Long answer: It's difficult and it's complicated. Allow me to explain....

First we have the issue of whether you really lose fat and gain muscle at the "same time."

Well, yes, if your definition of the "same time" is say, a month or 12 weeks. But in that case, you're probably not gaining muscle at the "same time" literally speaking, as in, right now this very moment you are reading this, or 7 days a week, 24 hours a day for months in a row.

The best explanation for what's really happening is that you alternate between periods of caloric surplus (anabolism) and caloric deficit (catabolism) and the net result is a gain in muscle and a loss in body fat.

You see, if you stay in a calorie surplus, it's the body's natural tendency for body fat and lean body mass to go up together. And if you stay in a calorie deficit, it's your body's natural tendency for body fat and lean body mass to go down together.

There may be exceptions, but the general rule is that it is very difficult to gain muscle and lose fat at the same time - the mechanisms are mostly antagonistic to one another. When it does happen, it's almost always the result of "unusual conditions" - I call them X factors.

The 4 X-Factors

The first X-factor is "training age" . Ever hear of "newbie gains?" The less trained your body is and the further you are from your genetic potential, the easier it is to gain muscle. The reverse is also true - an advanced bodybuilder with 20 years experience would be thrilled just to gain a few pounds of solid dry muscle in a year!

The second x factor is muscle memory. It's easier to regain muscle you've lost than it is to gain new muscle in the first place (ergo, the fat out of shape semi retired bodybuilder who starts training again and blows up and gets ripped "overnight").

The third X factor is genetics (or somatotype). Ever heard of the "genetic freak?" That's the dude who sprouts muscle like weeds even when he's on the "50-50 diet" (50% McDonald's and 50% pizza)... and he never gets fat. (That dude chose the right parents!)

The fourth X factor is drugs. I'm not just talking about pro bodybuilders, I'm talking about "Joe six pack" in the gym - not to mention those fitness models you idolize in the magazines. How did they get large muscle gains with concurrent fat loss? Chemicals.

I'm not a gambling man, but I'll place a wager on this any day: I'll bet that in 99% of the cases of large muscle gains with concurrent large fat losses, one or more of these x factors were present.

That's not all! There are actually 5 more X factors related to your body composition and diet status (the X2 factors). But I'll have to talk about those later.

So you're not a beginner, you don't take roids, you're not a genetic mutant and you have no muscle memory to take advantage of. Are you S.O.L? Well, I do want you to be realistic about your goals, but...

There IS a way for the average person to gain muscle and lose fat at the same time.

The Secret: You have to change your "temporal perspective!"

Traditionally nutritionists and fitness pros have only looked at calorie balance in terms of 24 hour periods. At midnight, you could tally up the calories like a shopkeeper closing out his register, and if the balance were positive, you'd say you were in a surplus for the day. If the balance were negative, you'd say you were in a deficit for the day.

But it's entirely possible that you might pass through periods of "within-day" surplus where you were in a highly anabolic state (for example, you eat the biggest, highest carb meal of the day after your workout), and you were in a deficit the rest of the day.

If you did intense weight training, and you timed your nutrient intake appropriately, Isn't it possible that you could gain a small amount of muscle during those anabolic hours, while losing fat the rest of the day? Granted it might only be grams or ounces - but what if you kept that up for a week? A month? Three months?

As you pan out and look at the bigger picture, what if most days of the week you were in a deficit for the entire day, and on some days you were in a surplus? If so, then isn't it possible that over the course of the week, you'd have a small net gain of muscle and loss of body fat a a result of the caloric fluctuation?

These within-day and within-week phases are called microcycles and mesocycles. If you also had a primary goal with a longer term focus of several months, say 12 weeks or 16 weeks, that would be a macrocycle.

What I've just described is nutritional periodization. Some people call it cyclical dieting. it's where you manipulate your calories (primarily by fluctuating carbohydrate intake, hence "carb cycling") in order to intentionally zig zag your way through periods of surplus and deficit and create specific hormonal responses.

The end result: muscle gain and fat loss during the same time period!

I know that someone out there is having a hissy fit because I've only talked about calories: deficits and surpluses. Rightfully so. Calories matter but there's more to it than calories - most importantly, hormones and "nutrient partitioning."

If you're in a calorie deficit you are going to pull energy from your body.The question is: From WHERE? If your hormones are out of whack and you're eating crap, you could lose more muscle than fat in a deficit and gain almost pure fat, not muscle, in a surplus!

But WHAT IF you could manipulate within day energy balance, use nutritional periodization AND control your hormones with food and lifestyle strategies?

NOW you can see how concurrent muscle gain and fat loss are starting to look possible!

Make no mistake - concurrent muscle gain and fat loss is a difficult goal to achieve. The good news: difficult does not mean impossible. Or as George Santayana said, "The difficult is that which can be done immediately, the impossible, that which takes a little longer."

If you’d like to learn more about losing fat and gaining muscle at the same time, check out my newest program, “The Holy Grail Body Transformation System.”

In it, you’ll hear all the details about nutritional periodization, cyclical dieting, hormonal manipulation, within day energy balance, nutrient partitioning, AND the all the X factors, including the 5 “X2-Factors” - which are the keys to gaining muscle and losing fat at the same time.

You’ll also get my new “TNB” training system, as seen in Men’s Fitness magazine (the complete, expanded version that Men’s Fitness didn’t have room to print).

This new body transformation program is available for a limited time at a discount during our "pre-launch" promotion: Visit the new Holy Grail website for more details:

"We purchased 15 protein powders and drinks mainly in the New York metro area or online and tested multiple samples of each for arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury" said Consumer Reports.

"Concentrations in most products were relatively low," continued the article, "but when taking into account the large serving size suggested, the number of micrograms per day for a few of the products was high compared with most others tested."

