Can you lose belly fat eating at maintenance?
Options
Replies
-
jaysiekemso wrote: »Just as an FYI, I too am already small with the belly issues as well. I am trying to improve my body composition but do have about 5 more pounds of fat to lose but gain it in muscle over time.
I am doing calorie cycling for several reasons and it is working for me. I am quite a but older than you and I tried this approach.
I have no idea what a caloric cycling is lol and were you eating under your maintenance or at your maintenance?
My situation is this... I am 5'4" and I was eating maintenance for about a 1 1/2 months to break out of a "stall". I had/have been I exercising (strength and cardio 6 days a week - I alternate days).
Today, I am now calorie cycling which broke my "stall" allowing me to lose some fat while I am recomping.. I only realistically have 3 - 5 pounds of fat to loose but will gain in muscle over a time...
Basically for two weeks on and two weeks off, I cycle my calories to where I am at a deficit on two weeks and less of one or more at maintenance the others.. It not complicated you just eat at your recommended macros (which is higher protein, etc..).
For example information / calculator one site: http://www.builtdaily.com/power-of-calorie-cycling/0 -
jaysiekemso wrote: »Springfield1970 wrote: »jaysiekemso wrote: »
And how are you eating?Springfield1970 wrote: »How I got my waist down to 25", eat at about 100 cals under my maintenance, lift heavy, swim, run and cycle as fast as I can. Eat all the exercise cals back, but at 127lb I had to work all mine out as all the machines and estimates are too much for me. Get my nutrition right.
Really all you need is a deficit and a plan to hold on to the muscle macros?
First, I'm a bulker and cutter. That's how I got my body fat so low and still looked curvy. Done a few cycles. Tried recomping, wasn't fit enough for it, too slow, and I wasn't experienced enough. Now I would find it easier, and I am recomping a little at maintenance now, but I know exactly what I'm doing with all my numbers now, and train 7-10 hours a week intensly.
Food, simple. .8g protein per pound of body weight. Fill the rest with carbs and fat. I eat exercise cals back so every day is different.
I also fuel my workouts so a big percentage of my calories are stacked 4 hours around my training as I don't want to burn fat while I'm training, just glycogen and carbs, I'm not going to make my poor body burn body fat while I train like I do! Eat well very soon after too.
OP ^ listen to this….trust me ...
I've only done a lot of research on cutting, I haven't really looked into bulking. Watched some videos on it and it seemed pretty depressing lol cos you do gain a lot of fat during the bulk right? That's another reason why I don't wanna bulk
i'm not too fussed about gaining big muscles either. Just want a really slim body with a flat tummy. I think if I keep cutting and keep working out I will lose the stubborn fat.. Or am I wrong?
look at springfields pics, does she look bulky or fat???0 -
alanlmarshall wrote: »That's not possible. Exercising created a deficit. What's really going on is that it is difficult to estimate small changes in energy expenditure when you have so little to lose. It's an enviable problem to have.
yes it its…she can do a slow recomp at maintenance and will lose some fat and gain some muscle…however, it is a painfully slow process….
Generalisation.
It isn't slow for everyone - you can't just throw out blanket statements like that without context. Besides which slow actually suits a lot of people that are close to their ultimate goal.
Same that recomp doesn't suit everyone cut/bulk cycles don't either. There are a whole load of variables both physical and mental that are unique to the individual.
Would agree though that as a lean female progress with recomp would be likely be slow for the OP.0 -
alanlmarshall wrote: »That's not possible. Exercising created a deficit. What's really going on is that it is difficult to estimate small changes in energy expenditure when you have so little to lose. It's an enviable problem to have.
yes it its…she can do a slow recomp at maintenance and will lose some fat and gain some muscle…however, it is a painfully slow process….
Generalisation.
It isn't slow for everyone - you can't just throw out blanket statements like that without context. Besides which slow actually suits a lot of people that are close to their ultimate goal.
Same that recomp doesn't suit everyone cut/bulk cycles don't either. There are a whole load of variables both physical and mental that are unique to the individual.
