tedtrushbodyathletica

Technique breakdown on lifting is tied to two variables, one is poor form fro the get go and two is fatigue This is the very reason Olympic lifters do not train with higher reps. It doesn't build strength and technique from fatigue is inevitable hence a much higher risk of injury. A belt will not help you in either of these situations, it is imperative to learn and practice correct technique fton the start and not to lift maximally while fatigued. Poor stabilizer muscle can be an issue but if you use proper technique and have a well rounded program that will be corrected quicky. T

Looking awesome!

Prefer back day for deads.

Have u had it looked at by a practitioner such as a chiro who works with professional athletes and is skilled in ART? If not I would highly suggest you so to avoid reinjury and to make sure it is fully healed and functional. T

Once you have access to proper food I would suggest dropping as much fat as possible prior to doing any type of gaining cycle. You are carrying significant amounts of body fat and when levels get this high your just increasing insulin resistance and any type of calorie surplus will result in predominantly fat gain not muscle. Get your weight down to 200lbs and then look at gaining muscle. T

The science is a belt creates higher internal pressure which in turn stabilizes the core. A stable core is a strong core and helps prevent back injuries as well as abdominal injuries. I always used a 4 inch power belt on anything 405 and over. T

No need to start any drugs. You have plenty of weight to lose and a cycle works much better when you are more insulin sensitive. Post your diet and cardio schedule and I can provide suggestions. T

Skipping meals or IF works for dropping weight and IF at least once per week is great for overall health. Now if you are talking body composition from a bodybuilding perspective then skipping meals and IF is not optimal for preserving lean mass while dropping fat only...body composition can suffer. T

If you are doing 30 min daily when was the last time that changed. Typically cardio should be increased in duration over time, so if you started the diet at 30min daily by week 6 or so you would probably be doing 45 min daily. If you havent changed the diet or cardio since starting then its a no brainer that your fat loss has stalled.

Progress on any diet will eventually come to a halt because the body adapts. Cardio should be utilized (walking) starting with a moderate amount daily ie 20min and then each week either maintaining or increasing duration slightly to avoid slowing fat loss. The diet may be fine but the process is not static. This means the diet, cardio , etc will all need to be tweaked in order to prevent adaptation. T

Thank you for pointing out the generalized macros used as they completely reinforce my point. My suggestions of diet type ie carb cycling or keto were suggestions of examples that could alter the outcome not directed at what the study actually instituted, 150g of carbs daily for a woman is definitely in the moderate range and depending on the individual would generally lead to plenty of glycogen storage. In no way would any of the subjects be in a low glycogen state. So i will repeat myself that the study does not address the point of fasted cardio being more efficient due to very low glycogen levels. AND the study clearly states that all subjects were not employing resistance training so if you are going to apply this to bodybuilding than it would be more accurate to have the subjects employ resistance training as this would alter glycogen levels. My point from the start was that fasted cardio is presumably more effective due to the increased use of fat as fuel when in a very low state of glycogen storage. If you want to talk bodybuilding application than again this study fails as all subjects were untrained so not very applicable. I am sure you can dig up many less than applicable studies however I would love to see one done on resistance trained individuals comparing fasted and non fasted cardio performed on a state of moderate glycogen storage vs extremely low glycogen storage. If you want I will back up my passionate view point with 25+ years of training hundreds of clients using a variety of diet plans from keto to carb cycling and cardio being performed in both fasted and non fasted states with both extremely low glycogen levels and moderate glycogen levels. That being said I can definitely say that in the individuals I worked with fasted cardio performed with very low glycogen levels was more effective then fasted cardio performed with moderate glycogen levels. However my original point was and still remains that the study does not address the point of doing fasted cardio from a BB perspective. T

No it would not be implied because one could be dieting via carb cycling and thus could potentially be in a state with moderate to higher glycogen stores. On the other hand someone running a ketogenic diet would definitely be very low glycogen and thus led to greater usage of fat for fuel in the absence of glycogen. The study does not specify which type of diet was being used or the level of glycogen depletion. T

Same issue with this study, fasted isn't defined as low or no glycogen. T

Fasted cardio is extremely efficient and effective however the definition of fasted here is not clearly articulated. The entire point of fasted cardio is performing cardio in a very low to no glycogen state. In order for this to occur the subject must already be on a low carb diet and a caloric deficit. The above study completely misses this point. Why is fasted cardio more effective? Because if done in the correct context ie the state mentioned above than fat is mobilized as an energy source due to a lack of glycogen. Fasted cardio done with full glycogen stores or partial glycogen stored is much less effective. Hence the term fasted cardio requires a clear definitions and context. T