Out of the 15 products tested, the following exceeded the U.S. Pharmocopeia (USP) suggested limits for safety:

EAS Myoplex Original Rich Dark Chocolate (ready to drink liquid): 16.9 arsenic, 5.1 cadmium
Muscle Milk chocolate powder: 12.2 arsenic, 5.6 cadmium, 13.5 lead, 0.7 mercury
Muscle Milk Vanilla Cream: 12.2 lead

* Amounts in micrograms

So, if you use protein drinks should you be worried? Should you stop drinking them? Well, it appears disconcerting that certain brands are high in these metals, but keep in mind that:

(1) Some people and organizations are questioning the choice of 3rd party lab used by Consumer reports, as well as the definitions for acceptable safe levels.

(2) These test results showed that that 12 out of 15 products were within safe limits even at high doses (or had zero heavy metals present), and

(3) Products which tested high were tested based on very large doses. Therefore, this might be a red flag only for very heavy users (three shakes a day or up to 8 scoops) of specific products (not protein powder in general)

Heavy metal contamination is a particular health concern for certain populations including infants, growing young children, women of childbearing age who plan to have kids soon, pregnant women, nursing women.

However, I don't believe this report is a reason for panic or giving up moderate use of protein supplements.

Due to all the publicity, I imagine that the few companies named will write rebuttals or responses, and if necessary, simply tighten up their quality control. Probably, the industry in general will start posting more information on their testing, safety and quality standards. Some companies have reassuringly already done so on their websites (which has probably boosted their sales, not hurt them).

I think this is mostly a non-issue.

Consumer Reports is a favorite publication for many people researching purchases of cars, electronics and appliances. They were probably well-intentioned in their protein article (although who knows what underlying biases might be there).

In the future, however, I'd like to see these types of tests performed under scientific scrutiny and get the results published in a peer reviewed journal. This way, we can review the test results, read about the experimental methods and get the evidence-based facts about protein requirements and contaminant safety standards, rather than depend on journalists whose usual job is comparing brands of toasters.

On a related note, the NSF has questioned the lab/testing methods used in this story:

NSF International cannot comment on the test results reported in the July 2010, Consumer Reports article on protein drinks. It omits critical information about the laboratory that performed the test and its accreditation qualifications. ISO 17025 accreditation is critical for any laboratory testing for heavy metals in dietary supplements and nutritional products. The article also omits the test methods used, analytical preparation, sample size, the basis of their risk assessment, detection limits, quality control data and instrumentation used for this report.

While it's fine and good that this info was published, what really bothers me about the write up is that it seems their journalists are using these test results as ammo to attack the entire idea of taking protein supplements and eating a high protein diet.

"You don't need extra protein" and "high protein diets damage your kidneys," claim Consumer Reports. They also quote a dietitian who said the body can only utilize 5 to 9 grams of protein per hour. I'd like to see a research citation on that one!

They are clearly perpetuating some of the same stupid myths about protein that bodybuilders and strength athletes have had to debunk for years.

When mentioning how cadmium is toxic to the kidney, they added, "the way that high protein is bad for your kidneys." That is false. A high protein diet (on par with what a strength athlete would reasonably consume), is not damaging to a healthy kidney.

High protein diets are contraindicated for patients who already have kidney disease and caution is warranted in certain populations where risk of sub-clinical kidney conditions may be present or where there is kidney disease predisposition. That's not the same as saying eating a high protein diet causes kidney disease.

It's quite true that there's a "more is better" mentality among many muscle-seekers and protein supplement marketing often feeds right into that. The consumer may be told - via advertisement or editorial - to take protein drinks multiple times every day (better for sales than recommending occasional or light use only when needed, right?)

Protein marketing can sometimes border on the outrageous today - with all kinds of claims made for muscle gain, fat loss, enhanced performance and even anti-aging. The truth is, protein supplements are just food - powdered or liquid food - they're NOT magic! A lot of muscle and fitness fanatics today depend way too much on supplements and not enough on whole, natural foods.

How many people actually drink 3 protein shakes a day, every day (21 a week)? I don't know. No one in my circle does, and it's not something I recommend. In my Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle program, I recommend eating mostly whole food, eating a variety of foods and using protein shakes or powders as an occasional supplement for convenience or if you need a supplement to help you meet your optimum level of intake.

Personally, I use protein powder once a day in my oatmeal and I enjoy an occasional protein shake - you can make some pretty tasty smoothies if you add things like fruit, peanut butter, ice, etc.. I don't plan on stopping.

Some people are freaking out over this. I know the personality type: certain people will say, 'No way, if there's ANY heavy metal in any protein drinks I'm not taking them at all! Why take a chance?" Seems prudent, except that most of the protein drinks tested were well within safety limits and all were within limits with more moderate usage.

Besides, small exposure is inevitable anyway. What's in the whole food you're eating? If you pressed the issue, you could find some substance to gripe about - including heavy metals - in many of the foods you eat daily right now - yes, the so called "clean foods" - dairy products, fruits, vegetables, lean meats, fish, shellfish, etc.

Advice:
(1) Too much of anything can be bad for you, so don't go crazy with protein drinks or protein foods (or too much of any one type of food).
(2) Avoid diets that make you dependent on protein shakes or meal replacement supplements
(3) Don't believe everything you read in the mainstream media until you check out the real science for yourself
(4) Use consumer reports when you want to know what car or camcorder to buy. Take their bodybuilding and sports nutrition info with a grain of salt.

Related Links

NSF statement about consumer reports story
http://www.nsf.org/business/newsroom/pdf/NSF_Statement_Consumer_Reports_Protein_Drinks.pdf

Consumer reports online write up (the full 5-page article in only in the print edition: July 2010 issue):
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/2010/july/food/protein-drinks/what-our-tests-found/index.htm

Here's the CBS story:

Online:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/01/earlyshow/main6537686.shtml

Video clip (CBS News):

Disclosure: I have no affiliations or associations of any kind with any protein or supplement companies.

