This will be my last thread on the issue.

[WillGrant]

both require a caloric deficit. and no one has in this thread said that you should base your food intake on chocolate.

Unfortunatly you dont know the history and wave and adonis claim you can get ripped on eatting junk as they see a calorie as just a calorie.

Mentzer also used to claim this but hey he also was a meth addict.

[Fatpanda]

merry xmas wave - i agree with everything you say except the nutrient timing issue 

[Fatpanda]

oh and i also disagree with the 1-2 lbs a week thing.

its ok for a guideline, but fat folks can lose a lot more without losing muscle, and even thin folks if their nutrient timing, nutrition and training are well thought out 

[myt1]

Happy holidays bro.

You too!

I took a walk through the complex down to the street entrance today, and it looks like with another pass from the plows tonight I'll be able to drive tomorrow.  Sad that it takes 2 1/2 days.....what do I pay taxes for n e way??? lol

[Gino30]

Guys,

No one has mentioned BMR.....its a good tool that can help someone understand how many calories are needed to maintain and how many to cut to lose fat


Now here's my question ----> what is the BEST way to lose fat, while preserving muscle...lol....havent heard that one before have we.........anyway, I forever fight this issue....I cut (calorie deficit), but have a problem with muscle loss......would it be that my calorie deficit it too much?

[bodybuilder1234]

how exactly do you know how many calories to take in a day though?

[Gino30]

how exactly do you know how many calories to take in a day though?

just go to the dozen of so calorie sites that list the food and its calories per 100g, serving, whatever......you just need to work out the ~weight of the different types of foods in the meal your just ate and hit these sites......

Anyway, losing fat is a f'ing curse of will power.....thats the bottom line here......as the OP stated, its very simple maths.....but when you do it and the fullness goes, you lose a little muscle here and there, the guts starts turning becuase your hungry....f'ck!

[wavelength]

This is basic stuff and true but the fact is you = full of shit when it comes to dieting on takeaways and junk food  

Explain what "junk" food is then and how it relates to body composition.
For each day of 2009, I can tell you exactly what I ate.

Unfortunatly you dont know the history and wave and adonis claim you can get ripped on eatting junk as they see a calorie as just a calorie.
Mentzer also used to claim this but hey he also was a meth addict.

I never said "a calorie is a calories" since this phrase is completely meaningless.

[wavelength]

merry xmas wave - i agree with everything you say except the nutrient timing issue 

oh and i also disagree with the 1-2 lbs a week thing.

its ok for a guideline, but fat folks can lose a lot more without losing muscle, and even thin folks if their nutrient timing, nutrition and training are well thought out

I agree that fat folks can lose more.

[wavelength]

Guys,

No one has mentioned BMR.....its a good tool that can help someone understand how many calories are needed to maintain and how many to cut to lose fat


Now here's my question ----> what is the BEST way to lose fat, while preserving muscle...lol....havent heard that one before have we.........anyway, I forever fight this issue....I cut (calorie deficit), but have a problem with muscle loss......would it be that my calorie deficit it too much?

Yes. If you lose muscle at a significant rate, your rate of weight loss (resp. caloric deficit) is too high. Could also be, your protein is too low, or your strength training is lacking, but I would think you have that covered.

[haider]

what about epic muscle gayning? what are your advices on that?

[uberman09]

you want big pectorals? bench three or 4 times a week until satisfied with result/growth rate.
you want big biceps? curl three or 4 times a week until satisfied with result/growth rate.
you want abs? do situps three or 4 times a week until satisfied with result/growth rate.
Want to get lean and healthy? MOVE your ass and eat only what you need, not more.
Wanta "perfect diet" to promote muscle growth? Just fucking eat some tuna, chicken rice potatoes and pasta everyday.


This is the incredible secret everyone is trying to figure out  

[Sherief Shalaby]

the main thing a trainer can do is  to create accountability. in other words it helps people doing what they should be doing. (even when they know what it is)

yes personal trainers or nutritional advisers are for lazy assholes only and not for real men

[JimmyJam1974]

yes personal trainers or nutritional advisers are for lasy assholes only and not for real men

[webcake]

bench 4 times a week is silly advice

[PJim]

you want big pectorals? bench three or 4 times a week until satisfied with result/growth rate.
you want big biceps? curl three or 4 times a week until satisfied with result/growth rate.
you want abs? do situps three or 4 times a week until satisfied with result/growth rate.
Want to get lean and healthy? MOVE your ass and eat only what you need, not more.
Wanta "perfect diet" to promote muscle growth? Just fucking eat some tuna, chicken rice potatoes and pasta everyday.


This is the incredible secret everyone is trying to figure out  

Worst advice ever.

[Topskin69]

For anyone who wants to get ripped and never has achieved it since:

You only need to follow 3 simple rules:

- eat enough protein (about 1g / lb of lean body mass a day).
- perform intense anaerobic training.
- reduce calories to lose about 1-2 lbs a week.

I guarantee anybody who does that for long enough to get ripped to shredds. Forget about books, fitness trainers, and "gurus". They are all bullshitters who want to steal your money. The whole industry is just a bunch of liars and crooks.

While this is reasonable advice in a general sense, it is not absolute. There are other factors to consider... such as ones individual metabolism, and the state of that metabolism over the period of the diet. The more/longer you diet the more your body will try to compensate by lowering your metabolic rate. In some cases it will also blunt the output of your thyroid gland, which negates the effectives of your diet.

I would add to your list, and say that other good tips are to do some cardio first thing on an empty stomach, and if you find yourself in sticking points, rev up the amount of calories you are eating for a couple of days to get your metabolism back in order, then start dropping calories again...

Taking a cyclical approach to dieting is best IMO.

[haider]

While this is reasonable advice in a general sense, it is not absolute. There are other factors to consider... such as ones individual metabolism, and the state of that metabolism over the period of the diet. The more/longer you diet the more your body will try to compensate by lowering your metabolic rate. In some cases it will also blunt the output of your thyroid gland, which negates the effectives of your diet.

I would add to your list, and say that other good tips are to do some cardio first thing on an empty stomach, and if you find yourself in sticking points, rev up the amount of calories you are eating for a couple of days to get your metabolism back in order, then start dropping calories again...

Taking a cyclical approach to dieting is best IMO.

wavelength is saying exactly that the above does not matter much. Ultimately it is about calories in and calories out, as long as the criteria he mentions are met- i.e. enough protein, losing 1-2 lb/week, and intense weight training.

a cyclical approach with drastically reduced or added calories would give the same results as if you would eat the average amount of calories consumed in that time period.

I believe this is what WL claims.

[Topskin69]

wavelength is saying exactly that the above does not matter much. Ultimately it is about calories in and calories out, as long as the criteria he mentions are met- i.e. enough protein, losing 1-2 lb/week, and intense weight training.

a cyclical approach with drastically reduced or added calories would give the same results as if you would eat the average amount of calories consumed in that time period.

I believe this is what WL claims.

Hmm....if that is the case then WL advice is not optimal. One's natural metabolic rate, and one's metabolic rate in whatever phase of the diet that they are in are too unpredictable to just offer such blanket advice. One should use the mirror as their guide, and make adjustments as needed.

[haider]

Hmm....if that is the case then WL advice is not optimal. One's natural metabolic rate, and one's metabolic rate in whatever phase of the diet that they are in are too unpredictable to just offer such blanket advice. One should use the mirror as their guide, and make adjustments as needed.

I would like for WL to answer this himself; but one might argue that reducing your calories to lose 1-2 lb/week isn't a drastic enough change to alter your metabolic rate significantly.

WL has mentioned that he has used traditional dieting methods before, but using his current methods has acheived the best results so far because it is easier.

[HTexan]

For anyone who wants to get ripped and never has achieved it since:

You only need to follow 3 simple rules:

- eat enough protein (about 1g / lb of lean body mass a day).
- perform intense anaerobic training.
- reduce calories to lose about 1-2 lbs a week.

