Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Eat more to reduce body fat? debate
LivingtheLeanDream
Posts: 13,342 Member
I'm a long term maintainer, a big believer in CICO, its definately how I maintain my weight but I had a long conversation with my eldest son the other night about lowering bf%.
He was mentioning how two of his co workers had in recent weeks started going to the gym and both have a personal trainer who advises them on food intake.
Both guys were wanting to maintain their weight but build muscle.
They were told firstly they weren't eating enough.
They were told eating too little leads to weight gain! yes really! (I just can't get my head around that, nor do I even believe it! I've been browsing these forums for years and can't see that it is possible!)
They increased their meals x 5 a day, mostly rice/chicken/fish/eggs veg and no bread no sauces (sounds boring to me personally!)
Anyway, both guys have remained the same weight but their body fat percentage has dropped radically in a matter of 5 or 6 weeks and both are visibly trimmer. I mean they have lost enough body fat for their clothes to be hanging off them.
So what gives?
I'd love to hear your thoughts because here I am with 7 years experience of counting calories in and out, I eat all the foods but I stay within the calories my body burns and maintain my weight fairly effortlessly (but always am looking to lower my bf% a little more.)
How can these guys be losing so much fat yet staying same weight?
They workout at gym heavy lifting 4 times a week. Is it really that simple? lift more = reduce bf%?
Your thoughts please?
Thanks in advance
Ruth
He was mentioning how two of his co workers had in recent weeks started going to the gym and both have a personal trainer who advises them on food intake.
Both guys were wanting to maintain their weight but build muscle.
They were told firstly they weren't eating enough.
They were told eating too little leads to weight gain! yes really! (I just can't get my head around that, nor do I even believe it! I've been browsing these forums for years and can't see that it is possible!)
They increased their meals x 5 a day, mostly rice/chicken/fish/eggs veg and no bread no sauces (sounds boring to me personally!)
Anyway, both guys have remained the same weight but their body fat percentage has dropped radically in a matter of 5 or 6 weeks and both are visibly trimmer. I mean they have lost enough body fat for their clothes to be hanging off them.
So what gives?
I'd love to hear your thoughts because here I am with 7 years experience of counting calories in and out, I eat all the foods but I stay within the calories my body burns and maintain my weight fairly effortlessly (but always am looking to lower my bf% a little more.)
How can these guys be losing so much fat yet staying same weight?
They workout at gym heavy lifting 4 times a week. Is it really that simple? lift more = reduce bf%?
Your thoughts please?
Thanks in advance
Ruth
0
Replies
-
ps I wasn't sure what to put as the title of this debate!0
-
Not a typo?? What?They were told eating too little leads to weight gain!
Just following the thread other than that question - topic is of interest to me too. 2 -
No its not a typo, they were told by this personal trainer that eating too little leads to weight gain!! I know, its dumbfounding! wonder how much training in nutrition and facts do you need to be a personal trainer!
0 -
sounds like they dropped carbs... instant water loss and looking more lean.
how are they measuring bodyfat %?9 -
LivingtheLeanDream wrote: »No its not a typo, they were told by this personal trainer that eating too little leads to weight gain!! I know, its dumbfounding! wonder how much training in nutrition and facts do you need to be a personal trainer!
Pretty much zero training, hence that statement.
That statement is the old starvation mode myth.
Of course they're getting more lean with a protein/vegetable meal plan and heavy lifting. The lifting is the important bit here.5 -
LivingtheLeanDream wrote: »No its not a typo, they were told by this personal trainer that eating too little leads to weight gain!! I know, its dumbfounding! wonder how much training in nutrition and facts do you need to be a personal trainer!
I....don't know what to say to that
4 -
LivingtheLeanDream wrote: »No its not a typo, they were told by this personal trainer that eating too little leads to weight gain!! I know, its dumbfounding! wonder how much training in nutrition and facts do you need to be a personal trainer!
you don't do any training in nutrition to be a PT....4 -
TavistockToad wrote: »sounds like they dropped carbs... instant water loss and looking more lean.
how are they measuring bodyfat %?
