PDA

View Full Version : Maintaining on 4000cals...but look like crap



endpoint
10-13-2010, 11:46 PM
So I am 290ish pounds, and I have been to see a nutritionist.
He is a sports nutritionist and has worked with a powerlifter before.

He cleaned up my diet a lot (I was eating pretty crappy for a while) and I ended up on ~4000 cals (3800-4000 depending on meat choices)


The breakdown is:
Carbs 43% - 424g
Fat 34% - 147g
Protein 23% - 214g


I have been on this for 3 months...and have been back to see him (but he didnt really offer any advice).
I am still 'fat' with a lot of flab around my midsection...and no where else.

The scale has not change a single number over the 3 months...but I haven't really change appearance either

I am a powerlifter and strongman and I train 4 times a week...but I dont even look like I work out (my first comp I was asked by the meet director if I have ever trained before, when I asked for a 660 opener on squats he pooped himself)

Here is the diet he wrote out:
--------------------------------
Breakfast

1 cup of oats
1 cup of skim milk
2 tbsp of berries
--------------------------------------
Pre training

2 slices of heavy fruit loaf/cinnamon toast
200g cottage cheese or ricotta
-----------------------------------------
Post
40g whey+ 5g creatine
-------------------------------------------
lunch

200g low fat meat
1 cup of rice
2 cups of vegetables
------------------------------------------
Afternoon tea

200g yogurt
10-15 almonds
2 pieces of fruit
--------------------------------
Dinner

200g lean meat
2 cups of pasta
2 cups of veggies
1 tbsp of oil
------------------------------------
Before Bed

200g of yoghurt or cottage cheese
1 piece of fruit




Does anyone have any advice?

I have tried to clean it up even more and take out some of the carbs.
This week I have started to eat whole foods only and steer clear of pasta and other starchy foods

I would love to 'recomp' I guess and stay the same weight, but actually have notable muscle mass

RichMcGuire
10-14-2010, 12:19 AM
By recomping, you'd be building or maintaining muscle mass at the expense of body fat for energy. It takes much longer to do.

Do you do any type of cardio or anything? If not, simply add that to your regimen and you will drop fat.

Already do cardio? Then drop kcals by 200 each day and you should be on your way.

A lot of it is just monitoring everything and making adjustments.

endpoint
10-14-2010, 01:51 AM
By recomping, you'd be building or maintaining muscle mass at the expense of body fat for energy. It takes much longer to do.

Do you do any type of cardio or anything? If not, simply add that to your regimen and you will drop fat.

Already do cardio? Then drop kcals by 200 each day and you should be on your way.

A lot of it is just monitoring everything and making adjustments.

There is a bit of cardio in there.

The only thing is, because I am training for strength I am fearful of dropping my calories in exchange for dropping strength.
I cant gain much strength with this diet as is.

Strength will always be the number one goal, followed by muscle mass, then leanness

Holto
10-14-2010, 02:29 PM
If you want to cut fat then you're going to have to put your other goals aside momentarily. Take a few months and cut.

endpoint
10-14-2010, 06:16 PM
If you want to cut fat then you're going to have to put your other goals aside momentarily. Take a few months and cut.

So you think 4000 cals is right for a 290lb person deadlifting, squatting and doing strongman events 4 times a week?

It seems kind of low to me...but I totally have it all wrong. If I go to berardis site and use his calculator it has me at 7000 to put on muscle. surely to lose fat I wouldn't drop 3000 cals.

How does the macronutrient profile look? How does the meal timings looks.
Thats what I am really asking.

I just feel frustrated that I have been all the way down to 2700 a day and I cannot lose weight.

I am willing to lose a bit of strength...but this is just getting ******ed. I dont understand whats happening

J.C.
10-15-2010, 04:42 AM
I can't really give you any expert advice on dieting but there a couple of articles you might find interesting on the main site about powerlifters losing fat:

http://www.wannabebig.com/interviews/an-interview-with-bench-press-specialist-vincent-dizenzo/
http://www.wannabebig.com/training/mike-wolfe-loses-76lbs-and-increases-his-bench-press/

You sound a bit discouraged and maybe these interviews will show you it's possible and make things seem a bit more positive.

Holto
10-15-2010, 02:39 PM
So you think 4000 cals is right for a 290lb person deadlifting, squatting and doing strongman events 4 times a week?

It seems kind of low to me...but I totally have it all wrong. If I go to berardis site and use his calculator it has me at 7000 to put on muscle. surely to lose fat I wouldn't drop 3000 cals.

