Losing fat.

Ok so I've pondered this question a few times before and I've really never found out about it. so I'm going to ask. Feel free to move it but I couldn't think of anywhere else to put it.

So the basic rules for weight loss are:
1. eat every 2-3 hours

2. eat at a 500 cal def.

3. eat clean

4. Cardio
(please feel free to add more those are all I can think of.)

Well the thing I have an issue with is the 500 cal def. The reason you dont go below that is because your body will use your hard-earned muscle because your "starving." But say I eat 1,500 cals fewer than I should. I'm losing crazy amounts of muscle right? But if I lift my muscles still want to grow. and if I eat the right amount of protien and a few fewer carbs than I should wont I just use the fat I have for my muscles to grow? I'm sure they may not grow at the same rate, but I wouldn't be losing any muscle, would I?

I'm not considering this I'm just wondering as to why it couldn't work.
And I'm not saying for someone who's bf% is ~5-10.

Gin Rummy: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.(from the boondocks)

right I'm not arguing that point, well I guess I am a little. But mostly calories. and why would the muscle be broken down? wouldn't it feed from the fat into the muscle thats trying to grow? if the muscle is trying to grow then I'd think your body would feed more so from the existing fatty tissue.

Gin Rummy: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.(from the boondocks)

Your body wants to be effcient and self preserved so when it is in a deficit (sp?) it burns muscle over fat. Because muscle takes energy to up keep and fat doesn't. It gets tricked into burning fat when the deficit is small. An extreme case would be starvation diets yess you lose weight but teh bulk of it is muscle thats why they don't work.

starting
124 pounds
11 bfp
5"7
15 years old

Current
147
10 bfp
5"8
18 years old

I understand that.

But if your muscle wants to grow, if it has a natural order to do so wont it try to do that instead of using it as food when there is an alternative choice. I mean would it grow and then eat itself. or would it grow and eat the fat at the same time? is anyone understanding what I'm saying? wheres danmirage when I need him? COMEBACK!.

what I'm saying is wouldn't the body do the easy thing and use the fat because the muscles are injured and trying to recover? if you didn't lift then it would just use muscles for sure. But if you injure your muscles(lift) then your body would need to repair what you injured and it would need to fuel itself also. So wouldn't it take the fat instead and repair your muscles since your muscles are already damaged?

Gin Rummy: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.(from the boondocks)

can no one explain this to me?

Gin Rummy: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.(from the boondocks)

nobody knows what I'm talking about or am I just an idiot? I have just thought about this for a long time and I want someone tell me why this line of thinking is wrong.

Gin Rummy: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.(from the boondocks)

Your muscles probly wouldn't recover because you would be at such a calorie deficit. I don't know but I wouldn't think it would work. I see what you're trying to say though but I'm not too convinced that it would work.

Blake
Age 19
Hieght ~5'10.5"
Weight ~196
Bench ~275
Squat ~390
Dead Lift ~375
MilitaryPress ~200
Hang Clean ~205
6-17-07
Put this in your profile if you or someone you know is fighting, has survived, or has died in a pokemon battle

Right I dont think its right and I kind of thought that but your muscles would have to heal. your body would make them heal.
Unless your body used your muscle to heal your muscle. then you may be burning muscle at a slower pace, you'd still be losing muscle but at a much slower pace I think. But I thought that the fat would be used first since the muscle was injured and may not be as effective in fixing the problems at hand.

Edited for smiley insert

Gin Rummy: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.(from the boondocks)

No clue man, when's Dan coming back from his trip? lol we need sound advice!

Blake
Age 19
Hieght ~5'10.5"
Weight ~196
Bench ~275
Squat ~390
Dead Lift ~375
MilitaryPress ~200
Hang Clean ~205
6-17-07
Put this in your profile if you or someone you know is fighting, has survived, or has died in a pokemon battle

yes yes we do. I miss dan.

Gin Rummy: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.(from the boondocks)

nobody?

Gin Rummy: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.(from the boondocks)

I'm no expert, I can't fill in the science bits as facts but as far as I understand, when you run a caloric deficate that high your talking 1500 calories, correct, your body is going to go to starvation mode. At first you would drop a lot of weight (first couple weeks) ,  mostly fat but yes muscle as well. But your metabolism is going to short circuit, and basically shut down. It will to a certain dergree burn off some fat, some muscle. Your won't be providing it with enough nutrients, for energy, cell repair, or really any system functions, nervous, digestive ect. And your going (I know you don't me you, the hypothetical you) to then ask you body to grow muscle on top of that, It would naturally repair the tissue that you damage by lifting, but it won't be adding to it (you can't make muscle from fat), or compensating for the overload you put upon it, it's just going to try to keep it together. Your body would be working hard to keep it self alive.
Meanwhile your metabolism has slowed to a crawl, because it has accepted that that is all the food it will have available, so it will make adjustmants that will allow life to continue under those circumstances. Ergo, that 1500 deficite becomes what it needs, and as soon as the caloric intake is increased, your body would start stashing away that excess as FAT, expecting the next famine, and preparing it self for it by being ready. ALso the big three carbs, protein, fat work together, to allow nutrient absorbtion, not enough of any of them and your body won't work effectively.

First..fat is NOT a viable energy source during intense training...carbs are and in a  severe deficit...muscle is converted to carbs.

Second...No matter how hard you train...in a deficit...the body's first priority is NOT muscle repair.  Your muscles DO NOT have to heal.

Third, water makes up 75%+- of muscle.  When you cut back calories, which are essential for life...you hold less water...thus less muscle!

In a severe deficit, the hormonal environment favors fat storage and muscle destruction...even without training. Add training and you boost the destructive effect.

Did that cover why the thinking is wrong.

Ok..now..there IS a way to play with short term caloric ups and downs to get a boost in weight loss...but you have to have been at maintenance-plus for a bit so the hormonal environment will favor this.

Why not just take the 1-2 pounds a week?

There are all sorts of ways to fine tune this...calories, nutrient timing, training intensity/progressions, cardio intensity/progressions, nutrient composition...

It is good to challenge the status quo of the going thought..but the standard 500-1000 cal deficit a day WORKS...if all else is in the right alignment.

Cheers!

My Journal - www.discussbodybuilding.com/fb.ashx?m=168123
PRIMERS:
Gain Muscle - www.discussbodybuilding.com/fb.ashx?m=111173
Lose Fat - www.discussbodybuilding.com/fb.ashx?m=111175

Thanks Dan I know you cant see it now but I have a big smile on my face. I knew you could break it down in a way I could understand. but thanks again. I had just been wondering as to why but I see why what I was thinking was wrong. thanks so much.

Gin Rummy: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.(from the boondocks)

Dan, how detemental is it to their health in that show "The Biggest Loser", when they lose around 8lbs a week, with some of them losing in the 2 digit range. They are large, but I'm pretty sure it's not healthy at all. Some of them have experience zero or near zero weight loss in a week, what is the reason behind this? Muscle gain? Overtraining.

Lets add another level of understanding to this.
 
That 1000 calorie deficit is not all from eating less!
 
Whole food is thermic..meaning there is a caloric cost to processing it.
 
If you DROP 1500 calories from your diet your caloric expenditure LOSS from eating less is about 200 a day!!! That is 1400 a week (assuming 30% fat, 25% protein and 45% carbs)
 
Now if you eat 1500 calories less a day (10,500 a week) your thyroid is going to make you hypo-metabolic, that is, it is going to downgrade your metabolism...lets say it does this by causing about 200 calories a day less to be burned.
 
Now, your caloric expenditure has drooped 2800 in a week (1400 + 1400)...but the deficit is still about 1100 a day!  The body is also going to start pumping out hormones to use the excess metabolic tissue (muscle) to slow your caloric expenditure...that means you could BURN off 2 pounds of muscle a week at first, just to meet the deficit!
 
That muscle is going to come from skeletal muscle and organs...
 
Sooner or later there is going to be a health cost for this!
 
IF you were looking to lose weight (VS lose FAT) you could lose about 4-6 pounds the first week...mostly water and muscle with some fat, and the same the second week...after that, it is all down hill.
 
Every pound of muscle you have can burn 35-50 calories and the body is looking to lose enough muscle to be at a static caloric intake/expenditure balance...so that means you are looking to LOSE about 22 pounds of muscle.
 
As you lose muscle you will also put on fat...so the weight loss won't look so great after the first few weeks.
 
That is sort of a longer answer to "The Biggest Loser" question as well.
 
Alternative?
 
- Eat more whole foods to increase the metabolic cost of eating and add to the ENERGY available to the body. 
 
- Increase muscle to increase metabolic rate.
 
- Keep hormone function optimal.
 
- Progress training to maintain losses/gains.
 
- Keep feeding the muscle! (Feed the Muscle, Burn the Fat...hmmm, sounds familiar)
 
- Use aerobic training wisely, excessive aerobics can affect muscle gains and favor a fat storing environment - by training the body to know it will need more fat to facilitate more aerobics
 
- Know and understand your unique chemistry and the styles of training and nutrition that your body is most responsive to.
 
OK..I'll stop.

My Journal - www.discussbodybuilding.com/fb.ashx?m=168123
PRIMERS:
Gain Muscle - www.discussbodybuilding.com/fb.ashx?m=111173
Lose Fat - www.discussbodybuilding.com/fb.ashx?m=111175

great post dan

Duke of the Emancipation Detoxification

hey u said burn the fat, feed the muscle sounds familiar. ur talking about the tom venuto e-book right? if u are have u tried it, or has any1 else reading this tried it? if u have how did it work for u cause im looking to get leaner and i cant seem to get lower than 10%

Duke of the Emancipation Detoxification