Insights from working with 1000’s of people to help them look, feel & perform at their best
Buy your tickets here
Time : 9am – 4pm
Date : 23rd Sunday feb
Location : Sweatbox Dundee
9am – Welcome
15 mins Open Q + A / Get to know Sheli + Emma
9:15am – Seminar Topic 1
The 10 biggest lesson we have learnt working with 1000s of clients
10:15am Sweat Class workout
11:30am – 12:30 Yoga + Movement Flow
12:30 -1pm LUNCH
1pm -2pm :
ESG : Fat loss: Theory into practise
Sheli : Aesthetics Vs Performance , The Yellow Brick Road .
2pm – 3:30pm – Seminar Topic 2
The evolving shape of women
Miss conceptions in fitness
Q+A + Goodbyes
Found this post from when I was working on this. It is a brilliant example of how complex cancer is and I hope it stands to prove the over simplification at best and extremely dangerous at worst of claims like ‘ketones can help your cancer’..
Exercise and breast cancer: the effect on the tumor
This data is from animal models of breast cancer expressing triple negative tumors which are the most aggressive, hardest to treat and have the poorest outcomes.
Before anyone says ‘it isn’t relevant because we are not mice’ .. yes there are limitations however;
– Animal models provide a tool to examine the effects of exercise on tumors in a closed experimental environment in which the lifestyle of the animal as well as the type and intensity of exercise can be controlled. This is not possible in the real world.
– Individuals with breast cancer display huge heterogeneity (they are all different) not just in terms of individual differences in health, age and ethnicity but in relation to their breast cancer type and treatment. This is less of an issue in genetically engineered mice models.
– Animal models also allow us to watch the tumors grow and thus make possible the detailed study of stage-specific responses to exercise. This gives us a greater insight into the development of tumors in relation to exercise and may help to identify the optimal mode, intensity and duration of exercise.
In conclusion, some of the huge limitations in exercise science – namely sample size, heterogeneity of populations and lack of control can be overcome using animal models. We need to piece the information we get from human and animal studies together to give us the most comprehensive understanding.
On to what animal models can show us about the effect of exercise on breast cancer tumors..
– A reduction in tumor progression. Both the number of tumors and the size of tumors were reduced with exercise.
– This reduction is thought to be linked to a reduction in inflammation (MCP-1 and IL-6 were both reduced)
– Intensity matters! – the reduction in tumor progression is generally seen in studies that have opted for exercise intensities of about 70% VO2 max. Interestingly, studies that have opted for low intensity exercise have found varying results with some even showing an increase in tumor progression.
– The age of initiation of exercise (probably in relation to tumor status) may be of importance. Two very similar studies were carried out on a genetic mouse model where one study found a positive effect of exercise and the other found a slight negative effect. One of the key differences is that the positive effect was found when mice began exercise at a much younger age and the negative effect was observed when mice began exercising later in life. This may have implications for the age at which we encourage girls to start routinely exercising.
This last point especially shows the complexity of cancer and how all tumors act differently & actually how even the same tutor can respond differently to a stimulus at a different stage in its life.
Why fast weight loss isn’t impressive: It’s not (all) fat.
Going through check ins this week a few people seem disappointed with 1-2lb weight loss a week..THAT IS PERFECT!! Which begs the question are your expectations of rate of fat loss realistic?
Faster fat loss probably isn’t more fat.. here is why..
Many of you may have heard that 1lb a week of weight loss is optimal because which 1lb of fat is 3500 calories and this equates to a deficit of 500 calories a day for a week. Cool.
However, the 3500 calorie rule doesn’t quite add up when we look at real world weight loss. It might if you lost weight solely from fat but that is extremely unlikely and even more so in the first week or so of a diet where we often see bigger drops in weight (remember weight loss doesn’t = fat loss).
This is because we use energy from glycogen and muscle breakdown as well as from fat when we are in an energy deficit.
The energy balance equation does not directly refer to weight or weight loss. It refers to energy stores.
Energy balance is the difference between how much energy you take in and how much energy you expend – over time this indicates how much energy you have stored in your body. This energy can be stored as glycogen in the muscle, as muscle tissue itself or, as fat.
So ,when you are losing weight it is coming from a mixture of glycogen, muscle and fat.. oh and all the fluctuations due to water retention & food volume.
Rapid weight loss can often mean you are losing a higher % of lean body mass and/or water. That’s why you’ll actually lose more weight if you don’t resistance train as you will lose more muscle mass.. just to be clear here.. MORE WEIGHT.. NOT MORE FAT!!!
So, you may weigh less but you will have a higher body fat % and you (arguably) won’t look as good.. unless you were going for the skinny fat look.. each to their own.
If you want to learn how to optimise your fat loss while minimising loss of lean body mass then get in touch.
Why does it appear that I am now maintaining my weight at a lower calorie intake than when I was lighter and had less muscle (in this case 3 years ago)?
You have become more efficient at using calories – this can either be by mechanical efficiency, reduced NEAT, reduced activity energy expenditure or a mixture of all
2) The amount of increased muscle mass has little impact on energy needs
You’ve probably added little muscle mass (this is not meant to be demoralizing or offensive..just fact). You have been training for years, you are lean, you don’t weigh very much and you have a petite frame. The extra calories you burn as a result of the muscle mass you have built in the last 3 years is not going to contribute much to your total daily energy expenditure or in other words.. your calorie needs.
3) Miss reporting/ inaccurate tracking
You think you are eating ‘X’ amount of calories but you are actually eating more than this and either forgetting to track or not measuring portion sizes accurately enough.
You stick to your diet some times, maybe even most of the time.. but not all the time. Standard example is the Mon-Fri dieter who eats what they want on the weekend.
5) You are not at maintenance.
You are in an energy deficit and you are still losing weight. This fat loss rate is slow as it is a representation of the total amount of body fat you have to lose which is low. This means it is easily masked on the scales from day to day and even week to week. When it comes to losing fat this slowly the scales often aren’t a sensitive enough measure to see fat loss from week to week.
This is something a lot of people do not consider.
If you are lean and thus do not have much fat to lose you can’t expect to be losing your typical 1lb of fat a week. In fact, 0.5lb a week of fat still isn’t that likely if you’re very lean.
So, if we are talking about fat loss of as little as 0.25lb a week can we really expect to see this on the scales given all the other influences? No.
I LOVE questions from clients.. they always get me thinking. In my clients situation I think the most likely answer is actually number 5.. basically she needs to be more patient. Slow fat loss does not mean you are at maintenance. If you are lean, it means you don’t have much more fat to lose at this point fat loss WILL slow.
The only positive is that when you are very lean (photo shoot or comp prep) even losing 0.5lbs of fat is going to show.