How does the macronutrient profile look? How does the meal timings looks.
Thats what I am really asking.

I just feel frustrated that I have been all the way down to 2700 a day and I cannot lose weight.

I am willing to lose a bit of strength...but this is just getting ******ed. I dont understand whats happening

The red part there is just a huge red flag for me.

On 2700/day were you losing weight?

on 4000/day were/are you losing weight?

Time+Patience
10-15-2010, 07:00 PM
So I am 290ish pounds, and I have been to see a nutritionist.
He is a sports nutritionist and has worked with a powerlifter before.

The breakdown is:
Carbs 43% - 424g
Fat 34% - 147g
Protein 23% - 214g

I would love to 'recomp' I guess and stay the same weight, but actually have notable muscle mass

I would say that this diet setup is very terrible and I would really look into no longer going to see this sports nutritionist. There might be a reason that he has worked with "a powerlifter" before ("a" meaning a single powerlifter).

If you weigh 290 pounds and he has you taking in just over 200 grams of protein them something is wrong. By looking at the macro breakdown your protein intake is the smallest % which is very wrong IMO.

I'm not an expert in the world of powerlifters and their dieting techniques, but I would guarantee that their protein breakdown isn't the smallest % in total macronutrients.

The biggest changes that I would make, and I would make these immediately, is to increase your protein intake. I would try to increase your protein intake to a MINIMUM of 300 grams a day, and I'd actually recommend 350-400 grams of protein a day. For an example I weight 200 pounds and am taking in around 320-350 grams of protein a day.

I would believe that you could increase your protein intake and not have to change much else, as that would increase your total caloric intake to around 4,500 calories a day or so, especially with you weighing around 300 pounds.


One method that I followed for about 4 weeks, which resulted in a nice little body recomp, was eatting relatively clean for the majority of the week and having 1-2 days where I ate not so clean.

Another method that I always try to follow is what my meals consist of; I try to make sure that I am eatting a fairly good amount of protein each meal and then I make sure I either eat carbohydrates or fats with the protein. Some people don't follow that as much and some people believe in it.

I try to think logically of the P+F or P+C in each meal as I believe it gives your body more separate macronutrients to digest and utilize for energy. They say that you can utilize fats for energy as well as carbohydrates, but I look at it like this if you have fats and carbs then your body will most likely utilize one of those sources for energy and "hold" onto the other macronutrient. It's not a scientific theory of mine, but it's more of my hypothesis.

You can also go the simple route of alternating carbs for days in which you working out or exerting more energy. On days where you workout you can increase your carbs, and days where you don't workout take away the carbs from 1-2 meals.

If there's anything that isn't clear and you'd like a bit more information I'll give you what I know from personal experience, but I am not the type that reads articles and looks for the scientific reasoning for how and why certain methods work. I don't love the research as much because it CAN'T be applied to every single person, some methods work for some and some methods work for others.

Time+Patience
10-15-2010, 07:06 PM
Another little note, I'm not sure about the time of your workout (I'm assuming it's early) but I'd like to see more whole meals in your diet. I think it's hard to go the first 3 meals without eatting something of "substance" like chicken and rice or a meat sandwich.

I try to eat 4 "whole" meals, which I mean as chicken, eggs, steak, tuna, or fish. I've noticed that my body utilizes whole foods better, and they are more fulfilling. Try to get some variety in, which is something I've been doing more recently, even with carbohydrate sources, I try to vary it now: rice, oatmeal, bread, potatoes, beans, and sugary post-workout carbs.

I think you could totally revamp your diet, but it'd be nice to know what direction you'd like to go.

Read through the various options that you have, such as carb rotation, lower fats, etc. and we'll see if we can help you develop a knew diet.

-ljfox
10-15-2010, 08:21 PM
Protein is also said to aid in fat loss. And with powerlifting your damaging muscle tissue and probably other things like your tendons and even bones in which protein will aid in reconstructing the damages done to them during your workout

endpoint
10-16-2010, 12:39 AM
Thanks Time+Patience.

I think the carb rotation is the direction I will head.
I agree the protein is way to low....it 'feels' very low.


Holto:
I was not losing weight on either.
2700 was crap though. Very little protein, lots of bad snacks...but I reached that level out of being frustrated and over eating and not having results. The nutritionist thinks I shut down my metabolism.

Thanks everyone

mrmuscle79
10-18-2010, 06:58 AM
Overall, your diet actually seems quite healthy! In terms of variety anyway...

