Recomposition: Maintaining weight while losing fat
Replies
-
Hello
I just found this thread and its exactly what I needed as I am so confused about recomposition and have some questions. I posted these already , but I figured it would make more sense to post them on this specific thread .
1. Which is more important to look at : Macros or nutrients on MFP when doing recomp ?
2. What should be the macro percentages for recomp ?
3. Should I calculate macros/ nutrients daily or weekly ? As I usually bank calories for the weekend.
4. How do you calculate macros when eating out ?
5. If I do not hit one of my macros , especially protein ,will my training be in vain ?
Thank you0 -
This article suggests that for optimal recomposition, men should be in the 10-12% bf range and women in the 19-24% range.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/initial-body-fat-and-body-composition-changes.html/
I was "stuck" on a plateau, so I figured I might as well do something productive. I might have been at a bf% that was not optimal for recomp but still got results preferable to not doing anything.
ETA-- Here is an interesting MFP blog:
http://blog.myfitnesspal.com/the-basics-of-body-recomposition-macronutrient-calculations-to-lose-fat-and-gain-muscle/
That blog looks ridiculous to me in terms of macro setup. It would have me eating 315g of protein per day on both training days and off days. His ratios are nowhere near the (far more sensible) ones I've seen posed by very knowledgeable people, such as in threads like this: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819055/setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets/p1
Ditto - some of the comments after the blog show the same issue.
Plus - when someone is willing to unnecessarily succumb to faddish vernacular right at the start "to burn fat and gain (lean) muscle" - makes me just look for problems.
Gee - tell me how to gain fat muscle just in case I wanted to. How do I get a rib-eye besides going to the butcher!
Oh wow, someone linked to Lyle McDonald's blog...this might turn into Bodybuilding.com forums circa 2009. Martin from Leangains is probably creeping somewhere in the shadows as well... Intermittent fasters rejoice!
In all seriousness, we owe much of what we understand about "recomp" to Lyle and his work...even if in recent years he's become more protective and defensive of his insights (some would say abrasively so). That's an understandable reaction, since he is generally not credited when people these days talk about body recomposition, being one of the establishing authors of the concept. I bring up Martin Berkhan above for the same reason in relation to IF.
It's important to understand that the terms we throw around on these forums were the result of some individual's hard work. If it were not for Lyle, perhaps we'd all be doing bulk/cut cycles forever! If it weren't for Martin, we may still all be eating 6-8 meals every day to lose weight, and without people like Alan Aragon (science of nutrition and performance) and Layne Norton and his pupil Berto Nunez (If it fits your macros or IIFYM), we may never have challenged the conventional modes of dieting.
I'm sure if the above posters read deeply into Lyle's earlier works, they'll find that he was the first one to research and offer it to the masses, for free, no strings attached and with no personal monetary agenda. I owe a great bit to these individuals and if you really want to TRULY understand body recomposition, Lyle's blog is certainly not a bad resource.
10 -
Hello
I just found this thread and its exactly what I needed as I am so confused about recomposition and have some questions. I posted these already , but I figured it would make more sense to post them on this specific thread .
1. Which is more important to look at : Macros or nutrients on MFP when doing recomp ?
2. What should be the macro percentages for recomp ?
3. Should I calculate macros/ nutrients daily or weekly ? As I usually bank calories for the weekend.
4. How do you calculate macros when eating out ?
5. If I do not hit one of my macros , especially protein ,will my training be in vain ?
Thank you
@FitBody3
1. Macro is short for macronutrient so don't really get your question. Most important thing is your training, with no muscle stimulus there's no growth.
2. Not that vital - have an overall healthy diet that you enjoy. Sensible to have a reasonable protein goal when you are training hard.
3. Doesn't matter.
4. Doesn't matter.
5. No.
Your focus is all wrong - recomp starts with your training, diet merely supports the process.
It's not at all confusing, it's just your body's natural response to training stimulus and doesn't have to be micro managed.11 -
Hello
I just found this thread and its exactly what I needed as I am so confused about recomposition and have some questions. I posted these already , but I figured it would make more sense to post them on this specific thread .
1. Which is more important to look at : Macros or nutrients on MFP when doing recomp ?
2. What should be the macro percentages for recomp ?
3. Should I calculate macros/ nutrients daily or weekly ? As I usually bank calories for the weekend.
4. How do you calculate macros when eating out ?
5. If I do not hit one of my macros , especially protein ,will my training be in vain ?
Thank you
@FitBody3
1. Macro is short for macronutrient so don't really get your question. Most important thing is your training, with no muscle stimulus there's no growth.
2. Not that vital - have an overall healthy diet that you enjoy. Sensible to have a reasonable protein goal when you are training hard.
3. Doesn't matter.
4. Doesn't matter.
5. No.
Your focus is all wrong - recomp starts with your training, diet merely supports the process.
It's not at all confusing, it's just your body's natural response to training stimulus and doesn't have to be micro managed.
Thank you so much ! You made it sound so easy and I have much more motivation now that I know that diet is not that important
0 -
Hello
I just found this thread and its exactly what I needed as I am so confused about recomposition and have some questions. I posted these already , but I figured it would make more sense to post them on this specific thread .