Tom Venuto is a lifetime natural (steroid-free) bodybuilder, fitness writer and author of Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle (e-book) and the national bestseller, The Body Fat Solution. Tom has appeared in The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Huffington Post, Oprah Magazine and Men's Fitness Magazine, as well as on dozens of radio shows including Sirius Satellite Radio, ESPN-1250 and WCBS. Tom is also the founder and CEO of the premier fat loss support community, the Burn The Fat Inner Circle

ANSWER: ! For most women, 11.8% is ripped, and for many, that's contest ready.

Just for comparison, I've done over 7,000 body fat tests during my career, and the lowest I have ever measured on a female was 8.9% (4-site skinfold method). She was a national-level figure competitor and she was shredded - full six pack of abs... "onion skin!"

However, I do know some women who get down to 11-13% body fat - by all standards extremely lean, complete with six pack abs - but oddly, they still had a few stubborn fat spots - usually the hips and lower body - so this would confirm your experience.

I know a guy who looks absolutely chiseled in his abs at 11% body fat, but other guys don't look really cut in the abs until they get down to 6-8% body fat.

That's the trouble with trying to pin down one specific body fat number as THE body fat level for seeing 6-pack abs (or being contest or photo-shoot ready):

Everyone distributes their body fat differently and two people may look different at the same percentage.

Here's what I'd recommend:

Get familiar with some benchmarks for body fat levels.

My Burn The Fat system has a body fat rating scale, which includes averages and my suggested optimal body fat percentages.

This is my own chart, which I created with a combination of research literature and my own personal experience.

:: Burn The Fat, Feed the Muscle Body fat rating scale ::

WOMEN:
Competition Shape ("ripped"): 8-12%
Very Lean (excellent): < 15%
Lean (good): 16-20%
Satisfactory (fair): 21-25%
Improvement needed (poor): 26-30%
Major improvement needed (Very poor): 31-40%+

MEN:
Competition Shape ("ripped"): 3-6%
Very Lean (excellent): < 9%
Lean (good): 10-14%
Satisfactory (fair): 15-19%
Improvement needed (poor): 20-25%
Major improvement needed (Very poor): 26-30%+

Just a quick note: You're not destined to get fatter as you get older, but in the general population (non fitness and bodybuilding folks), the average older person has more body fat.

What I did to accomodate this is to include a range instead of one number, so younger people can use the low end of the range and older people can use the higher number.

Also, just so the average reader can keep things in perspective, single digit body fat for women and low single digits for men is far beyond lean - it's RIPPED - and that's usually solely the domain of competitive physique athletes.

Competition body fat levels were not meant to be maintained all year round. It's not realistic and it may may not be healthy, particularly for women.

The average guy or gal should probably aim for the "lean" category as a realistic year round goal, or if you're really ambitious and dedicated, the "very lean category."

You'll probably have to hit the "very lean" category for six pack abs. However, the bottom line is that there's no "perfect" body fat percentage where you're assured of seeing your abs.

Besides, body fat is one of those numbers that gets fudged and exaggerated all the time. I hear reports of women with body fat between 4 and 8% and I usually dismiss it as error in measurement (or there's some "assistance" involved). Body fat testing, especially with skinfolds, is not an exact science. All body fat tests are estimations and there is always room for human error.

The low numbers are nice for bragging rights, but the judges don't measure your body fat on stage. What counts is how you look and whether you're happy with that (or whether the judges are happy with it, if you're competing).

You can use my chart to help you set some initial goals, but for the most part, I recommend using body fat testing as a way of charting your progress over time to see if you're improving rather than pursuing some holy grail number.

In my Burn The fat, Feed The Muscle program, you can learn more about how to measure your body fat - professionally or even by yourself in the privacy of your own home.

Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle explains why body mass index and height and weight charts are virtually worthless, and shows you how to track your body composition over time and "tweak" your nutrition and training according to your weekly results.

Get more details at: www.BurnTheFat.com

Train hard and expect success,

Tom Venuto,
Author of Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle
www.BurnTheFat.com
www.BurnTheFatInnerCircle.com

Tom Venuto is a lifetime natural (steroid-free) bodybuilder, freelance writer and author of the #1 best selling diet e-book, Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle and the national best-seller, The Body Fat Solution (Avery/Penguin books). Tom has written hundreds of articles and has been featured in IRONMAN, Australian IRONMAN, Natural Bodybuilding, Muscular Development, Men's Fitness, Men's Exercise and on hundreds of websites worldwide. Tom is also the founder and CEO of the Internet's premier fat loss support community, the: Burn The Fat Inner Circle.

Photography Copyright Kostas Marangopoulos of Greek Bodybuilding

If you've watched movies like Bigger, Stronger Faster or surfed some of the bodybuilding boards online, no doubt, you've heard hardcore bodybuilders defend steroid use. Supporters claim that steroids don't cause any serious health problems, only relatively minor side effects which can be easily managed.

Perhaps that might be true if these drugs were used in the dosages and durations for which they are prescribed for medical use. Perhaps it might be true if they were used under medical supervision. Perhaps that might be true if users regularly got their bloodwork and health checked. However, that's not how steroids are being used today at the most elite levels of the game, is it?

Because of their status as controlled substances, steroids are usually purchased on the black market, so the buyer does not always know what he or she is taking. The drugs are self-administered, often at the advice of the dealer or local gym drug guru. Some bodybuilders take them for years. Almost all bodybuilders use multiple drugs. Many are not using drugs, they are abusing them.

With the assistance of chemicals, pro bodybuilders today are continually setting new standards, pushing the envelope on muscle mass, many of them crossing the 300 pounds barrier.

As such, it would be extremely naive to think that steroids are not without more serious risks than mere gyno, acne and testicular shrinkage.