Perhaps the quantities are too much?

One thing I also recommend to everyone is to cut sugar intake AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE!

If you can drastically reduce any sugar intake you currently have, it will have a major impact on your overall health and weight. A positive impact of course!

Also, try looking to add/replace with more natural and raw foods to your current diet.

Holto
10-18-2010, 08:44 AM
Holto:
I was not losing weight on either.

Were you gaining weight on 4000? I think it's important that you discover your maintenance.

endpoint
10-18-2010, 10:46 PM
Were you gaining weight on 4000? I think it's important that you discover your maintenance.

Nope Didn't gain on 4000 either.

As I look into it more, the carbohydrates seem to be the problem. Not the calories, amount of meals, but the carbohydrates as well as the marco balance

Hopefully someone with a clue about nutrition will answer

Sean S
10-19-2010, 09:01 AM
Something isn't adding up here. There's no way you can be maintaining on 4000 calories and maintaining on 2700 calories. Your body will adjust your metabolic rate some based on your intake, but a 1300 calorie difference a day is very large. I would start with getting your bodyweight in protein and then fill in the rest of your calories with carbs and fats. If you feel like carbs are a problem, then don't go crazy with the carbs. If you have truly been tracking and calculating things and aren't losing any fat at 4000 calories, then you will have to drop the calories a bit. You can't necessarily go by calculators for predicted calorie intake, you have to track your own intake and then adjust accordingly.
If you still don't have any luck, I would suggest hiring someone like Shelby Starnes to do a custom plan for you. He will give a plan and then make adjustments each week based on your weight and appearance.

Holto
10-19-2010, 11:37 AM
Something isn't adding up here. There's no way you can be maintaining on 4000 calories and maintaining on 2700 calories.

Thanks Sean. That was what I was getting at but often I come across as snyde.

Endpoint: You need to determine your maintenance. That's your first step. Once you get that sorted you can start playing with macro ratios and what not but I doubt it will make much difference.

endpoint
10-19-2010, 05:14 PM
Thanks Sean. That was what I was getting at but often I come across as snyde.

Endpoint: You need to determine your maintenance. That's your first step. Once you get that sorted you can start playing with macro ratios and what not but I doubt it will make much difference.

so having a high insulin sensitivity will not effect someones body composition?

Holto
10-21-2010, 09:37 AM
so having a high insulin sensitivity will not effect someones body composition?

Perhaps once an athlete is into single digits of body fat. Lift heavy and eat smart and you have complete control over your body composition.

The biology is quite complicated. Focus on the physics (the total calories) and the biology will sort itself out.

RichMcGuire
10-21-2010, 06:59 PM
Perhaps once an athlete is into single digits of body fat. Lift heavy and eat smart and you have complete control over your body composition.

The biology is quite complicated. Focus on the physics (the total calories) and the biology will sort itself out.


I wanted to quote this to emphasize it. I think this is a terrific point.

endpoint
10-21-2010, 07:34 PM
So it has been been 2 weeks where I have cut out 80-90% of the carbs and added more fat sources,

I am getting 4000-4500 calls, and I am already seeing a reduction in fat (there was a bit of water loss in the first week). I am no where near ketosis (well I dont think so as there is more than 100g of carbs)

I dont think calories were the problem with me, more the excess carbs.

6lbs in week one
4.5 in week two

Thats including a re-feed on Saturday and Sunday

ehopkins932
10-21-2010, 09:39 PM
Looks like you got everything in check bro. And like people said, stop wasting your money on a sports nutritionist. They learn outdated information that doesn't apply to powerlifters.....the sign in my university caf says that an athlete should have something ridculous like 60 or 80% of their cals to come from carbs.

Good luck with everything....little changes to the diet over time when things stall should lead you to where you want to be.

Holto
10-22-2010, 01:53 PM
I dont think calories were the problem with me, more the excess carbs.


Endpoint your body just does not work that way. The weight loss from the carb depletion is a reduction in gycogen and it's temporary. It will impair your ability to train and recover.

ehopkins932
10-22-2010, 02:05 PM
Endpoint your body just does not work that way. The weight loss from the carb depletion is a reduction in gycogen and it's temporary. It will impair your ability to train and recover.

This is completely incorrect. The weight loss from reduction in carbs to the level he is at is mostly water. And if the weights are going up, it is clearly not affecting recovery. If he is timing how he eats his carbs correctly, he should be fine and will most likely drop fat (which is what he is experiencing).

