BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > Articles on the Main Site
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Unread 03-14-2014, 09:16 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

They weren't eating at maintenance but I don't recall details beyond that. This was years ago.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Unread 03-14-2014, 12:34 PM
w1cked w1cked is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
ALL THE METABOLIC DAMAGE!!!!
5 scoops of Xtend would've prevented that if they knew their science
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Unread 03-15-2014, 10:12 PM
niloluiz niloluiz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 264
Default

Interesting results @ phase 3. Even bigger fat loss despite switching to a "normal diet" and limited activity. It was specified what exactly this normal diet and activity comprised? Even if 50% deficit or close to maintenance.... this implies some kind of inertial/momentum effect (that is, they continued to lose fat even faster despite pulling the brakes on the calorie deficit during those 3 days...).

They used DEXA so fat loss measurement should be accurate enough.

I'm reading this correctly? And if so.... WTH lol I wasn't aware of such phenomena.

In the past when I was kind of obsessed with reaching the biggest deficit possible, I'd setup my cellphone alarm app to fire up every 1h and would run 20 minutes on the treadmill at 5.5mph (enough to burn 200+kcal) this was repeated for 10 times to get 2000kcal expenditure with exercise. Diet would be only 500kcal and total deficit close to 4k that day.
This was done mostly at mondays after a sunday refeed/binge to quick start the diet. My daily deficit goal back then was generally 2000kcal/day (1k feed, 1k exercice) on weekdays only, while weekend would be off. I could sustain that consistently for few weeks and got great results while things didn't degenerated.... (many lessons learned since then....)

So it's not the same as this experiment (5k deficit daily for 4 days lol, that's truly epic). Still good to know that this kind of effort is not a waste and LBM losses is not abysmal as I imagined.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Unread 03-16-2014, 05:27 AM
rhwbullhead rhwbullhead is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 636
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NOAMattD View Post
I'm more interested in the anecdote about the person who had some kind of workstation cycle and did very low-intensity cardio all day. When you said "keeping calories stable" do you remember if that still meant a deficit (just not necessarily a severe one)? If they were eating at/above maintenance and still losing fat it sounds like this could be kind of a "throw money at the problem" solution to calorie partitioning.
I've studied the guy Lyle's talking about: his name was Jolio. He was extreme in cardio and in his diet. He went through periods of consuming only whey and fish oil because whey was the most cost efficient way to get his protein even though he admitted it wasn't very satiating.

The one link I have saved on this phone shows him taking inn 330g protein from whey at 225lb body weight and doing 4-8 hrs of LISS. Later in the log he took in less protein per LBM. I don't have the exact numbers. He also did HEAVY weights. From the comments others made, his lifts were strong as many were impressed by his poundage. He maintained his strength through his crazy program and has been sort of an idol of mine as I've tried to follow.his extreme cardio approach to.cutting at various times in the last two years.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Unread 03-16-2014, 08:55 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by niloluiz View Post
Interesting results @ phase 3. Even bigger fat loss despite switching to a "normal diet" and limited activity. It was specified what exactly this normal diet and activity comprised? Even if 50% deficit or close to maintenance.... this implies some kind of inertial/momentum effect (that is, they continued to lose fat even faster despite pulling the brakes on the calorie deficit during those 3 days...).
I didn't got into a lot of details in the writeup but basically they were food tracked for a week before the intervention to establish 'maintenance' calories nad put back on that in Phase 3. The study suggested that this might still have been a deficit due to food under-reporting initially. Which is probably true.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Unread 03-17-2014, 05:17 AM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,068
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
I didn't got into a lot of details in the writeup but basically they were food tracked for a week before the intervention to establish 'maintenance' calories nad put back on that in Phase 3. The study suggested that this might still have been a deficit due to food under-reporting initially. Which is probably true.
Is it possible that it was the result of some of the waste mass still being excreted from the body (following the oxidation of fatty acids during Phase 2)?

Edit: to clarify, by waste mass I mean whatever remains of fat tissue after fatty acid is used, like carbon, oxygen or whatever. ??

Last edited by BigPecsPeter : 03-17-2014 at 05:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Unread 03-17-2014, 08:07 AM
thombrogan thombrogan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 684
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigPecsPeter View Post
Is it possible that it was the result of some of the waste mass still being excreted from the body (following the oxidation of fatty acids during Phase 2)?
That might be possible, but underestimating initial intake or being more active seem more likely.
__________________
-Thom Brogan

"I knew you before you knew you had hands" ~Tracey Brogan
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Unread 03-17-2014, 08:23 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigPecsPeter View Post
Is it possible that it was the result of some of the waste mass still being excreted from the body (following the oxidation of fatty acids during Phase 2)?

Edit: to clarify, by waste mass I mean whatever remains of fat tissue after fatty acid is used, like carbon, oxygen or whatever. ??
Many things are possible which is why I said the researchers 'suggested...'. They didn't measure such and all they could do was speculate.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Unread 03-17-2014, 06:56 PM
atresia atresia is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 857
Default

Fascinating stuff. I wish the study would've extended longer, but that's probably impractical and perhaps unethical. Interesting study and great review.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Unread 03-17-2014, 07:18 PM
niloluiz niloluiz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
Many things are possible which is why I said the researchers 'suggested...'. They didn't measure such and all they could do was speculate.
Ah so the researchers noticed that too. I would be surprised if they didn't since it's glaring.

Probably this was caused by few different factors including maybe measurement margin of error, the partial glycogen depletion causing calories to be initially stored while fat burn kept going-on, among other possibilities.

It's also glaring that the protein consumed didn't get any LBM sparing compared with zero protein but this has more to do with the type of protein used (whey) as observed in the article.

I would read the entire paper but only the abstract is available. Anyway the main point covered by all that was really interesting.

Last edited by niloluiz : 03-17-2014 at 07:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.