Brad Schoenfeld - Facts and Fallacies of Fat Loss

AnvilHead · May 2017

Dr. Brad Schoenfeld presented this lecture at the 2016 NSCA Personal Trainers Conference. This presentation addresses many topics which are frequently discussed here on MFP, often with a lot of myths and misinformation propagated in the discussions. I recently came across it one of the fitness-related groups in my Facebook feed and thought it was worth sharing for anybody who's interested in a solid, scientific, evidence-based approach to numerous topics related to weight/fat loss: https://www.nsca.com/education/videos/facts-and-fallacies-of-fat-loss/

For those with short attention spans who don't want to spend the 50 minutes to watch the entire lecture (although you should, it's well worth the time), here's a timetable of where various topics are addressed:

01:03 - Ketogenic Diets
19:38 - CICO (Calories In, Calories Out)
20:12 - Nutrigenomics
23:56 - Meal Frequency
29:05 - Practical Implications for Meal Frequency
30:47 - Fasted Cardio
38:35 - Bottom Line re: Fasted Cardio
40:00 - 3500 calories = 1 lb. of weight loss, true or false?
40:39 - Adaptive Thermogenesis
44:11 - Leptin
45:04 - "The Oprah Effect"
46:21 - Summary re: Adaptive Thermogenesis and 3500 cal = 1 lb. fat loss
47:19 - Practical Applications for Mitigating Adaptive Thermogenesis

animatorswearbras · May 2017

Really interesting lecture thankyou for posting!

ninerbuff · May 2017

Thanks for this bro.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

ndj1979 · May 2017

Tagging

inertiastrength · May 2017

love him!

TR0berts · May 2017

Simply beautiful.

psuLemon · May 2017

Tagging because I love his work.

Unknown · May 2017

This content has been removed.

veronikamellon · May 2017

Thank you, very informative and balanced view

annaskiski · May 2017

Excellent vid!

This should be pinned actually. It would help a lot of newbies.

crazyycatladyy1 · May 2017

Just watched it and loved it-thanks for posting!

fitmom4lifemfp · May 2017

Excellent presentation. Lots of good information that is not always understood by everyone.

sgt1372 · May 2017

Bookmarked for later viewing.

Want to find out what the "Oprah Effect" is.

Is it the constant pattern of weight loss/gain yo-yoing or the increase in Weight Watchers stock price when she reports that she lost weight (again)? LOL!

rybo · May 2017

In for the link

fitmom4lifemfp · May 2017

sgt1372 wrote: »

Bookmarked for later viewing.

Want to find out what the "Oprah Effect" is.

Is it the constant pattern of weight loss/gain yo-yoing or the increase in Weight Watchers stock price when she reports that she lost weight (again)? LOL!

Exactly.

This is actually the "Oprah Effect". http://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/oprah-effect.asp

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-02/weight-watchers-surges-after-oprah-effect-helps-fuel-earnings

GottaBurnEmAll · May 2017

A well spent 50 minutes. Thanks for posting.

avygyaru · May 2017

Thank you so much for sharing this. I'm officially in love with that site in general now.

cqbkaju · May 2017

@AnvilHead

Thank you sir.

CTcutie · May 2017

Can't wait to finish this!

PAV8888 · May 2017

Want to watch! Thanks for the link.

inertiastrength · May 2017

I don't understand the part about the thermic effect of digesting protein. If that's the case why wouldn't the low carb group lose more than the non low carb group under controlled circumstances... same cals etc? Like I understand they were all capped at 100g protein but if one were to consume MORE protein in relation to the same cals wouldn't they have a deeper deficit over time?

AnvilHead · May 2017

mrsnattybulking wrote: »

I don't understand the part about the thermic effect of digesting protein. If that's the case why wouldn't the low carb group lose more than the non low carb group under controlled circumstances... same cals etc? Like I understand they were all capped at 100g protein but if one were to consume MORE protein in relation to the same cals wouldn't they have a deeper deficit over time?

1) Protein was held equal, so they were consuming the same amounts of protein - thus TEF was about the same.

2) As Brad discussed, the TEF of a mixed meal (mixed macros within the meal) is considered to be around 10%. Protein is rarely consumed to the exclusion of all other macronutrients while in a fasted state.

3) For the TEF to be anywhere near significant in terms of calorie expenditure, one would have to make a ridiculous adjustment in the amount of protein they ate. And such adjustments wouldn't be made in a ketogenic diet in the first place because protein is as insulogenic as carbohydrates, and would knock you out of ketosis.

[ETA:] More in depth discussion of TEF here from another source (Lyle McDonald): http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/metabolic-rate-overview.html

Excerpt:

About the only time that TEF can become considerable is when you replace carbohydrates or fat with protein. For every 100 calories of carbs/fat replaced with protein, you’d expect to burn about 25 calories more (30 cal for protein vs. 3-6 for carbs/fat). So a doubling of protein from 60 to 120 grams/day might increase TEF by 80 calories/day. Triple it to 180 grams/day and TEF could increase by 150 calories. The 20-30% TEF of protein can become even more significant at extreme intakes. However, for the most part, such extreme intakes aren’t practical or used outside of the bodybuilding subculture. In all but the most extreme diets, protein stays fairly static and carbs and fats are shuffled around; the effect is typically minimal in terms of TEF.

sardelsa · May 2017

This is awesome. Thanks for sharing!

lemurcat12 · May 2017

mrsnattybulking wrote: »

I don't understand the part about the thermic effect of digesting protein. If that's the case why wouldn't the low carb group lose more than the non low carb group under controlled circumstances... same cals etc? Like I understand they were all capped at 100g protein but if one were to consume MORE protein in relation to the same cals wouldn't they have a deeper deficit over time?

AnvilHead's answer is right on, but to make it more simple still, low carbers don't eat more protein than non low carbers who are focused on getting adequate protein (and maybe not even then). On low carb I eat my .8 g/lb of protein or LBM (close to the same thing), and that's what I eat when not low carbing.

Someone who does a strict form of keto might even eat less protein than a lot of non low carbers who are as focused on protein as seems to be common around here (keto's default recommendation is 20% protein, which is lower than the MFP default).

However, one reason some low carb v. low fat studies get messed up is that the "low carb" group has more protein when you look at the breakdowns.

inertiastrength · May 2017

Thanks guys! That makes more sense

Nony_Mouse · May 2017

Excellent vid @AnvilHead

. I'm always so relieved somehow to find out I do know what I'm spouting on about and that I'm not just spouting nonsense or flat out misinterpreting things!!