Cycling carbs for FAST WEIGHT LOSS? Need input!

I was asked for references from the book. The book describes how it works. These are 10% of the references from the book. I don't believe that controlled studies exist to prove or disprove the difference between applying CBL versus a simple carb deficit since this book has only been around a year or so.

The concept of carb cycling has been around since the early 80's, at least. Yet there are still no RCT's showing it's superiority. That should tell you something, eh?

I'll just keep implementing the plan. 7/1/2012 I was 215, my avatar is from yesterday at 186. PR's in squat, DL, and push press while down 29 lbs in 4 months. Bench is down from 345 to 335, but I think that's pretty good considering the weight loss's effect on the leverages.

I don't think carb cycling makes much difference if all you care about is the number on the scale, but there's plenty of experience in the BB community to see how it works for a lot of people with the goal of preserving muscle mass while dieting down or gaining muscle mass while limiting fat gain.

I've never said that it didn't work. If you like it and you're seeing results, you should absolutely keep at it.

My only point is that there's no evidence to say it's superior, other than anecdotal evidence, which is the weakest form of evidence you could present.

FWIW - I am not aware of any studies that show any appreciable difference between carb cycling and not. That being said, many people will carb cycle to provide energy for their workouts (as opposed to using it for fat loss per se).

There is some evidence, compelling but not conclusive, to suggest that there may be some benefit to having more carbs at night - which is not carb cycling. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21475137

I'm aware of that one, drives the "no carbs at night" folks nuts.

The funny thing is, there is also a study I read about not long ago that says just the opposite.

And that is why I just eat what I want when I want. I got tired of trying to keep up with it all!

Not a bad approach at all to have - I do it too. Why make it more complicated than it needs to be!

Although, I would be interested in seeing the study you are referring to for my own edification.

FWIW - I am not aware of any studies that show any appreciable difference between carb cycling and not. That being said, many people will carb cycle to provide energy for their workouts (as opposed to using it for fat loss per se).

There is some evidence, compelling but not conclusive, to suggest that there may be some benefit to having more carbs at night - which is not carb cycling. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21475137

I'm aware of that one, drives the "no carbs at night" folks nuts.

The funny thing is, there is also a study I read about not long ago that says just the opposite.

And that is why I just eat what I want when I want. I got tired of trying to keep up with it all!

You just have to keep it in perspective. I've never quoted it to try to prove that carbs at night was superior, but it certainly suggests that they won't make you fat

You are of course assuming that the OP is actually lifting weights here.

Carb Nite was originally designed for non-lifters. I just showed her some places to find information on what she asked about.

I was referring to your point about it being beneficial for lifting performance (which I actually do not disagree with).

Sorry if you took it that way. I didn't mean to make that point. My observation on lifting performance is that I (see I, not everybody) lift better on CBL, OK on CNS, terribly on ULC, and OK on simple calorie restriction (and of course, WONDERFULLY on the SEE FOOD diet ).

You are of course assuming that the OP is actually lifting weights here.

Carb Nite was originally designed for non-lifters.

In THAT case, then let me tell you this: I lost more weight in a shorter period of time than you did and I wasn't carb cycling AND I'm a woman AND I started out weighing far less than your start weight.

Congrats. If I were competing with you in that regard I'd probably have to cut out a glute. My goal was not to make the number on the scale smaller, but the number that came out of the bod pod BF% test smaller while preserving strength and muscle mass.

You are of course assuming that the OP is actually lifting weights here.

Carb Nite was originally designed for non-lifters.

In THAT case, then let me tell you this: I lost more weight in a shorter period of time than you did and I wasn't carb cycling AND I'm a woman AND I started out weighing far less than your start weight.

Congrats. If I were competing with you in that regard I'd probably have to cut out a glute. My goal was not to make the number on the scale smaller, but the number that came out of the bod pod BF% test smaller while preserving strength and muscle mass.

Understandable, but the OP asked about fast weight loss. And I have very muscular legs, thank you. Dancing, yoga, running and walking steep hills on a regular basis tends to do that. :-)

FWIW - I am not aware of any studies that show any appreciable difference between carb cycling and not. That being said, many people will carb cycle to provide energy for their workouts (as opposed to using it for fat loss per se).

There is some evidence, compelling but not conclusive, to suggest that there may be some benefit to having more carbs at night - which is not carb cycling. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21475137

I'm aware of that one, drives the "no carbs at night" folks nuts.

The funny thing is, there is also a study I read about not long ago that says just the opposite.

And that is why I just eat what I want when I want. I got tired of trying to keep up with it all!

Not a bad approach at all to have - I do it too. Why make it more complicated than it needs to be!

Although, I would be interested in seeing the study you are referring to for my own edification.

I would point you to it, but I read about it in a fitness magazine probably a year or more ago and can't remember details anymore.

I'm pretty sure it was probably the same magazine that said you should eat them at night, which makes me even more determined to just find what works for me and leave it at that. It's so exhausting! lol

As I say, I am not disagreeing with your approach at all, but if you look at the link I provided, it is actually to a peer reviewed study not some random fitness magazine.

FWIW - I am not aware of any studies that show any appreciable difference between carb cycling and not. That being said, many people will carb cycle to provide energy for their workouts (as opposed to using it for fat loss per se).

There is some evidence, compelling but not conclusive, to suggest that there may be some benefit to having more carbs at night - which is not carb cycling. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21475137

I'm aware of that one, drives the "no carbs at night" folks nuts.

The funny thing is, there is also a study I read about not long ago that says just the opposite.

And that is why I just eat what I want when I want. I got tired of trying to keep up with it all!

Not a bad approach at all to have - I do it too. Why make it more complicated than it needs to be!

Although, I would be interested in seeing the study you are referring to for my own edification.

I would point you to it, but I read about it in a fitness magazine probably a year or more ago and can't remember details anymore.

I'm pretty sure it was probably the same magazine that said you should eat them at night, which makes me even more determined to just find what works for me and leave it at that. It's so exhausting! lol

As I say, I am not disagreeing with your approach at all, but if you look at the link I provided, it is actually to a peer reviewed study not some random fitness magazine.

I read several, which is why I don't remember which, but they're respected magazines that report on peer-reviewed studies. They don't just make things up. I know there's a study somewhere. I just don't know where to look for it.

There's no evidence that it would yield any greater weight loss than a linear caloric deficit/macronutrient intake.

And we have a winner!

Exactly. End.

At some point, hopefully in the near future, the term "weight loss" has to go away. The OP said "fast weight loss," but she says she wants to preserve muscle mass and have "that firm look," or something like that. If she, at her very small size, only focuses on weight loss, she's going to atrophy. Manipulating nutrient timing can, does, and will help her achieve her goal, as she stated, not in her subject line, but upon further investigation, of reducing her body fat while preserving or building muscle. Body builders use it, power lifters use it, figure competitors use it, I use it, Shelby Starnes uses it for himself and his clients, John Kiefer uses it for himself and his clients, Julia Ladewski uses it for herself and her clients, Brian Carroll uses it, and on and on and on.

Long story short -

Scale weight => calorie is a calorie
Maintain or increase muscle mass and/or strength while cutting body fat => Carb cycling/backloading/manipulation is an industry proven method to help you achieve that goal.

Seems several posters on these boards see "lose weight" and can't wait to jump in with "a calorie is a calorie." Upon further investigation of what people really want to achieve, "lose weight" isn't 'really' the ultimate goal. When people don't have an abundance of body fat to lose, there's more to the way the body responds to different stimuli that can promote their progress toward the goal.

Eating your sardwich on a bike.