Recomposition: Maintaining weight while losing fat

bioklutz wrote: »

Then I noticed something! My back is starting to looks fabulous!!

. . . and shoulders and arms, oh my! Great work, thanks for sharing.

cmasongreen wrote: »

I really want to start a recomp, but I'm not sure if I am there yet? I am a 6'2" male maintaining between 188-192 lbs. I am near the top of the normal range of the BMI chart, but have not been able to measure my BF%. Sorry if this has already been answered but I can't sift through 31 pages of comments lol.

Am I good to start a recomp? Again, sorry for the ignorance.

If you are at or around your goal weight then yes.

griffinca2 wrote: »

For bioklutz; I started re-comp abt two & half months ago and really hadn't seen a whole lot of changes until recently. Have lost some inches here and there buy like you one of my problems was my thighs; I changed some of the leg/glute exercises (1-leg deadlifts/sumo squats) by using a Smith mach (and going heavier) and doing my 20 min cardio session on an upright, stationary (not a spin) bike--I use the random setting and am currently using level 6 (working on level 7). I have lost an close to an inch from my thighs and around my knees. Might want to change up some of your exercises, etc.

Thanks for the suggestions! I have been trying a couple of different variations. Unfortunately I don't think I am someone whose body (thighs specifically) changes quickly and that is fine. I have been doing this since January so it isn't even a year yet. I suspect that my thighs will not really change much more in measurement but will just look more muscular - eventually

Thanks for the nice compliments Auddii & benjammin!

A solid article that I came across recently.

http://shreddedbyscience.com/can-you-gain-weight-in-a-calorie-deficit/

robertw486 wrote: »

LolBroScience wrote: »

A solid article that I came across recently.

http://shreddedbyscience.com/can-you-gain-weight-in-a-calorie-deficit/

Don't go posting stuff like that. It kills the game of quite a few people around there that claim it's impossible to lose weight and add LBM at the same time, as well as the game of many who claim that the only way to make any LBM gains requires lifting heavy, often, and with huge amounts of protein.

That one example is a real eye opener. Older people, lifting only very little, with low protein intake, eating in a deficit, and increased LBM while losing fat.

Well, it is the recomp thread after all

That article is better than most on the subject, which have very shoddy separation of the difference between terms of muscle mass and LBM.
A study says LBM and that's all that is measured - commenter says muscle mass and takes off on reasoning on study.

Drink a couple glasses of water and you just increased your LBM.
Start a cardio routine and your blood volume will increase and therefore your LBM.
Start a lifting routine and before you've even tapped out your existing muscle strength, your body stores more glucose with attached water in the muscles, and therefore you increased LBM.

But in none of those examples would muscle mass have increased.

Which is fine - the right increase of LBM still increases metabolism, from body dealing with extra water (well, not drinking it or increased sodium intake much).

But strictly speaking - you didn't increase muscle mass.

And in all those examples above, you could indeed be eating less calories than you burn daily - and gain weight.
Water weight.
And that's LBM.

Not muscle mass.

I did notice that even in this commentary, some of the studies on the untrained would fall in to this point of water weight not being accounted for as body improvements and assumed it was muscle mass. Not a good assumption.

AnvilHead wrote: »

robertw486 wrote: »

LolBroScience wrote: »

A solid article that I came across recently.

http://shreddedbyscience.com/can-you-gain-weight-in-a-calorie-deficit/

Don't go posting stuff like that. It kills the game of quite a few people around there that claim it's impossible to lose weight and add LBM at the same time, as well as the game of many who claim that the only way to make any LBM gains requires lifting heavy, often, and with huge amounts of protein.

That one example is a real eye opener. Older people, lifting only very little, with low protein intake, eating in a deficit, and increased LBM while losing fat.

Actually, it dovetails quite nicely with the usual contention that "newbie gains" will result in some LBM being put on as bodyfat is reduced. Did you read the conclusion of the linked study?:

The main thing we want you, dear reader, to take home from this article is this – recomposition is normal. It happens – less so in trained individuals, but much more in untrained, new lifters. It’s not necessarily something to aim for, but be aware of it and how it can affect your scale weight if you use that as a metric to gauge progress for either you or your clients...

