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
  #1  
Unread 03-13-2014, 09:09 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default A time-efficient reduction of fat mass in 4 days with exercise and caloric restrictio

Article on the main site
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 03-13-2014, 08:33 PM
noah_k noah_k is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 391
Default

A new level of extremity, interesting. I know the protein was far below suggested requirements, but was still surprised to see such severe and identical LBM loss with both the protein and sucrose group. I'd have guessed 75g for a 100kg fellow would make a difference, but then again not in light of 8.5hrs of exercise.

It's too bad they did not include the same groups but without the exercise, just to compare, though I guess we know LBM losses would still be high, nothing really too useful? But what I'd really like to see is a similar study with variations of extremity, though where subjects take a potent anabolic alongside - to see just how muscle sparing they can be.

The phase 4 losses were kind of cool to see, good habits carried over instead of psychological breakdown gaining back and then some.

Last edited by noah_k : 03-13-2014 at 08:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 03-14-2014, 12:16 AM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,098
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by noah_k View Post
A new level of extremity, interesting. I know the protein was far below suggested requirements, but was still surprised to see such severe and identical LBM loss with both the protein and sucrose group. I'd have guessed 75g for a 100kg fellow would make a difference, but then again not in light of 8.5hrs of exercise.
Severe LBM loss?! Look at the results. After 7 days (end of Phase 3) the LBM loss from baseline was just 26%. And after 4 weeks where the subjects did as they wished, the LBM loss from baseline was less than 12%. What I find interesting here is precisely how little LBM was lost after 7 days in spite of the most extreme deficits and low protein.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 03-14-2014, 01:02 AM
noah_k noah_k is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 391
Default

Oops - you're absolutely right. When glancing over lbm, I didn't realize the the chart was from baseline instead of from the last phase, but that's pretty obvious in hindsight especially looking at the fat loss. And Lyle's small notation beneath it.

But I'm with you, at even half the recommendations of muscle sparing protein, it's still surprising to me to see that the losses were the same as with the sucrose group.

Last edited by noah_k : 03-14-2014 at 01:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 03-14-2014, 02:25 AM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,098
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by noah_k View Post
Oops - you're absolutely right. When glancing over lbm, I didn't realize the the chart was from baseline instead of from the last phase, but that's pretty obvious in hindsight especially looking at the fat loss. And Lyle's small notation beneath it.

But I'm with you, at even half the recommendations of muscle sparing protein, it's still surprising to me to see that the losses were the same as with the sucrose group.
I wonder what the results would have been on a pure fat diet.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 03-14-2014, 07:07 AM
Sam Hell Jr. Sam Hell Jr. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 309
Default

What stage of metabolic damage were the subjects in? Like 8?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 03-14-2014, 07:57 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigPecsPeter View Post
Severe LBM loss?! Look at the results. After 7 days (end of Phase 3) the LBM loss from baseline was just 26%. And after 4 weeks where the subjects did as they wished, the LBM loss from baseline was less than 12%. What I find interesting here is precisely how little LBM was lost after 7 days in spite of the most extreme deficits and low protein.
It's a bodyfat issue as I've talked about before. The fatter you are, the less LBM you lose under all conditions.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 03-14-2014, 07:59 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Hell Jr. View Post
What stage of metabolic damage were the subjects in? Like 8?
ALL THE METABOLIC DAMAGE!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 03-14-2014, 08:33 AM
NOAMattD's Avatar
NOAMattD NOAMattD is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 392
Default

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.
__________________
Discaprine, come from WITHIN.

RFL Round 2 Log (ended 10/25/2013)

UD2.0 Log (started 12/29/13)

Last edited by NOAMattD : 03-14-2014 at 08:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 03-14-2014, 09:16 AM
Sam Hell Jr. Sam Hell Jr. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 309
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.
With respect: If we're talking massive activity deficits like that, somewhere around 2,000 cal/day burned, the distinction between eating 80%, 100%, 110% of maintenance is less relevant.
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 11:50 AM.


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