Non-natural bodybuilders don't just use steroids, they often use a cocktail of drugs including, but certainly not limited to growth hormone, insulin, cytomel, clenbuterol, DNP, and one which perhaps is more responsible for kidney problems than steroids - diuretics.

I am not a doctor or an expert on steroids or performance enhancing drugs. However, I do have theory about why we keep hearing about bodybuilders and kidney problems.

What about the combination of steroids, very high protein diet, unusually high muscular bodyweight, extremely low pre-contest body fat, precontest dehydration and diuretics....could that be a veritable PERFECT STORM for a kidney malfunction or other health problem - even in the absence of genetic predisposition?

Add previous medical history or heredity into the mix and using the standard precontest drug cocktail might be nothing short of playing with matches while doused in gasoline.

How much each one of these factors contributes to the kidney dysfunction, I have no idea, but for those who claim that it was only the high protein or diuretics or genetics might want to know that the new study says there are potential direct nephrotoxic effects of anabolic steroids.

I thought this recent Times story was interesting, and so was the new study, so I wanted to share them with you. The Times story included quotes from bodybuilding luminaries such as Ken "Flex" Wheeler, King Kamali, and Bob Cicherillo. It also featured an interesting video by Patrick Antonecchia, who ended his steroid use and career about a year ago after diagnosis of kidney disease.

Here's the link, and be sure to check out the video too:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/10/sports/10steroids.html

The research paper was published in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology and was conducted at Columbia University. The abstract of the paper can be read on Pub Med at:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19917783.

I read the full text of the study. The "Index patient" in the study suffered from focal segmental glomeruloscelrosis, a form of kidney disease. They showed his photo (body) in the journal full text and his physique was clearly that of a pro competitor (nearly 300 lbs). His profile was as follows:

• 30 years old, male caucasian
• 6 feet 1 inch tall, 295 pounds
• Professional bodybuilder
• consumed 550 grams of protein per day
• supplements: creatine, glutamine, BCAA, multivitamins
• drugs: injectable testosterone, oral methyl-1 test, GH, insulin & ephedrine/caffeine
• Anabolic steroid use for 10 years
• blood pressure at time of first hospital check in: 145/80
• patient put on medication and told to desist from bodybuilding
• 2 months after quitting bodybuilding, lost 40 pounds. 8 months later lost another 40 lbs - (215 lbs)
• blood pressure dropped to 110/75, renal health improved, but he suffered from severe depression related to changes in body image (perceived himself as "skinny and weak")
• Patient resumed training and high protein diet, drug free, weight climbed to 267 lbs
• Against dr's orders, patient resumed drugs and climbed to 296
• Patient had relapse of kidney problems, leading doctors to propose a form of focal segmental glomeruloscelerosis (kidney disease) was directly a result of steroid use combined with the unusually high lean body mass/body mass index
• (no mention of diuretics)

Some people might figure, yeah, this is just a rare case study - and it was in fact just a case study. But there were 10 subjects in the cohort and it was published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Most of us in bodybuilding have heard "locker room talk" about kidney problems and drug-using competitive bodybuilders for decades. More anecdote, Yes I know. But I haven't just read about this. I've seen it.

A friend of mine, earlier this year, was forced to end his bodybuilding career after he was rushed to the hospital - on the day before his contest - with kidney failure. Thank God he recovered without permanent damage. But his doctor, who said she had seen many bodybuilders in her emergency room before, told him he had to quit the steroids... And competition. Forever.

It hits you quite a bit harder when it happens to someone you've known for years - someone who had no known genetic predisposition for kidney trouble, no medical history and who claimed to be very careful about his usage. He was also under 200 pounds.What does it take for the bodybuilding community to start to rethink this?

Train hard, train natural,
Tom Venuto, author of
Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle

Ok, for all you psychos left, who have not left for Mens Fitness dot com, here's how the Doomsday workout went down:

I arrived at the dungeon (one of the gyms where I train with Richie - no one works there, you just get a key to front door), and started warming up while Richie was finishing off his last victim.

After she limped out of the gym, Richie sauntered on over to the squat rack where I was getting loose with some light sets, and all of a sudden it starting getting really dark outside.

I looked out the window and dark clouds started blowing in and looming overhead. I'm talking BLACK! Did you ever see that show, Stormchasers. Yeah. Like that! I swear with god as my witness this is a true story. IT was PITCH BLACK out as I got ready for my first set.

I figured this was a real BAD omen... there was a foreboding feeling, like the end of the world was coming. Truth be told, it would shortly be the end of something: my ability to stand up.

So I warmed up with 135, then again with 185.

We slapped weight on each side of the bar and I cranked out 15 reps with 225. My strength hasn't been what it used to be, and I've had to watch my lower back (ruptured L4 comes back to haunt me sometimes), but it felt pretty easy for 15 reps.

245 for 12. No problem, but I started feeling it because Richie gave me barely a minute rest. less than 60 seconds later, 265 for 10. I felt that one. Still not all that heavy, but I admit it, I was sucking wind because the slave-driver wasn't letting me get full recovery between sets (that's always part of his evil, cold, calculated plan by the way).

I figured 285 then 315 was coming, but nope, he got me off guard. Drop set. Actually, I should have known it was coming because he had the bar filled up with 10s - a plate, a quarter and 4 tens on each side: 265, drop weight, 245, drop weight, 225, drop weight, 205 drop weight... then I dropped.

He didn't let me lie there on the floor for long though. Again, just about 60 seconds, maybe I had 90, but it didn't feel like any rest at all, and back to the rack. Usually you figure three heavy sets, then a drop set and you're done. But noooooo. Not the M.O.P.

It was ASCENDING SET time!

If you guys only do DESCENDING SETS (aka drop sets), but not ASCENDING SETS, then be thankful for what you are missing....

225 6 reps, NO REST, slap a ten on each side, 245 for 6 reps, NO REST, slap a ten on each side 265 for 6 reps... BARELY got six and I think he spotted me.. can't seem to remember. By the way, it's no coincidence that the reps were 6-6-6. This man is evil.

And by now all HELL broke loose outside. It was a torrential downpour. lighting. thunder. Stormchasers. End of the world stuff.

Richie looks down at me; dark clouds behind his head, and says, "Venuto, you look like a squirrel I ran over with my truck last week."

"Thanks richie. I feel like one."

I'm telling you, if this doesn't look like much on paper, with those admittedly moderate poundages, then bring your ass out here to Jersey and do it with us... at the pace we did it, then yap all you want.

I swear, that would would be enough quads for a lot of people, but that was just the beginning... over to the smith machine for split squats. Just one plate per side - and you know the bar is counterbalanced, so thats not even 135 - couldn't be so bad eh? Hmpf!

You would hardly notice it unless you have a keen eye for form, but the slightest shift in your upper body position can make a split squat sheer torture. Most people lean forward and that throws a ton of stress on the powerful glutes and lower back. Not in Richie's world.

Smyth Split Squats: Chest is up and out, torso is TOTALLY vertical. You have to position yourself properly under the bar to do this and then there is absolutely no forward trunk inclination whatsoever. Hips thrust forward. Up and down - slowly - like a piston, only 3/4 reps, 1/4 of a rep short of lockout. rep to Total failure and stop RIGHT at the point of failure. Three sets on each leg. Very brief rest intervals.

The burn cannot be described, it has to be felt.

I remember watching a Milos Sarcev Video once from Bodybuilding dot com and Milos (a bonafide psycho in his own right - hats off to you Mr. Sarcev), displayed a PUKE-O-METER on the screen. Instead of red mercury rising, there was green vomit rising. When it hit the bulb at the top, the camera man followed Sarcev's victims out to the parking lot to catch the action.

You should be proud of me. I didn't lose my breakfast. I'm good about that. Remember: when you're "bulking" you don't want the movement of valuable calories in the wrong direction.

But I felt close. I also felt the acid meter rising. I swear that it felt like the lactic acid was rising from my legs all the way up into my face until my face was flushed with acid. the second I racked the bar, it was like the acid drained out and down. Weird.

If I were training by myself, I know at this point I'd be taking like a 5 minute breather. I know myself and I admit it. But nope. No relief. Quickly over to the dumbbell rack.

THIS I wasnt expecting. Sumo squats. I grabbed a 120 pounder. Not a heck of alot for a Sumo squat. But At this point, it might as well have been a ton. About 12 or 15 reps. Then NO REST, I grabbed a pair of 80's and did dumbbell stiff leg deadlifts.

The puke o meter almost topped out again. CRAP! If you only try one thing from this workout, try this superset - it will hit your quads, glutes, hams in a way that will catch you off guard. It knocks the wind out of you too. NOTE: on the sumo's again, vertical torso - its all low back and glutes if you lean forward. concentrate on drivin through the heels WITH the quads. Stiff leg deads: very strict, butt out, back arched, head up - to failure with strict form. Three supersets.

I curse richie and all his descendants. Sadist.

But he's not quite finished.

leg Curl machine.

I'd tell you what we did, but honestly I just can't remember. All I really remember is that the walk upstairs was just as bad as finishing off the leg curls. SHIT! It dawned on me. I had to walk back down the stairs too.

I curse Richie and all his descendants.

Seriously though, If I dont bring a notebook with me, I sometimes cannot keep track of what he gives me on some exercises. So it was with these leg curls. Every set is different, and there are mini sets within sets. Range of motion changes. Static holds. Tempo changes. Switch from two legs to one leg at a time. Its all a blur.

Finally, we were finished. It's 8:30 in the morning. I had a long work day ahead of me. too bad I crashed. Slept through most of it.

So that was the Armageddon workout. As I look forward to my next workout, I keep thinking about Armageddon.. .Armagettin my ass kicked.

- Tom V.

Gironda's posing - Amazing! Really makes you appreciate the aesthetic physique.

Ironically, Gironda was so far ahead of his time, (too ripped for the 1950's era), the judges didnt know what to do with him, and he never had the success onstage that he wanted. His claim to fame came later as a hollywood trainer to the stars in the 60's and 70's and into the 80's with the pro bodybuilders.

Trivia: Did you know that Gironda was Arnold Schwarzenegger's first trainer when Joe Weider brought arnold to america? Legend has it that a bulky Arnold showed up at Vince's Gym, where the Austrian announced, "My name is Arnold Schwarzenegger and I am going to the greatest bodybuilder who ever lived." To which Vince replied, "You look like a fat f**k to me!"

Transcript

QUESTION: Tom, there have actually been some debates on the forums about whether body building is even a sport at all; whats your response to the people who say it's really not a sport?

ANSWER: I guess it depends on your definition of a sport. I know some people who say poker is a sport. I would call Poker a game, but hey, if you want to call it a sport if you’re a poker fan, more power to you,, I mean it’s just a label.

But depending on your definition, bodybuilding may or may not be a sport. So call it a competition if you prefer, because I don’t think anybody can argue with that. In fact a lot of us in bodybuilding use that word competition bodybuilding a lot more often than we say the sport of bodybuilding.

I call it a sport, because to me it’s my sport and I think that if something has a physical component and there’s competition involved, then it’s a sport. Bodybuilding has that. Some people say, well that’s not a broad enough definition, there has to be skill, there has to be athleticism, but who gets to decide the definition of skill or athletisism? The Olympic committee? High schools and universities? Some all-wise, all-knowing authority? Who gets to decide. Why don’t we just decide for ourselves and call it whatever we want to call it.

I think that some people would argue against bodybuilding being a sport because they say the judging is too subjective. And for sure there is a degree of subjectivity but in bodybuilding the criteria for scoring are very very clear. It’s not vague like some people think it is, the criteria are very specific and easy for a professional to judge just by looking at the physique.

