View Single Post
AvidFisherman
Old 08-03-17, 09:21 AM
  #15
 
AvidFisherman's Avatar
 
Superior Pro
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Fishin' in the dark
Likes: 363
Fitness/Nutrition Post #1:

Energy balance is not an exact predictor of changes in body fat, muscle mass, or even body weight. It simply describes how much energy will be stored (in some form) or released from the system. However, energy balance is still the primary tool at our disposal when it comes to maximizing the rate of either loss of fat mass or gain in lean body mass. Regardless of whether you are in a calorie surplus/deficit/balance, the processes of storing and releasing fat from fat cells will be continually running in cycles throughout the day. Fat storage or release from a cell, or even fat oxidation for that matter, should not be considered as one snapshot in time. Fat gain is determined by the net effect over a prolonged period of the continual fat storing and fat releasing cycles. For all intents and purposes, if over a long period of time we have a net negative energy balance, then we can assume in most scenarios it is likely there will be a loss of fat mass.

Pros of an aggressive diet:

Having a more aggressive fat loss diet does not cause more weight regain over traditional dieting and it helps you get into good condition faster.

Large calorie deficits do not always mean muscle mass will be lost. Even advanced trainees and athletes can maintain/gain muscle during a deficit

McMaster University had a study of people on different calorie deficits. The greatest was 40% under their maintenance calories. They trained with high intensity exercise, resistance training, and HIIT. The lower protein group preserved lean mass while the higher protein group gained lean mass. This shows that even with a diet low in protein if you resistance train you can maintain your muscle on a calorie deficit, and if your protein intake is high you can gain muscle mass on a severe calorie deficit.

Researchers at Pennington Biomedical Research Centre published a study looking at the effect of caloric restriction on overweight individuals:

Control= maintenance calories lost 1%

Calorie restriction-25% reduction of calories lost= 10.4%

Calorie restriction and exercise 12.5% decreased calorie and 12.5% increase in energy expenditure= lost 10%

Large Calorie Deficit group- 890 kcal/day until 15% weight reduction and then switched to maintenance= lost 13.9%

Low Calorie dieters had a higher weight reduction even though they only dieted for 8-11 weeks and then went maintenance instead of the full 24 week diet for group 2 and 3.

Cons of an aggressive diet:

Short and more aggressive diets lead to a greater decrease in resting energy expenditure, there is a sharper adaptation to the metabolism. However, because the diet is short you can return to maintenance and reverse most of the metabolic adaptations.

Less food will decrease your maximum recoverable volume so you do not recover from training to the same extent as when you are on a high caloric intake (I've got some hormones coming in that say otherwise [emoji48] ).

Summary:

It comes down to a psychological preference. Do you want to go on a low deficit for a long period of time or a large deficit for a short period of time?

Sources:

Sigma Nutrition

Some other places I cannot remember



Sent from my SM-G930R4 using Tapatalk

Last edited by AvidFisherman; 08-03-17 at 09:26 AM.
is Online   Reply With Quote