RichMcGuire
10-22-2010, 03:14 PM
This is completely incorrect. The weight loss from reduction in carbs to the level he is at is mostly water. And if the weights are going up, it is clearly not affecting recovery. If he is timing how he eats his carbs correctly, he should be fine and will most likely drop fat (which is what he is experiencing).

As long as hes in a kcal deficit. You can't eat more than maintenance and drop body fat...even if it was a reduction of carbohydrates.

I should also note that the type of training also dictates how many carbohydrates are needed. Metabolic training induces glycogen depletion at a much faster rate than power training. And there really isn't anything wrong with more carbohydrates. At the end of the day, it's kcals. You can't tell me that thermodynamic energy equilibrium doesn't exist and somehow a low carb diet magically gets around this.

Holto
10-22-2010, 03:57 PM
The weight loss from reduction in carbs to the level he is at is mostly water

Yep. One glucose molecule bound to 4 water molecules = GLYCOGEN


And if the weights are going up, it is clearly not affecting recovery.

Well that's just a horrific oversimplification. One can recover well enough to be improving and still not be recovering optimally.

Rich addressed the other parts of your post I had issues with.

endpoint
10-22-2010, 08:35 PM
All I know is its working currently, when it stops working I will reassess and re-plan.

I guarantee you there is a lot of water...but there is some fat loss as well.

I am recovering better than I was in the past.

Its only 2 weeks. We will give it some time.

All I know is I am starting to look better and feel better than I ever have

russds
10-22-2010, 09:06 PM
Lots good advise on this thread. I agree, that from the beginning things didnt' really add up. I didn't see a lot of time frames given in your examples, and posts. You want to make sure and give a certain diet a 2-3 month period. (monitor it weekly) but give it a good amount of time. For example if you were eating 2700 for an extended period of time, you would lose weight for sure. I didn't get a picture of how long you had tried these various things. Also, the bottom line is amount of calories, it doesn't matter if they are carbs, or fat or what. Calories > maintenance = gain weight, calories < maintenance = lose weight.
-Russ

endpoint
10-22-2010, 09:23 PM
Lots good advise on this thread. I agree, that from the beginning things didnt' really add up. I didn't see a lot of time frames given in your examples, and posts. You want to make sure and give a certain diet a 2-3 month period. (monitor it weekly) but give it a good amount of time. For example if you were eating 2700 for an extended period of time, you would lose weight for sure. I didn't get a picture of how long you had tried these various things. Also, the bottom line is amount of calories, it doesn't matter if they are carbs, or fat or what. Calories > maintenance = gain weight, calories < maintenance = lose weight.
-Russ

2700 was for about 5 months with some days a bit higher (but not much)

ehopkins932
10-23-2010, 11:24 AM
All calories are not equal...yes the weight may come off regardless as long as he is in a deficit. But how much of the weight lost is muscle vs fat will be different depending on the macros. A lot has been written on this subject. One reason being the thermic effect of protein and there are many others.

As far as it not being optimal recovery...I should have stated my comment better. If he is making progress at the same rate as before (with more carbs) then obviously he is doing fine. Thats what it really comes down to....and if that is that case and he is losing fat AND maintaining muscle he is doing well

RichMcGuire
10-23-2010, 03:58 PM
All calories are not equal...yes the weight may come off regardless as long as he is in a deficit. But how much of the weight lost is muscle vs fat will be different depending on the macros. A lot has been written on this subject. One reason being the thermic effect of protein and there are many others.

As far as it not being optimal recovery...I should have stated my comment better. If he is making progress at the same rate as before (with more carbs) then obviously he is doing fine. Thats what it really comes down to....and if that is that case and he is losing fat AND maintaining muscle he is doing well

In terms of what a kcal actually is, a kcal really is a kcal..

Also, the thermic effect of food (TEF) is simply part of the equation of energy in vs. energy out. It still is thermodynamic energy equilibrium in the end. How much weight lost being fat vs. muscle is more dependent on genetics, a proper stimulus(such as tension), how lean the person already is, and adequate protein. Of course, there's more to this. Leptin levels have shown a lot of the cause for fat loss. But it's still the basic concept.

If you want to be technical, with a standard diet, extra carbohydrates would actually protect muscle mass and performance.

But in the end, you can't tell me more carbohydrates are going to make someone not retain muscle. That's sort of what it feels like you were saying indirectly with what I bolded (in relation to what was said). As long as someone consumes enough protein and is in a caloric deficit, they will lose fat. There is simply no way around this.

Those low carb fanatics are simply misinformed of the biology of the human body. Low carbs don't magically zap body fat away. Being in a caloric deficit does.

Now I will say carbohydrates can be used for certain purposes..such as metabolic depletion of glycogen and what not. And also, someone might lower carbohydrates because they don't want to reduce protein and fat because of hormones and amino acids.

But most people totting these carb diets are using it as a magic pill. And I sort of feel like that is what's happening here. I mean, he hasn't changed his kcals at all but now is magically losing weight because of the evil carbs? That points more in the direction of glycogen depletion a.k.a water loss.

OP - I found an article for you. It talks about glycogen depletion as weight loss and how you might go about lowering kcals in the form of carbohydrates and use refeeds to protect muscle. You'll notice the lower carb days are nothing drastic either.

http://healing.about.com/cs/uc_directory/a/fatlosscoach_2.htm

f=ma
10-23-2010, 04:36 PM
for me, moderate carbs are ideal for dieting.

ehopkins932
10-25-2010, 09:58 AM
In terms of what a kcal actually is, a kcal really is a kcal..

Also, the thermic effect of food (TEF) is simply part of the equation of energy in vs. energy out. It still is thermodynamic energy equilibrium in the end. How much weight lost being fat vs. muscle is more dependent on genetics, a proper stimulus(such as tension), how lean the person already is, and adequate protein. Of course, there's more to this. Leptin levels have shown a lot of the cause for fat loss. But it's still the basic concept.

If you want to be technical, with a standard diet, extra carbohydrates would actually protect muscle mass and performance.

But in the end, you can't tell me more carbohydrates are going to make someone not retain muscle. That's sort of what it feels like you were saying indirectly with what I bolded (in relation to what was said). As long as someone consumes enough protein and is in a caloric deficit, they will lose fat. There is simply no way around this.

Those low carb fanatics are simply misinformed of the biology of the human body. Low carbs don't magically zap body fat away. Being in a caloric deficit does.

Now I will say carbohydrates can be used for certain purposes..such as metabolic depletion of glycogen and what not. And also, someone might lower carbohydrates because they don't want to reduce protein and fat because of hormones and amino acids.

But most people totting these carb diets are using it as a magic pill. And I sort of feel like that is what's happening here. I mean, he hasn't changed his kcals at all but now is magically losing weight because of the evil carbs? That points more in the direction of glycogen depletion a.k.a water loss.

OP - I found an article for you. It talks about glycogen depletion as weight loss and how you might go about lowering kcals in the form of carbohydrates and use refeeds to protect muscle. You'll notice the lower carb days are nothing drastic either.

http://healing.about.com/cs/uc_directory/a/fatlosscoach_2.htm

The insulin from carbs make it much harder to lose fat...there is a reason people lean out fast on keto diets or timed-carb diets and carb cycle to stay lean. Different people have different sensitivity to insulin.

And yes, a lot of people find that they lose a lot of weight in a week and say no carbs is magic, and like you said, this is due to water depletion.

Im not really going to argue this anymore because OP is losing fat and still has his strength going up and good energy levels.

Holto
10-25-2010, 11:04 AM
The insulin from carbs make it much harder to lose fat...

You're getting lost in the complexity of the biology.

Do yourself a favor and take the time to fully understand the physics at work. Then you can attack the biology form a level of understanding that will greatly simplify it.

ehopkins932
10-25-2010, 01:38 PM
Fair enough, I dont feeling like arguing this issue anymore. Ill agree to disagree :)

simonic
10-25-2010, 03:56 PM
You're getting lost in the complexity of the biology.

That's the major issue it seems.

Could you explain the digestion process, the biochemistry involved in digestion, and the relating/created hormones please? What happens to protein, fat, and carbohydrates? You seem to be attacking the digestion process without giving an intimate view of what actually takes place.

Why wouldn't a low/moderate carbohydrate work in the long run? Would carbohydrate timing be more beneficial (Essentially, working for your carbs)?

RichMcGuire
10-25-2010, 07:32 PM
That's the major issue it seems.

Could you explain the digestion process, the biochemistry involved in digestion, and the relating/created hormones please? What happens to protein, fat, and carbohydrates? You seem to be attacking the digestion process without giving an intimate view of what actually takes place.

Why wouldn't a low/moderate carbohydrate work in the long run? Would carbohydrate timing be more beneficial (Essentially, working for your carbs)?

While we are on the subject of asking questions, I have one for you. Can you explain how someone could create body fat while on a deficit? Regardless of insulin and carbohydrates and hormones? I was under the impression that mass could not be created nor destroyed..only change forms.

On that same note, can you tell me why a low carbohydrate would be special compared to a standard diet (provided enough protein and fat) that was in a deficit? I.e how is insulin going to contribute to a body fat gain while in a deficit of kcals? That sounds to me like you are creating energy out of thin air and that violates thermodynamics.

But seriously, do you really want us to whip out a biology book and go through the specific digestive process with you? We could talk about Ghrelin, CCK and PPY peptides that get secreted into the blood stream after a meal, etc.. but that all seems pretty trivial at this point. I think if you think about my questions above, you'll come to a better understanding of whats going on in the thread. And I'll be honest, if you want to know basic biology 101, you can simply use google or take a basic nutrition class that provides you with a text book O.o

endpoint
10-25-2010, 11:14 PM
I dont much about these things, but here are some studies I found (well abstracts).
They probably dont answer any questions, but may guide people on the path to research (i dont know if they are relevant or not)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12077732

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/662209

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/386065

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC442270/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12106620

endpoint
10-25-2010, 11:21 PM
I have a side question.
My fat free mass was measured (about a year ago) as being somewhere between 220-230. I have put on more muscle since then.

would that have anything to do with what we talk about?
If we stripped all my fat off, I would weigh more than 70 lbs than RichMcGuire.

Is that going to affect how we process things?

simonic
10-26-2010, 12:12 PM
I know the digestion process, and I agree about being in a calorie deficit.

However, the OP stated that he has been on 2700 calorie and not lost/gained. While, also being on a 4000 calorie, and not seeing any changes (while still having a gut). As was mentioned, something isn't adding up, or there might be a medical condition.

If 4000 is his maintenance, then 2700/day regardless of the body entering "starvation mode" he should have seen some form of weight loss. And, if 2700/day is his true maintenance then at 4000/day he should definitely see weight gain. Granted, this assumes all measurements be via scale, and not to include tape and/or body fat measurements.

LanceGoyke
10-26-2010, 01:25 PM
Someone said not to get caught up in insulin or glycemic load stuff until you're under 10% body fat... they couldn't be more correct. Simpler is ALWAYS better.

Have carbs ONLY after a workout or first thing in the morning.

You need more protein. At least another whole meal's worth of protein. Shoot for at least 290g.

Don't eat until you're full. If you're not happy with where you're at (i.e. feeling sluggish, looking fat), change the amount of food you eat accordingly. I have to say that I eat more than 4000 calories a day and I weigh 100 pounds less than you and I'm not gaining weight. Don't be afraid to eat a little more if necessary.

As a [huge] powerlifter, strength is your number one concern I'm assuming. If you want to drop to the 275# class, I would suggest doing it immediately after a meet, making sure you've maintained your new weight for a few weeks before dialing in your training for your next meet.

On that note, post-meet would be a perfect time for switching up your training at this time (i.e. higher reps). Give your joints a little rest and dial in the fat loss.

Lastly, you may be getting body composition changes, but just not realizing it. Pictures are a great way to track progress like this so that you can have an honest opinion. A sex buddy may also be able to tell. Even some of your friends or family may be able to tell.

simonic
10-26-2010, 02:07 PM
I can't really give you any expert advice on dieting but there a couple of articles you might find interesting on the main site about powerlifters losing fat:

http://www.wannabebig.com/interviews/an-interview-with-bench-press-specialist-vincent-dizenzo/
http://www.wannabebig.com/training/mike-wolfe-loses-76lbs-and-increases-his-bench-press/

You sound a bit discouraged and maybe these interviews will show you it's possible and make things seem a bit more positive.

Was going to post the Vincent article, but figured I'd check to see the ones already linked. They're good reads, and are aimed at low carb/carb timing. Essentially, if you're going to take in carbs -- make the Insulin count, and do its job.

RichMcGuire
11-06-2010, 11:11 PM
I have a side question.
My fat free mass was measured (about a year ago) as being somewhere between 220-230. I have put on more muscle since then.

would that have anything to do with what we talk about?
If we stripped all my fat off, I would weigh more than 70 lbs than RichMcGuire.

Is that going to affect how we process things?

Being over 200 lbs at an extremely low bf% for someone not extremely tall is usually, if not impossible for someone not on anabolics. People who think they are are just fatter than they realize. But this thread has already taken its toll. Posts have already been removed from this thread.

endpoint
11-08-2010, 02:38 AM
Being over 200 lbs at an extremely low bf% for someone not extremely tall is usually, if not impossible for someone not on anabolics. People who think they are are just fatter than they realize. But this thread has already taken its toll. Posts have already been removed from this thread.

I feel sad you have put a limit on yourself and you have doomed yourself to being small

endpoint
11-08-2010, 02:43 AM
Oh and for anyone else who cares, I am up to 4500 and still losing weight and getting stronger.

endpoint
11-08-2010, 02:45 AM
Being over 200 lbs at an extremely low bf% for someone not extremely tall is usually, if not impossible for someone not on anabolics. People who think they are are just fatter than they realize. But this thread has already taken its toll. Posts have already been removed from this thread.

PS I was measured with a dexa scan two days ago. 235lbs of fat free mass.

Sean S
11-08-2010, 06:26 AM
PS I was measured with a dexa scan two days ago. 235lbs of fat free mass.

What was your bodyfat %? I think his point was that it's tough to have that much lean body mass and be very lean in a natural trainee.

Holto
11-08-2010, 03:43 PM
That's the major issue it seems.

Could you explain the digestion process, the biochemistry involved in digestion, and the relating/created hormones please? What happens to protein, fat, and carbohydrates?

Ask me a specific question and I'd be happy to answer it.


Why wouldn't a low/moderate carbohydrate work in the long run?

Because it has no impact on the laws of physics.

I'll explain myself a little bit here.

You eat a meal that creates a high insulin response. Nutrients are shuttled into cells (fat and muscle)

Now what?

Your blood sugar is low yet it still requires energy. How does your body counteract this? One way is to mobilize fat.

So if you follow the process a little further than "insulin makes us fat" you'll see that in application it just doesn't work that way.

RichMcGuire
11-08-2010, 06:39 PM
I feel sad you have put a limit on yourself and you have doomed yourself to being small

Sean summed up what I meant very well.

But to address this quote specifically, I'm at a pretty happy size now for my height. I also like to set realistic expectations on what can be achieved. In less than a year from now, I'd like to enter a bodybuilding contest I've been looking at recently. Hormones are a pretty big limiting factor when it comes to just how much LBM someone can really hold and/or retain. Anabolics sort of 'break natures rules'.

So unless you're like 8 ft tall, you're certainly not going to be a ripped 240+ lb bodybuilder without drugs...unless you kid yourself with how fat you actually are.

RichMcGuire
11-10-2010, 01:24 AM
I feel sad you have put a limit on yourself and you have doomed yourself to being small

Also, I was going to add to this.

The Mr. Olympia Winners


Dexter Jackson 2008 (Current) 5′6.5″ 230 lb.
Jay Cutler 2006,2007 5′9″ 255 lb.
Ronnie Coleman 1998-2005 5′10″ 270 lb.
Dorian Yates 1992-1997 5′10″ 255 lb.
Lee Haney 1984-1991 5′11″ 235 lb.
Samir Bannout 1983 5′8″ 210 lb.
Chris Dickerson 1982 5′6″ 190 lb.
Franco Colombu 1976, 1981 5′4″ 185 lb.
Arnold 1970-1975, 1980 6′1″ 230 lb.
Frank Zane 1977-1979 5′9″ 185 lb.
Sergio Oliva 1967-1969 5′8″ 225 lb.
Larry Scott 1965-1966 5′7″ 205 lb

This chart comes from http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/supplement-marketing-on-steroids-by-alan-aragon.html

Take a look at those numbers. Many of these steroid users with around 3-6% BF had 200 lbs or less of BODY weight.

You should also look into what the FFMI is. A guy at around 6'2 with 10% bodyfat with a FFMI of 25.5 would weigh 220 lbs. It's doubtful you'll be getting above a 25.5 index without drugs. It just simply will not happen. Also, you should look up Casey Butt.

Actually, I'll just make this easier for you since you seem to be so stubborn. Just click this link:

http://www.weightrainer.net/potential.html

The predictions are very accurate and work. Sorry to put a limit on what you can gain, but it's just the reality of things. Being too optimistic is just ignorant of the actual science.

I'll save my objections to your DEXA for another night.

endpoint
11-11-2010, 12:45 AM
Sean summed up what I meant very well.

But to address this quote specifically, I'm at a pretty happy size now for my height. I also like to set realistic expectations on what can be achieved. In less than a year from now, I'd like to enter a bodybuilding contest I've been looking at recently. Hormones are a pretty big limiting factor when it comes to just how much LBM someone can really hold and/or retain. Anabolics sort of 'break natures rules'.

So unless you're like 8 ft tall, you're certainly not going to be a ripped 240+ lb bodybuilder without drugs...unless you kid yourself with how fat you actually are.

Oh I am fat dont worry about that, I am under no illusion.
I train to look and lift like a man.
Being happy and small means **** to me.

I agree about the anabolics, but I still think there is something to lifting heavy and not being a homo

endpoint
11-11-2010, 12:49 AM
Holy **** are you arguing with a dexa scan? Do you know what it is and how it works.


You are small,
you look like a woman,

and now you are ******ed.

I'm out of this forum (i am sure I wont be missed)



Also, I was going to add to this.

The Mr. Olympia Winners


Dexter Jackson 2008 (Current) 5′6.5″ 230 lb.
Jay Cutler 2006,2007 5′9″ 255 lb.
Ronnie Coleman 1998-2005 5′10″ 270 lb.
Dorian Yates 1992-1997 5′10″ 255 lb.
Lee Haney 1984-1991 5′11″ 235 lb.
Samir Bannout 1983 5′8″ 210 lb.
Chris Dickerson 1982 5′6″ 190 lb.
Franco Colombu 1976, 1981 5′4″ 185 lb.
Arnold 1970-1975, 1980 6′1″ 230 lb.
Frank Zane 1977-1979 5′9″ 185 lb.
Sergio Oliva 1967-1969 5′8″ 225 lb.
Larry Scott 1965-1966 5′7″ 205 lb

This chart comes from http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/supplement-marketing-on-steroids-by-alan-aragon.html

Take a look at those numbers. Many of these steroid users with around 3-6% BF had 200 lbs or less of BODY weight.

You should also look into what the FFMI is. A guy at around 6'2 with 10% bodyfat with a FFMI of 25.5 would weigh 220 lbs. It's doubtful you'll be getting above a 25.5 index without drugs. It just simply will not happen. Also, you should look up Casey Butt.

Actually, I'll just make this easier for you since you seem to be so stubborn. Just click this link:

http://www.weightrainer.net/potential.html

The predictions are very accurate and work. Sorry to put a limit on what you can gain, but it's just the reality of things. Being too optimistic is just ignorant of the actual science.

I'll save my objections to your DEXA for another night.

RichMcGuire
11-11-2010, 01:22 AM
Holy **** are you arguing with a dexa scan? Do you know what it is and how it works.


You are small,
you look like a woman,

and now you are ******ed.

I'm out of this forum (i am sure I wont be missed)

Yep, you sure look like a man. What would I know?

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s227/RichMcGuire/fat-bastard.jpg

Codeguru
11-11-2010, 02:03 PM
Yep, you sure look like a man. What would I know?

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s227/RichMcGuire/fat-bastard.jpg

I ATE A BABY!...

Codeguru

Time+Patience
11-11-2010, 06:52 PM
Did this really just happen on this forum? Did we just get a bit carried away? This had the makings of being a solid thread for advice, but low and behold what it turned out into.

RichMcGuire
11-11-2010, 08:24 PM
Did this really just happen on this forum? Did we just get a bit carried away? This had the makings of being a solid thread for advice, but low and behold what it turned out into.

Still lots of good advice here as long as it's listened to.

And no worries, I think the troll said he was leaving ;)

Songsangnim
11-11-2010, 09:23 PM
I was under the impression that mass could not be created nor destroyed..only change forms.

.o

I'm a little late to this party, I just saw this thread now...but mass can certainly be destroyed. Losing bodyfat for example. Did you mean "energy"?

RichMcGuire
11-11-2010, 10:38 PM
I'm a little late to this party, I just saw this thread now...but mass can certainly be destroyed. Losing bodyfat for example. Did you mean "energy"?

Yes, I did. I.E The energy from fat is simply used as energy elsewhere.

More specifically to this thread, matter cannot be created out of thin air. So being in an energy deficit is not going to let the formation of matter(fat) to occur. It was ironic for the OP to state that he was consuming more kcals and still losing fat. Instead he claimed that fat as a macro nutrient itself was causing fat gains when in reality, we know this to be not true.

But thx for catching the smaller details. No need for me to edit it now :P