I'm trying to shread/ not lose muscle

RayInMotion

MrM27 wrote: »

That's extremely pathetic of you to misrepresent that study to try and back up what you are claiming.

I have no idea how the part of decreased calories lowered their metabolic rate doesn't back up my claim of decreased calories lowers metabolic rate.

DeguelloTex

RayInMotion wrote: »

MrM27 wrote: »

That's extremely pathetic of you to misrepresent that study to try and back up what you are claiming.

I have no idea how the part of decreased calories lowered their metabolic rate doesn't back up my claim of decreased calories lowers metabolic rate.

You're really going to make the argument that you don't understand the difference between the effects of eating at enough of a deficit to lose 9% of your baseline weight and the effects of eating however many fewer calories than will get burned in 10 minutes of sprinting? Really?

ndj1979

RayInMotion wrote: »

MrM27 wrote: »

That's extremely pathetic of you to misrepresent that study to try and back up what you are claiming.

I have no idea how the part of decreased calories lowered their metabolic rate doesn't back up my claim of decreased calories lowers metabolic rate.

because you said this:

"Except not eating slows your metabolism and starves your body, putting it into fat-storing mode."

if that were true the people in your study would not have lost weight...because "fat storing mode"

LolBroScience

ndj1979 wrote: »

RayInMotion wrote: »

MrM27 wrote: »

That's extremely pathetic of you to misrepresent that study to try and back up what you are claiming.

I have no idea how the part of decreased calories lowered their metabolic rate doesn't back up my claim of decreased calories lowers metabolic rate.

because you said this:

"Except not eating slows your metabolism and starves your body, putting it into fat-storing mode."

if that were true the people in your study would not have lost weight...because "fat storing mode"