1. Which is more important to look at : Macros or nutrients on MFP when doing recomp ?
2. What should be the macro percentages for recomp ?
3. Should I calculate macros/ nutrients daily or weekly ? As I usually bank calories for the weekend.
4. How do you calculate macros when eating out ?
5. If I do not hit one of my macros , especially protein ,will my training be in vain ?
Thank you
@FitBody3
1. Macro is short for macronutrient so don't really get your question. Most important thing is your training, with no muscle stimulus there's no growth.
2. Not that vital - have an overall healthy diet that you enjoy. Sensible to have a reasonable protein goal when you are training hard.
3. Doesn't matter.
4. Doesn't matter.
5. No.
Your focus is all wrong - recomp starts with your training, diet merely supports the process.
It's not at all confusing, it's just your body's natural response to training stimulus and doesn't have to be micro managed.
Thank you so much ! You made it sound so easy and I have much more motivation now that I know that diet is not that important
There are general ranges for macronutrients, which you can loosely follow. @sijomial stated though, training is a bit more important, so having a solid progressive overload program will be key.
In general terms, protein should be (shown as grams per kg/grams per lb):
Protein: 1.5-2.2g/.6-1g
Fats: .8-1.3g/.35-.6g
Carbs: remainder
You can vary carbs and fats a bit more if you would like due to satiety. Also, these numbers are more based on cutting calories, so you can be more towards the lower end of protein unless you like higher protein for satiety. I personally do well with 1g/lb based on being a huge eater. When I go from cuts to maintenance, I actually increase fats because who doesn't love cheese.6 -
This article suggests that for optimal recomposition, men should be in the 10-12% bf range and women in the 19-24% range.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/initial-body-fat-and-body-composition-changes.html/
I was "stuck" on a plateau, so I figured I might as well do something productive. I might have been at a bf% that was not optimal for recomp but still got results preferable to not doing anything.
ETA-- Here is an interesting MFP blog:
http://blog.myfitnesspal.com/the-basics-of-body-recomposition-macronutrient-calculations-to-lose-fat-and-gain-muscle/
That blog looks ridiculous to me in terms of macro setup. It would have me eating 315g of protein per day on both training days and off days. His ratios are nowhere near the (far more sensible) ones I've seen posed by very knowledgeable people, such as in threads like this: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819055/setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets/p1
Ditto - some of the comments after the blog show the same issue.
Plus - when someone is willing to unnecessarily succumb to faddish vernacular right at the start "to burn fat and gain (lean) muscle" - makes me just look for problems.
Gee - tell me how to gain fat muscle just in case I wanted to. How do I get a rib-eye besides going to the butcher!
Oh wow, someone linked to Lyle McDonald's blog...this might turn into Bodybuilding.com forums circa 2009. Martin from Leangains is probably creeping somewhere in the shadows as well... Intermittent fasters rejoice!
In all seriousness, we owe much of what we understand about "recomp" to Lyle and his work...even if in recent years he's become more protective and defensive of his insights (some would say abrasively so). That's an understandable reaction, since he is generally not credited when people these days talk about body recomposition, being one of the establishing authors of the concept. I bring up Martin Berkhan above for the same reason in relation to IF.
It's important to understand that the terms we throw around on these forums were the result of some individual's hard work. If it were not for Lyle, perhaps we'd all be doing bulk/cut cycles forever! If it weren't for Martin, we may still all be eating 6-8 meals every day to lose weight, and without people like Alan Aragon (science of nutrition and performance) and Layne Norton and his pupil Berto Nunez (If it fits your macros or IIFYM), we may never have challenged the conventional modes of dieting.
I'm sure if the above posters read deeply into Lyle's earlier works, they'll find that he was the first one to research and offer it to the masses, for free, no strings attached and with no personal monetary agenda. I owe a great bit to these individuals and if you really want to TRULY understand body recomposition, Lyle's blog is certainly not a bad resource.
I can certainly vouche that all of those people you discussion, with the exception of Martin, are highly discussed. It's a shame that Martin doesn't get as much credit on IF, because he did lay a solid foundation. It has also been spun to be in support of LCHF a lot. I have had a few debates on IF recently, and people talk about the huge benefits (potential increase in metabolism, improve insulin sensitivity, potential link to prevention of alzheimers) and spin it as a LCHF diet. And whats ironic, is several cases, they have reference the work of Martin, without realizing that Martin does fairly low fat, high carb/high protein. And a large portion of his diet is starches and increase ice cream... daily.3 -
This article suggests that for optimal recomposition, men should be in the 10-12% bf range and women in the 19-24% range.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/initial-body-fat-and-body-composition-changes.html/
I was "stuck" on a plateau, so I figured I might as well do something productive. I might have been at a bf% that was not optimal for recomp but still got results preferable to not doing anything.
ETA-- Here is an interesting MFP blog:
http://blog.myfitnesspal.com/the-basics-of-body-recomposition-macronutrient-calculations-to-lose-fat-and-gain-muscle/
That blog looks ridiculous to me in terms of macro setup. It would have me eating 315g of protein per day on both training days and off days. His ratios are nowhere near the (far more sensible) ones I've seen posed by very knowledgeable people, such as in threads like this: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819055/setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets/p1
Ditto - some of the comments after the blog show the same issue.
Plus - when someone is willing to unnecessarily succumb to faddish vernacular right at the start "to burn fat and gain (lean) muscle" - makes me just look for problems.