Sometimes the decision is close, but how is that so different is that from something like diving or gymnastics? There’s a panel of judges watching a diver dive or a gymnast do a floor exercise and you look at the scoreboard and you see all the judges don’t give the same score do they? Why can’t they all give the same score if the criteria for winning are cut and dried? So there’s subjectivity in those kinds of sports too.

I think it’s a silly debate and I don’t think the debate will never end. I consider bodybuilding to be a competition AND I consider it a sport and beyond that, I consider bodybuilding an art. And it's an art in more than one sense of the word – because the process is an art and end result is art too.

Related links

Leigh Peele
www.FatLossTroubleshooter.com

The Fitcast Show
www.TheFitCast.com

Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle: Fat Burning Secrets of Bodybuilders and Fitness Models
www.BurnTheFat.com

Barbell Leverage Curls - Turn Your Curling 90 Degrees and TRASH Your Biceps and Forearms!: A Guest Blog By Nick Nilsson of Fitness e-books.com

The standard barbell curl is a great bicep exercise. So I'm going to turn it 90 degrees and make it even better! I find this exercise actually gives me better tension on the upper arm flexors than most standard curling exercises.

For this version of the barbell curl, you're going to be making use of a very different concept in resistance. You're going to be turning the barbell 90 degrees (like I mentioned above) and curling the barbell LENGTHWISE.

I'll explain in more detail about why it's so effective after you see exactly what it is. It'll make it easier to get the idea of why it's such a powerful concept.

First, get an EZ bar and load one end of it. The bends in the bar make it much easier on the wrist as you're doing this exercise...much more so than a straight bar.

You really don't need much weight - just a 5 or 10 lb plate will be fine for starters. The way you lift the weight is going to make that small amount feel like a whole lot more!

Here's a shot of me holding the bar loaded with one plate on the end. You know, I just realized this sure looks like a fishing trophy pose...just caught me a a 30 lb steelhead!

Right, so now, you're going to hold the bar lengthwise with one hand. Grip it just a bit past the center on the angled part. The rest of the bar will run directly up the back of your forearm. The loaded end should be down. The pictures show it better than I can explain it.

You'll need to experiment a bit with where you grip, but as you can see in the picture below, where I'm gripping on the bar is where it angles backward. This takes some of the pressure off the wrist as you're doing the exercise.

Now comes the fun part...start raising the loaded end of the barbell up with a curl motion. The length of the bar will press against the back of your forearm.

Keep curling all the way up as high as you can. It looks like very similar to reeling in a fish with a fishing pole (boy, I just keep beating the carp out of this fishing analogy, don't I? :)

If you need a little help, you can spot yourself with the other hand.

Here's what the exercise looks like with the other hand.

Now here's a view from a bit further back.

That's the movement!

Why It's So Good

This type of leverage training hits the muscles from a very different angle because of how you're applying leverage to the bar. You're basically making the barbell an extension of your arm, placing the resistance further out from the fulcrum (pivot point).

That means you can use less actual weight but still get more resistance.

Technically speaking, when you do a regular barbell curl, the fulcrum of the exercise is INSIDE the elbow joint. When you do THIS exercise, the fulcrum actually moves OUTSIDE the elbow joint. This fulcrum is where the barbell contacts the bottom of your forearm as you curl up.

Without going into too much anatomical and kinesiological detail, the bottom line is, using the barbell like this greatly changes how resistance is applied to the muscles and provides an excellent growth stimulus BECAUSE it's such a huge change in how the resistance is applied.

The other good thing about this exercise? At the top of the curl, the weight is still away from your body at an angle, and you still get tension even at the top of the range of motion!

Just be sure you don't whack somebody walking in front of you when you're doing this one at the gym...

On the other hand, it WOULD teach them a good lesson about walking in front of you while you're training...

- Nick Nilsson

This exercise was an excerpt from Nick's new training manual,
"The Best Arm Exercises You've Never Heard Of"...68 unique exercises for the biceps, triceps and forearms. If you're looking to break through a plateau, get some training variety or just have some fun in your training again definitely check this book out at Fitness e-books.com

Related links

Leigh Peele
www.FatLossTroubleshooter.com

The Fitcast Show
www.TheFitCast.com

Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle: Fat Burning Secrets of Bodybuilders and Fitness Models
www.BurnTheFat.com

10) What in your opinion is the role of fruit and dairy products during cutting periods?

I include fruit in my pre-contest diet, but because it’s a low carb diet, there’s not a lot of carbs in general and that means there’s not a lot of fruit. I eat more green vegetables and fibrous carbs than starches or fruits on a contest diet. But you shouldn’t interpret that as meaning fruit is fattening; that is absolutely not true. You can get shredded with fruit in your diet, no doubt about it. The reduced carbs helps on many levels, but getting cut is still mostly about the calories.

Same goes for dairy. Dairy is not fattening, in fact the latest research says the opposite – there are dozens of research papers saying that something in the dairy products is important for fat loss, whether that’s calcium or vitamin D or something else, the researchers are still trying to hash it out.

Most bodybuilders cut dairy because they say it makes them smooth and or bloated, and that’s probably true when you consider how many people are lactose intolerant. But “causes bloating” and “makes you fat” are two different things.

I don’t eat much dairy on my contest diet, but again that’s not because I think it’s fattening, I just choose to allocate my calories to protein, fibrous carbs, essential fats and then I rotate in the starchy carbs based on my carb cycling schedule.

11) How much can you bench/have you benched? What are some of your best lifts as a natural bodybuilder?

I was never powerlifter material so I don’t have much to brag about here. My best bench was 335 for 3. I partially tore my left pec a few years ago so heavy benching days are over.

My best full squat was 405 for 6 with belt and knee wraps but I had a ruptured disk at age 19 so that has always been a limiting factor. I turned to high rep squats partially for that reason. I also got interested in high rep squatting because Tom Platz was an idol of mine in my early bodybuilding years, and he built the worlds best developed, freakiest legs by using a mix of high rep squats and heavy squats, not just heavy training.

