How do I lose inches?
What's the most effective way to lose inches? I'm not concerned about weightloss, I just want to appear smaller. Does pilates work? Lifting?
Heavy weight lifting is great to reshape the body.
Thanks! I've been wanting to get into lifting for a while! I'm not a huge fan of pilates 
Just trying to figure out how to get started.
To lose inches, cardio activities is best. As weights are best for sculpting / toning muscles.
It is not possible to spot reduce inches to my knowledge, thus the BMI must be targetted.
Original Post by punch_i_nello:
To lose inches, cardio activities is best. As weights are best for sculpting / toning muscles.
It is not possible to spot reduce inches to my knowledge, thus the BMI must be targetted.
What? Prove cardio is better for losing fat than weight lifting. The research and literature will not back you up. Also, what do you mean by "sculpting" and "toning?" Weight lifting is very simple. Do it on a calorie surplus and you build muscle. Do it on a calorie deficit and you lose fat, exposing existing muscle.
BMI is a bunch of crap. It doesn't tell you body composition. Over 1/3 of people with a healthy BMI are clinically obese (aka skinny fat)
Many different philosophies for sure and to each their own.
The proof is in society. Go ahead and look at the military branches, martial arts, or the wide array of professional sports (basketball, soccer, football, tennis, track & field, etc etc etc.) for case study - occupations that actually do depend on physical fitness at a high level. In which, (to burn inches) it is commonplace for training regimens to target the heart rate and cardiovascular through aerobic activity (and not anaerobic). Secondary to that is weight lifting - supplementary for a specific occupational task. Feel free to tell all them, and their training regimens, they all have been doing it wrong (backwards) for decades (to lose inches).
In these cases, it is much more useful for a human to be able to move in space, with speed, quickness, and strength / enhance overall athleticism, rather than to have sole focus on stationary weight lifting regardless. (I.e. in certain life and death , or human competition situations, it is less likely one will perform an isolated decline bench, hamstring curl, or bicep curl something, at a stand still). Aerobic activities, and drills (specific per discipline / occupation) are more emphasized in training. Though weight lifting is complementary to building strength so to ultimately perform specific tasks better than average.
As per OP, Aerobic burns more calories than Anaerobic (weights, strength training, etc.) overall, but if you are sleeping with the weight machines, I'm sure one can burn just as much calories with them if one tries.
What a bunch of crap! How many people in those professions started off as fat? I don't remember Lebron James fighting obesity. I'm not saying that cardio isn't important for health, fitness, and athletic capacity . I am saying that weight training is more important for fat people trying to be not fat than cardio is, and the research will back me up.
Most people doing professional sports aren't fat. How many fat people do you think can compete at a high fitness level (like professional sports) where tons of cardio is needed?
If you can run for 4 hours at a time, you'll burn a lot more calories than someone who's pumping iron for an hour, but most fat people can't run for 30 minutes, much less 4 hours. If they tried, they would likely injure themselves and be out of commission for several weeks if not months.
Weight training will help people preserve their muscle mass as they lose fat, preserve their bone density and organ matter as they lose fat, improve their overall strength, improve the strength of their joints-which have suffered from carrying excess weight, and is an activity that they can do, even if they get winded quickly, without seriously injuring themselves.
Most fat people will burn the same amount of calories per hour lifting weights as they would doing cardio because their capacity to do cardio is limited. Losing weight so you can run is a great a idea. Trying to not be fat by running is a risky idea.
Getting strong is one of the most useful things you can do. If a car is crushing you, do you want strong people around who can lift the car, or fast people who can try to tie the axel to their waist and run the car off of you.
Also, most fat people don't have the genetic potential to be a professional athlete and wouldn't respond well to their training programs. If you're obese, you were probably never going to be the next Mark Spitz.
I stopped reading at your first line due to the close-mindedness, and derisiveness.
It is super common for athletes to be out of shape in the beginning of the training season (rookie and vets), or after an injury. If you watch sports, many football players (namely linebackers and linemen) , and most basketball big men (centers and power forwards) report to camp out of shape / overweight / fat before seasons start too (i.e., those naturally fat / report to camp fat). Which is why they have their offseason training camps filled with emphasis on running, aerobic drills, and imposed diets specific for each player (see NFL and NBA). Common knowledge to the avid sports fan. College and Pros too.
And seriously, do you have proof 100% of military folks were not overweight prior to being accepted into the military? Uhm.. most train significantly so they can pass the physical prior to entry and all are then bound to maintain a physical fitness / readiness per month during employ. How to they do this? Running. Why? Because they will be tested on running times, distance, and obstacles during boot camp. What happens? They lose weight. OMG new stuff.
Also, "crap?" I was being respectful. So I decided not to read the rest of your post (or any of your other posts). Sorry dude, still 4th of July holiday.