Gee - tell me how to gain fat muscle just in case I wanted to. How do I get a rib-eye besides going to the butcher!
Oh wow, someone linked to Lyle McDonald's blog...this might turn into Bodybuilding.com forums circa 2009. Martin from Leangains is probably creeping somewhere in the shadows as well... Intermittent fasters rejoice!
In all seriousness, we owe much of what we understand about "recomp" to Lyle and his work...even if in recent years he's become more protective and defensive of his insights (some would say abrasively so). That's an understandable reaction, since he is generally not credited when people these days talk about body recomposition, being one of the establishing authors of the concept. I bring up Martin Berkhan above for the same reason in relation to IF.
It's important to understand that the terms we throw around on these forums were the result of some individual's hard work. If it were not for Lyle, perhaps we'd all be doing bulk/cut cycles forever! If it weren't for Martin, we may still all be eating 6-8 meals every day to lose weight, and without people like Alan Aragon (science of nutrition and performance) and Layne Norton and his pupil Berto Nunez (If it fits your macros or IIFYM), we may never have challenged the conventional modes of dieting.
I'm sure if the above posters read deeply into Lyle's earlier works, they'll find that he was the first one to research and offer it to the masses, for free, no strings attached and with no personal monetary agenda. I owe a great bit to these individuals and if you really want to TRULY understand body recomposition, Lyle's blog is certainly not a bad resource.
I can certainly vouche that all of those people you discussion, with the exception of Martin, are highly discussed. It's a shame that Martin doesn't get as much credit on IF, because he did lay a solid foundation. It has also been spun to be in support of LCHF a lot. I have had a few debates on IF recently, and people talk about the huge benefits (potential increase in metabolism, improve insulin sensitivity, potential link to prevention of alzheimers) and spin it as a LCHF diet. And whats ironic, is several cases, they have reference the work of Martin, without realizing that Martin does fairly low fat, high carb/high protein. And a large portion of his diet is starches and increase ice cream... daily.
Haha, the really sad part about it is these people don't get exposure/credit because simply they are too focused on the work itself. These people talk about nutrition and exercise performance in bougie fitness/science vernacular which is understandably hard for the average dieter to tolerate let alone digest. The engineering departments hardly ever talk to the end users for that reason (I chuckle as I type because now I'm thinking about Tom getting interviewed by The Bobs in Office Space and he's screaming at them that the engineers are not good at dealing with customers!!!). I'm glad these guys get a fair shake on here, even if they aren't the most agreeable in format or even personality sometimes. It's quite a shame about Martin because his interpretation of IF is such a beautiful tool and has nothing to do with food selection, but let the spinsters spin. Maybe something good will come of it.
Re-comp, is comp-licated (sorry, had to). it doesn't have to be. The more you start digging into the parameters of a recomp as outlined by Lyle and his peers, the more you'll find it to be a never ending black hole of ever-expanding parameters. Each tier of this black hole as you fall deeper becomes more ridiculous to the outsider looking in, but somehow more important to you, the fallen. At the bottom of the hole, you're looking up things in a medical textbook to validate a preformed notion about what recomp actually means. I see hallmarks of this when people start debating optimal BF% to start a recomp as if it were the single crucial factor. No mention of family/genetic history of obesity. Joint tolerances? NEAT levels? T levels? Where does it stop and how much does it matter.
You can start your recomp program today, and learn along the way. We as a community can try to help you, but the learning process is strictly yours and you must take ownership of it.
7 -
This article suggests that for optimal recomposition, men should be in the 10-12% bf range and women in the 19-24% range.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/initial-body-fat-and-body-composition-changes.html/
I was "stuck" on a plateau, so I figured I might as well do something productive. I might have been at a bf% that was not optimal for recomp but still got results preferable to not doing anything.
ETA-- Here is an interesting MFP blog:
http://blog.myfitnesspal.com/the-basics-of-body-recomposition-macronutrient-calculations-to-lose-fat-and-gain-muscle/
That blog looks ridiculous to me in terms of macro setup. It would have me eating 315g of protein per day on both training days and off days. His ratios are nowhere near the (far more sensible) ones I've seen posed by very knowledgeable people, such as in threads like this: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819055/setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets/p1
Ditto - some of the comments after the blog show the same issue.
Plus - when someone is willing to unnecessarily succumb to faddish vernacular right at the start "to burn fat and gain (lean) muscle" - makes me just look for problems.
Gee - tell me how to gain fat muscle just in case I wanted to. How do I get a rib-eye besides going to the butcher!
Oh wow, someone linked to Lyle McDonald's blog...this might turn into Bodybuilding.com forums circa 2009. Martin from Leangains is probably creeping somewhere in the shadows as well... Intermittent fasters rejoice!
In all seriousness, we owe much of what we understand about "recomp" to Lyle and his work...even if in recent years he's become more protective and defensive of his insights (some would say abrasively so). That's an understandable reaction, since he is generally not credited when people these days talk about body recomposition, being one of the establishing authors of the concept. I bring up Martin Berkhan above for the same reason in relation to IF.
