| Author | Post |
|---|
superman
New Member
| Joined: | 24 Jul 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 6 |
|
Posted: 24 Jul 2013 12:03 pm |
|
Just curious on thoughts of this..
I've done the super low calorie thing a couple years ago and failed.. I got as low as I've ever been on the scale eating 1000 calories a day for a few months (normally 160-165 lb male). I got down to 154 and was lethargic, having terrible energy/sex drive and all the symptoms of decreased metabolism. I looked small and judging from strength, I had lost some muscle.
Today, I am around 165 and look leaner than I did when I was 10-11 pounds lighter. I eat 1800 a day.
My biggest problem, in looking back, is that I was on this sustained hypo-caloric intake and never doing refeeds. I didn't even know about them back then. I now do one every week at about 2500-2600.
I'm thinking about shooting for sub-10% body fat levels again I'm about 12% right now and have never really gone
under that.
Now realizing the power of refeeds and keeping Leptin high, I'm wondering how an extreme diet would go if a person like myself was to do 800 calories a day and then have a 4000 calorie day (high carb/mod protein/low fat) once a week. It almost seems like this would accelerate fat loss without all the nasty side effects of a slowed metabolism (or whatever you want to call it).
Thoughts?Last edited on 24 Jul 2013 12:04 pm by superman
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 24 Jul 2013 12:50 pm |
|
My first thought is "what is the point". As I understand them, re-feed days should not be higher than maintenance calories or slightly over.
"Rule of 31" allows you to calculate the maximum deficit you can tolerate that results in fat loss (rather than muscle loss)
You are 165lb and 12% so you are 20lb of fat and the maximum calorie deficit that can actually be powered by fat is 20 x 31 = 620 calories a day. If you create a larger deficit, some of that energy will be the loss of muscle and some of it will be the metabolic downshift you previously experienced (body learns how to make do with fewer calories).
(Supposedly 'Rule of 31' applies to the deficit from diet and you are still free to create extra deficit with exercise? never been clear about that point.)
To sum up - don't see the point of losing muscle - most people want to lose fat. The leaner you are the smaller your deficit has to be. A good discipline to have is patience.
|
superman
New Member
| Joined: | 24 Jul 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 6 |
|
Posted: 24 Jul 2013 02:11 pm |
|
Thanks, Nir. In all honesty, I probably wouldn't do this anyway.. Back when I did the 1000 cals a day, it was torture. At my current caloric intake, life is good and it's a comfortable eating pattern. I was just curious from a purely physiological standpoint.
While I understand that refeed days are typically slightly over maintenance, that's typically because people eat at a slight deficit all week so to go any higher is creating a surplus. I guess I'm curious if going well over your maintenance and still creating a deficit for the week couldn't offer advantages? It would be the ultimate leptin spike which seems like it would offer a big benefit.
As far as muscle loss, it seems that there are a few studies that demonstrate that applying continual resistance to the muscles with an intake of protein is enough to keep muscle atrophy from happening. At 800 cals a day, I could still get 1g of protein p/ body weight and 18g of fat and then get all the carbs my body would desire on the refeeds.
btw.. I'm not challenging anything you've said. You certainly know far more than I do. I've only been at the fat loss game a couple years and have just recently really started reading up on it a lot more. It's all just conjecture on my part. What prompted my question was watching 'Naked and Afraid' the last few weeks. These people lose ridiculous amounts of fat on that tv show when isolated for 21 days in the jungle and not eating anything. They're obviously losing muscle too but I was just entertaining the idea of being able to lose fat as fast as they do and somehow retain muscle.
Also.. when you say, "You are 165lb and 12% so you are 20lb of fat and the maximum calorie deficit that can actually be powered by fat is 20 x 31 = 620 calories a day."
-- How is this calculated?
Oh.. and what is "Rule of 31"?
|
superman
New Member
| Joined: | 24 Jul 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 6 |
|
Posted: 24 Jul 2013 02:16 pm |
|
Found the 'Rule of 31'. Interestingly enough, Lyle even says the number is bogus with protein and resistance training.
http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=12760
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 24 Jul 2013 06:01 pm |
|
So that rule-of-31 would allow people to create large deficits,
but on the other hand periodic re-feeds will then be very welcome to ensure their metabolism doesn't take a dive.
That would be the point where they could lose at the fastest rate compared to what they can do when they become leaner.
I am still obsessive about these sorts of things but the focus of my obsession has moved away from creating calorie and macro cycling schemes to finding out what sort of diet is going to be healthiest for me in the long term. (If you have any interest in that area I would recommend looking up Dr Joel Fuhrman. Or CRON - Calorie Restriction with Optimal Nutrition)
|
superman
New Member
| Joined: | 24 Jul 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 6 |
|
Posted: 24 Jul 2013 06:12 pm |
|
Sounds good. Thanks for your thoughts, Nir.
I am transitioning into the healthier aspects too.. since I'm in my mid-40s. On the one hand, I'm still obsessive because I want to be under 10% just once in my life to say I did it! On the other hand.. every year (since about 40) is showing a few more progressive signs of aging that are expressed in my everyday living so the bigger picture is showing itself to be more important. :)
Great site. Looking forward to learning more here...
|
Current time is 09:30 am | |
|
