Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Strength Training While Losing Weight??
Options
Replies
-
FitFamilyGuy wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »FaithfuLEEfit wrote: »Do you think that it is better to strength train while trying to lose weight -OR- do you think that it is better to lose the desired amount of weight before trying to tone the body?
Shhhhh... Don't tell anyone about my secret weapon to melt body fat.... Muscle.
Muscle is the friend of my metabolism and the enemy of my fat. Why not direct those calories to work, grow and keep muscle instead of shuttling those calories off to storage? Why would I want to melt away my body and lose my secret weapon muscle?
Ultimately the calorie deficit is what burns the fat but the muscle helps tilt the body fat percentage towards less fat and more muscle. The more muscle I grow the easier that process gets. I build myself up to get lean, I don't deprive and strip myself down.... at least at the age of 41 that is what I have learned from the past 26 years of doing just that.
Every lb of muscle you add burns 6 to 8 calories per day more. And let's not forget that fat is metabolically active at about 4 calories per lb. The net gain in calories burned is not exactly a game changer. There are lots of reasons to weight train but increased metabolism is not one of the best ones.
I am aware of this but let's not think of it in terms of "Simple Interest", let's think of it in terms of "Compound Interest":
a) Just working the muscle itself uses calories.
b) Growing the new muscle uses calories.
c) Keeping the new muscle uses calories.
d) Working the muscle floods the body with youthful anabolic hormones.
e) Having muscle helps a person feel strong, confident and capable of more activity.
f) Muscle provides shape, fills out lose skin, creates curves etc.
A. Relatively few. A strength work out is probably around a few hundred calories per hour above non-activity.
B. Again, relatively few. Just look at the amount of calories studied to be necessary to permit optimal growth is probably 200 calorie surplus a day or less, and that not all of that is going to be the work the actual growth is doing.
C. Yeah, 6 to 8 calories per day per pound.
D. Not seeing the relevance, nor evidence for a flood.
E. Not sure the relevance to a discussion on the metabolic activity of muscles.
f. Not sure the relevance to a discussion on the metabolic activity of muscles.7 -
FaithfuLEEfit wrote: »Ahh that makes sense. When I started my weight loss journey, I was doing both cardio and strength training. However, I recently watched a YouTube video in which the YouTuber stated that you should lose weight first and then strength train. I had never heard that before, so I decided to come over and ask the real pros what they thought.
I'm glad you decided to come here and ask. There is SO MUCH bad information out there, especially on YouTube. Weight lifting and strength training are great tools that can be incorporated by anyone regardless of what their goal is: lose, maintain, or gain. That YouTuber telling people to lose without doing strength training because "they cancel each other out" has no idea what they are talking about and really should just cancel their channel.5 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »FaithfuLEEfit wrote: »Do you think that it is better to strength train while trying to lose weight -OR- do you think that it is better to lose the desired amount of weight before trying to tone the body?
Shhhhh... Don't tell anyone about my secret weapon to melt body fat.... Muscle.
Muscle is the friend of my metabolism and the enemy of my fat. Why not direct those calories to work, grow and keep muscle instead of shuttling those calories off to storage? Why would I want to melt away my body and lose my secret weapon muscle?
Ultimately the calorie deficit is what burns the fat but the muscle helps tilt the body fat percentage towards less fat and more muscle. The more muscle I grow the easier that process gets. I build myself up to get lean, I don't deprive and strip myself down.... at least at the age of 41 that is what I have learned from the past 26 years of doing just that.
Every lb of muscle you add burns 6 to 8 calories per day more. And let's not forget that fat is metabolically active at about 4 calories per lb. The net gain in calories burned is not exactly a game changer. There are lots of reasons to weight train but increased metabolism is not one of the best ones.
I am aware of this but let's not think of it in terms of "Simple Interest", let's think of it in terms of "Compound Interest":
a) Just working the muscle itself uses calories.
b) Growing the new muscle uses calories.
c) Keeping the new muscle uses calories.
d) Working the muscle floods the body with youthful anabolic hormones.
e) Having muscle helps a person feel strong, confident and capable of more activity.
f) Muscle provides shape, fills out lose skin, creates curves etc.
A. Relatively few. A strength work out is probably around a few hundred calories per hour above non-activity.
B. Again, relatively few. Just look at the amount of calories studied to be necessary to permit optimal growth is probably 200 calorie surplus a day or less, and that not all of that is going to be the work the actual growth is doing.
C. Yeah, 6 to 8 calories per day per pound.
D. Not seeing the relevance, nor evidence for a flood.
E. Not sure the relevance to a discussion on the metabolic activity of muscles.
f. Not sure the relevance to a discussion on the metabolic activity of muscles.
Weight training has a huge range of methods, level of intensity etc. I am going to phrase this answer with the understanding that we are talking about "average" gym goers training which likely have room for improvement.
A. 200 calories is a great start for an average person. As muscle and knowledge is built it should go up from there. Luckily 200 is a number that can likely be grown over time.
B. 100 calories to grow. Great! That is more demand on top of the original 200 plus.
C. 6-8 calories per pound... Great! That means that if I put on 12 lbs of muscle I'll be able to burn an extra 72 to 96 calories, 24 hours per day or 504 to 672 calories per week? Great!... and in my case, I know that I easily have 20lbs of extra muscle which means I have an extra 120 to 160 calories to eat every single day which is up to 1,120 calories per week. Great! That is on top of what I burn in the gym and the grow after? Good news.
So far it sounds like muscle is a great way to build the metabolism and the starting point should grow over time.
D. I may be out on a limb here but doesn't Testosterone and other hormones surge during intense weight lifting? I believe Testosterone is a positive hormone for both strength and fat burning. Doesn't weight lifting help balance hormones which should be good for keeping a healthy weight? This effect may be a little less direct but I think it is a part of the formula for staying lean. No?
F. Again I think this is relevant to the end goal of staying lean. Someone who gets "skinny" will probably still think they are "fat" if their skin hangs and the muscles are flat and weak. I have seen plenty of people who are "skinny" but think they are "fat" because of the lack of muscle and shape of their body. Again, the answer is muscle.
G. My real world point was not addressed. Paraphrasing, 'if I stop lifting weights and lose muscle I will ultimately get 'skinny fat' and my body fat percentage will increase.' Again, the answer is muscle to allow me to eat more calories. That is my reality, not a theory.
H. Finally, I get that we can "isolate" a very, very specific point such as "metabolic activity of muscles" and then exclude very real helpful points to get and stay lean. I think this is very unfortunate because the narrow view distracts from the bigger picture and real strategies to reach real goals. Ultimately most people are trying to find a way to get and stay lean in which case point A, B, C, D, E, F & G are likely very valid. It is hard to argue with real world results and in the real world I have experienced and seen that muscle and proper nutrition create bodies that are fat burning machines.
(These are just my opinions. Not advice to anyone specific.)
In regards to getting and staying lean aren't these points generally correct?
1 -
FitFamilyGuy wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »FaithfuLEEfit wrote: »Do you think that it is better to strength train while trying to lose weight -OR- do you think that it is better to lose the desired amount of weight before trying to tone the body?
Shhhhh... Don't tell anyone about my secret weapon to melt body fat.... Muscle.
Muscle is the friend of my metabolism and the enemy of my fat. Why not direct those calories to work, grow and keep muscle instead of shuttling those calories off to storage? Why would I want to melt away my body and lose my secret weapon muscle?
Ultimately the calorie deficit is what burns the fat but the muscle helps tilt the body fat percentage towards less fat and more muscle. The more muscle I grow the easier that process gets. I build myself up to get lean, I don't deprive and strip myself down.... at least at the age of 41 that is what I have learned from the past 26 years of doing just that.
Every lb of muscle you add burns 6 to 8 calories per day more. And let's not forget that fat is metabolically active at about 4 calories per lb. The net gain in calories burned is not exactly a game changer. There are lots of reasons to weight train but increased metabolism is not one of the best ones.
I am aware of this but let's not think of it in terms of "Simple Interest", let's think of it in terms of "Compound Interest":
a) Just working the muscle itself uses calories.
b) Growing the new muscle uses calories.
c) Keeping the new muscle uses calories.
d) Working the muscle floods the body with youthful anabolic hormones.
e) Having muscle helps a person feel strong, confident and capable of more activity.
f) Muscle provides shape, fills out lose skin, creates curves etc.
A. Relatively few. A strength work out is probably around a few hundred calories per hour above non-activity.
B. Again, relatively few. Just look at the amount of calories studied to be necessary to permit optimal growth is probably 200 calorie surplus a day or less, and that not all of that is going to be the work the actual growth is doing.
C. Yeah, 6 to 8 calories per day per pound.
D. Not seeing the relevance, nor evidence for a flood.
E. Not sure the relevance to a discussion on the metabolic activity of muscles.
f. Not sure the relevance to a discussion on the metabolic activity of muscles.
Weight training has a huge range of methods, level of intensity etc. I am going to phrase this answer with the understanding that we are talking about "average" gym goers training which likely have room for improvement.
A. 200 calories is a great start for an average person. As muscle and knowledge is built it should go up from there. Luckily 200 is a number that can likely be grown over time.
