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 04-21-2009, 10:04 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default Not Losing Fat at 20% Deficit, What to Do?

Q&A on the main site
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 04-21-2009, 10:18 AM
Morgan's Avatar
Morgan Morgan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Whitman, MA
Posts: 216
Default

all my nutbutters are 16gms per serving, just sayin!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 04-21-2009, 10:22 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Which is why I shouldn't go from memory. Thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 04-23-2009, 06:53 AM
BWTrainer BWTrainer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 677
Default

Could it be possible that eating a little more actually results in a bigger deficit? I'm not talking Berardi numbers here. What I mean is, could a sharp reduction in cals cause an even greater metabolic slowdown through leptin, thyroid, subconsciously moving less, etc?

Say maintenance is 2500, but dieting at 1800 cals slows maintenance to 2400, a 600 cal deficit.

Now say that person drops cals to 1500, but 'maintenance' slows down to 2000 because of it. You're eating less, but the deficit is only 500 now.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 04-23-2009, 08:22 AM
Weib Weib is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 815
Default

Wouldn't weight then be a factor?

start of diet - X lbs x 12 vs 5 weeks at X-20lbs X 12 for a constant deficit.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 04-23-2009, 09:22 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weib View Post
Wouldn't weight then be a factor?

start of diet - X lbs x 12 vs 5 weeks at X-20lbs X 12 for a constant deficit.
Don't understand what you're saying.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 04-23-2009, 09:21 AM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 22,641
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BWTrainer View Post
Could it be possible that eating a little more actually results in a bigger deficit? I'm not talking Berardi numbers here. What I mean is, could a sharp reduction in cals cause an even greater metabolic slowdown through leptin, thyroid, subconsciously moving less, etc?

Say maintenance is 2500, but dieting at 1800 cals slows maintenance to 2400, a 600 cal deficit.

Now say that person drops cals to 1500, but 'maintenance' slows down to 2000 because of it. You're eating less, but the deficit is only 500 now.
Possibly except that I've never seen anything approximating that level of drop in a diet study. There is individual variacne and that can offset some of the deficit but I doubt the overall magnitude would be that much.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 04-28-2009, 03:05 PM
Hannah Hannah is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England
Posts: 185
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BWTrainer View Post
Could it be possible that eating a little more actually results in a bigger deficit? I'm not talking Berardi numbers here. What I mean is, could a sharp reduction in cals cause an even greater metabolic slowdown through leptin, thyroid, subconsciously moving less, etc?

Say maintenance is 2500, but dieting at 1800 cals slows maintenance to 2400, a 600 cal deficit.

Now say that person drops cals to 1500, but 'maintenance' slows down to 2000 because of it. You're eating less, but the deficit is only 500 now.
This study suggests that might be the case:
PLoS ONE. 2009;4(2):e4377. Epub 2009 Feb 9.
Metabolic and behavioral compensations in response to caloric restriction: implications for the maintenance of weight loss.Redman LM, Heilbronn LK, Martin CK, de Jonge L, Williamson DA, Delany JP, Ravussin E; Pennington CALERIE Team.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...gdbfrom=pubmed

It's interesting though that exercise and calorie restriction combined didn't cause the same drop in daily energy expenditure as calorie restriction alone, suggesting that at least some of the drop was caused by reduced activity which was presumably compensated for in the exercise group.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 04-29-2009, 07:47 PM
itawolf itawolf is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 39
Default

Good post Hannah!!

---and like was said --your eating alot more than you think--well cal wise---a
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 05:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.