I'm not sure about that, must ask my son - but if they're visibly leaner there's no question about fat loss right?0 -
TavistockToad wrote: »LivingtheLeanDream wrote: »No its not a typo, they were told by this personal trainer that eating too little leads to weight gain!! I know, its dumbfounding! wonder how much training in nutrition and facts do you need to be a personal trainer!
you don't do any training in nutrition to be a PT....
So how come they feel so free to spout their so called knowledge...sorry but that bugs me! LOL so much bad information out there in general.0 -
LivingtheLeanDream wrote: »TavistockToad wrote: »sounds like they dropped carbs... instant water loss and looking more lean.
how are they measuring bodyfat %?
I'm not sure about that, must ask my son - but if they're visibly leaner there's no question about fat loss right?
do you ever wake up in the morning and think, ohhhh, my stomach looks good, oooh there's some abs starting to show... and then by evening they're gone?
that's hydration not 'gaining' fat through the day.9 -
@tavistock that happens me daily LOL but that's natural cos food in my system etc...1
-
The thing behind eating 5/6 meals aday that’s not big each , is that you don’t want your metabolism to stay asleep and act as anti starvation survival saving food mode which happens when you eat 3 big meals aday with 4/6 hours between ,
So they eat every 2/3 hours a meal which contains a decent amount of protein and slightly low carbs makes thier bodies’s metabolism rate higher
And as they train whether it’s cardio or weightlifting the protein they get helps to build lean muscles and burn those extra fats
But after all it depends on the bodytype and its metabolism,a hardgainer doesn’t have to worry about the carbs intake that much unlike easygainers. So you can expect from some ppl to eat 7 meals a day and still lose weight.40 -
If you're alive and breathing, your metabolism won't sleep. Starvation mode isn't real. Metabolism isn't something you boost.
https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/metabolic-damage/14 -
NavaGunJara wrote: »The thing behind eating 5/6 meals aday that’s not big each , is that you don’t want your metabolism to stay asleep and act as anti starvation survival saving food mode which happens when you eat 3 big meals aday with 4/6 hours between ,
So they eat every 2/3 hours a meal which contains a decent amount of protein and slightly low carbs makes thier bodies’s metabolism rate higher
And as they train whether it’s cardio or weightlifting the protein they get helps to build lean muscles and burn those extra fats
But after all it depends on the bodytype and its metabolism,a hardgainer doesn’t have to worry about the carbs intake that much unlike easygainers. So you can expect from some ppl to eat 7 meals a day and still lose weight.
Nope - this is an old bro-science myth that just will not die... your body does not hang onto calories and turn them into fat when you decrease the amount of food that you eat. Your metabolism does not slow down when you eat 3 meals a day and it does not speed up when you eat 5+ meals a day.
Basically what is happening to these guys is a re-comp - they are eating at close to maintenance and they are trading out fat for muscle.15 -
It sounds like a few things could be happening. They could actually be at a deficit but since starting training they could be retaining water and maintaining their weight over the few weeks. Also fluxes in water weight can make a difference in appearance. It sounds like they could be recomping, although it is a short period of time to see results, but if they are newer to lifting that could definitely be possible. After my first bulk (and fairly new to training) I transitioned to recomp and I was visibly leaner in less than 3 months. But that was shortlived.
In any case in order to actually lower bodyfat, there are two methods to do it. Deficit or recomp.6 -
Yes I was thinking the time wasn't enough for recomp results.3
-
The only time eating less leads to weight gain is when it causes you to binge because you are not eating enough. IMO.
But guys can change their BODIES so quickly it really does irritate me. Let's see how it goes long term for them. 3 -
SummerSkier wrote: »The only time eating less leads to weight gain is when it causes you to binge because you are not eating enough. IMO. But guys can change their BODIES so quickly it really does irritate me. Let's see how it goes long term for them.
I know men eh!!! so annoying LOL but I'll be asking for updates as the weeks go on - I'm not sure who could eat rice and chicken day in day out long term
1 -
I'm guessing they are young men - late teens, early 20's - doing a structured lifting program for the first time, so they have a good chance of getting some fairly impressive 'newbie' gains when starting out. I am willing to bet that the gains taper off as they keep with the program.5
-
too low calories can cause adaptive thermogensis and increase the stress on the body raising cortisol levels that can cause an increase in water retention. There is some thought behind the increasing calories - that you become more energetic, workout harder, your unintentional movement increases and sleep better - all of which contributes to weight loss...
that being said - so does cutting carbs...6 -
I'm guessing they are young men - late teens, early 20's - doing a structured lifting program for the first time, so they have a good chance of getting some fairly impressive 'newbie' gains when starting out. I am willing to bet that the gains taper off as they keep with the program.
They are both early 20s yes.0 -
Insufficient info to determine. Guessing/speculating:
No calorie counting mentioned, just eating frequency, no bread, and the typical boring/filling diet ("mostly rice/chicken/fish/eggs veg", no sauces).
If they were eating SAD before, I wouldn't be surprised if their physical volume of food is higher but total calories lower (food more nutrition dense, not as calorie dense, higher fiber, more satiating).
And if they went from little/no or lackadaisical exercise to a regular training program (of whatever type, but presumably including some lifting since their goal is muscle), that's increased calorie burn, and a bit of apparent muscle filling/firmness from water retention for repair, maybe small newbie gains. So, weight maybe close enough over a few weeks to call "the same" (minus a few fat pounds, plus a few water pounds, even a tiny muscle tissue add in 5-6 weeks if young, male, eating ample protein & close to maintenance while lifting decently).
So, eat more (physical volume) but really less (counted in calories), move more (added exercise) = fat loss to better reveal what muscle they already had, plus a little muscle filling/firmness, water weight in muscle keeping scale weight close enough, and voila.
Just speculating, like I said.10 -
@AnnPT77 your theory sounds plausible for sure. I realise there's not enough information to go on, the conversation just got me thinking.
Plus it doesn't help I am trying to help my hubby lose weight (his choice I might add) and am monitoring his calories so he's eating at deficit, he's lost 6lbs to date (been about 9 weeks since he started) but for 3 weeks he has stalled entirely, which us long termers know happens but it annoys the heck out of him - any wonder when he hears my son talking about 'you can eat too little' he thinks he should be eating more!
Thanks 1 -
The more precise medical term for metabolism going to sleep is called being dead. Metabolisms do not sleep.NavaGunJara wrote: »The thing behind eating 5/6 meals aday that’s not big each , is that you don’t want your metabolism to stay asleep and act as anti starvation survival saving food mode which happens when you eat 3 big meals aday with 4/6 hours between ,
So they eat every 2/3 hours a meal which contains a decent amount of protein and slightly low carbs makes thier bodies’s metabolism rate higher
And as they train whether it’s cardio or weightlifting the protein they get helps to build lean muscles and burn those extra fats
But after all it depends on the bodytype and its metabolism,a hardgainer doesn’t have to worry about the carbs intake that much unlike easygainers. So you can expect from some ppl to eat 7 meals a day and still lose weight.
If your body has a secret food saving economy mode, why would it ever run in a less efficient manner? What evolution advantage could ever be parlayed by burning calories without a purpose that ultimately results in increased reproduction?
Technically eating protein will result in a higher TEF (thermic effect of food) than other meals, but when it comes to losing weight, the TEF differences in meals is liable to count for all of 3/5ths of a rat's behind worth of results.
I also don't see how lean protein + cardio is going to make an appreciable change in muscle. Outside of someone in an underweight state, just upping protein isn't really going to encourage muscle growth. Hypertrophy tends to come from resistance training volume. Nor will increased muscle burn that much fat - about 4 to 6 calories a day to maintain a pound of muscle.7 -
Here's some peer reviewed literature, but you'll find it difficult if not impossible to get a definitive answer from an actual scientific study, from what I've seen.:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4683169/
I personally think the answer is different for different people. Try six meals a day for a month and see what results you get, then try three for a month and compare the results -- and whether you feel good, enjoy it and can sustain it. Then do the same with different caloric levels. You'll eventually find the combination that works best for you -- and even that may change over time. But you will likely lose weight along the way.
Apps and wearables are only going to be able to give you rough estimates of what you need for your age, weight etc -- they can't adjust for your specific genetics, gut bacteria and other variables. I use them as guidelines and adjust as I learn more about what works best for me.0 -
LivingtheLeanDream wrote: »@AnnPT77 your theory sounds plausible for sure. I realise there's not enough information to go on, the conversation just got me thinking.
Plus it doesn't help I am trying to help my hubby lose weight (his choice I might add) and am monitoring his calories so he's eating at deficit, he's lost 6lbs to date (been about 9 weeks since he started) but for 3 weeks he has stalled entirely, which us long termers know happens but it annoys the heck out of him - any wonder when he hears my son talking about 'you can eat too little' he thinks he should be eating more!
Thanks
Well, there is the possible path:
Undereat => fatigue => reduced activity => lower NEAT/TDEE => slowed loss
I suspect that for some cases, that can mean somewhat faster loss at somewhat higher calories, if the person can find a sweeter spot in the energy level vs. intake tradeoff. But I doubt that applies at all in the originally stated case, and probably not in your husband's case, either, sadly.5 -
I'm certainly not a spring chicken anymore, but I can verify the concept of more food leading to better results.
I have to eat at least at maintenance (for me) to get the energy for training hard enough to push my body into fat loss. Keeping in mind, that fat loss results in lower bodyfat percentage overall, but not necessarily in weigth loss. Well, right now it does..so it's a win-win for me currently..
2 -
If you're losing weight, you're not eating maintenance calories.I'm certainly not a spring chicken anymore, but I can verify the concept of more food leading to better results.
I have to eat at least at maintenance (for me) to get the energy for training hard enough to push my body into fat loss. Keeping in mind, that fat loss results in lower bodyfat percentage overall, but not necessarily in weigth loss. Well, right now it does..so it's a win-win for me currently..4 -
I feel like it is almost impossible to debate this topic without actually seeing before and after photos, or seeing the scale weight for proof. Your son says that they are both visibly leaner, but that could simply be his perception. Also, you say they are the exact same weight, but that seems peculiar as well. As someone else pointed out, eliminating carbs would cause an initial drop in water weight and that in itself could make a person look leaner in ways. I would also expect the number on the scale to drop from the water weight loss. A couple weeks is definitely not enough time to show dramatic results from a recomp. The trainers theory on calories alone is enough for me to discredit almost anything else they have to say.3
-
1. If they are weight lifting now and weren't before, they will gain some muscle (even in a deficit, especially if newbies).
2. If not accurately tracking calories, they may or may not actually be eating more than before. The stuff they cut out is usually very calorie dense (sauces) or under-estimated from mindlessly eating it on the side in addition to other stuff (bread).
3. Calorie deficit can increase with more food. Not due to some 'starvation mode' thing, but because we tend to get lethargic and not move much if we under-eat so TDEE goes down (from NEAT and exercise drops rather then BMR difference).
4. Their activity level has probably gone up and hence calories burned if they weren't doing any physical activity before (at the very least they have added weight training, which probably accounts for at least a few hundred extra calories burned per week, assuming it isn't replacing something else).
5. Short term time span = much of the difference is probably a difference merely in water weight/bloating. (dropping the carbs and probably-salty sauces depending on what they ate before would create a large drop in water weight).
ETA: on the last one: ..or rather the water weight/bloating effectively 'moved' to the muscles (water retention from salty/carby food in those usual areas decreased, while water weight in the now repairing muscles increased).2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions