply those principles. Being a fan of Dorian Yates, I think you can see that.
dorianyates
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
younggunz177 said:
I hear what your saying....however (using that logic) you better stay away from the "muscle magazines" as well then considering most of thier information is biased toward the supplement industry/and or specific companies as well. I think most people can see between the lines.
Like anything ......get what you can out of it and throw the rest away.
Peace
Yeah, BodyBuilding.com is terrible.
I mean, it's mostly filled with huge, ripped guys telling you about what they ate/supplemented/trained with to get to their size! Madness!
Seriously, I think the above comment is a bunch of crap.
The vast majority of stuff I have read on BB.com has usually involved a scientifically sound explanation -- or at the very least; a solid testimonial that a certain supplement/method works.
It's one of the most comprehensive, varied and informative bodybuilding sites out there.
When you want to hear about growing muscle and training, you go to bodybuilding.com -- you don't go to skinnyfitnesscientist.com
I mean, it's mostly filled with huge, ripped guys telling you about what they ate/supplemented/trained with to get to their size! Madness!
Seriously, I think the above comment is a bunch of crap.
The vast majority of stuff I have read on BB.com has usually involved a scientifically sound explanation -- or at the very least; a solid testimonial that a certain supplement/method works.
It's one of the most comprehensive, varied and informative bodybuilding sites out there.
When you want to hear about growing muscle and training, you go to bodybuilding.com -- you don't go to skinnyfitnesscientist.com
dorianyates
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Freestyle said:
Well said
younggunz177
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Couldn't agree with you more Dorian on the information you shared on magazines.
I'm not here to argue, but I have enough experience on bb.com to form a sound opinion. What you do with my opinion is completely up to you, even if it means flaming. The science most often presented at bb.com, that is to say with the training suggestions in most cases, is pseudo science, not factual. It is more then often simply random ideas, without much thought given.
I'm not here to argue, but I have enough experience on bb.com to form a sound opinion. What you do with my opinion is completely up to you, even if it means flaming. The science most often presented at bb.com, that is to say with the training suggestions in most cases, is pseudo science, not factual. It is more then often simply random ideas, without much thought given.
Nuh-uh -- you don't get out of it that easy, buddy.
You can't just slag off an entire site, saying their information is flawed/wrong etc., without backing it up. It's akin to defamation.
If 100 bodybuilders do the same thing and get the same results, does it really matter if it doesn't appear to have scientific validity?!
I mean, most of these guys are not scientists, and they don't want to be. The whole bodybuilding community is built on people who picked up some weights and started pumping away. Over time, they exchanged tips and ideas to achieve more growth, and progressed the whole community to what it is today. Through trial and error and common experience.
Bodybuilding wasn't started by some dweeb in a labcoat, running formulas on the best possible ways to enhance somebody's figure. It was started by the muscle hound in the gym.
If it works, then it is scientifically proven. Scientists may not like the who/what/where/when/why/how of it happening, but they can't deny the results.
Actually, it's only since scientists began getting actively involved in the community that we've started seeing a wave of useless supplements.
And it's not like BB pushes supplements down people's throats. The only times I've seen specific supplements recommended in an article is when the writer is relaying personal experience. But of course they're going to pepper their site with ads for supplements that can be brought in their store -- they want to make money.
Just because a newspaper has advertising in it, doesn't mean the editorial information is any less valid/informative.
I just cannot see how/why you formed this opinion.
You can't just slag off an entire site, saying their information is flawed/wrong etc., without backing it up. It's akin to defamation.
If 100 bodybuilders do the same thing and get the same results, does it really matter if it doesn't appear to have scientific validity?!
I mean, most of these guys are not scientists, and they don't want to be. The whole bodybuilding community is built on people who picked up some weights and started pumping away. Over time, they exchanged tips and ideas to achieve more growth, and progressed the whole community to what it is today. Through trial and error and common experience.
Bodybuilding wasn't started by some dweeb in a labcoat, running formulas on the best possible ways to enhance somebody's figure. It was started by the muscle hound in the gym.
