I’m also going to ask if people could narrow the possible suggestions to ‘low tech’ answers, because I only have a few dumbbells lying around, so bench presses and the like are out.
Give yourself more time is the answer here. Just be motivated to actually lift, and do it on a regular basis, and also make sure that you have a well thought out lifting plan.
Consult a personal trainer if you’re really interested.
Usually when I start a workout after months of being lazy, I find that I see the most (or most dramatic) results occur during the first month. After that, the results taper off and it takes more to get any change. YMMV.
But as the others here have said, it’s pert’near impossible to get ‘ripped’ in a month.
So just start a free-weight routine, eat lots of protein, avoid fatty crap. Supplements are good, Whey and Amino 2222 are two that I’ve used in the past with pretty good results.
Bulking up definitely takes time. But, If you only have a month I would recommend getting as lean as possible, which means low fat diet and lots of cardio. The more lean you are the more your muscles will show. It gives the illusion that you have been working out more than you really have.
See Bill Philips “Body for Life” A very good program. You may only have dumbells, but there’s a lot you can do with those. And spend some money on a gym membership, don’t let yourself get stuck on this because you’re unwilling to part with a few $$$.
You mean bulk or ripped? Bulking up means to get massive, not necessarily getting ripped. Since you probably mean ripped, it’s not going to happen in a month. It takes a controlled diet (not necessarily exercise) to get ripped and usually takes a few months to get into ripped shapped. Some bodybuilders take drugs on top of that before competition. Stuff that is giving to horses, like Clen, and dirutetics. Nasty stuff.
I guess the best way would to watch your diet for a month and excercise on some split (3 on 2 off, cardio on off day, etc…). In a month you’ll look better.
Maybe there’s some small hope. I read the scientific abstracts, but don’t know whether to trust this or not (I know, you’ll all ask for a cite). But here’s one routine you can try.
Get some Creatine (say, NHF Creatine monohydrate)
Keep it dry (it decomposes with moisture)
Take it every day, following directions.
You may notice some changes due to water retention within a month, and possibly some increased stamina during the harder portions of your workout.
Go to the gym 5 times a week.
At the worst, you’ll have started a workout program that will be an excellent beginning. Just keep it up and you’ll have some visible results by summer. Within two years you’ll be a changed person.
Or
Just buy my “GET RIPPED IN THREE WEEKS” Video, along with my patented Chest Pumper, Ab Bloater, Bicep Ballooner, and Ass Blaster exercise machines for AMAZING results. Those combined with my secret Carb-Protein mixture with our state-of-the-art patent pending MIRACULOUS ingredient 1,8 Beta-glucoadrenomethoxy-Butyrandrogenase made from all natural Herbal sources with NO SIDE EFFECTS. EA$Y payment plan!!
(Just kidding about that last one. There are side effects.)
Creatine supplementation enhances isometric strength and body composition improvements following strength exercise training in older adults.
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2003 Jan;58(1):B11-9
Dietary creatine supplementation and exercise performance: why inconsistent results? Can J Appl Physiol 2002 Dec;27(6):663-81
"Intakes of 285-300 mg/kg body mass 1 over 36 d or 3050 mg/kg body mass 1 over ~4 wk are sufficient to produce benefits (muscle mass and high intensity power gains); however, not all study results are consistent. "
Although FranticMad posts some cites from PubMed that may contain useful information–and I agree with him in that PubMed is an execellent resource of information, there is a caveat.
Just because an article is posted in PubMeb doesn’t make it factual.
That is–don’t believe everything you read. Just because a journal article is listed in the PubMed database DOESN’T mean it’s conclusions are true.
I’m not a weight lifter or creatine user, but I do lift weights and work out (but not with regularity I should), so I would be interested in workouts with minimal effort.
But this could be a classic example of research promoted in a journal with an editorial board that has an agenda–creatine promotion.
Is this the case? I don’t know. But who are the editors? What stock do they own in what creatine selling companies?
None, hopefully.
Give me the cites for creatine in Nature, Science, and the high impact physiologic journals.
Maybe it’s just me–but the more names in a journal’s title makes me wonder what’s up. If the science is that good, you don’t need some journal that no ones ever heard of or read. Do you?
And again, just being published, don’t make the research true.
That rant done. What are the Physio journals? Where I should look to find the real info (where the field debates on this topic?)
Do you want to bulk up or get ripped? They’re not always compatible.
Short answer: bulk up with heavy weights on major muscles (squats) and lots of food.
Get ripped: Lots of aerobics, watch the diet.
Absolutely true. And I don’t know who funded the research or who is on the editorial board.
As I’ve said in another post, even JAMA (journal of the American medical association) publishes crap once in a while. I’ve used creatine a couple of times and I think it made a difference, but I won’t swear by it.
Here’s an article on creatine from SupplementWatch, a pretty good site for research on supplements. With about 35 sources listed, I’d say they’ve done a good job of not publishing bad research.