Regardless, my second post can't be debunked unless the histories of training regimens of the above mentioned occupations are rewritten. You have a time machine ready or something (if so, powerball numbers please)?
Original Post by punch_i_nello:
Many different philosophies for sure and your welcome to keep your own and defend it like no tomorrow lol.
The proof is in society. Go ahead and look at the military branches, martial arts, or the wide array of professional sports (basketball, soccer, football, tennis, track & field, etc etc etc.)/ occupations that actually do depend on physical fitness at a high level, and it is commonplace to target the heart rate and cardiovascular through aerobic activity (and not anaerobic). Secondary is weight lifting - supplementary for a specific task. Go tell all them, and their training regimens, they all have been doing it wrong for decades (to lose inches). But hey to each their own.
In part, it is much more useful for a human to be able to move in space, with speed, quickness, and strength / be athletic, rather than to have sole focus on stationary weight lifting regardless. (I.e. in life and death situations, it is less helpful to an isolated decline bench, hamstring curl, or bicep curl something). Though weight lifting is complementary to building strength so to ultimately perform bigger tasks better.
As per OP, Aerobic burns more calories than Anaerobic (weights, strength training, etc.) overall, but if you are sleeping with your weight machines, I'm sure you can burn just as much calories with them if you try.
Weight training is used in combination in a lot of training ie military, football, etc. In fact my first weight training program was based on a military program my cousin is using to get into special forces and my brother is going into high school next year and the coaches for football are already asking for him to sign up for their summer weight training and other training programs.
Cardio helps burn calories but one can cut back on calories and both promote weight loss but in combination with weights is the way to go. I mean you can burn tons of calories with cardio and easily eat every calorie back and never get results but with lifting eating at a deficit to maintenance to a surplus will shape you for the better.
If you think that an athlete who is out of shape because he hasn't been playing for a while is comparable to someone who has struggled with obesity for half of his life if not longer, than you're either a fool or purposefully being obtuse to try and save your sorry argument.
I would apologize, but I am not sorry. Your argument is crap. I wasn't saying that you are crap. Even the smartest of people postulate the crummiest of theories sometimes.
Your posts shows that you don't know the first thing about strength training: bicep curls and weight machines, really. Nor do you appreciate the benefits of strength training for overweight people.
Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion but if you want to post a bunch of crap without any evidence to back it up, don't be surprised when people challenge it.
Weight training is used in combination in a lot of training ie military, football, etc. In fact my first weight training program was based on a military program my cousin is using to get into special forces and my brother is going into high school next year and the coaches for football are already asking for him to sign up for their summer weight training and other training programs.
Cardio helps burn calories but one can cut back on calories and both promote weight loss but in combination with weights is the way to go. I mean you can burn tons of calories with cardio and easily eat every calorie back and never get results but with lifting eating at a deficit to maintenance to a surplus will shape you for the better.
I'm on the fence with that. Aerobic + deficit eating = weight loss, while Anaerobic + deficit eating = weight loss. aerobic burns calories > lifting burns calories? Arguably true. If true, aerobic more effective in losing inches (per OP)?
I agree with combo training for military or sport. Strength training to gain above-average functionality and performance edge. Though my pop and brother, both served in the Navy, were asked to run more than anything. My ol' high school buddy, and ex gf, currently in the Army, complain about the rigor of the running demands too. Running and more running. For strength training (though much less emphasized), calisthenics - of push-ups, sit-ups, lunches, and crunches (and variations of them) - are preferred due to ease of accessibility / no equipment necessary.
All free stuff too- running, walking, push ups, sit ups, lunges, crunches, and the like to stay lean. If someone is telling an individual that they need to lift weights (to lose inches), they either work at a gym, or are trying to sell you something.
LOL Sorry smashy, I left you at the word "crap." But, before you sleep tonight know that: Between me and God, we know everything. YOU MAD SIS?
Good night all!
Original Post by punch_i_nello:
Cardio helps burn calories but one can cut back on calories and both promote weight loss but in combination with weights is the way to go. I mean you can burn tons of calories with cardio and easily eat every calorie back and never get results but with lifting eating at a deficit to maintenance to a surplus will shape you for the better.
I'm on the fence with that. You can have developed a killer metabolism from aerobic and eat a ton, not gain, as versus having a slower metabolism.
I agree with the combo training- especially if one is in the military. Strength training - essential in this case for functionality and performance edge as well.
LOL but to the smashy person. YOU MAD BRO?
good night all!
Sorry, I should have specified: no results in shape wise/body fat % if you eat back all your calories you burn, endurance yes one can gain very good endurance benefits from cardio that is why it is very important in athletes but I though this was about inch loss/shape/form/looking fitter/vanity (I mean that is why I do it, lifting and eating at a deficit).
And Smashy23 is a girl btw.
Original Post by punch_i_nello:
I stopped at your first line due to close-mindedness.
It is super common for athletes to be out of shape in the beginning of the training season (rookie and vets), or after an injury. If you watch sports, many football players are out of shape, and most big men (centers and power forwards) in basketball are out of shape before seasons start too (i.e., naturally fat).
Also, "crap?" I'm being respectful to you. So I decided not to read the rest of your post. Sorry dude, still on 4th of July holday.
Regardless, my second post can't be debunked unless the history of the above mentioned occupations is rewritten. You have a time machine?
This article with numerous scientific citations debunks the theory that excercise is linked to weight loss in the short to medium term.
So to lose "inches" that would leave one appearing to be smaller, you will need to lose weight.
There is no magic that directly swaps fat for muscle so you either have to lose fat or build muscle (see here).*
*We have now gone back to the point where he need to asterisk this with - except if you are a fat newbie (where muscle gain will be very modest and non-existent by the time you finish dieting down), are de-trained or are on gear.
Wow. Calm down everybody. Its an Internet forum. :]
I think both cardio and weight lifting, used in combination, work best. But make sure you're lifting HEAVY and HARD. You should sweat just as much lifting as cardio. I've changed up my weight lifting routine by following the LiveFit plan; I lift heavier weights than I ever have and do more different exercise than ever before. Its only been two weeks, but I've lost an inch off my waist. My weight is the same, so I know I'm building muscle as well as burning fat. However, I'm also doing about 30 minutes of moderate-high intensity cardio intervals every day I work out (6 days a week). Its pretty awesome; can't recommend the LiveFit program enough. Its been amazing (and crazy hard) so far!
Edit: Arguing on the internet is de-meaning...
Original Post by punch_i_nello:
The proof is in society. Go ahead and look at the military branches, martial arts, or the wide array of professional sports (basketball, soccer, football, tennis, track & field, etc etc etc.) for case study - occupations that actually do depend on physical fitness at a high level.
An interesting debate! punch i nello is right that many people, most importantly athletes etc. do a lot of cardio for their training regimen. However, these people exercise to prepare and improve for their sports or activities, i.e. for their performance in basketball, soccer, etc. In these sports, cardiovascular health is key to success since they have to move and run quickly.
Cardiovascular health in general is very important, and I think everyone should do at least some cardio. It has huge health benefits and improves several blood values. Moreover, for several sports, it is key.
However, saying that since these people all do cardio and are lean, we all should do cardio, is a bit like saying: "look, anorexics are all very lean, so in order to loose weight, we should become anorexic!". As you can see, in this kind of inference, there is a logical flaw. Don't get me wrong: cardio works to achieve the goal of weight loss if coupled with a caloric deficit, but this does not imply that it is the best way to achieve this goal. Moreover, the initial question is not how to improve health, fitness or athletic performance (which is what the athletes and military guys try to achieve). The question was how to reduce the body fat percentage most effectively.
Luckily, there is research on this and a nice summary can be found here: (click) (click), and this research suggests that weight lifting in combination with a caloric deficit is superior to cardio in order to reduce fat. This also reflects most expert opinions on this matter.
On a sidenote: it was mentioned that cardio burns more calories than weight lifting. While this is true for the time of the workout session, it is also known that cardio only increases the metabolic rate post workout for about an hour or so (HIIT about 24h I think), whereas weight lifting (or "metabolic workouts") are supposed to raise the metabolism for about 48 hours. I have read somewhere that the increase in EPOC is substantial when lifting heavy, and some people believe that overall, weight lifting burns more calories than cardio. This seems to depend on individual factors, though. See here and here for the discussion. Hence, the statement that cardio burns more is far from obvious. However, if someone here knows nice good sources for this discussion (with some nice calculation), please share! I would be interested in reading more about the specifics.
Nevertheless, if someone has a sufficient amount of time, cardio and weights should be combined, of course. ;)
The original question was pilates vs weight lifting. Hands down Weight lifting is going to be the best. She stated she isn't concerned with weight loss.
I lift weights and I have lost more inches and wear a smaller size than I did when I was 10 lbs lighter and at that time I just did cardio. I am a lot smaller today due to lifting weights - I don't do cardio at all.
Cardio is good for heart and cardiovascular health no denying that but weight lifting is good for bone and muscle health.
She isn't training for a sport- or at least she didn't say she was. I know most of the people in the gym I see who are into sports, whether football, baseball cross country track or whatever they are doing free weights during their off season to build muscle to be better at their sport. Why would college and even high schools athletic departments have weight rooms if lifting weights wasn't good for the sports?
Thanks guys! I know you were all trying to help, and you all had valid points. I've wanted to start lifting for a while, but just was wondering if things like pilates are worth my time too. I do a lot of cardio as is so that's why I was looking for maybe a change or something different!