My best high rep squatting is 225 lbs for 54 reps, 275 for 32 reps and 325 for 20 reps. I probably won’t squat 4 plates again, too risky for my lower back, but I think I still have it in me to beat some of those repping PR’s. One of my training partners “PWNED” me years ago when I did 50 reps with 225 and he did 75. That pissed me off so much I remember it to this day. I’m going to beat that rep record yet.

12) Do you think dextrose and post workout drinks are overrated?

I think post workout drinks with simple sugars and whey are fine and they serve their purpose. In fact, since these are cheap ingredients, I think you can make a good case for making your own or buying inexpensive whey and simple carb drinks, and get pretty good results while saving yourself a small fortune.

These “everything but the kitchen sink” formulas that are being promoted lately are expensive, but the additional benefit of a lot of the added ingredients is questionable. I think post workout nutrition is pretty simple and people overcomplicate it. If I think drinks are “overrated,” I only think so in that I believe you can get equally good results with food if you eat a bodybuilding diet with 6 meals a day.

13) Should there be changes in a bodybuilder’s training style between high volume and high intensity training or is it someone’s choice?

Training volume is one of the variables that’s going to be different from person to person based on individual preference and choice as well as one’s genetics. An extremely high volume is generally unwise for the natural bodybuilder, but I’m convinced that an extremely low volume program as a default style of training is equally unwise in most cases.

I never got good size from a one set to failure program, unless that was like 3-4 exercises, each with warm up sets and then one all out set to failure (but that’s still multiple sets isn’t it?) What I noticed from the very low volume training was more strength than size. On the other hand, I never argue with results. If you do low volume training as your year-round method and it’s working, keep it up.

14) What in your opinion is more important? Food selection, food quantity or nutrient timing?

That depends. Most important for what? Fat loss? Health? Happiness? For fat loss nothing is more important than calories in versus calories out. The reason I say this is because you could select the best foods and have perfect nutrient timing, but if you’re in a caloric surplus, you won’t lose fat, it’s that simple – you have to get the food quantity right.

You also have to get the food quality right for good health. And for the athlete or bodybuilder, nutrient timing is also clearly very important. But all these factors need to work together in synergy, I don’t think it makes sense to try to put them into a hierarchy where you say that it’s all nutrient timing or it’s all about which foods or macros you eat and not calories. It’s everything together.

15) How do you imagine yourself at 60?

Still living the bodybuilding lifestyle. Ripped, jacked and looking at least 10-15 years younger than my age. As I get older I want to be a role model to other people who want to be in great shape in their golden years and I want to stand as a counter example to anyone who says it can’t be done. All you need is ONE person who has done something that others say is impossible and that blows excuses and generalizations about age and fitness/physique of the water.

When I was a teenager, I was introduced to guys like IFBB pro Albert Beckles, a masters champ who competed in IFBB pro shows in his 50's. He was the talk of the magazines in the 1980's, not just because of his amazing, peaked biceps and ripped condition, but because he appeared to be getting better into his 50's and was actually winning the pro shows. (Below: Beckles training in the 1980's at World Gym in Los Angeles):

Thanks to guys like Beckles, the idea got planted in my head that a great physique was totally possible after age 50. As I look back now since I’ve hit the big 4-0, I see how valuable it was to have that kind of idea given to me at a young age.

It’s unfortunate, but some people think it's all downhill after 60 or even after 50. But this old paradigm, like the idea that you can’t build a great physique without drugs, is slowly but surely dying as more people are maintaining tremendous physiques into their 50s and 60s.

16) In bodybuilding there is a time for bulking up and a time for cutting up. Do you think the body and our system gets stressed in a negative way if you keep alternating between the two? Is it beneficial for a bodybuilder (who doesn’t compete) to bulk up and cut down? What are the benefits, if any?

How do you define “bulking up?” If you mean getting fat and gaining as much weight as you can in the off season, then sure your body gets stressed in a negative way.

It’s not all that different than the weight cycling that obese dieters go through and we know from research and medical studies that yo yo dieting has many negative effects on your health.

Sure, you’re going to gain weight and body fat in the off season, but that’s like going from ripped to normal not from ripped to fat.

I wrote an article about that here: www.burnthefat.com/bodybuilders_fitness_models

Getting fat in the off season is dumb and serves no purpose. Even if there’s no negative effect on your health, you’re just making it harder on yourself when contest time rolls around – you’ll have to diet longer and harder to get it all off.

It's better to do a slow steady lean gain and put a limit on how much fat you are willing to gain. For me that’s double digits – If I hit 10% body fat, I tighten up the diet and add cardio. It’s a matter of personal standards as much as anything.

17) Can you go into a few tips for female bodybuilding? Do you think the program or a competitive woman should in any way different from that of a man? (nutrition & workout wise?)

There’s almost no difference in training. The only real big difference between men and women is in the daily energy requirements. Women almost always need significantly fewer calories than men, so if a female tries to follow the nutrition program of a man, or if she tries to follow a diet program that gives the same amount of calories to all men and women, she usually will not lose weight and will sometimes gain.

The rest of the differences between men and women have more to do with personal goals than with gender per se. If women should train differently than men for example, it’s mostly because they have different goals for their physiques than men in general. If a man and woman had identical goals, I would train them mostly the same.

There are some other female-specific concerns, but the training program is mostly a function of a person’s primary goals, not gender. I think female-based workouts are more for marketing purposes than anything.

18) What is your opinion of the natural bodybuilding physiques that are competing these days?

Awesome and getting better. Look at guys like Jim Cordova. AMAZING! I think there’s a “3-minute mile” effect occurring in natural bodybuilding. Every year, we’re seeing better and better physiques in the natural federations. What people once believed was not possible without drugs is now being achieved, so the physique improvement perpetuates more physique improvement as the bar keeps getting raised.

