Unsustainable
Seth Jarvis is Elite
Also, I will be 35 in a couple of months, so my testosterone levels and metabolism is dropping. So I am combating that also.
I need to start a fitness routine and get my diet under control. I've been using MyFitnessPal off and on lately. It's a pretty decent tool. Going from sitting behind a computer at school all day to walking all day at work has definitely helped though, that's for damn sure.
I feel like I'm at the point in my life where I need to start working out on a regular basis to not die. I just know it's going to hurt and I'm not looking forward to that. Sigh. This is going to suck. I don't even know how to work out anymore.
this gets worse as you age, if something comes up and I can't do strength training, I'll hurt when I get back to it. Most things (back, chest, etc..) are fine, but Squats absolutely kill me if I miss time. Nothing, running, skating, eliptical, running stairs, etc..stops that.
I'm stuck in a van most of the day.
Anyone ever cycle P6 Black / Red?
4 weeks Black, 4 weeks Red, 4 weeks clean?
I don't even know what that is. To be honest, you use a lot of supplements that I think are unnecessary for almost everyone. Especially if your main goal is just getting into/staying in shape. To each their own, though. If you like them and can afford them, go nuts. I don't think there's any harm except possibly to your wallet. But I would double check everything on examine.com (you don't need to sign up for anything).
CLA appears to be a good research molecule, since there is a lot of evidence after human ingestion and it was one of the first of its mechanisms (PPARa / PPARy modulator) to be used.
A pretty poor fat burner, and even more unreliable than it is bad at burning fat. It might make you lose enough fat to compensate for that cookie you had once.
It has no astounding other affects on health or anything, it just seems to be quite an overhyped and uneventful molecule(s)
Well, for example, here's what Examine has to say about CLA:
That's the gist of it, but there are pages and pages of sciencey based stuff along with countless referenced studies. If that doesn't deter you, that's totally fine and I get that. I'm just personally not a fan of stuffing my body with so many substances. Not because they're bad for you, just because many of them don't really work as advertised.
Also, those goals are kind of strange how they're all clumped so close together when the workouts are very different. At ~220, that bench is intermediate, the deadlift and squat are novice, and the OHP is advanced. These charts aren't "official" by any means, but they're a decent indicator. Do you have issues that your deadlift and squat goals are relatively low? The "ratios" I've always heard repeated are 0.75BW for OHP, 1BW for bench, 1.5BW for squat, and 2BW for deadlift.
My fitness goals is around 10% body fat, 225 bench, 250 squat, 275 deadlift for the main lifts, 205 military press also.
LOL -- so weird seeing different goals for different folks.
It would be, like, a serious miracle if I could bench 225 or mp 205 -- I struggle at 135 for bench and 105 for mp -- but my skinny-fat ass could squat 275 and DL 315 when I was lifting regularly. Makes me wonder if you're just being conservative, tbh, or if you're just built completely differently.
I've moved on to tabata now, because I just don't have regular enough access to a gym because I travel so much. I miss lifting.
I'm using a linear progression. I add 5lbs per upper body lift and 10lbs per lower body lift each time. Till I can't achieve the lift, then I unload 10% and start back over.
I was trying to figure the best ratios for my body weight and frame.
Still...those are some strange goals. If you're capable of hitting 205 on the OHP, you should probably be able to pull damn near 350-400 on the deadlift, assuming your training is similar, and that you don't have an injury preventing you from getting up that high. It's similar with squats.
I guess my point is, if your setting the bar that high for OHP, why is your deadlift/squat goal so low?