It's important to understand that the terms we throw around on these forums were the result of some individual's hard work. If it were not for Lyle, perhaps we'd all be doing bulk/cut cycles forever! If it weren't for Martin, we may still all be eating 6-8 meals every day to lose weight, and without people like Alan Aragon (science of nutrition and performance) and Layne Norton and his pupil Berto Nunez (If it fits your macros or IIFYM), we may never have challenged the conventional modes of dieting.
I'm sure if the above posters read deeply into Lyle's earlier works, they'll find that he was the first one to research and offer it to the masses, for free, no strings attached and with no personal monetary agenda. I owe a great bit to these individuals and if you really want to TRULY understand body recomposition, Lyle's blog is certainly not a bad resource.
I can certainly vouche that all of those people you discussion, with the exception of Martin, are highly discussed. It's a shame that Martin doesn't get as much credit on IF, because he did lay a solid foundation. It has also been spun to be in support of LCHF a lot. I have had a few debates on IF recently, and people talk about the huge benefits (potential increase in metabolism, improve insulin sensitivity, potential link to prevention of alzheimers) and spin it as a LCHF diet. And whats ironic, is several cases, they have reference the work of Martin, without realizing that Martin does fairly low fat, high carb/high protein. And a large portion of his diet is starches and increase ice cream... daily.
Haha, the really sad part about it is these people don't get exposure/credit because simply they are too focused on the work itself. These people talk about nutrition and exercise performance in bougie fitness/science vernacular which is understandably hard for the average dieter to tolerate let alone digest. The engineering departments hardly ever talk to the end users for that reason (I chuckle as I type because now I'm thinking about Tom getting interviewed by The Bobs in Office Space and he's screaming at them that the engineers are not good at dealing with customers!!!). I'm glad these guys get a fair shake on here, even if they aren't the most agreeable in format or even personality sometimes. It's quite a shame about Martin because his interpretation of IF is such a beautiful tool and has nothing to do with food selection, but let the spinsters spin. Maybe something good will come of it.
Re-comp, is comp-licated (sorry, had to). it doesn't have to be. The more you start digging into the parameters of a recomp as outlined by Lyle and his peers, the more you'll find it to be a never ending black hole of ever-expanding parameters. Each tier of this black hole as you fall deeper becomes more ridiculous to the outsider looking in, but somehow more important to you, the fallen. At the bottom of the hole, you're looking up things in a medical textbook to validate a preformed notion about what recomp actually means. I see hallmarks of this when people start debating optimal BF% to start a recomp as if it were the single crucial factor. No mention of family/genetic history of obesity. Joint tolerances? NEAT levels? T levels? Where does it stop and how much does it matter.
You can start your recomp program today, and learn along the way. We as a community can try to help you, but the learning process is strictly yours and you must take ownership of it.
I've come across Lyle and Martin's sites quite some time ago, but I didn't take the time to read through much of their work because I was getting hit by information from a lot of blogs and sites at the time I first decided to work out consistently (way before I even thought about diet). Are there any posts or works in particular that are a good starting point? Or is it all textual gold?0 -
s3rialthrill3r wrote: »This article suggests that for optimal recomposition, men should be in the 10-12% bf range and women in the 19-24% range.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/initial-body-fat-and-body-composition-changes.html/
I was "stuck" on a plateau, so I figured I might as well do something productive. I might have been at a bf% that was not optimal for recomp but still got results preferable to not doing anything.
ETA-- Here is an interesting MFP blog:
http://blog.myfitnesspal.com/the-basics-of-body-recomposition-macronutrient-calculations-to-lose-fat-and-gain-muscle/
That blog looks ridiculous to me in terms of macro setup. It would have me eating 315g of protein per day on both training days and off days. His ratios are nowhere near the (far more sensible) ones I've seen posed by very knowledgeable people, such as in threads like this: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819055/setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets/p1
Ditto - some of the comments after the blog show the same issue.
Plus - when someone is willing to unnecessarily succumb to faddish vernacular right at the start "to burn fat and gain (lean) muscle" - makes me just look for problems.
Gee - tell me how to gain fat muscle just in case I wanted to. How do I get a rib-eye besides going to the butcher!
Oh wow, someone linked to Lyle McDonald's blog...this might turn into Bodybuilding.com forums circa 2009. Martin from Leangains is probably creeping somewhere in the shadows as well... Intermittent fasters rejoice!
In all seriousness, we owe much of what we understand about "recomp" to Lyle and his work...even if in recent years he's become more protective and defensive of his insights (some would say abrasively so). That's an understandable reaction, since he is generally not credited when people these days talk about body recomposition, being one of the establishing authors of the concept. I bring up Martin Berkhan above for the same reason in relation to IF.
It's important to understand that the terms we throw around on these forums were the result of some individual's hard work. If it were not for Lyle, perhaps we'd all be doing bulk/cut cycles forever! If it weren't for Martin, we may still all be eating 6-8 meals every day to lose weight, and without people like Alan Aragon (science of nutrition and performance) and Layne Norton and his pupil Berto Nunez (If it fits your macros or IIFYM), we may never have challenged the conventional modes of dieting.
I'm sure if the above posters read deeply into Lyle's earlier works, they'll find that he was the first one to research and offer it to the masses, for free, no strings attached and with no personal monetary agenda. I owe a great bit to these individuals and if you really want to TRULY understand body recomposition, Lyle's blog is certainly not a bad resource.
I can certainly vouche that all of those people you discussion, with the exception of Martin, are highly discussed. It's a shame that Martin doesn't get as much credit on IF, because he did lay a solid foundation. It has also been spun to be in support of LCHF a lot. I have had a few debates on IF recently, and people talk about the huge benefits (potential increase in metabolism, improve insulin sensitivity, potential link to prevention of alzheimers) and spin it as a LCHF diet. And whats ironic, is several cases, they have reference the work of Martin, without realizing that Martin does fairly low fat, high carb/high protein. And a large portion of his diet is starches and increase ice cream... daily.
Haha, the really sad part about it is these people don't get exposure/credit because simply they are too focused on the work itself. These people talk about nutrition and exercise performance in bougie fitness/science vernacular which is understandably hard for the average dieter to tolerate let alone digest. The engineering departments hardly ever talk to the end users for that reason (I chuckle as I type because now I'm thinking about Tom getting interviewed by The Bobs in Office Space and he's screaming at them that the engineers are not good at dealing with customers!!!). I'm glad these guys get a fair shake on here, even if they aren't the most agreeable in format or even personality sometimes. It's quite a shame about Martin because his interpretation of IF is such a beautiful tool and has nothing to do with food selection, but let the spinsters spin. Maybe something good will come of it.
Re-comp, is comp-licated (sorry, had to). it doesn't have to be. The more you start digging into the parameters of a recomp as outlined by Lyle and his peers, the more you'll find it to be a never ending black hole of ever-expanding parameters. Each tier of this black hole as you fall deeper becomes more ridiculous to the outsider looking in, but somehow more important to you, the fallen. At the bottom of the hole, you're looking up things in a medical textbook to validate a preformed notion about what recomp actually means. I see hallmarks of this when people start debating optimal BF% to start a recomp as if it were the single crucial factor. No mention of family/genetic history of obesity. Joint tolerances? NEAT levels? T levels? Where does it stop and how much does it matter.
You can start your recomp program today, and learn along the way. We as a community can try to help you, but the learning process is strictly yours and you must take ownership of it.
I've come across Lyle and Martin's sites quite some time ago, but I didn't take the time to read through much of their work because I was getting hit by information from a lot of blogs and sites at the time I first decided to work out consistently (way before I even thought about diet). Are there any posts or works in particular that are a good starting point? Or is it all textual gold?
If you have the time (and patience) I highly recommend all of Lyle's books. I have read UD2.0, RFL, Flexible Dieting, Ketogenic Diet, BodyOpus experience and Bromocriptine and have learned a tonne about nutrition, physiology and more.2 -
trigden1991 wrote: »s3rialthrill3r wrote: »This article suggests that for optimal recomposition, men should be in the 10-12% bf range and women in the 19-24% range.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/initial-body-fat-and-body-composition-changes.html/
I was "stuck" on a plateau, so I figured I might as well do something productive. I might have been at a bf% that was not optimal for recomp but still got results preferable to not doing anything.
ETA-- Here is an interesting MFP blog:
http://blog.myfitnesspal.com/the-basics-of-body-recomposition-macronutrient-calculations-to-lose-fat-and-gain-muscle/
That blog looks ridiculous to me in terms of macro setup. It would have me eating 315g of protein per day on both training days and off days. His ratios are nowhere near the (far more sensible) ones I've seen posed by very knowledgeable people, such as in threads like this: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819055/setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets/p1
Ditto - some of the comments after the blog show the same issue.
Plus - when someone is willing to unnecessarily succumb to faddish vernacular right at the start "to burn fat and gain (lean) muscle" - makes me just look for problems.
Gee - tell me how to gain fat muscle just in case I wanted to. How do I get a rib-eye besides going to the butcher!
Oh wow, someone linked to Lyle McDonald's blog...this might turn into Bodybuilding.com forums circa 2009. Martin from Leangains is probably creeping somewhere in the shadows as well... Intermittent fasters rejoice!
In all seriousness, we owe much of what we understand about "recomp" to Lyle and his work...even if in recent years he's become more protective and defensive of his insights (some would say abrasively so). That's an understandable reaction, since he is generally not credited when people these days talk about body recomposition, being one of the establishing authors of the concept. I bring up Martin Berkhan above for the same reason in relation to IF.
It's important to understand that the terms we throw around on these forums were the result of some individual's hard work. If it were not for Lyle, perhaps we'd all be doing bulk/cut cycles forever! If it weren't for Martin, we may still all be eating 6-8 meals every day to lose weight, and without people like Alan Aragon (science of nutrition and performance) and Layne Norton and his pupil Berto Nunez (If it fits your macros or IIFYM), we may never have challenged the conventional modes of dieting.
I'm sure if the above posters read deeply into Lyle's earlier works, they'll find that he was the first one to research and offer it to the masses, for free, no strings attached and with no personal monetary agenda. I owe a great bit to these individuals and if you really want to TRULY understand body recomposition, Lyle's blog is certainly not a bad resource.
I can certainly vouche that all of those people you discussion, with the exception of Martin, are highly discussed. It's a shame that Martin doesn't get as much credit on IF, because he did lay a solid foundation. It has also been spun to be in support of LCHF a lot. I have had a few debates on IF recently, and people talk about the huge benefits (potential increase in metabolism, improve insulin sensitivity, potential link to prevention of alzheimers) and spin it as a LCHF diet. And whats ironic, is several cases, they have reference the work of Martin, without realizing that Martin does fairly low fat, high carb/high protein. And a large portion of his diet is starches and increase ice cream... daily.
Haha, the really sad part about it is these people don't get exposure/credit because simply they are too focused on the work itself. These people talk about nutrition and exercise performance in bougie fitness/science vernacular which is understandably hard for the average dieter to tolerate let alone digest. The engineering departments hardly ever talk to the end users for that reason (I chuckle as I type because now I'm thinking about Tom getting interviewed by The Bobs in Office Space and he's screaming at them that the engineers are not good at dealing with customers!!!). I'm glad these guys get a fair shake on here, even if they aren't the most agreeable in format or even personality sometimes. It's quite a shame about Martin because his interpretation of IF is such a beautiful tool and has nothing to do with food selection, but let the spinsters spin. Maybe something good will come of it.
Re-comp, is comp-licated (sorry, had to). it doesn't have to be. The more you start digging into the parameters of a recomp as outlined by Lyle and his peers, the more you'll find it to be a never ending black hole of ever-expanding parameters. Each tier of this black hole as you fall deeper becomes more ridiculous to the outsider looking in, but somehow more important to you, the fallen. At the bottom of the hole, you're looking up things in a medical textbook to validate a preformed notion about what recomp actually means. I see hallmarks of this when people start debating optimal BF% to start a recomp as if it were the single crucial factor. No mention of family/genetic history of obesity. Joint tolerances? NEAT levels? T levels? Where does it stop and how much does it matter.
You can start your recomp program today, and learn along the way. We as a community can try to help you, but the learning process is strictly yours and you must take ownership of it.
I've come across Lyle and Martin's sites quite some time ago, but I didn't take the time to read through much of their work because I was getting hit by information from a lot of blogs and sites at the time I first decided to work out consistently (way before I even thought about diet). Are there any posts or works in particular that are a good starting point? Or is it all textual gold?
If you have the time (and patience) I highly recommend all of Lyle's books. I have read UD2.0, RFL, Flexible Dieting, Ketogenic Diet, BodyOpus experience and Bromocriptine and have learned a tonne about nutrition, physiology and more.
I've been patiently waiting for his long anticipated Women's Book. But it sounds like it might be delayed a bit longer (ankle surgery).0 -
I'll be trying to start recomp in a bit. I'm 5'4" and about 115 lbs (roughly converted from 163 cm / 52 kg). I don't want to get below 50 kg, but really need to lower my body fat (around 21%) and build some muscle.
I'll start at 1600 kcal and a 40/30/30 carbs/protein/fat ratio and will adjust as I go if necessary.
I'll be sure to keep you updated!
P.S.: Do you have any suggestions for iOS apos to keep track of tape measurements, weight and body fat?0 -
I'll be trying to start recomp in a bit. I'm 5'4" and about 115 lbs (roughly converted from 163 cm / 52 kg). I don't want to get below 50 kg, but really need to lower my body fat (around 21%) and build some muscle.
I'll start at 1600 kcal and a 40/30/30 carbs/protein/fat ratio and will adjust as I go if necessary.
I'll be sure to keep you updated!
P.S.: Do you have any suggestions for iOS apos to keep track of tape measurements, weight and body fat?
I use an app called "monitor your weight," which does track everything you've mentioned. But I have Android, so I'm not sure if it's available for iOS.2 -
thejadegirl wrote: »I'll be trying to start recomp in a bit. I'm 5'4" and about 115 lbs (roughly converted from 163 cm / 52 kg). I don't want to get below 50 kg, but really need to lower my body fat (around 21%) and build some muscle.
I'll start at 1600 kcal and a 40/30/30 carbs/protein/fat ratio and will adjust as I go if necessary.
I'll be sure to keep you updated!
P.S.: Do you have any suggestions for iOS apos to keep track of tape measurements, weight and body fat?
I use an app called "monitor your weight," which does track everything you've mentioned. But I have Android, so I'm not sure if it's available for iOS.
Thanks! It's available on the App Store! I'll try that one!1 -
So, I took some comparison photos. On left is today @121 lbs, eating 1700 calories & right is from June 2016, 116 lbs & eating 1350 calories. I'm trying to get my calories up to my estimated TDEE of 1900 calories. In June I was also doing 16:8 IF so I could eat that low. Now I am eating breakfast again to fuel my morning workouts & loving it! No question here, just sharing what I've been doing and to say, don't be afraid to eat more.
26 -
trigden1991 wrote: »s3rialthrill3r wrote: »This article suggests that for optimal recomposition, men should be in the 10-12% bf range and women in the 19-24% range.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/initial-body-fat-and-body-composition-changes.html/
I was "stuck" on a plateau, so I figured I might as well do something productive. I might have been at a bf% that was not optimal for recomp but still got results preferable to not doing anything.
ETA-- Here is an interesting MFP blog:
http://blog.myfitnesspal.com/the-basics-of-body-recomposition-macronutrient-calculations-to-lose-fat-and-gain-muscle/
That blog looks ridiculous to me in terms of macro setup. It would have me eating 315g of protein per day on both training days and off days. His ratios are nowhere near the (far more sensible) ones I've seen posed by very knowledgeable people, such as in threads like this: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/819055/setting-your-calorie-and-macro-targets/p1
Ditto - some of the comments after the blog show the same issue.