It’s like when Roger Bannister ran a mile in under four minutes. Before that, everyone thought it was impossible. But once a single person had broken the barrier, we realized it was not a physical barrier but a mental barrier. Within one year after Bannister broke the three-minute mile, 37 other runners did it too!

How do you explain this? Nothing changed in the runner’s bodies; nothing changed in the laws of physics; there were no new breakthroughs in running techniques. It was simply the runner’s beliefs of what was possible that changed - the mental barrier was broken – and this is now happening in natural bodybuilding.

This is why it’s so important to work on mental training as much as physical training and I gave so much attention to goal setting and mental reprogramming in my bodybuilding and Fat Loss programs.

19) Recently, watching for the millionth time the movie pumping iron, I saw that the purpose of bodybuilding was symmetry, good posing and body parts flowing with each other for a complete beautiful physique. Nowadays, with the help of new equipment, workout programs, advanced supplementation and new age pharmacology, mass is what is most important in bb shows. What in your opinion is the future of bodybuilding? How long can the harmony of a good body withstand the continuous demand for more and more mass?

I don’t think we have to look to the future, the mass monsters arrived a while ago and they’ve already pushed the limits to the max. Unfortunately, it’s hard to go backwards once a new standard is achieved or declared and the fans and judges are every bit as responsible for this as the athletes are.

A symmetrical, ripped and big bodybuilder will always beat a symmetrical, ripped and small bodybuilder. But the harmony is lost when the symmetry is lost. When symmetry is sacrificed for size, and that is rewarded, that’s when I think the future of bodybuilding is in jeopardy.

The fans need to show an appreciation for the Reeves’ and Zane’s and Labrada’s of the current era and a dislike for the distended stomachs and size for the sake of size. At the same time, the judges have to reward symmetry, cuts and classical body shapes.

Size is a part of the bodybuilding judging criteria and always will be - as it should - but we can’t expect this sport to go in a positive direction if we reward size at the expense of symmetry and shape.

20) Where do you see bodybuilding as a sport going in the short term and in the long term?

Open, professional bodybuilding is probably always going to remain a subculture indefinitely because mass monsters with freaky physiques are always going to be perceived by the public as freaks or at best, as fitness extremists.

However, I think that natural bodybuilding could get more mainstream publicity, recognition and appreciation than anyone realizes.

The reason I say that is because my second book, The Body Fat Solution, was published by a mainstream New York City publisher and was written for a mainstream audience. It’s NOT a bodybuilding book at all, like Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle.

As I was on the promotional tour for my new book when it was first released, I did dozens of interviews on mainstream radio like WCBS, ESPN and even Martha Stewart on Sirius satellite radio. I was also featured in the Wall Street Journal, Oprah Magazine, First for Women magazine and other mainstream publications which are as far removed from bodybuilding as you can get. Well, something really interesting happened...

I thought I was going to steer away from talking about bodybuilding when doing my media tour, because I didn’t want to intimidate potential readers or scare anyone away in the mainstream weight loss market, but the exact opposite happened. The newspaper reporters and radio hosts kept asking me about bodybuilding, and especially because my bio says I’m a natural bodybuilder. Although the average person has no idea what bodybuilding is all about, they’ve heard about steroid use in mainstream sports like baseball, so when they hear that a bodybuilder is “steroid-free” it’s actually very newsworthy right now.

I think this creates a tremendous opportunity for ambitious natural bodybuilders who are well-spoken, to get out into the mainstream and educate the public about the virtues of bodybuilding and weight training the natural way. In fact, it’s a totally untapped area, but so many bodybuilders just think about getting their picture in a muscle magazine or on bodybuilding dot com, they are completely oblivious to the bigger opportunities.

Just to give you an idea of thinking out of the box here, I was brainstorming with my new publicist last week and she was talking about approaching magazines that are read by moms and booking interviews on how to help them keep their teenage sons off steroids.

If more natural bodybuilders would do this kind of thing, they would be making a great name for themselves and for the sport of bodybuilding, while at the same time, helping other people. You’d be a hero, and yet bodybuilders are usually very narrow-minded when it comes to this kind of thing.

Think BIGGER and you’ll make yourself a better and more successful person and you’ll make bodybuilding a better sport for us all.

21) When will you come to Greece and do a seminar?

When will you guys invite me? (And what are you going to feed me when I get there?!)

- Tom Venuto,
Hoboken, New Jersey, USA
www.BurnTheFat.com

---

About Tom Venuto

Tom Venuto is a lifetime natural (steroid-free) bodybuilder, independent nutrition researcher, freelance writer and author of Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle (e-book) and the #1 Amazon best-seller, The Body Fat Solution (Avery/Penguin, hardcover). Tom’s articles are featured on hundreds of websites worldwide and he has been featured in IRONMAN, Australian IRONMAN, Natural Bodybuilding, Muscular Development, Men’s Fitness, Men’s Exercise as well as on dozens of radio shows including Martha Stewart healthy living (Sirius), ESPN-1250 and WCBS. Tom is also the founder and CEO of the premier fat loss support community, the Burn The Fat Inner Circle

---

About Kostas & Greek Bodybuilding

Kostas Marangopoulos is a lifetime natural bodybuilder, fitness writer and bodybuilding nutrition coach specializing in lean muscle building with 15 years experience. His educational background included a Master's Degree and he is also a certified personal trainer with the National Strength & Conditioning Association. He is the editor-in-chief of the groundbreaking Greek Bodybuilding Magazine "Bodybuilders.gr e-Mag" and the managing director of the largest Greek bodybuilding website and forum on the web, www.Bodybuilders.gr. Kostas also manages two of the largest natural bodybuilding and fitness websites on the web, www.BodybuildingApplied.com and www.amazingabdominals.com

---

]]>