If it works, then it is scientifically proven. Scientists may not like the who/what/where/when/why/how of it happening, but they can't deny the results.
Actually, it's only since scientists began getting actively involved in the community that we've started seeing a wave of useless supplements.
And it's not like BB pushes supplements down people's throats. The only times I've seen specific supplements recommended in an article is when the writer is relaying personal experience. But of course they're going to pepper their site with ads for supplements that can be brought in their store -- they want to make money.
Just because a newspaper has advertising in it, doesn't mean the editorial information is any less valid/informative.
I just cannot see how/why you formed this opinion.
younggunz177
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Ok, I never wanted to get into this that deep on those forums or these, but I suppose if you want my rationale...
Because something "works" does not mean it is optimal. Obviously doing any type of physical activity will yield greater results then nothing at all. I would never deny otherwise (well, to a certain degree, as too much exercise can eventually lead to medical problems forcing you in the opposite direction).
Denying that bodybuilders have experience is also nothing I would deny. They are very experienced...in tradition, nothing more. They may add their tidbits or twists to things, but nothing has any reasoning that a rational person (given the time and effort) would not be able to completely debunk. In fact, little if any of it has anything close to what could be called reasoning.
True, there are many bad supplements. Heck, I'm the last person in the world to say otherwise, but don't blame scientists or denounce their use in the exercise physiology field because of bad supplements. If you do that, you don't think there is any use for such things as kinesiology, exercise science, exercise physiology, or anatomy. If you want to look at someone to blame, blame yourself for not learning everything about a substance other then what a company that is selling it says, or believing the hype given by the advertisements and company that depends on the product to make money. If you spend money on supplements and didn't like the results, that is on you and the company that sold them, not the scientific community.
Hey, if you want to denounce science, scientists in general, and the scientific community, I don't see us carrying on this conversation. Oh, and you are wrong, exercise science has existed since the 1940's. Scientists have always been involved, not just with supplements. Scientists also were the ones to develope performance enhancing drugs, and all the great equipment you use in the gym.
Because something "works" does not mean it is optimal. Obviously doing any type of physical activity will yield greater results then nothing at all. I would never deny otherwise (well, to a certain degree, as too much exercise can eventually lead to medical problems forcing you in the opposite direction).
Denying that bodybuilders have experience is also nothing I would deny. They are very experienced...in tradition, nothing more. They may add their tidbits or twists to things, but nothing has any reasoning that a rational person (given the time and effort) would not be able to completely debunk. In fact, little if any of it has anything close to what could be called reasoning.
True, there are many bad supplements. Heck, I'm the last person in the world to say otherwise, but don't blame scientists or denounce their use in the exercise physiology field because of bad supplements. If you do that, you don't think there is any use for such things as kinesiology, exercise science, exercise physiology, or anatomy. If you want to look at someone to blame, blame yourself for not learning everything about a substance other then what a company that is selling it says, or believing the hype given by the advertisements and company that depends on the product to make money. If you spend money on supplements and didn't like the results, that is on you and the company that sold them, not the scientific community.
Hey, if you want to denounce science, scientists in general, and the scientific community, I don't see us carrying on this conversation. Oh, and you are wrong, exercise science has existed since the 1940's. Scientists have always been involved, not just with supplements. Scientists also were the ones to develope performance enhancing drugs, and all the great equipment you use in the gym.
younggunz177
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Hey Freestyle, I didn't mean to offend you, and I apologize if I did. If you want to keep the discussion going, I'm perfectly open to that. As long as it remains professional and you are willing to think about my rationale (as I'm willing to hear yours), I'm willing to discuss as much as you like. Also, if you would like, you are welcome to join my own forums at gunnarfitness.com. I don't charge if you sign up under the free access. Please feel free to go there and read my articles if you like. I expose many of the lies given by the fitness industry and those that call themselves "experts" or "gurus". Take care.
Gunnar
Gunnar
Look, I'm not anti-science at all. I never doubted the science behind the stuff at BB.com, because it comes from wide and varied sources.