B. 100 calories to grow. Great! That is more demand on top of the original 200 plus.
C. 6-8 calories per pound... Great! That means that if I put on 12 lbs of muscle I'll be able to burn an extra 72 to 96 calories, 24 hours per day or 504 to 672 calories per week? Great!... and in my case, I know that I easily have 20lbs of extra muscle which means I have an extra 120 to 160 calories to eat every single day which is up to 1,120 calories per week. Great! That is on top of what I burn in the gym and the grow after? Good news.
So far it sounds like muscle is a great way to build the metabolism and the starting point should grow over time.
D. I may be out on a limb here but doesn't Testosterone and other hormones surge during intense weight lifting? I believe Testosterone is a positive hormone for both strength and fat burning. Doesn't weight lifting help balance hormones which should be good for keeping a healthy weight? This effect may be a little less direct but I think it is a part of the formula for staying lean. No?
F. Again I think this is relevant to the end goal of staying lean. Someone who gets "skinny" will probably still think they are "fat" if their skin hangs and the muscles are flat and weak. I have seen plenty of people who are "skinny" but think they are "fat" because of the lack of muscle and shape of their body. Again, the answer is muscle.
G. My real world point was not addressed. Paraphrasing, 'if I stop lifting weights and lose muscle I will ultimately get 'skinny fat' and my body fat percentage will increase.' Again, the answer is muscle to allow me to eat more calories. That is my reality, not a theory.
H. Finally, I get that we can "isolate" a very, very specific point such as "metabolic activity of muscles" and then exclude very real helpful points to get and stay lean. I think this is very unfortunate because the narrow view distracts from the bigger picture and real strategies to reach real goals. Ultimately most people are trying to find a way to get and stay lean in which case point A, B, C, D, E, F & G are likely very valid. It is hard to argue with real world results and in the real world I have experienced and seen that muscle and proper nutrition create bodies that are fat burning machines.
(These are just my opinions. Not advice to anyone specific.)
In regards to getting and staying lean aren't these points generally correct?
A. It isn't going to grow much.
B. No, that isn't a demand, it is a facilitation. It puts a cap on the maximum reasonable value of daily cost of growing a muscle.
C. 12 pounds is a lot of muscle to put on. For la week of calories burn less than a hour of cardio can burn.
D. No, I believe it actually drops during it, but a person's testosterone will generally increase with fitness. Testosterone is also an appetite increaser. I'm also not sure the point of putting in a signalling mechanism as if it is independently changing metabolism to some great extent above the muscle.
F. Still not seeing the relevance, it sounds like you're trying to broaden the discussion.
G. Why do you think I need to engage with the debate you want me to have to disagree with your particulars?
H. So moving the goal posts to ignore the areas that need correction? If you're conceding the other points so you can ultimately say building muscle is often found beneficial, to ahead, I don't find it an interesting or controversial claim.0 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »FitFamilyGuy wrote: »FaithfuLEEfit wrote: »Do you think that it is better to strength train while trying to lose weight -OR- do you think that it is better to lose the desired amount of weight before trying to tone the body?
Shhhhh... Don't tell anyone about my secret weapon to melt body fat.... Muscle.
Muscle is the friend of my metabolism and the enemy of my fat. Why not direct those calories to work, grow and keep muscle instead of shuttling those calories off to storage? Why would I want to melt away my body and lose my secret weapon muscle?
Ultimately the calorie deficit is what burns the fat but the muscle helps tilt the body fat percentage towards less fat and more muscle. The more muscle I grow the easier that process gets. I build myself up to get lean, I don't deprive and strip myself down.... at least at the age of 41 that is what I have learned from the past 26 years of doing just that.
Every lb of muscle you add burns 6 to 8 calories per day more. And let's not forget that fat is metabolically active at about 4 calories per lb. The net gain in calories burned is not exactly a game changer. There are lots of reasons to weight train but increased metabolism is not one of the best ones.
I am aware of this but let's not think of it in terms of "Simple Interest", let's think of it in terms of "Compound Interest":
a) Just working the muscle itself uses calories.
b) Growing the new muscle uses calories.
c) Keeping the new muscle uses calories.
d) Working the muscle floods the body with youthful anabolic hormones.
e) Having muscle helps a person feel strong, confident and capable of more activity.
f) Muscle provides shape, fills out lose skin, creates curves etc.
A. Relatively few. A strength work out is probably around a few hundred calories per hour above non-activity.
B. Again, relatively few. Just look at the amount of calories studied to be necessary to permit optimal growth is probably 200 calorie surplus a day or less, and that not all of that is going to be the work the actual growth is doing.
C. Yeah, 6 to 8 calories per day per pound.
D. Not seeing the relevance, nor evidence for a flood.
E. Not sure the relevance to a discussion on the metabolic activity of muscles.
f. Not sure the relevance to a discussion on the metabolic activity of muscles.
