Best Method For Ungodly Amounts of Fat Loss

There has been a lot of talk and debate about different diets to lose weight but nothing has changed since the days of Arnold. The body is a one way machine. It either gains weight or loses it. As much as people want to do it, it is physically, genetically and mechanically impossible to lose fat and build muscle at the same time. Lose fat = low carbs, high protein and low calories. Gain muscle = high carbs, high protein and high calories. The best way to steadily lose weight and not hit a plateau is to have small meals consistently through the day. Keep the body working and burning. Only feed it enough carbs to function and make the body turn to fat for energy. Fasting will work but then your body will chance direction and then it will turn against you. It will become catabolic and eat the muscle you have for energy because it isn't getting what it needs from the food you're giving it and fat wont be enough.

ummm... No.

The first half is correct, most of the rest is unfounded broscience.

This thread gonna get smashed...

I will not argue my point. Just talk to any nutritionist. You could also read "The new encyclopedia of modern bodybuilding" for more info.

I just heard about this study in the news. You eat your daily amount of calories, but allow the 16 hour fast by stopping eating, say at 6 p.m. and having breakfast at 10. It puts the body into fat burning mode at night. Seems to be working for you, congrats. I'm sure you can google the study for details.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/18/science/la-sci-fasting-diet-20120518

No offense, but most of the 21lb you lost is actually water weight. Did you lose some fat - very likely, but that is because you are at a significant calorific deficit, not because you are Intermitent Fasting. You really need to do more research on IF - for weight loss, it is not about significant deficits, just eating your total calories in a set window. Whether you are IF'ing or not, you will have a greater likelihood of losing more LBM from VLCDs than with a more reasonable deficit. Now, you will have a much higher LBM anyway due to the amount that you are overweight so losing some extra may not be an issue at first.

If you would like to point to a study that shows IF preserves LBM when combined with a VLCD it would be very interesting.

ETA: I am not sure what lifestyle not eating for 3 days is, but thats not one that I want.

To make it simple, eat at a caloric deficit. It's much more than just calories in calories out, but if you eat less carbohydrates, you'll also consume less calories. Stay fuller by eating meat and fats, they're good for you. It's been documented in medical journals that eating the right fats (not the saturated fats), can help lower LDL levels and raise HDL levels in the body. Also, you'll retain or gain muscle mass this way. It's also documented that eating a low-protein diet or a low-fat diet are viable options, but the weight you're losing is a mixture of fat and muscle tissue. So, which would you prefer to lose your weight from? I myself am putting myself on a diet that is at a caloric deficit to my BMR and eating moderate amounts of protein, fats, and lots of vegetables (yes, there are some carbs, but eat the ones with dietary fiber and low carbohydrates, you don't want to be constipated), with very low amounts of carbohydrates.

Obviously, this is a very simplified version of low-carb vs low-fat diets, but the bottom line is: eat less calories and you won't gain weight. Just don't put yourself into starvation mode where you basically have diarrhea.

Edit: accidentally a word.

I will not argue my point. Just talk to any nutritionist. You could also read "The new encyclopedia of modern bodybuilding" for more info.

1) Nice deadlift.

2) That book is great for a reference to different lifts for various bodyparts. The nutritional section is AWFUL and full of misinformation. I've got two copies of the book and it's just plain outdated and wrong. Research has thankfully progressed beyond most of the gym dogma that still gets passed around.

They had to have been doing something right to get the results that they did though imo.

1) Roids.
2) Approximately reasonable total daily intake of calories and macronutrients (this matters greatly).


Meal frequency does not create any additional thermic effect.

How you ask?

I'm pretty sure no one did.

Yet another magic bullet agenda from someone who thinks they've got the answer. People have had success with fat loss and lean gains using a number of different methods. Losing 21 lbs in 3 weeks may seem great, but then that would just be falling into the "more is better" trap. More isn't always better. If you enjoy loose skin and dehydration, though, knock yourself out.

I will not argue my point. Just talk to any nutritionist. You could also read "The new encyclopedia of modern bodybuilding" for more info.

1) Nice deadlift.