Would agree though that as a lean female progress with recomp would be likely be slow for the OP.
ok - well everything I have seen read/abut it states that it is a slow process and can take up to a year to see any appreciable results....
if you have anything that is to the contrary to that then I would be happy to take a look at it...0 -
Following because Si is going to/talking about recomp. Here to learn.0
-
alanlmarshall wrote: »That's not possible. Exercising created a deficit. What's really going on is that it is difficult to estimate small changes in energy expenditure when you have so little to lose. It's an enviable problem to have.
Actually it is, its called recomp. If youre stimulating muscles for growth enough the body will offset the fat loss while sleeping fasted.0 -
Springfield looks like a rock star... and eats chocolate in bed. I'm gonna listen to her.
0 -
alanlmarshall wrote: »That's not possible. Exercising created a deficit. What's really going on is that it is difficult to estimate small changes in energy expenditure when you have so little to lose. It's an enviable problem to have.
yes it its…she can do a slow recomp at maintenance and will lose some fat and gain some muscle…however, it is a painfully slow process….
Generalisation.
It isn't slow for everyone - you can't just throw out blanket statements like that without context. Besides which slow actually suits a lot of people that are close to their ultimate goal.
Same that recomp doesn't suit everyone cut/bulk cycles don't either. There are a whole load of variables both physical and mental that are unique to the individual.
Would agree though that as a lean female progress with recomp would be likely be slow for the OP.
ok - well everything I have seen read/abut it states that it is a slow process and can take up to a year to see any appreciable results....
if you have anything that is to the contrary to that then I would be happy to take a look at it...
I'm guessing you haven't ever recomped then?
Take a fat, 18 year old male new to training and recomp will give fast results. IMHO opinion there would be no need for a calorie surplus until their muscle gains slowed and assuming their ultimate goal hasn't been met.
Take a fully trained 30 something who is fairly lean and progress will (likely) be slow recomping. So (probably) if no other factors are more important then bulk/cut would be the better choice.
But it depends on many factors what route people take - major one being the person's end goal.
So for me at the opposite end of the spectrum from an 18 year old newbie a bulk/cut cycle would simply see me get fat, slow (I cycle a lot), add a little muscle and then have to cut off the excess fat again leaving me very close to where I started. In my 50's my ability to gain muscle isn't really restricted by my calorie intake! That's where context matters.
Even after almost 40 years of training I saw good steady progress both measurable and visible from recomping over a period of 6 months.
For the OP:
Female (so progress unlikely to be quick), lean (doesn't have an easily accessible energy store) both factors pushing towards bulk/cut.
But on the flip side - very close to ultimate goal (assumption from picture and comments made), maybe not mentally ready to get "fluffy" and gain weight again?
0 -
To the OP, a recomp will work but really your goal needs to be more training oriented than loss oriented or it will be very discouraging (at least it would be to me). If it were me, I would slowly add back in calories until you are full on maintenance (also knows as reverse dieting) which will help fix your metabolism if there is an issue. Do that for a month or so and then re-cut and see if you can knock out that last little bit. My personal experience tells me it might be your macros that are causing issues...some people need extra low fat others extra low carbs and others are just low cal across the board. You will need to play with those and see if any combination works better for that week and go from there.
Considering where you are...you are in the enviable position of having to really "plan" your diet for results...so many of us can do all sorts of stupid stuff and still have it work but you are that much farther along 0 -
You do realize that actors he portrayed are using growth hormones and anabolics to get as lean and muscular as they did? It's a facade for NATURALs to achieve those types of results simply eating at maintenance.
0 -
You do realize that actors he portrayed are using growth hormones and anabolics to get as lean and muscular as they did? It's a facade for NATURALs to achieve those types of results simply eating at maintenance.
That would be my assumption too (and no it's not something I agree with at all) but also the end result that the actors are striving for in a very short timescale isn't what the majority of people are aiming for and prepared to work for.0 -
alanlmarshall wrote: »That's not possible. Exercising created a deficit. What's really going on is that it is difficult to estimate small changes in energy expenditure when you have so little to lose. It's an enviable problem to have.
yes it its…she can do a slow recomp at maintenance and will lose some fat and gain some muscle…however, it is a painfully slow process….
Generalisation.
It isn't slow for everyone - you can't just throw out blanket statements like that without context. Besides which slow actually suits a lot of people that are close to their ultimate goal.
Same that recomp doesn't suit everyone cut/bulk cycles don't either. There are a whole load of variables both physical and mental that are unique to the individual.
Would agree though that as a lean female progress with recomp would be likely be slow for the OP.
ok - well everything I have seen read/abut it states that it is a slow process and can take up to a year to see any appreciable results....
if you have anything that is to the contrary to that then I would be happy to take a look at it...
I'm guessing you haven't ever recomped then?
Take a fat, 18 year old male new to training and recomp will give fast results. IMHO opinion there would be no need for a calorie surplus until their muscle gains slowed and assuming their ultimate goal hasn't been met.
Take a fully trained 30 something who is fairly lean and progress will (likely) be slow recomping. So (probably) if no other factors are more important then bulk/cut would be the better choice.
But it depends on many factors what route people take - major one being the person's end goal.
So for me at the opposite end of the spectrum from an 18 year old newbie a bulk/cut cycle would simply see me get fat, slow (I cycle a lot), add a little muscle and then have to cut off the excess fat again leaving me very close to where I started. In my 50's my ability to gain muscle isn't really restricted by my calorie intake! That's where context matters.
Even after almost 40 years of training I saw good steady progress both measurable and visible from recomping over a period of 6 months.
For the OP:
Female (so progress unlikely to be quick), lean (doesn't have an easily accessible energy store) both factors pushing towards bulk/cut.
But on the flip side - very close to ultimate goal (assumption from picture and comments made), maybe not mentally ready to get "fluffy" and gain weight again?
you accused me of generalizing, but you appear to be doing the same thing. I was curious if you had any literature on the subject of recomping that shows it is in fact not a slow process...
No, I have never done a recomp...0 -
alanlmarshall wrote: »That's not possible. Exercising created a deficit. What's really going on is that it is difficult to estimate small changes in energy expenditure when you have so little to lose. It's an enviable problem to have.
yes it its…she can do a slow recomp at maintenance and will lose some fat and gain some muscle…however, it is a painfully slow process….
Generalisation.
It isn't slow for everyone - you can't just throw out blanket statements like that without context. Besides which slow actually suits a lot of people that are close to their ultimate goal.
Same that recomp doesn't suit everyone cut/bulk cycles don't either. There are a whole load of variables both physical and mental that are unique to the individual.
Would agree though that as a lean female progress with recomp would be likely be slow for the OP.
ok - well everything I have seen read/abut it states that it is a slow process and can take up to a year to see any appreciable results....
if you have anything that is to the contrary to that then I would be happy to take a look at it...
I'm guessing you haven't ever recomped then?
Take a fat, 18 year old male new to training and recomp will give fast results. IMHO opinion there would be no need for a calorie surplus until their muscle gains slowed and assuming their ultimate goal hasn't been met.
Take a fully trained 30 something who is fairly lean and progress will (likely) be slow recomping. So (probably) if no other factors are more important then bulk/cut would be the better choice.
But it depends on many factors what route people take - major one being the person's end goal.
So for me at the opposite end of the spectrum from an 18 year old newbie a bulk/cut cycle would simply see me get fat, slow (I cycle a lot), add a little muscle and then have to cut off the excess fat again leaving me very close to where I started. In my 50's my ability to gain muscle isn't really restricted by my calorie intake! That's where context matters.
Even after almost 40 years of training I saw good steady progress both measurable and visible from recomping over a period of 6 months.
For the OP:
Female (so progress unlikely to be quick), lean (doesn't have an easily accessible energy store) both factors pushing towards bulk/cut.
But on the flip side - very close to ultimate goal (assumption from picture and comments made), maybe not mentally ready to get "fluffy" and gain weight again?
I don't see generalization in the bolded statement above. 6 months is a good decent time. Definitely not equal to a year as someone suggested above.0 -
alanlmarshall wrote: »That's not possible. Exercising created a deficit. What's really going on is that it is difficult to estimate small changes in energy expenditure when you have so little to lose. It's an enviable problem to have.
yes it its…she can do a slow recomp at maintenance and will lose some fat and gain some muscle…however, it is a painfully slow process….
Generalisation.
It isn't slow for everyone - you can't just throw out blanket statements like that without context. Besides which slow actually suits a lot of people that are close to their ultimate goal.
Same that recomp doesn't suit everyone cut/bulk cycles don't either. There are a whole load of variables both physical and mental that are unique to the individual.
Would agree though that as a lean female progress with recomp would be likely be slow for the OP.
ok - well everything I have seen read/abut it states that it is a slow process and can take up to a year to see any appreciable results....
if you have anything that is to the contrary to that then I would be happy to take a look at it...
I'm guessing you haven't ever recomped then?
Take a fat, 18 year old male new to training and recomp will give fast results. IMHO opinion there would be no need for a calorie surplus until their muscle gains slowed and assuming their ultimate goal hasn't been met.
Take a fully trained 30 something who is fairly lean and progress will (likely) be slow recomping. So (probably) if no other factors are more important then bulk/cut would be the better choice.
But it depends on many factors what route people take - major one being the person's end goal.
So for me at the opposite end of the spectrum from an 18 year old newbie a bulk/cut cycle would simply see me get fat, slow (I cycle a lot), add a little muscle and then have to cut off the excess fat again leaving me very close to where I started. In my 50's my ability to gain muscle isn't really restricted by my calorie intake! That's where context matters.
Even after almost 40 years of training I saw good steady progress both measurable and visible from recomping over a period of 6 months.
For the OP:
Female (so progress unlikely to be quick), lean (doesn't have an easily accessible energy store) both factors pushing towards bulk/cut.
But on the flip side - very close to ultimate goal (assumption from picture and comments made), maybe not mentally ready to get "fluffy" and gain weight again?
I don't see generalization in the bolded statement above. 6 months is a good decent time. Definitely not equal to a year as someone suggested above.
right, so a sample size of one invalidates everything else?
to the part I bolded....an 18 year old untrained kid is going to have fast results whether they do a recomp, cut, bulk, or just start picking things up.....so that is not exactly a great comparison point...0 -
Did anyone send you to read this yet? http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1161603/so-you-want-a-nice-stomach/p1
Awesome information, and the OP really knows her stuff.0 -
alanlmarshall wrote: »That's not possible. Exercising created a deficit. What's really going on is that it is difficult to estimate small changes in energy expenditure when you have so little to lose. It's an enviable problem to have.
yes it its…she can do a slow recomp at maintenance and will lose some fat and gain some muscle…however, it is a painfully slow process….
Generalisation.
It isn't slow for everyone - you can't just throw out blanket statements like that without context. Besides which slow actually suits a lot of people that are close to their ultimate goal.
Same that recomp doesn't suit everyone cut/bulk cycles don't either. There are a whole load of variables both physical and mental that are unique to the individual.
Would agree though that as a lean female progress with recomp would be likely be slow for the OP.
ok - well everything I have seen read/abut it states that it is a slow process and can take up to a year to see any appreciable results....
if you have anything that is to the contrary to that then I would be happy to take a look at it...
I'm guessing you haven't ever recomped then?
Take a fat, 18 year old male new to training and recomp will give fast results. IMHO opinion there would be no need for a calorie surplus until their muscle gains slowed and assuming their ultimate goal hasn't been met.
Take a fully trained 30 something who is fairly lean and progress will (likely) be slow recomping. So (probably) if no other factors are more important then bulk/cut would be the better choice.
But it depends on many factors what route people take - major one being the person's end goal.
So for me at the opposite end of the spectrum from an 18 year old newbie a bulk/cut cycle would simply see me get fat, slow (I cycle a lot), add a little muscle and then have to cut off the excess fat again leaving me very close to where I started. In my 50's my ability to gain muscle isn't really restricted by my calorie intake! That's where context matters.
Even after almost 40 years of training I saw good steady progress both measurable and visible from recomping over a period of 6 months.
For the OP:
Female (so progress unlikely to be quick), lean (doesn't have an easily accessible energy store) both factors pushing towards bulk/cut.
But on the flip side - very close to ultimate goal (assumption from picture and comments made), maybe not mentally ready to get "fluffy" and gain weight again?