Weight training has a huge range of methods, level of intensity etc. I am going to phrase this answer with the understanding that we are talking about "average" gym goers training which likely have room for improvement.
A. 200 calories is a great start for an average person. As muscle and knowledge is built it should go up from there. Luckily 200 is a number that can likely be grown over time.
B. 100 calories to grow. Great! That is more demand on top of the original 200 plus.
C. 6-8 calories per pound... Great! That means that if I put on 12 lbs of muscle I'll be able to burn an extra 72 to 96 calories, 24 hours per day or 504 to 672 calories per week? Great!... and in my case, I know that I easily have 20lbs of extra muscle which means I have an extra 120 to 160 calories to eat every single day which is up to 1,120 calories per week. Great! That is on top of what I burn in the gym and the grow after? Good news.
So far it sounds like muscle is a great way to build the metabolism and the starting point should grow over time.
D. I may be out on a limb here but doesn't Testosterone and other hormones surge during intense weight lifting? I believe Testosterone is a positive hormone for both strength and fat burning. Doesn't weight lifting help balance hormones which should be good for keeping a healthy weight? This effect may be a little less direct but I think it is a part of the formula for staying lean. No?
F. Again I think this is relevant to the end goal of staying lean. Someone who gets "skinny" will probably still think they are "fat" if their skin hangs and the muscles are flat and weak. I have seen plenty of people who are "skinny" but think they are "fat" because of the lack of muscle and shape of their body. Again, the answer is muscle.
G. My real world point was not addressed. Paraphrasing, 'if I stop lifting weights and lose muscle I will ultimately get 'skinny fat' and my body fat percentage will increase.' Again, the answer is muscle to allow me to eat more calories. That is my reality, not a theory.
H. Finally, I get that we can "isolate" a very, very specific point such as "metabolic activity of muscles" and then exclude very real helpful points to get and stay lean. I think this is very unfortunate because the narrow view distracts from the bigger picture and real strategies to reach real goals. Ultimately most people are trying to find a way to get and stay lean in which case point A, B, C, D, E, F & G are likely very valid. It is hard to argue with real world results and in the real world I have experienced and seen that muscle and proper nutrition create bodies that are fat burning machines.
(These are just my opinions. Not advice to anyone specific.)
In regards to getting and staying lean aren't these points generally correct?
A. It isn't going to grow much.
B. No, that isn't a demand, it is a facilitation. It puts a cap on the maximum reasonable value of daily cost of growing a muscle.
C. 12 pounds is a lot of muscle to put on. For la week of calories burn less than a hour of cardio can burn.
D. No, I believe it actually drops during it, but a person's testosterone will generally increase with fitness. Testosterone is also an appetite increaser. I'm also not sure the point of putting in a signalling mechanism as if it is independently changing metabolism to some great extent above the muscle.
F. Still not seeing the relevance, it sounds like you're trying to broaden the discussion.
G. Why do you think I need to engage with the debate you want me to have to disagree with your particulars?
H. So moving the goal posts to ignore the areas that need correction? If you're conceding the other points so you can ultimately say building muscle is often found beneficial, to ahead, I don't find it an interesting or controversial claim.
Fair enough. Let's respectfully agree to disagree.
A) I would guess that I burn more calories lifting weights than the average person. I have seen what most people do and it sometimes looks like there is a whole lot of room for improvement. If I can build myself up from the average, I'm sure others can too.
C) I don't think 12 pounds is unrealistic. I explained why below.
D) So weights isn't good for testosterone and testosterone isn't good for lean body composition? Ok?
F) Perhaps. I fist firmly believe that more muscle means more calories are burned. Then to help drive home the multiple other benefits that results in people like me actually achieving real world goals, I tend to elaborate. To me, a bird in the hand is more valuable than two in the bush.
G) Sorry I missed your point here.
H) I still think all of the points are valid.
To summarize I would simplify it all down to the extreme examples like a bodybuilder which I think also applies to the average person. The reality is that those who have a lot of muscle to work, weight more and eat more calories to feed that extra muscle and their body fat percentage is generally lower. Those muscles are hungry for calories 24 hours a day. Putting aside all of the other benefits for those trying to get and keep off body fat this is a reality that can not be denied.
I can appreciate that if you limit the expectation for the average person to only gain a pound or two of muscle then you may have a point but I believe that the average person has more potential than that. I think that a lot of people probably have a lot of untrained muscle that could easily support 12 pounds more. Again, the average person probably does not follow the proper protocols to gain 12 pounds of muscle but if they did I don't think it is at all unrealistic. At 41, without using drugs, I probably have around 25 lbs of extra muscle, or possibly more based on my fathers size. Using that as a very rough benchmark, I think others are likely capable of achieving half or possibly as much or even more success than me. Why not? As a 5 foot 11, middle age, small framed, 31 inch waist, medium t-shirt wearing man, I'm not exactly a big person.
But at the end of the day I really have nothing to prove as I have walked the walk for nearly 3 decades. I prove my argument to myself every day as it is in my results. I am lean and fit because I build muscle and watch my nutrition. If I did not lift weights my body fat percentage would increase. I believe that speaks for itself. For me, in my reality, the extra muscle I carry has boosts my metabolism so that I can eat more calories to support the muscle. That along with smart eating keeps me lean year after year. Again, the bird in the hand thing. Haha. No hard feelings though. I wish you all the best. It is perfectly fine to agree to disagree. I wish you well. 0 -
Some minor flaws in the analysis. Might get newbie gains of 12 pounds. Someone whose been at it a while may not see that sort of gain.
Someone who carried around a 300# body is going to have some muscles to start with, so are they even going to be a newbie in their legs and perhaps their core? Assuming of course they were not bed ridden and never ever moved.
Second, assuming someone is gaining that 12# of muscle, are they losing any fat? So if I gain 12# of muscle, but have also lost 12# of fat, then my increased calorie burn to support that tissue isn't 72 extra calories / day, but maybe only 24-48 extra calories.
Still better than a kick in the plums, but lets not oversell it.
I'm not against resistance training. I do a combination of cardio and resistance training to keep core strength and to keep arthritis at bay. Like most things in life, I think balance is required. Functional fitness.
And I think it was alluded to in the last of the post, eating is a very large lever in the tool box. It's far easier to eat an extra 500+ calories each day than it is to work them off with either cardio or adding muscle.2 -
tbright1965 wrote: »Some minor flaws in the analysis. Might get newbie gains of 12 pounds. Someone whose been at it a while may not see that sort of gain.
Someone who carried around a 300# body is going to have some muscles to start with, so are they even going to be a newbie in their legs and perhaps their core? Assuming of course they were not bed ridden and never ever moved.
Second, assuming someone is gaining that 12# of muscle, are they losing any fat? So if I gain 12# of muscle, but have also lost 12# of fat, then my increased calorie burn to support that tissue isn't 72 extra calories / day, but maybe only 24-48 extra calories.
Still better than a kick in the plums, but lets not oversell it.
I'm not against resistance training. I do a combination of cardio and resistance training to keep core strength and to keep arthritis at bay. Like most things in life, I think balance is required. Functional fitness.
And I think it was alluded to in the last of the post, eating is a very large lever in the tool box. It's far easier to eat an extra 500+ calories each day than it is to work them off with either cardio or adding muscle.
This is great because I really think it helps people see a less understood way of looking at these things. Let me address your points.
YOUR NEWBIE POINT:
A newbie should have an easy 12 lbs to gain. Someone who has been 'at if for a while' should already have extra muscle and the goal is to learn how to get more or keep the muscle they have. If someone already added 15 lbs, don't stop and melt it away. That would not be good. That muscle is your friend and secret weapon.
YOUR 300 Lbs OBESE POINT:
There are exceptions to every rule and I don't think this situation applies to most people. I have no advice here but I would think that medically supervised exercise of many types, appropriate cardio, appropriate weights and diet would all be very important.
YOUR SAME WEIGHT, MORE MUSCLE, LESS FAT, SMALL DIFFERENCE IN CALORIES POINT:
YES!! This is the best case scenario. The goal is not to simply up calorie intake, the real end goal is to burn fat and have more healthy muscle. If goal was simply upping calorie intake then someone could eat unlimited food and store it all. If someone has 10 lbs of fat the best case scenario is to burn 10 lbs of fat and add strong, healthy, youthful muscle to replace it. At this point the few extra calories are inconsequential. The goal has been achieved and those delicious calories are now going towards strength, power, confidence... not body fat. If only the fat was lost then the calorie budget would be lower and any extra calories would be stored as fat instead of feeding hungry muscle.
YOUR DIET POINT:
YES!! Exactly! Diet is huge! Like the fit 20 somethings, the best case scenario is a good balance been muscle (weights) and body fat (diet). Attention to both details are required.
(Of course there are many aspects to health that can't be covered here. Just some general opinions.)
4 -
Here is another external blog post you might enjoy that delves into this question...
https://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/lose-weight-and-build-muscle-or-do-one-then-the-other
2 -
I have lost weight while lifting weight.1
-
Here is another external blog post you might enjoy that delves into this question...
https://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/lose-weight-and-build-muscle-or-do-one-then-the-other
Nice, that seems to back up loads of the good info I've gotten from folks here. thanks0 -
@dmkoenig Thanks for the article. They made a lot of great points! I have already started incorporating strength training into my workouts.1
-
I always think that lifting weights is the best solution, you burn more calories weight training than you do cardio for example, and you can do high reps to get a good cardio fix whilst also building that muscle which will give you the more defined features8
-
Here is another external blog post you might enjoy that delves into this question...
https://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/lose-weight-and-build-muscle-or-do-one-then-the-other
Well done dmkoenig. FaithfuLEEfit here is another external blog post that you may also enjoy as it explains these same basic principles that your asking about...
