Checkout tihs diet from RESPECTED local trainer...
- 03-24-2006, 11:47 PM
Checkout tihs diet from RESPECTED local trainer...
Okay...this dude was a competitive BBer, makes big bucks training ppl, and has been diong it for years. He's like 50 now.
Well, my mom's friend used him a while back, and she said his diet worked well enough for her. I asked to see it, and here it is. she's about 40 yrs old, 5'4", and around 145lbs. she's pretty active (on her feet all day cutting hair, so not reallly active).
#1 oatmeal pancakes, turkey breast
#2 small orange
#3 swordfish, asparagus (3/4 cup)
#4 1/2 cantaloupe
#5 Salmon, Cauliflower (1/2 cup)
I didn't work ti all out, but that's probably somewhere between 600-900kcals AT BEST.
What a joke...then again, I guess he can't fail his clients if he has them on starvation level calories.
- 03-25-2006, 12:27 PM
03-25-2006, 12:31 PM
More than stupidity, I think this is probably more a case of laziness. Why spend a couple of hours meticulously calculating macros, and then revisit periodically to tweak when you can just say, "Look at my pics; do as I say."
03-25-2006, 12:40 PM
I don't see the problemOriginally Posted by kwyckemynd00
600- 900 cals a meal for 6 meals is ok right?
Sleep Supplement 3Z BCAA: Red Raspberry and Lemon flavors
HGH/sleep enhancer: HGHpro
Test Booster: TestoPRO and STOKED!
Preworkout: MANIAC Fruit Punch and Pink Lemonade
03-25-2006, 12:57 PM
03-25-2006, 03:23 PM
Reminds me of the "SPECIAL K" diet. Someone came up to me telling me they dropped 15lbs on this diet. I wasn't aware of it, so when I was at the grocery store I looked at the special K cereal box. WTF!! Subsitute 2 meals with 3/4 cups of special k and skim milk, and you can have a "normal" 3rd meal. No **** someone is going to loose #'s on the scale, that's only about 200 kcal per cereal bowl, which means 400kcals on 2 of 3 meals throught the day. Dats stupidity! Talk about muscle wasting, starving, and just bouncing back when the person cant take the diet anymore. People just dont get it, there is no "quick fix" for diet and exercise. Plain and simple.
03-25-2006, 04:44 PM
you guys are all stupid, this diet is awesome. You guys don't understand the synergy between oranges and swordfish. The combination makes you HYOOGE!
03-25-2006, 05:02 PM
NOOOO only if they're clementine's and you have to eat 3 of them. Please note that eating more then 3 in a day is only reccomended for those interested in developing cartoon like musculature that would be considered freakish by most people's standards.
03-26-2006, 03:57 AM
03-26-2006, 04:44 AM
Well I hope the training was better (though probably not if it was at home) as that diet is useless.Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
03-26-2006, 05:00 AM
I'm not suprised at what he had posted for her diet. I see trainers in the gym I workout at doing ridiculous movements for their clients. Like for curling, they say the proper way to curl is not even go half way down, just a couple inches then back up. I'm thinking to myself, how can this work when they aren't performing no motion at all??? I'd hate to ask what kind of diet they have planned out for their clients but it probably resembles something what the trainer at your gym gives out.
03-26-2006, 04:18 PM
sorta goes along with it.. i was running at my gym the other day... Stong And Shapley in East Rutherford ( a lil plug cant hurt)
anyway.. on the news they had this lady on who was talking about diet.. and she was saying how people only really need to eat once a day and before 4pm.. the only food she eats is a half of some sort of small melon... 2 english muffins and 1/2 serving of turkey...
03-26-2006, 05:41 PM
Ex-marine, I'm sure he was putting her through boot camp. Usually ppl think they're accomplishing something significant if they're in pain and the scale shows a drop *sigh*.Originally Posted by The Godfather
03-26-2006, 08:15 PM
i donno, i think that 900-1500 cals a day spead out threw the day for a 40 somthing year old lady trying to loose weight sounds ok, depending how active she is.
03-27-2006, 12:11 AM
900-1500 is a big spread, man. That's like 50% difference in calories, almost. I can't just say I need between 5000 and 3000 calories per day and expect reasonable results. Plus, 900cals is probably less than her RMR. If she were a vegetable and not even using calories to digest food, she'd still need that many calories.Originally Posted by bigmontel
03-27-2006, 07:21 AM
yeah, i see what your saying, i guess that as a personal trainer you see a middle aged woman who probably has a poor diet, no exercise routine, and they try to overcompensate because in todays society everyone is all about the instant gratification and they want to see results now, and severly cutting calories will show major changes in apperance. 900cals is a little extreame though.
not to mention if this guy was a marine he's extreme already and probably thinks crazy crap like..."back in my day i could live off a junebug for 6 months...suck it up"
03-27-2006, 08:08 AM
03-27-2006, 11:55 AM
03-27-2006, 11:58 AM
May have, but she obviously isn't completely satisfied because she wanted my help.Originally Posted by houseman
Plus, it doesn't matter. People get the results they need by going anorexic. Does that mean its healthy? Does that mean a trainer, who 'should' have an ehtical obligation to do a good job and not put a client on a diet which could lead to poor health, should write a starvation diet? No.
It may be good for business making middle aged women starve and sweat, but that doesn't mean its okay. And they didnt' ask to starve. They asked to lose bodyfat.
03-27-2006, 12:06 PM
If she got results then he did his job.Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
Was it optimal? Probably not. But I have learned when it comes to 99% of the population looking to lose weight, etc... they don't really care how its done as long as whoever they hired gets them the results they want.
In general, most aren't concerned with losing or gaining muscle as long as they see the scale dropping and their waist size shrinking.
Like I said, was it optimal? Not likely but it's hard to argue IF she achieved results.
03-27-2006, 04:19 PM
Eh, you just like to argue. It wasn't that it wasn't 'optimal', it was probably downright detrimental.Originally Posted by houseman
To me, unless its pure ignorance that built the diet, he's almost a crook.
03-27-2006, 04:25 PM
I'm not arguing anything man. I'm simply saying that if she got the results she wanted (initially) then that is what matters.Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
Now that she is a bit more "less green" and perhaps understands things a bit better its a good thing that she's seeking out other people, like yourself, to get her BETTER results now.
No need to be to defensive.
03-27-2006, 04:40 PM
Well, my apologies for taking it the wrong way.
Well, she didnt' feel like she wasted her money--not from what I tell anyway.
03-27-2006, 04:57 PM
I see what House is trying to say. Most people today look for whatever is the fastest and easiest for results and that is for everything. If it wasn't true then the infomercial craze would of died out.
It's not ethically sound what these guys are doing but if their livelyhood depends on it then they have to do what gets them money. Quick results get money.
Same with docs and giving out drugs to patients who demand em or they're taking their business elsewhere. Not all of em do it but many will. Same in all industries where making the client happy nets income.
Just give thanks to the people we have on the boards and trainers like Bobo who tell it like it is and do what's right over what you want to hear.
03-29-2006, 03:39 PM
I completely understand what House is saying. Though he's an argmentative a$$ (that's a compliment) and will argue with anyone about anything (you know what you are... don't hide it because I'm the same way... I'll argue just because I can at times)... he's got an extremely valid point.
I'm getting into the personal training realm and one of the things I'm talking to clients about on day one is "what are your realistic goals?" I think we can give them options and then educate them, but ultimately THEY PAY US for RESULTS. If we explain the drawbacks, etc, why they SHOULD do it this way instead, then that's all we can do.
Or, are we as personal trainers put into a position where we have to only do things the "right" way? If we arm our clients with the education that they this isn't the healthy way to do things, but it can work for immediate results, are we to blame? Do we not give them the option?
How many of use here undestand shortcuts? How many of us use AAS/PHs, etc, when we surely haven't reached our potential and don't need them? We know the risks, we've done the research, and we're willing to take them.... so should our clients get anything more? I don't know... just posing a few questions...
Similar Forum Threads
- By cbarbarian23 in forum Nutrition / HealthReplies: 6Last Post: 02-06-2013, 01:04 AM
- By Beowulf in forum MMAReplies: 1Last Post: 11-18-2006, 11:44 AM
- By Kristopher in forum Weight LossReplies: 5Last Post: 09-14-2005, 09:25 PM
- By Dr of Golf in forum Weight LossReplies: 6Last Post: 06-03-2005, 11:09 AM