Plus - when someone is willing to unnecessarily succumb to faddish vernacular right at the start "to burn fat and gain (lean) muscle" - makes me just look for problems.
Gee - tell me how to gain fat muscle just in case I wanted to. How do I get a rib-eye besides going to the butcher!
Oh wow, someone linked to Lyle McDonald's blog...this might turn into Bodybuilding.com forums circa 2009. Martin from Leangains is probably creeping somewhere in the shadows as well... Intermittent fasters rejoice!
In all seriousness, we owe much of what we understand about "recomp" to Lyle and his work...even if in recent years he's become more protective and defensive of his insights (some would say abrasively so). That's an understandable reaction, since he is generally not credited when people these days talk about body recomposition, being one of the establishing authors of the concept. I bring up Martin Berkhan above for the same reason in relation to IF.
It's important to understand that the terms we throw around on these forums were the result of some individual's hard work. If it were not for Lyle, perhaps we'd all be doing bulk/cut cycles forever! If it weren't for Martin, we may still all be eating 6-8 meals every day to lose weight, and without people like Alan Aragon (science of nutrition and performance) and Layne Norton and his pupil Berto Nunez (If it fits your macros or IIFYM), we may never have challenged the conventional modes of dieting.
I'm sure if the above posters read deeply into Lyle's earlier works, they'll find that he was the first one to research and offer it to the masses, for free, no strings attached and with no personal monetary agenda. I owe a great bit to these individuals and if you really want to TRULY understand body recomposition, Lyle's blog is certainly not a bad resource.
I can certainly vouche that all of those people you discussion, with the exception of Martin, are highly discussed. It's a shame that Martin doesn't get as much credit on IF, because he did lay a solid foundation. It has also been spun to be in support of LCHF a lot. I have had a few debates on IF recently, and people talk about the huge benefits (potential increase in metabolism, improve insulin sensitivity, potential link to prevention of alzheimers) and spin it as a LCHF diet. And whats ironic, is several cases, they have reference the work of Martin, without realizing that Martin does fairly low fat, high carb/high protein. And a large portion of his diet is starches and increase ice cream... daily.
Haha, the really sad part about it is these people don't get exposure/credit because simply they are too focused on the work itself. These people talk about nutrition and exercise performance in bougie fitness/science vernacular which is understandably hard for the average dieter to tolerate let alone digest. The engineering departments hardly ever talk to the end users for that reason (I chuckle as I type because now I'm thinking about Tom getting interviewed by The Bobs in Office Space and he's screaming at them that the engineers are not good at dealing with customers!!!). I'm glad these guys get a fair shake on here, even if they aren't the most agreeable in format or even personality sometimes. It's quite a shame about Martin because his interpretation of IF is such a beautiful tool and has nothing to do with food selection, but let the spinsters spin. Maybe something good will come of it.
Re-comp, is comp-licated (sorry, had to). it doesn't have to be. The more you start digging into the parameters of a recomp as outlined by Lyle and his peers, the more you'll find it to be a never ending black hole of ever-expanding parameters. Each tier of this black hole as you fall deeper becomes more ridiculous to the outsider looking in, but somehow more important to you, the fallen. At the bottom of the hole, you're looking up things in a medical textbook to validate a preformed notion about what recomp actually means. I see hallmarks of this when people start debating optimal BF% to start a recomp as if it were the single crucial factor. No mention of family/genetic history of obesity. Joint tolerances? NEAT levels? T levels? Where does it stop and how much does it matter.
You can start your recomp program today, and learn along the way. We as a community can try to help you, but the learning process is strictly yours and you must take ownership of it.
I've come across Lyle and Martin's sites quite some time ago, but I didn't take the time to read through much of their work because I was getting hit by information from a lot of blogs and sites at the time I first decided to work out consistently (way before I even thought about diet). Are there any posts or works in particular that are a good starting point? Or is it all textual gold?
If you have the time (and patience) I highly recommend all of Lyle's books. I have read UD2.0, RFL, Flexible Dieting, Ketogenic Diet, BodyOpus experience and Bromocriptine and have learned a tonne about nutrition, physiology and more.
I've been patiently waiting for his long anticipated Women's Book. But it sounds like it might be delayed a bit longer (ankle surgery).
It will certainly be an eye opener for many.1 -
trigden1991 wrote: »It will certainly be an eye opener for many.
In what way?0 -
Some things that have been available to know but putting it together in an understandable way and making application that is useable. But also some newer research.
Some interviews where stuff in the book is detailed.
https://youtu.be/6846ZTBu08k
https://youtu.be/rLcjhm4-CSg
https://youtu.be/0MF7WLkBQbg 5 -
I would love to hear comments regarding 3 days full body lifting program, vs. 3 days of working separate muscle groups (for instance, leg day, arm day, shoulder day). Both are lifting programs, and not circuit training with cardio intervals.
The workouts are all similar in length (approx 45 minutes) and have progression planned by increasing weight. They also use similar lifts, it is just that one program mixes them up so that you are hitting full body three days a week, where on the other you are working each part one day a week for the entire session.
Is there an advantage to one type of program over the other?1 -
It's better to workout the same muscles 2x or more per week. If you just workout a muscle once a week, it wouldn't be enough.