[link removed by MFP Mods]0 -
I don't see the point on holding that attitude for empirical claims. If I say the earth is an oblate spheroid and someone says it is flat, I don't agree to disagree with them on it.FitFamilyGuy wrote: »Fair enough. Let's respectfully agree to disagree.
A. I'm not sure what is the point of this, and it sounds almost contradictory at this point. If you're claiming you're doing the exrecises properly, you should be using less calories because the goal in most weight lifting is to move the maximum weight the maximum number of times - a part of accomplishing that is using the minimal energy.FitFamilyGuy wrote: »A) I would guess that I burn more calories lifting weights than the average person. I have seen what most people do and it sometimes looks like there is a whole lot of room for improvement. If I can build myself up from the average, I'm sure others can too.
C) I don't think 12 pounds is unrealistic. I explained why below.
D) So weights isn't good for testosterone and testosterone isn't good for lean body composition? Ok?
F) Perhaps. I fist firmly believe that more muscle means more calories are burned. Then to help drive home the multiple other benefits that results in people like me actually achieving real world goals, I tend to elaborate. To me, a bird in the hand is more valuable than two in the bush.
G) Sorry I missed your point here.
H) I still think all of the points are valid.
C. To the extent it is realistic for someone to acquire in moderate time, would imply they're making beginner gains.
D. Why would you say "So weights isn't good for testosterone and testosterone isn't good for lean body composition? " in response to me saying "but a person's testosterone will generally increase with fitness." I would say that if there were two people at equal composition, the one with the lower testosterone might actually be more easy to maintain.
G. You've started broadening your claim and asking about all kinds of areas about an overall thesis as if I have to agree with everything or nothing. I'm not here to just provide you a counter argument for the sake of argument. I'm trying to actually put out sound information.
H. Odd response for someone that started off with the implication that this could all be subjective. Also, no. The idea that muscles use up large calories is one you yourself seem to be retreating from based on your trying to make it look like people are somehow disagreeing with you about if there are merits to weight lifting.
No one disagree with you seems to be denying muscles use calories. That's an uninteresting claim. The idea of "hungry" seems to mean little in comparison to what it sounds like. It is a few calories a pound per day. That's one of your points that is definitively not valid.FitFamilyGuy wrote: »To summarize I would simplify it all down to the extreme examples like a bodybuilder which I think also applies to the average person. The reality is that those who have a lot of muscle to work, weight more and eat more calories to feed that extra muscle and their body fat percentage is generally lower. Those muscles are hungry for calories 24 hours a day. Putting aside all of the other benefits for those trying to get and keep off body fat this is a reality that can not be denied.
I could just as trivially claim muscle can easily be unassociated with keeping off body fat by pointing out the way power lifters and strongmen tend to be fine with putting on fat to gain muscle. That one can be a metabolically obese power lifter or strongman is a reality that cannot be denied.
If one was merely looking at it in a time efficiency window, it would be easy for cardio to end up with a greater calorie burn compared to burn from weight lifting, plus accumulated muscle maintenance.3 -
Mandylou19912014 wrote: »I always think that lifting weights is the best solution, you burn more calories weight training than you do cardio for example, and you can do high reps to get a good cardio fix whilst also building that muscle which will give you the more defined features
Weight training, while a wonderful thing and worth doing, is not going to burn more calories on a per-minute basis than reasonable cardio, and the EPOC is often oversold (it's usually expressed as comparative percentages; those percentages are a percent of the calories burned during the activity; a small percent of a larger number can be > a large percent of a smaller number).
A HRM may tend to overstate calorie burn from an exercise involving a substantial resistance component, because strain raises heart rate, but doesn't correlate with calorie burn.
Nothing wrong with weight training (to say the least), and high rep/low weight is great if that's what you enjoy. Good to be realistic about the tradeoffs, though, IMO.
I think OP has made a great change in her routine that will pay off well for her, short and long term.
Gotta say, I think that "12 pounds of muscle gain" idea in some of the foregoing subthread is a pretty long-term goal, especially for those of us who are female (like OP), doubly especially for those of us who are in a calorie deficit (like OP currently). Sure, aim high . . . but let's be realistic, too.3 -
magnusthenerd wrote: »
I don't see the point on holding that attitude for empirical claims. If I say the earth is an oblate spheroid and someone says it is flat, I don't agree to disagree with them on it.FitFamilyGuy wrote: »Fair enough. Let's respectfully agree to disagree.
A. I'm not sure what is the point of this, and it sounds almost contradictory at this point. If you're claiming you're doing the exrecises properly, you should be using less calories because the goal in most weight lifting is to move the maximum weight the maximum number of times - a part of accomplishing that is using the minimal energy.FitFamilyGuy wrote: »A) I would guess that I burn more calories lifting weights than the average person. I have seen what most people do and it sometimes looks like there is a whole lot of room for improvement. If I can build myself up from the average, I'm sure others can too.
C) I don't think 12 pounds is unrealistic. I explained why below.
D) So weights isn't good for testosterone and testosterone isn't good for lean body composition? Ok?
F) Perhaps. I fist firmly believe that more muscle means more calories are burned. Then to help drive home the multiple other benefits that results in people like me actually achieving real world goals, I tend to elaborate. To me, a bird in the hand is more valuable than two in the bush.
G) Sorry I missed your point here.
H) I still think all of the points are valid.
C. To the extent it is realistic for someone to acquire in moderate time, would imply they're making beginner gains.
D. Why would you say "So weights isn't good for testosterone and testosterone isn't good for lean body composition? " in response to me saying "but a person's testosterone will generally increase with fitness." I would say that if there were two people at equal composition, the one with the lower testosterone might actually be more easy to maintain.
G. You've started broadening your claim and asking about all kinds of areas about an overall thesis as if I have to agree with everything or nothing. I'm not here to just provide you a counter argument for the sake of argument. I'm trying to actually put out sound information.
H. Odd response for someone that started off with the implication that this could all be subjective. Also, no. The idea that muscles use up large calories is one you yourself seem to be retreating from based on your trying to make it look like people are somehow disagreeing with you about if there are merits to weight lifting.
No one disagree with you seems to be denying muscles use calories. That's an uninteresting claim. The idea of "hungry" seems to mean little in comparison to what it sounds like. It is a few calories a pound per day. That's one of your points that is definitively not valid.FitFamilyGuy wrote: »To summarize I would simplify it all down to the extreme examples like a bodybuilder which I think also applies to the average person. The reality is that those who have a lot of muscle to work, weight more and eat more calories to feed that extra muscle and their body fat percentage is generally lower. Those muscles are hungry for calories 24 hours a day. Putting aside all of the other benefits for those trying to get and keep off body fat this is a reality that can not be denied.
I could just as trivially claim muscle can easily be unassociated with keeping off body fat by pointing out the way power lifters and strongmen tend to be fine with putting on fat to gain muscle. That one can be a metabolically obese power lifter or strongman is a reality that cannot be denied.
If one was merely looking at it in a time efficiency window, it would be easy for cardio to end up with a greater calorie burn compared to burn from weight lifting, plus accumulated muscle maintenance.
Goodness magnusthenerd, thank you for your detailed reply. I appreciate your energy and attention to detail. I underestimated how much time I would need to go into an answer that personally seems like common sense to me. I say "common sense" because from my perspective, I am walking the walk.
I know what will happen if I eat fewer calories and stop lifting weights:
1) I know I will have less demand for the calories to go towards muscle because there will be less muscle.
2) I know that my body fat percentage will go up and I will be less lean.
3) I know that I have my current lean physique because of my weights (muscle) and diet.
It is difficult to debate isolated theories dependent on a lot of variables and potential problems when the first hand real world result is something I live. I can appreciate your perspective and I think you make some valid points but I find myself getting lost in details when the results seem to speak for themselves.
To simplify:
a) Beginners have an easier time adding new muscle and those who have lifted weights for a while probably already have muscle that they should keep and learn to possibly even build more. The point is that I think the average person has the ability to add enough muscle to gain a significant advantage over those who do not. I think that breaking down the advantage to a single pound sounds discouraging to others but in the real world multiple pounds is a real advantage. Personally, I probably have an extra 25 lbs (+17%) of muscle on my frame so I think others have the ability to do something similar if not more.
b) We can drop the extra discussion about the added benefits of the weights. I bring up the other points out of passion and hoping others see things from a fresh perspective and not the standard, "eat less" and work hard many times per week for what seems like to me, a lot of time on "cardio". Personally, I see a lot of people trying to do that and failing. I meet a lot of people believing in this traditional strategy and then they are amazed at how I keep my physique without cardio, with shorter workouts, without suffering, without cutting carbs and depriving myself, without drugs, with a lot of rest time during my workouts, while eating ice-cream and pizza... etc. etc... People have litterall approached me out of the blue to ask me my secrets and question how my build is possibly achieved without cardio, deprivation and suffering. I would generally suggest that those who understand and implement weights and nutrition to burn fat, typically are able to get and stay lean better than those trying typical "weight loss" strategies. But again, I just get passionate because I walk the walk and I like seeing others learn that there is another way. We can drop these added benefits of muscle if you like.
I would like to touch on your argument about Powerlifters and Strongmen. I agree that you can have a lot of muscle and be obese. We both agree on that. A powerlifter is not trying to be lean and muscle alone does not make a person lean. It is the combination of muscle and a good diet that is the advantage. However, these guys have a huge demand for calories and if they watch their diet they would probably burn off fat and improve their body fat percentage much, much easier and faster than someone with the same body weight and less muscle. Again, the difference would be the extra muscle. The point about a Bodybuilder is that they have the system nailed to the extreme. Bodybuilders know how to eat lots of food and have those calories feed lean body mass, not storing those calories as body fat. These guys know how to eat several thousands of calories and have low body fat at the same time. If that muscle was not present those calories would be stored as fat. Again, it comes down to the muscle and the real world end result.
So is your main point that most people are not capable of gaining much muscle and therefore 8 calories per pound isn't really worth the investment of time and energy? If this is the case then we can respectfully agree to disagree? What do you think is our main difference of opinion?
All of this however is not specific advice to anyone in particular.
0 -
The only benefit of losing weight before training would be if your main source of fitness would be running. And then only if you're very heavy. I started running when I was 115Kg and have had knee issues ever since.
If you do the moves correctly you can lift at any weight and it will accelerate weight loss whilst maintaining muscle (which then burns calories so win win)0 -
I fall into the wish I'd lifted more sooner camp. I probably did about 15 minutes resistance training to every 4 hours cardio for about 5 months. About the time I hit my goal weight, I found myself feeling weak at times. I thought maybe I set my goal weight too low. I reset my MFP goal to maintain weight and made a point of incorporating strength exercises or classes around Thanksgiving (3 months ago) and just recently starting feeling stronger. It took a while but it is a very worthwhile and noticeable feeling.
All that being said, I think it is most important to focus on what you enjoy and will stick with FIRST and then contemplate what you can change or add. For me, I love to swim and bike and during the long days of summer thrived on that. Plus pounds were coming off. I regret muscle loss I may have inflicted on myself; but truthfully, I would not have listened to someone tell me to lift weights back then. The resistance training I did was shoulder stabilization exercises to protect my swimming shoulders and trunk, hip strengthening because I have hip arthritis. The point is they related to my biggest motivation at the time - avoid ever having pain in my shoulders and mitigating the pain I had in my hips. I liken it to - its more important to find a way of eating you'll stick with than the one that would help you the most if you did it.2 -
susansmckenzie wrote: »I fall into the wish I'd lifted more sooner camp. I probably did about 15 minutes resistance training to every 4 hours cardio for about 5 months. About the time I hit my goal weight, I found myself feeling weak at times. I thought maybe I set my goal weight too low. I reset my MFP goal to maintain weight and made a point of incorporating strength exercises or classes around Thanksgiving (3 months ago) and just recently starting feeling stronger. It took a while but it is a very worthwhile and noticeable feeling.
All that being said, I think it is most important to focus on what you enjoy and will stick with FIRST and then contemplate what you can change or add. For me, I love to swim and bike and during the long days of summer thrived on that. Plus pounds were coming off. I regret muscle loss I may have inflicted on myself; but truthfully, I would not have listened to someone tell me to lift weights back then. The resistance training I did was shoulder stabilization exercises to protect my swimming shoulders and trunk, hip strengthening because I have hip arthritis. The point is they related to my biggest motivation at the time - avoid ever having pain in my shoulders and mitigating the pain I had in my hips. I liken it to - its more important to find a way of eating you'll stick with than the one that would help you the most if you did it.
Without intending to second-guess your own interpretation of your circumstances, I'm wanting to say this for others who may be reading:
Feeling weak (or fatigued) for otherwise unexplained reasons is a warning sign of too low a calorie goal, which can happen any time during weight loss, but that risk may inicrease if a person keeps weight loss rate too fast as they approach goal weight (so has less fat left to lose). It may not be weakness because of excessive muscle loss right away, so you can probably correct quickly and avoid major muscle loss. (Right at first, the weakness is probably more about energy systems, not mostly about muscle tissue.)
So, strength training is a great way to keep existing muscle while losing weight, and those new to it might even build a little muscle (will certainly build strength): Very worthwhile.
But another element in retaining as much muscle as possible is managing weight loss rate carefully, to make sure it stays conservatively sensible, which IMO ideally means tapering it to a slower rate as goal weight approaches, if that slow-down doesn't seem to be happening naturally on its own.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 912 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions