Aesthetics / Muscle / Dieting

[gaze]

Agreed he is in good shape for his age, he's not just in as good shape as a guy who worked out all his life, at least in terms of physique.

I just find everything so contradictory to itself.

Testosterone and anabolic hormones are important, there is clear evidence for their levels correlate to fat intake. If you go too low fat you get problems there, this has been talked about a lot.

Also, this low-fat thing would not be possible without modern industry, then you can forget about milk, cheese, and meats except wild game, since they all sport high fat. Also I am of Scandinavian heritage, there is not much fruit there and carbs was hard to come by before agriculture. Should this not have affected some biological processes? Does not seem primed for carbs.

When I increased sugar my SHBG went down, this is the only dietary change in 5 years that has increased my Free T. Diabetics have too low SHBG, it's a clinical marker. I lived mostly on low-fat milk (not skim), fruit/juice and meat. I did not consider it a high-fat diet. Everything worked well on this diet except the increase in visceral fat.

I've read all of Broda Barnes books often cited and mention by Ray Peat. He treated hundreds of his overweight patients by doing a higher fat/higher protein diet protocol called a "Reducing Diet" that you would go on as soon as you needed to lose some weight. It's explained in detail in his book on Hypothyroidism.

That's the opposite even though he was a somewhat expert of his time concerning thyroid and metabolism charing the same views as Peat. Peat never mentions this, it annoys me a lot he doesn't address Broda's full research. Clearly, Broda would not prescribe such as thing if it had very harmful implications for his thyroid patients.

Problem is, most people who work out intensely eventually crash and put on crazy amounts of weight. Light exercise is ideal and although I don’t think ray cares much about physique, he has said low stress weight lifting a couple times a week is beneficial for the muscles.

Also, I agree there are a lot of contradictions. For example, I am personally going after low SHBG. SHBG renders T inactive IMO, and i’ve personally found my morning woods to be more frequent with lower SHBG. SHBG also rises in age, which is not a good sign for high SHBG. There’s also another guy on this forum who’s trying to lower his SHBG because of his low libido.

Regarding the high fat diet, I do understand the appeal of ancestral diets, but many of these have been lied about by the Weston a price foundation to sell fish oil. I think overall for weight loss low strss is the best way, and if you find eating fattier cuts of meat with some cheese butter relaxes you, gives you sustained energy, and is helping you lose weight, then by all means do it. Just make sure if you have a craving for orange juice after a workout, listen to that craving.

I agree with your frustration on contradictions overall, but I think it’s shortsighted to blame Ray or Danny Roddy, cause both are simply trying to help, and you may find as your health and stress improves naturally you’ll be eating more fruit/juice with no issues

 

[Shin]

Like the dude said in your quote; more frequent meal feeding would most likely have resulted in higher lean mass retention. It’s been shown that animals fed less than 3 protein meals a day had bigger livers than those who recieved more frequent feedings.

Insulin resistance will have effect. It is an adaptation to the feeding pattern but it will hinder your glycogen storage. It takes time to top out glycogen stores and it’s essential for high performance in the gym.

You likely had issues from your previous traditional deficit because you didn’t spend enough time at maintenance to normalize grehlin and leptin levels. And if you got lean enough (under 8% bf) then your levels would likely have never normalized being that that level of leanness does not support healthy hormonal function. Obviously you could never stay in a deficit forever lol there are strategies you have to employ to retain a body composition once the dieting is over. It took me awhile to learn that too, but once I understood how to transition from a diet to maintenance I no longer had rebounds.

Would you mind sharing your cutting plan which got you to look like in that pic?
How were your energy levels at 7-8% BF, did you still feel good?

 

[Aleeri]

Did an InBody scan the other week, I am actually in a better place than most people. It is just that what I aim for is below the average, so I'm not really fat according to the average lol. Perfectionist clearly.

I'm 183cm, 82kg.
BMI 24.4
40kg skeletal muscle mass (this is why my BMI is higher)
12kg body fat mass.
Around 15% body fat levels
Fitness score 87/100
Basal metabolic rate: 1878 (about 100cal higher then I thought)


I've switched to lifting 5-6 days a week now, already feels tons better and lost some weight without changing diet. I think it might be so simple that I've been too sedentary.

 

[revenant]

Did an InBody scan the other week, I am actually in a better place than most people. It is just that what I aim for is below the average, so I'm not really fat according to the average lol. Perfectionist clearly.

I'm 183cm, 82kg.
BMI 24.4
40kg skeletal muscle mass (this is why my BMI is higher)
12kg body fat mass.
Around 15% body fat levels
Fitness score 87/100
Basal metabolic rate: 1878 (about 100cal higher then I thought)

I've switched to lifting 5-6 days a week now, already feels tons better and lost some weight without changing diet. I think it might be so simple that I've been too sedentary.

How was the metabolic rate calculated? Do you really eat that little?

I'm the same height and weight and used to eat about that amount, but on these forums the recommendation would probably be closer to 3000 kcal per day, sedentary or not. Which pretty much means getting fat and then hoping for the best.

 

[Aleeri]

How was the metabolic rate calculated? Do you really eat that little?

I'm the same height and weight and used to eat about that amount, but on these forums the recommendation would probably be closer to 3000 kcal per day, sedentary or not. Which pretty much means getting fat and then hoping for the best.

It was calculated in the machine, not sure what equation it uses. This is the calories burned at rest, so it would be this + whatever I burn from activity. The gym recommended 2500 calcs as a good aim.

I also think that if you work out more often with weights that the body will prioritize energy into muscle rather than fat since it is used a lot. As in less fat storage would happen, but I guess I will find it in 2 months. Will report back.

 

[ExCarniv]

Check Christopher Walker, he have an impressive physique and his diet is pretty based on Peat ideas + IF.

Google Thermo Diet Christopher Walker.

 

[GreekDemiGod]

Optimal bodyfat level for a non-competitive male who wants to look good naked is 10% - 12%.
Lower than 8-9% will have detrimental hormonal effects.
Now to get to my point. One does not easily get to 10 - 12%, unless he has exceptional insulin sensitivity. Most of us have to diet to drop that low.

 

[ExCarniv]

Also, Peat said for weight loss, you can do low calorie days getting at least 600 calories from sugar to maintain liver glycogen.

Metabolic flexibility is a good thing tho, normal calorie days most days, low calorie days for weight loss and high calorie days when you train hard.

 

[Ron J]

One thing not commonly thought of regarding fat storage beyond calorie balance is that it is also a way the body isolates toxins and protects itself. Fatty liver is a a reaction to liver harm. Visceral fat storage is protecting internal organs and possibly isolating an irritated digestive system, mediated by cortisol.

When you see someone with a flat stomach and a non-veiny six pack or toned stomach, you are basically seeing these attractive traits:

-low or no inflammation or bacterial overgrowth in the gut
-good insulin sensitivity, little insulin spiking
-low cortisol due to low stress life
-steady supply of food so no trigger for the body to store extra fat

You are correct that eating in excess will cause you to gain weight, but that is in excess of your metabolic rate. The swing on caloric overrun or deficit will generally be no more than 10-25%, while you can potentially boost your metabolic rate by 7x by getting all cells to oxidative phosphorylation, or something in between, which is substantially more impactful than percentage changes.

You can't abuse T3 or it will just turn into reverse t3 so it's really not a good strategy.

Did you check Kate Deering? She claimed to initially put on weight and then return to a svelte figure on a Peat diet.

Is there something wrong with having a lot of veins on your abs?

 

[anniejohnson]

Nobody on this forum has their head in reality. Everyone lies about how they're doing and how's they're looking. This is just another example of how out of touch all you stupid ***** are.

 

[charlie]

Nobody on this forum has their head in reality. Everyone lies about how they're doing and how's they're looking. This is just another example of how out of touch all you stupid ***** are.

 

[redsun]

Nobody on this forum has their head in reality. Everyone lies about how they're doing and how's they're looking. This is just another example of how out of touch all you stupid ***** are.

Could you be more specific, no one can understand your psychotic ramblings.

 

[corvetteseeker]

@Aleeri - I really sympathize with your frustrations and now exactly what you mean; I've been going through the same challenges.

I have quite the experience fasting and here's an amazing experience I had a couple of years ago you'll probably find interesting:

(I will preface this with the fact that I tend to be overweight naturally and had and have a sedentary job.)

A couple of years ago, I was barely maintaining 13% body fat eating just 1700 cals/day and doing 16/8 IF. I was also running 2x a week and lifting 3x week.
I changed nothing except the following and promptly got my first ever 6 pack in just one month: cut the running completely and kept my calories
the same overall but instead of 1700 every day, I ate about 3400 every other day and fully fasted the other day.

My main gripe with fasting is it kills my creativity and my empathy for others; it just makes it very difficult to interact with others.
If I had a factory job and/or didn't have a family, I would do fasting hands down to maintain a lean weight.

I've heard so many horror stories about hormones on low fat but it's the only Peat approach I haven't fully tried so I am giving that a shot.
If this doesn't work, I don't know how I can avoid fasting.

 

[YamnayaMommy]

Thanks for this post. I first heard about Ray Peat through BAM and, browsing the forum, was confused about whether RP ideas about diet were compatible with the aspirational physique goals described in BAM.

I agree that IF is the simplest way to achieve caloric deficit but worry about losing muscle etc.

I just had my third baby last February and, as a lactating mother with three kids four and under, don’t have the leisure of weighing and measuring food 3x/day. I lost the baby weight after #1 (50lbs) through weighing and measuring, IIFYM diet and following a strength training program. After #2, I lost baby weight (60lbs) by skipping dinner, eating lots of lean protein and veggies, and doing YOUTUBE HIIT and strength training when I could. I got back to 135 lbs (am 5’10”) 9 months postpartum and then, after a month of being able to wear nice cloths again, got effing pregnant again, as a result of gravely underestimating our fertility. I then gained SEVENTY LBS for third baby, and have lost 65 of it, almost seven months later, by skipping dinner M-F. My baby is 94th percentile for height and 91st for weight, so the IF has not stunted his growth and my milk supply is fine. And no I’m not selling milk.

At this point I want to continue fat loss, especially in stomach, and build muscle. To Avoid skinny fat decondition that I’m currently in. I feel sooooo good eating sugar, so Ray Peat’s ideas about diet are very affirming. Although I’m ultimately utilitarian about diet and could be fine with whatever.

Am I sabotaging myself with IF?

I notice the female physique influencers on YouTube mostly do not seem to do IF. And that the layne Norton et al crowd ridicules fat loss magic claims frequently made by IF partisans.

I've been doing Ray Peat diet like 1.5 years now along with experiments with supplements and thyroid hormones. Body temperature seems just about optimal, resting pulse rate could come up (probably down because of exercise) but in general, after I eat I have a good pulse rate in the 75-85.

In the process, I also got more fat than ever around my belly. I no longer see how some of the Ray Peat guidelines could ever work long term when this is the case.

What's becoming increasingly clear to me is that the Ray Peat principles do not take in consideration or care about those of us who also want to LOOK good, as in building muscle, abs and keeping body fat levels on the lower side. Fructose is prized for example and starch is not, yet fructose is very inferior for building muscle.




These aesthetics are considered positive traits, as in we find them more attractive in partners, excess body fat is never seen as healthy, it turns people off for good reason. Some people argue that it's not healthy to have body fat levels that give you a six-pack, but then why do we view it as attractive, I don't buy this reasoning.

Clearly, the drop in metabolic rate after we are young makes it very hard to go back to the effortless lean we experience when we kids. How would it even be possible to? When we are young we are growing/learning at a crazy rate, that's why the body consumes so much energy, this doesn't happen when we older and the body stops developing like this. No Ray Peat diet will ever bring that back, that's certain.




None of the Ray Peat guidelines are compatible with weight loss for aesthetics and he doesn't even seem to like exercise much, to be honest. Zero people that are public in the Ray Peat community such as for example Danny Roddy etc has an impressive physique.

It's always about stress reduction here rather than stress adaptation and I am kinda on the fence that a 90kg lean muscular person has way higher survival chance than a skinny fat Ray Peat follower with a high pulse rate. It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Resistance training taught me one thing and that is that stress adaptation and mental challenges are equally good ways to reach stress reduction or even better. The more you challenge yourself the stronger you become to resist life's challenges.

All in all, when it comes to resistance training and maintaining an aesthetically pleasing body, it can be concluded that Ray Peat knows very little.




The question then is who has similar views to Ray Peat in terms of diet but focus more on exercise? What good tips out there can we try?

Fasting and caloric deficit is a big no-no in terms of Ray Peat, yet it is the ONLY WAY to lose body fat.

And don't tell me the crap about bringing up your metabolic rate will make you lose it. Yes, you might lose some weight that way in the span of a couple of years, but it will never make you look awesome. Same as you will never build that muscle without lifting that weight.

Also if the metabolic rate was all there was then taking tons of T3 and eating like a champ would make you lose body fat, and it doesn't. I tried it. Many people tried it. Many people here just got fat.

Bodybuilders often take T3 when they diet on a deficit to lose fat, how could increasing metabolism through eating MORE and taking T3 be expected to do the same? It doesn't.




The human body is a machine built for survival and it will store energy as much as it can when the opportunity is given, hence if you always eat an excess you will never lose fat.

Please prove me wrong but nobody will be able to since then you will be like sitting on the billion-dollar weight loss secret. If there was an easy way somebody would have discovered it already.


The best possible ways I've researched are:

• Alternate day 24h fasts every 3 days (seems to not lower metabolism as much as traditional dieting according to research)
  
• Skipping a meal in order to easier reach a deficit on any given day
  
  
• Combine the above with occasional refeeds and 1-2 weeks off dieting every few weeks of dieting and it is probably the best way to lose fat without hurting metabolism through metabolic adaptation.

If you guys have any good links to fitness gurus or the like that seem to value metabolic rate but also are successful in terms of aesthetics, please share. Where are these people, they seem to not exist.

I would love for Ray Peat to talk about building muscle and weight loss but clearly, he does not have experience in these areas or even interest, which is why he never writes about it.

 

[aussiebaldguy]

Nobody on this forum has their head in reality. Everyone lies about how they're doing and how's they're looking. This is just another example of how out of touch all you stupid ***** are.

Quite a broad brush...you must be a house painter

 

[Zigzag]

What do you think about prolonged fasting (1-2 weeks)? Is it a viable mechanism to restart yourself?

 

[ExCarniv]

What do you think about prolonged fasting (1-2 weeks)? Is it a viable mechanism to restart yourself?

The only way to "restart" yourself is getting adecuate sleep and eating enough nutrients.

Doing prolonged fasts will only put you under extreme stress.

 

[tygertgr]

The only way to "restart" yourself is getting adecuate sleep and eating enough nutrients.

Doing prolonged fasts will only put you under extreme stress.

A lot of people report breaking out of extreme depression by a couple weeks of fasting. There is some convincing literature suggesting it might be a tool against cancer ("anti-peat" I know). Religious traditions that have lasted thousands of years incorporate fasting.

I don't see what the harm is in taking some vacation and going five days without eating and seeing what happens. No reason not to try it.

 

[lampofred]

A lot of people report breaking out of extreme depression by a couple weeks of fasting. There is some convincing literature suggesting it might be a tool against cancer ("anti-peat" I know). Religious traditions that have lasted thousands of years incorporate fasting.

I don't see what the harm is in taking some vacation and going five days without eating and seeing what happens. No reason not to try it.

That's more than enough time to completely destroy your thymus, and then all immunity starts subtly getting disordered. It's a lot easier to destroy these fragile tissues than to restore them.

 

[tygertgr]

That's more than enough time to completely destroy your thymus, and then all immunity starts subtly getting disordered. It's a lot easier to destroy these fragile tissues than to restore them.

I would say you're dramatically overestimating how stressful fasting over a leisured five days is. If you go for a couple days without eating (knowing that you have nothing pressing to do) parts of your neo-cortex start to shut down and you can take a break from thinking and worrying. It's very relaxing. You can't think. You stare at the ceiling and perceive things in a more basic way. Orwell in "down and out" wrote about this phenomenon where being hungry on the street was actually lower stress in his experience than being middle class in a lot of ways.

Thymus Shmiamus. If it degenerates from a few days of hunger then it obviously isn't that important. I trust three thousand year old traditions and ceremonies over some nerd with pubmed.

I also think there's clearly something to the autophagy arguments. Occasionally ramping up the systems that break down tissues is better than never doing it.