I guarantee anybody who does that for long enough to get ripped to shredds. Forget about books, fitness trainers, and "gurus". They are all bullshitters who want to steal your money. The whole industry is just a bunch of liars and crooks.

hold the presses!!!
caloric intake < needed calories  = weight loss
 Give the man a Nobel prize.

[haider]

hold the presses!!!
caloric intake < needed calories  = weight loss
 Give the man a Nobel prize.

As a WL guy this offends me deeply.

There's a genius in the simplification of things. If everyone realised how simple it was there wouldn't be a billion dollar industry created out of this.

[Topskin69]

I would like for WL to answer this himself; but one might argue that reducing your calories to lose 1-2 lb/week isn't a drastic enough change to alter your metabolic rate significantly.

WL has mentioned that he has used traditional dieting methods before, but using his current methods has achieved the best results so far because it is easier.

If his approach works for him then great. I would just point out that there are too many variables with metabolic rate/hormones/rate of digestion etc, to just offer blanket advice to everyone and pass it off like gospel truth.

The real simple thing to take away from what I am saying... is be pragmatic...give your dieting/training program a fair chance, keep tabs on your physique, and make adjustments to your diet/training/supplement/drug intake as needed.

I for one have found that my metabolism flatlines, if I don't eat frequently, or don't do cardio...both of which seem to correct the problem. Then again, I also have a naturally slow/average metabolism, and almost never find myself needing more then 2-3k calories a day. I weigh a reasonably lean 250.

[haider]

If his approach works for him then great. I would just point out that there are too many variables with metabolic rate/hormones/rate of digestion etc, to just offer blanket advice to everyone and pass it off like gospel truth.

I guess thats part of the debate; WL will most certainly argue that caloric restriction under the guidelines he has posted is by far the most important variable.

He should take it from here 

[wavelength]

what about epic muscle gayning? what are your advices on that?

drugs

While this is reasonable advice in a general sense, it is not absolute. There are other factors to consider... such as ones individual metabolism, and the state of that metabolism over the period of the diet. The more/longer you diet the more your body will try to compensate by lowering your metabolic rate. In some cases it will also blunt the output of your thyroid gland, which negates the effectives of your diet.

I would add to your list, and say that other good tips are to do some cardio first thing on an empty stomach, and if you find yourself in sticking points, rev up the amount of calories you are eating for a couple of days to get your metabolism back in order, then start dropping calories again...

Taking a cyclical approach to dieting is best IMO.

Metabolism is dependent on total caloric intake, no doubt. But the 3 rules remain true. IMO, cardio is unessential, so is doing it on an empty stomach. Everything else is bro science as far as I know.

Hmm....if that is the case then WL advice is not optimal. One's natural metabolic rate, and one's metabolic rate in whatever phase of the diet that they are in are too unpredictable to just offer such blanket advice. One should use the mirror as their guide, and make adjustments as needed.

Adjustment of calories to achieve a certain rate of weight loss accommodates for whatever lowering of metabolism might occur. However, for most people, this lowering isn't nearly as severe as claimed.

hold the presses!!!
caloric intake < needed calories  = weight loss
Give the man a Nobel prize.

I'm not talking about weight loss, I'm always talking about (close to) optimal body composition. After all, this is a bodybuilding board. I'm old but that has not slipped my mind yet.

If his approach works for him then great. I would just point out that there are too many variables with metabolic rate/hormones/rate of digestion etc, to just offer blanket advice to everyone and pass it off like gospel truth.

The real simple thing to take away from what I am saying... is be pragmatic...give your dieting/training program a fair chance, keep tabs on your physique, and make adjustments to your diet/training/supplement/drug intake as needed.

I for one have found that my metabolism flatlines, if I don't eat frequently, or don't do cardio...both of which seem to correct the problem. Then again, I also have a naturally slow/average metabolism, and almost never find myself needing more then 2-3k calories a day. I weigh a reasonably lean 250.

I agree with the pragmatic approach, this is what this thread is all about. Everything else is merely a matter of convenience.

I guess thats part of the debate; WL will most certainly argue that caloric restriction under the guidelines he has posted is by far the most important variable.
He should take it from here  

Yes, as numerous studies have shown.