It also reinforces that strength training is in fact a significant part of the process, and that the laws of thermodynamics aren't invalidated. Did you read the intro?:

Note: This article isn’t going to be an in-depth exploration of whether or not energy balance applies to humans; that is not up for dispute. There are countless metabolic ward studies supporting the theory. Rather, it is going to be exploring some of the nuances of how energy balance can apply to humans – the “grey areas” that tend to throw most of us when our weight doesn’t move as predicted over time, especially when resistance training becomes a significant part of the equation....

I did read the entire piece, including where the trained lifters still had gains in LBM while losing fat. The only trained group that showed fat increase was on the lowest protein levels used for the trained subject, but they were also the only group of trained subjects tested that was eating at a surplus.

The data in the chart actually somewhat conflicts with the "newbie gain" idea. The largest net gains in LBM and losses in fat were trained test subjects. And later in the piece it states that the group in surplus gained more fat but not more LBM, which conflicts with those who say the only way to bulk is to eat in a greater surplus.


If a group doing 4 sets of leg presses and extensions three times a week qualifies as "lifting heavy"... well that would be new to my way of thinking.

AnvilHead wrote: »

robertw486 wrote: »

...If a group doing 4 sets of leg presses and extensions three times a week qualifies as "lifting heavy"... well that would be new to my way of thinking.

Really? Go try 4 sets of leg press with about 600 pounds on the sled, then do 4 sets of extensions with a couple hundred on the stack. Let me know if it feels heavy or not. If you can even walk two days later, limp back into the gym and repeat it twice more that week. Then progress the weight weekly to maintain the intensity.

If you want to impress that some lift more than others... well that's obvious. I'm not new to the idea of lifting, being in the military we didn't even hit the free weight room unless we were going to work.

But the study breaks down the exact program used, and as with most it's based on a percentage of max single lift strength tests.

From the linked on the older guys....

"During the first 4 wk of training, the workload was increased from 60% of 1RM (10–15 repetitions in each set) to 75% of 1RM (8–10 repetitions). Starting at week 5, 4 sets of 8 repetitions were performed at 75–80% of 1RM on each machine."

Considering the ages, protein intake, eating in deficit ... and really one of the guys was removed due to a gardening incident... they did fairly well.

heybales wrote: »

That article is better than most on the subject, which have very shoddy separation of the difference between terms of muscle mass and LBM.
A study says LBM and that's all that is measured - commenter says muscle mass and takes off on reasoning on study.

Drink a couple glasses of water and you just increased your LBM.
Start a cardio routine and your blood volume will increase and therefore your LBM.
Start a lifting routine and before you've even tapped out your existing muscle strength, your body stores more glucose with attached water in the muscles, and therefore you increased LBM.

But in none of those examples would muscle mass have increased.

Which is fine - the right increase of LBM still increases metabolism, from body dealing with extra water (well, not drinking it or increased sodium intake much).

But strictly speaking - you didn't increase muscle mass.

And in all those examples above, you could indeed be eating less calories than you burn daily - and gain weight.
Water weight.
And that's LBM.

Not muscle mass.

I did notice that even in this commentary, some of the studies on the untrained would fall in to this point of water weight not being accounted for as body improvements and assumed it was muscle mass. Not a good assumption.

Yes, makes sense. I have seen Brad Schoenfeld address that before though... and that he has seen site specific increases in muscle size in trained individuals while in a deficit as opposed to just increases in LBM. Unfortunately, I've never come across the actual studies.... but he addressed it much like the summary of the article:

"Recomposition is normal, It happens – less so in trained individuals, but much more in untrained, new lifters. It’s not necessarily something to aim for, but be aware of it and how it can affect your scale weight if you use that as a metric to gauge progress for either you or your clients."

He also went on to say it is usually in body parts that are less developed, and that while it can technically occur... it is far less optimal than if one were to be in a caloric surplus.