So 3x full body is better.0 -
^3 days full body has the advantage for strength and hypertrophy.3
-
Agree w/the two above; I've do full body 3X week and periodically change the exercises and have noticed changes (increases in strength and hypertrophy (and I'm in my 60s).
3 -
16
-
I would love to hear comments regarding 3 days full body lifting program, vs. 3 days of working separate muscle groups (for instance, leg day, arm day, shoulder day). Both are lifting programs, and not circuit training with cardio intervals.
The workouts are all similar in length (approx 45 minutes) and have progression planned by increasing weight. They also use similar lifts, it is just that one program mixes them up so that you are hitting full body three days a week, where on the other you are working each part one day a week for the entire session.
Is there an advantage to one type of program over the other?
@standenvernet great work!
@tigerblue regarding the above I'll echo what's been said with a bit more nerdery.
The main advantages to full body training are as follows in my opinion:
1) More frequent training may allow faster skill development for any movements that overlap throughout the week. For example if you are squatting 3 days per week you could make a logical argument that this would provide faster skill acquisition in the squat. Better skill = more weight on the barbell.
2) More frequent training may allow for reduced soreness due to the repeated bout effect kicking in earlier. Reduced soreness may not seem like a big deal but it can be important both for performance and quality of life reasons.
3) More frequent training will upregulate protein synthesis more frequently and this has positive implications for hypertrophy. In theory, if you can cause muscle protein synthesis in the legs to go up 3 times per week, you can accumulate more muscle mass over time compared to a scenario where you're only achieving this once per week.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2710217212 -
So, I took some comparison photos. On left is today @121 lbs, eating 1700 calories & right is from June 2016, 116 lbs & eating 1350 calories. I'm trying to get my calories up to my estimated TDEE of 1900 calories. In June I was also doing 16:8 IF so I could eat that low. Now I am eating breakfast again to fuel my morning workouts & loving it! No question here, just sharing what I've been doing and to say, don't be afraid to eat more.
How tall are you, if you don't mind my asking?2 -
So, I took some comparison photos. On left is today @121 lbs, eating 1700 calories & right is from June 2016, 116 lbs & eating 1350 calories. I'm trying to get my calories up to my estimated TDEE of 1900 calories. In June I was also doing 16:8 IF so I could eat that low. Now I am eating breakfast again to fuel my morning workouts & loving it! No question here, just sharing what I've been doing and to say, don't be afraid to eat more.
How tall are you, if you don't mind my asking?
I'm 5'2.5" (.5" really matters, lol).6 -
I'm trying to build muscle & lose body fat--not weight. My question is how come every eating plan out there deals with a calorie deficit (300 - 400 cals worth) designed to lose weight???? I'm 60+, 5"3" and weigh abt 115 lbs (AND DO NOT WANT TO LOSE ANY MORE WEIGHT); I do full-body workouts 3X a week, and lift as heavy as I possibly can (don't want to injure myself). I'm in maintenance @ abt 1610 cals (+/-) a day. My question is should I increase or decrease my cals to lose body fat only (I'm @ 23% and want to get to around 21%)? BTW, I can do 10+ full-body push-ups. I've been trying to work w/my eating plan, but can't seen to find the info I need. Any suggestions would be welcomed!! Many thanks. 1
-
griffinca2 wrote: »I'm trying to build muscle & lose body fat--not weight. My question is how come every eating plan out there deals with a calorie deficit (300 - 400 cals worth) designed to lose weight???? I'm 60+, 5"3" and weigh abt 115 lbs (AND DO NOT WANT TO LOSE ANY MORE WEIGHT); I do full-body workouts 3X a week, and lift as heavy as I possibly can (don't want to injure myself). I'm in maintenance @ abt 1610 cals (+/-) a day. My question is should I increase or decrease my cals to lose body fat only (I'm @ 23% and want to get to around 21%)? BTW, I can do 10+ full-body push-ups. I've been trying to work w/my eating plan, but can't seen to find the info I need. Any suggestions would be welcomed!! Many thanks.
May I ask why you want an eating plan? Set MFP at maintain. Eat nutritious foods and a good amount of protein. Use a good progressive lifting program. Be patient. You could complicate it more, but those are the basics. For that matter, you could simply use an eating plan and increase the calories to maintain.2 -
@griffinca2
You don't need an eating plan - just an overall healthy diet that you enjoy.
You don't want a calorie deficit if you don't want to lose weight.
Keep it simple: eat at maintenance, follow an effective lifting routine, be patient, be realistic.5 -
Hi ! This is perfect for me but I have some questions.
1. Will this work If I am still young ? ( 19 years old )
2. Is there a way I could recomp by lifting dumbbells at home / doing pilates / using resistance bands ?
3. What size of dumbbells should I buy if I am an absolute beginner ?
4. Is it alright if I still do cardio everyday ? ( walking and elliptical )
Thanks 1 -
@JustDoIt987
1/ It's an advantage being young.
2/ Yes. But as you progress you may need more/heavier equipment. You can also do bodyweight exercises.
3/ Ones that will challenge you but be a manageable weight. (Adjustable ones can be good and are space/price efficient.)
4/ Yes. Depends on intensity and duration of course, you may get some recovery/performance clashes.3
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
- 426 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