2) That book is great for a reference to different lifts for various bodyparts. The nutritional section is AWFUL and full of misinformation. I've got two copies of the book and it's just plain outdated and wrong. Research has thankfully progressed beyond most of the gym dogma that still gets passed around.

They had to have been doing something right to get the results that they did though imo.

1) Roids.
2) Approximately reasonable total daily intake of calories and macronutrients (this matters greatly).


Meal frequency does not create any additional thermic effect.

Roids definitely helped lol. Another man's trash is another man's treasure I guess. My body has reacted better to the smaller meals throughout the day compared to 3 squared or large gaps in between.

Got your FR, will be accepting all of them in the AM as I have a few to get to.

Meanwhile, please see here:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/529002-a-compliation-on-meal-frequency

Now, I'm not sending this because I wrote it (on a previous account), it's because I've referenced this to both studies, and outside resources (very reputable people in the bodybuilding industry), and it goes into detail about TEF/DIT (expenditure from feeding). Please check the resources that I've attached within the thread.

There has been a lot of talk and debate about different diets to lose weight but nothing has changed since the days of Arnold. The body is a one way machine. It either gains weight or loses it. As much as people want to do it, it is physically, genetically and mechanically impossible to lose fat and build muscle at the same time. Lose fat = low carbs, high protein and low calories. Gain muscle = high carbs, high protein and high calories. The best way to steadily lose weight and not hit a plateau is to have small meals consistently through the day. Keep the body working and burning. Only feed it enough carbs to function and make the body turn to fat for energy. Fasting will work but then your body will chance direction and then it will turn against you. It will become catabolic and eat the muscle you have for energy because it isn't getting what it needs from the food you're giving it and fat wont be enough.

ummm... No.

The first half is correct, most of the rest is unfounded broscience.

This thread gonna get smashed...

Agree. The catabolic phase happens when total DAILY lack of protein needed isn't met.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Hi there! I've been at it for 3 weeks so far on my 100 lbs weight loss challenge- and I have lost TWENTY ONE lbs. How you ask? Low Carb, moderate fat, high protein diet + Intermittent fasting. You have one large meal a day (1200-1800 calories), or 2 semi-large meals a day and you FAST from the last meal to the first the next day (at least 16 hours). You will lose fat and maintain muscle exclusively on this protocol, I swear. Don't let myths such as Starvation Mode and "starving yourself" get to you. I fasted for 72 hours, went to the gym, and still had peak energy/strength/muscle tone/mass. This is the future of dieting- and best part- it's not a diet, it's a LIFESTYLE.

I don't know why on earth you guys are challenging this method. He SWORE. I'm doing it all wrong.

no offence.

You are 18, you have 100lbs to lose (at 18 ?) and you been doing it for 3 weeks.

you dont know what works, period.

Peace

Considering I lose 2-3 lbs a week, I'm pretty sure I found what works for me
Lolwut

Whats low carb in your opinion?
Keto?
Diary is hidden.

Considering I lose 2-3 lbs a week, I'm pretty sure I found what works for me
Lolwut

You have your age in your favour actually. God... to be 18 again!! I'm pretty sure I could drop 4lbs a week at 18. In fact, when I was eighteen, I struggled to keep weight on! But the other thing in your favour is that you have quite a lot of weight (you said 100lbs) to lose. The first 30-50 will be easier than the last 50, trust us. Then let us know how well your plan is working.

Considering I lose 2-3 lbs a week, I'm pretty sure I found what works for me
Lolwut

You have your age in your favour actually. God... to be 18 again!! I'm pretty sure I could drop 4lbs a week at 18. In fact, when I was eighteen, I struggled to keep weight on! But the other thing in your favour is that you have quite a lot of weight (you said 100lbs) to lose. The first 30-50 will be easier than the last 50, trust us. Then let us know how well your plan is working.

This is what I was thinking. After you've don't this, say, 3 months, I would like you to come back and tell us about each 4 week period. One of two things will most likely happen. You'll either go crazy eating only once a day and need a change or your weight loss will slow down and you'll wonder why you're stalling.