The burden of proof is on you. I don't have to prove that the science is sound, because I haven't made any accusations. If you insist that the science is wrong/flawed, then it's your responsibility to prove exclusively that those methods are wrong, and present solid science as to why it's wrong.
Can you build a natural competition body using your methods, quicker and bigger than those using the information at BB.com? Or is it just theory?
Because (and I'm not trying to be an *** here) the evidence is pretty well stacked against your claims.
I have a friend who's a personal trainer, who has a great physique. He's a stubborn guy who started bodybuilding on his own in his mid teens. He did it all on his own. If someone told him he had to eat protein to get large, then he studied his *** off on the different types of proteins, why they had to be used and the best times to take them. Same with any supplement or training method. He never just took anybody's word for anything, because he knew a lot of bodybuilders were prone to bullshite.
Yet, 80% of the time, all he really discovered in his research is that the person in question was right. But now, he also has a huge amount of knowledge about everything he does to his body, or puts into it.
To say that's all crap is a pretty big call.
The burden of proof is on you. I don't have to prove that the science is sound, because I haven't made any accusations. If you insist that the science is wrong/flawed, then it's your responsibility to prove exclusively that those methods are wrong, and present solid science as to why it's wrong.
Can you build a natural competition body using your methods, quicker and bigger than those using the information at BB.com? Or is it just theory?
Because (and I'm not trying to be an *** here) the evidence is pretty well stacked against your claims.
I have a friend who's a personal trainer, who has a great physique. He's a stubborn guy who started bodybuilding on his own in his mid teens. He did it all on his own. If someone told him he had to eat protein to get large, then he studied his *** off on the different types of proteins, why they had to be used and the best times to take them. Same with any supplement or training method. He never just took anybody's word for anything, because he knew a lot of bodybuilders were prone to bullshite.
Yet, 80% of the time, all he really discovered in his research is that the person in question was right. But now, he also has a huge amount of knowledge about everything he does to his body, or puts into it.
To say that's all crap is a pretty big call.
younggunz177
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
As I have stated, anything is better then nothing. I'm not saying the science is bad that fitness "experts" recommend, I'm saying for the most part, it isn't science at all. I can go into depth on the very simplist of things recommended by fitness "experts".
Experience is not what explains rationale. I'm saying yes, had anyone trained correctly through the theory of high intensity training, they would have become better, or gotten to their current condition faster with the use of THE appropriate theory of exercise. Saying there is more then one theory of anything is a self-contradiction. Your own statement is a theory, and therefore not necessarily true!!
A theory is not something to take lightly as if it is just another bunch of ideas. It is a set of principles used to describe some part of reality or to show an appropriate human guidline for action. And all of it must be rational and explainable at all levels.
Ask yourself where these experts have explained things having to do with their ideas...
Why do they advocate more then one set?
How do they judge overtraining?
Why do they always put their programs into one week time spans?
Those are just a couple that they cannot explain. Go ahead and ask all you want, you won't get anything near a rational answerif you have the ability not to accept anything you are told. I would hope you wouldn't even be that way with my comments. I would rather you think for yourself (and truly think and accept nothing blindly, including things that I say).
Experience is not what explains rationale. I'm saying yes, had anyone trained correctly through the theory of high intensity training, they would have become better, or gotten to their current condition faster with the use of THE appropriate theory of exercise. Saying there is more then one theory of anything is a self-contradiction. Your own statement is a theory, and therefore not necessarily true!!
A theory is not something to take lightly as if it is just another bunch of ideas. It is a set of principles used to describe some part of reality or to show an appropriate human guidline for action. And all of it must be rational and explainable at all levels.
Ask yourself where these experts have explained things having to do with their ideas...
Why do they advocate more then one set?
How do they judge overtraining?
Why do they always put their programs into one week time spans?
Those are just a couple that they cannot explain. Go ahead and ask all you want, you won't get anything near a rational answerif you have the ability not to accept anything you are told. I would hope you wouldn't even be that way with my comments. I would rather you think for yourself (and truly think and accept nothing blindly, including things that I say).