I don't see generalization in the bolded statement above. 6 months is a good decent time. Definitely not equal to a year as someone suggested above.
right, so a sample size of one invalidates everything else?
to the part I bolded....an 18 year old untrained kid is going to have fast results whether they do a recomp, cut, bulk, or just start picking things up.....so that is not exactly a great comparison point...
Absolutely agreed. "18 year old" is just a magical number. I wished I had all this info available back then. Heck there were no laptops back when I was 18.
I'm only here because I really wanted to learn about re-comp. Si is awesomely good with re-comp and he is endurance athlete just like me and hence I stopped by to see what he had to say.
Bulk/cut is not my option due to my lifestyle and my sport.0 -
auroranflash wrote: »Springfield looks like a rock star... and eats chocolate in bed. I'm gonna listen to her.
I think i should too!0 -
alanlmarshall wrote: »That's not possible. Exercising created a deficit. What's really going on is that it is difficult to estimate small changes in energy expenditure when you have so little to lose. It's an enviable problem to have.
yes it its…she can do a slow recomp at maintenance and will lose some fat and gain some muscle…however, it is a painfully slow process….
Generalisation.
It isn't slow for everyone - you can't just throw out blanket statements like that without context. Besides which slow actually suits a lot of people that are close to their ultimate goal.
Same that recomp doesn't suit everyone cut/bulk cycles don't either. There are a whole load of variables both physical and mental that are unique to the individual.
Would agree though that as a lean female progress with recomp would be likely be slow for the OP.
ok - well everything I have seen read/abut it states that it is a slow process and can take up to a year to see any appreciable results....
if you have anything that is to the contrary to that then I would be happy to take a look at it...
I'm guessing you haven't ever recomped then?
Take a fat, 18 year old male new to training and recomp will give fast results. IMHO opinion there would be no need for a calorie surplus until their muscle gains slowed and assuming their ultimate goal hasn't been met.
Take a fully trained 30 something who is fairly lean and progress will (likely) be slow recomping. So (probably) if no other factors are more important then bulk/cut would be the better choice.
But it depends on many factors what route people take - major one being the person's end goal.
So for me at the opposite end of the spectrum from an 18 year old newbie a bulk/cut cycle would simply see me get fat, slow (I cycle a lot), add a little muscle and then have to cut off the excess fat again leaving me very close to where I started. In my 50's my ability to gain muscle isn't really restricted by my calorie intake! That's where context matters.
Even after almost 40 years of training I saw good steady progress both measurable and visible from recomping over a period of 6 months.
For the OP:
Female (so progress unlikely to be quick), lean (doesn't have an easily accessible energy store) both factors pushing towards bulk/cut.
But on the flip side - very close to ultimate goal (assumption from picture and comments made), maybe not mentally ready to get "fluffy" and gain weight again?
you accused me of generalizing, but you appear to be doing the same thing. I was curious if you had any literature on the subject of recomping that shows it is in fact not a slow process...
No, I have never done a recomp...
And I've never had to do a bulk/cut cycle - well not intentionally anyway!
My point was all about context - trying to illustrate that there are too many variables to simply state it's fast or slow or takes a year to see results. Genetics is a big issue too. Probably the quickest recomper I've seen was a teenage rugby player who grew muscle incredibly quickly without weight gain - he has since become a competitive bodybuilder and not surprisingly now has to bulk/cut to achieve his new goals.
You could read up on Alan Aragon's culking approach is you want to know more about a more structured approach than my "train hard, eat enough and physique follows performance" style of recomp.
0 -
Both work as I've done both myself, it will work for some but not others baring in mind. I saw results at around the 3month mark when maintaining, I was maintaining muscle mass but could see I was getting more vascular and leaner then I decided to change up my calories to around a 250cal deficit and saw results in about a month and a half. I would recommend eating in a deficit of about 200-300 cals if you are in a rush to get rid of the excess fat (of which I can't see any) eat in a deficit, but if your not in any kind of a rush I'd give maintaining a go. I'm back on a maintaining phase as of tomorrow0
-
I haven't read the whole thread, but I seem to drop body fat at maintenance.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions