Loosing fat and muscle while working out 6x a week

PAV8888

TallGent66 wrote: »

robthephotog wrote: »

TallGent66 wrote: »

Doesn't the body prefer to burn fat first when in a calorie deficit?

The body wants the most convienient source of energy.

Usually itll burn glucose in the muscle then fat stores combined with protein (muscle) stores and finally even lean or vital organ tissue if it comes to it.

If you are stimulating the muscle tissue to grow (ie resistance training) the body will prefer fat bc it needs to be rebuilding muscle tissue to heal. Hence why most suggest resisitance training on top of proper diet for weight loss. So you lose "mostly" fat.

Is it realistic to hope for lost weight to be 80% fat, 20% muscle? Or 90 / 10?

Thank you.

Less likely with the large deficits you're pulling.

increased protein intake, muscle stimulus, moderate deficit (no more than say 25% of TDEE while carrying obese levels of fat or 20% starting around mid overweight levels of fat) and your 80-20 or 90-10 while obese or 67:33 when overweight... sure.

Increase your deficits to the level you have and I would expect the ratio to worsen

I note that in all these discussions non-fat mass does not exclusively consist of muscle mass.

and that exceptional results are just that... exceptions.

TallGent66

PAV8888 wrote: »

TallGent66 wrote: »

robthephotog wrote: »

TallGent66 wrote: »

Doesn't the body prefer to burn fat first when in a calorie deficit?

The body wants the most convienient source of energy.

Usually itll burn glucose in the muscle then fat stores combined with protein (muscle) stores and finally even lean or vital organ tissue if it comes to it.

If you are stimulating the muscle tissue to grow (ie resistance training) the body will prefer fat bc it needs to be rebuilding muscle tissue to heal. Hence why most suggest resisitance training on top of proper diet for weight loss. So you lose "mostly" fat.

Is it realistic to hope for lost weight to be 80% fat, 20% muscle? Or 90 / 10?

Thank you.

Less likely with the large deficits you're pulling.

increased protein intake, muscle stimulus, moderate deficit (no more than say 25% of TDEE while carrying obese levels of fat or 20% starting around mid overweight levels of fat) and your 80-20 or 90-10 while obese or 67:33 when overweight... sure.

Increase your deficits to the level you have and I would expect the ratio to worsen

I note that in all these discussions non-fat mass does not exclusively consist of muscle mass.

and that exceptional results are just that... exceptions.

Not sure I should 'eat back' all exercise calories expended, as I'm not sure how reliable those estimates are.

PAV8888

TallGent66 wrote: »

Not sure I should 'eat back' all exercise calories expended, as I'm not sure how reliable those estimates are.

I can't spot the post right now... but going from the memory of a different post are you not averaging well below the minimum 1500 for a male. While being exceptionally tall? And well over 250lbs?

I mean when you should be losing at a maximum sane rate while still eating well over 2.5K calories and you're eating sub 1500 and ZERO exercise calories back.... I don't know that I would worry too much about exactitude.

Having a debate about 60%, 70%, or 80% or even 50% of exercise calories if you take food intake logging inaccuracies into account? Sure. It may well be open for discussion.

Debating whether 0% is correct? I'll take a wild guess that it is unlikely to be.