Implementing Low-fat Diet And Needing Advice

[Jon]

120 reps weekly is exorbitantly high, in my view. The sources you provided in your previous post were based largely on anecdote and the intuition of weightlifting coaches and enthusiasts. To me, these sources don't exercise much scientifically and don't provided thorough citations. Therefore, I don't think they are appropriate for someone pursuing scientifically optimal health and wellness through nutrition, lifestyle and training, which would be the goal shared by most on this board. For this aim I would point you to "Body By Science" or even "the 4-hour body" by Timothy Ferris. The former delves into many of the scientific aspects and is heavily cited, while the latter is admittedly more anecdotal but well still well supported as it alluded to Arthur Miller's training with Casey Viator who was able to gain nearly 40 lbs of muscle with on 1 work out each week (though steroid usage was denied), and the result is a strong case for lowering volume and frequency in ostensibly every weightlifters workout. Body By Science even details how subjects improved in many ways simply by lowering their training frequency from 3 times per week to once per week.

That said, if hyperophy is the goal then some of the "bro-science" routines detailed in your links could be optimal, but I would never recommend them to anyone because they will compromise structure and metabolism long term. After all, all weightlifters and bodybuilders end up with joint pain, injuries, back problems, etc etc. To avoid this I would never train to failure and never perform more than a single 30 minute routine for any given muscle group per week, and I don't consider biceps or triceps to be a muscle group, the arms fall into the push/pull categories from my perspective, as they are always working in conjunction with the large muscles. 120 reps per week should be cut in half, or even a quarter. Besides, muscle growth is mainly achieved through dietary protein, this was proven by multiple time Olympian Dorian Yates who asserted that 80% of bodybuilding is diet, and that his lifting never lasted more than 30 minutes with a couple intense sets per muscle, but mostly warm-up sets.

Your assertion that these programs are all based on anecdotal evidence is false. You also seem to believe in programs founded on the success of infamous steroid abusers like casey viator who founded his training principles on the Colorado experiment (of which my Uncle was actually a participant in) and Dorian Yates who used ridiculous amounts of steroids and followed the heavy duty training principles and rest pause made popular by the mentzer brothers (also known steroid users) which was not founded in science but by anecdote and is more risky for injuries due to over training than any of the things I outlined above. Your opinion of me suggesting too much volume itself is anecdotal if you have no solid science to back it on

https://muscleandstrengthpyramids.com/nutrition-videos/


https://renaissanceperiodization.com/

Juggernaut -BECOME UNSTOPPABLE

These links are to organizations which provide more in depth insights on training methods than the links I posted earlier and provide free training templates. I've been coached by someone from each of these groups and their training methods are all based on the same science as the earlier links I posted, just more in depth and articulate in their approach along with more concise timing of phases. These organizations also specialize in drug free athletic coaching as their athletes compete in drug free federations which are easy to prove based on taking any of the athletes and testing their FFMI for yourself.

This video is eric helms (phd) giving a quick but concise lecture on appropriate volumes, intensities and frequencies, and gauging RPE, and though he doesn't exactly outline what I have above for my own personal use, it's still very close and probably tailored to a safer recommendation for novice viewers who are going to do the maximal volume despite best suggestions:


I have looked at other studies on optimal training volumes and overtraining and found the figure of 120 reps per week being the max for an advanced trainee but it's late and I don't feel like digging it up so I'll do it tomorrow. Hopefully this helps explain my suggestions more throuroughly.

 

[JustAGuy]

Cardio should be limited to no less than 10,000 steps a day and no more than what your daily life requires because cardio accumulates stress hormones in greater quantity and more quickly than low volume/ high intensity weight lifting does.

I am wondering what you think of higher volume / low intensity vs low volume / high intensity for lifting. For me personally the low volume / high intensity feels way more stressful. Especially with very CNS intensive movements (free weight compounds) and if rep tempo is kept short (lifting as explosively as possible with short concentric and eccentric.

I have been testing different things for a while and for me the the least stressful is experienced as following (using mood/energy levels/sleep as parameters):
- Machine compounds are a lot less stressful to me than free weight (chest press machine vs bench press etc.)
- Taking long rest periods between sets seems to be a lot less stressful than rushing a workout in as short as time as possible.
- Higher reps (like 8-20) seems less stressful than lower reps (3-5).

Also for me personally doing cardio on very low intensity (I wouldn't even call it cardio, since HR stays low, like just walking around or cycling slow speed for no longer than 20 min at once). Seems to be a decent way to increase caloric expenditure without stress throughout the day. I think the stress effect comes when one does cardio that feels taxing, when it stops feeling like "movement" and starts to feel like "training".

 

[Jon]

120 reps weekly is exorbitantly high, in my view. The sources you provided in your previous post were based largely on anecdote and the intuition of weightlifting coaches and enthusiasts. To me, these sources don't exercise much scientifically and don't provided thorough citations. Therefore, I don't think they are appropriate for someone pursuing scientifically optimal health and wellness through nutrition, lifestyle and training, which would be the goal shared by most on this board. For this aim I would point you to "Body By Science" or even "the 4-hour body" by Timothy Ferris. The former delves into many of the scientific aspects and is heavily cited, while the latter is admittedly more anecdotal but well still well supported as it alluded to Arthur Miller's training with Casey Viator who was able to gain nearly 40 lbs of muscle with just 1 work-out each week (steroid use was denied), and the result is a strong case for lowering volume and frequency in ostensibly every gym-goers routine, regardless of goals. Body By Science even details how already strong, experienced lifters improved in many ways simply by lowering their training frequency from 3 45 minute workouts per week to one 20 minute workout per week.

That said, if hyperophy is the goal then some of the "bro-science" routines detailed in your links could be better suited. Though, I would never recommend them to anyone for fear they will compromise structure and metabolism long term. After all, all weightlifters and bodybuilders end up with joint pain, injuries, kidney problems etc etc. To avoid this I would never train to failure and never perform more than a single 30 minute routine for any given muscle group per week, and I don't consider biceps or triceps to be a muscle group, the arms are included push/pull categories, as they are always working in conjunction with the primary muscles.

So regardless I think the 120 reps per week should be cut in half, or even a quarter, if full hormonal recovery is given attention. Besides, muscle growth is mainly achieved through dietary protein, this was proven by multiple time Olympian Dorian Yates who asserted that 80% of bodybuilding is diet, and that his lifting never lasted more than 30 minutes with a couple intense sets per muscle, but mostly warm-up sets.

Here is the study on maximal rep ranges:
The influence of frequency, intensity, volume and mode of strength training on whole muscle cross-sectional area in humans. - PubMed - NCBI

Since it's in pubmed and I don't have an account, here's another website summarizing what it says:
The Optimal Volume Per Muscle Group, Body Part, Workout & Week

Hope this clears it up.

 

[Jon]

I am wondering what you think of higher volume / low intensity vs low volume / high intensity for lifting. For me personally the low volume / high intensity feels way more stressful. Especially with very CNS intensive movements (free weight compounds) and if rep tempo is kept short (lifting as explosively as possible with short concentric and eccentric.

I have been testing different things for a while and for me the the least stressful is experienced as following (using mood/energy levels/sleep as parameters):
- Machine compounds are a lot less stressful to me than free weight (chest press machine vs bench press etc.)
- Taking long rest periods between sets seems to be a lot less stressful than rushing a workout in as short as time as possible.
- Higher reps (like 8-20) seems less stressful than lower reps (3-5).

Also for me personally doing cardio on very low intensity (I wouldn't even call it cardio, since HR stays low, like just walking around or cycling slow speed for no longer than 20 min at once). Seems to be a decent way to increase caloric expenditure without stress throughout the day. I think the stress effect comes when one does cardio that feels taxing, when it stops feeling like "movement" and starts to feel like "training".

Hey man give me some time later today or tomorrow to answer your question as I'm thinking I'm just going to make a thread for my training recommendations and personal routines since I feel bad that I hijacked @DanielleB 's thread and I don't want to take focus off her topic anymore.

 

[Jon]

@DanielleB @Jem Oz hey i just wanted to give you two a better Katch Mcardle calculator:
https://goodcalculators.com/tdee-bmr-calculator/

I think the one I had posted earlier had been set to estimate lower than the normal activity multipliers. Hope this helps.

 

[DanielleB]

@DanielleB @Jem Oz hey i just wanted to give you two a better Katch Mcardle calculator:
https://goodcalculators.com/tdee-bmr-calculator/

I think the one I had posted earlier had been set to estimate lower than the normal activity multipliers. Hope this helps.

You're awesome! Thank you for posting the link! I'm a bit confused though.... because the site that had the TDEE calculator on it but multiplied by a slightly lower activity rate explained that it did so because most people overestimate their activity rate and so it seemed that it was "more accurate" due to taking this into account?

What are your thoughts on this? I plugged in my stats on the new calculator you posted and it gave my TDEE as around 1870 calories. So if I'm wanting to lose weight, doesn't this mean I need to be eating close to around 100 calories less??

 

[Jon]

@DanielleB i think the former site estimates too low. I think if your honest with yourself about how much activity you actually do then the original multipliers are accurate as I've never had issues maintaining weight using the exact number it gave me.

Yes, as a matter of fact to even see half a pound of fat loss per week (which is generally accompanied by 0.5-1lbs of waterloss) after dieting for 7 days you would have to eat 250 calories less.

In your circumstance I would not recommend weightloss at this time. I would instead recommend eating at maintenance and focus on progressive strength training to gain lean mass and subsequently increase your bmr and TDEE. After 8-12 months of progress (6-12lbs of muscle gain) then fatloss would be more manageable as you could accommodate more calories and get adequate nutrients while undergoing a caloric deficit. As a novice weight lifter, despite your health issues, you can make extreme muscle gains following a well laid out program. I'm working on a training guide for this site but admittedly it's more of an undertaking than I thought it would be and is taking awhile so I'll post some links in a bit for good programs for you and hopefully that will help. I made fantastic gains In muscle and strength even at my most ill and at times it was actually the only thing that made me feel better or normal so take that for what you will.

 

[cyclops]

Jon what's your height, weight, and bodyfat? Is that a pic of you in avatar?

 

[Jon]

Muscle also consumes about 50calories per lb per day so 6-12 more lbs of muscle should equate to 300-600 more calories burned a day by BMR and should also raise your TDEE through strength training by roughly 500-750 calories a week if you weight train 45mins-1hr 2-3x a week. Overall this would raise your TDEE per day by 370-700 calories a day. @DanielleB

 

[DanielleB]

@DanielleB i think the former site estimates too low. I think if your honest with yourself about how much activity you actually do then the original multipliers are accurate as I've never had issues maintaining weight using the exact number it gave me.

Yes, as a matter of fact to even see half a pound of fat loss per week (which is generally accompanied by 0.5-1lbs of waterloss) after dieting for 7 days you would have to eat 250 calories less.

In your circumstance I would not recommend weightloss at this time. I would instead recommend eating at maintenance and focus on progressive strength training to gain lean mass and subsequently increase your bmr and TDEE. After 8-12 months of progress (6-12lbs of muscle gain) then fatloss would be more manageable as you could accommodate more calories and get adequate nutrients while undergoing a caloric deficit. As a novice weight lifter, despite your health issues, you can make extreme muscle gains following a well laid out program. I'm working on a training guide for this site but admittedly it's more of an undertaking than I thought it would be and is taking awhile so I'll post some links in a bit for good programs for you and hopefully that will help. I made fantastic gains In muscle and strength even at my most ill and at times it was actually the only thing that made me feel better or normal so take that for what you will.

Good advice, per usual but something I'm not quite understanding is that you say to build muscle while on maintenance calories for 6-12 months to shoot for muscle gain and then implement a caloric deficit to achieve fat loss.

I don't feel that I need to build muscle, I only stopped weight training for about 2.5 months while my energy was too low to continue without furthering my issues. I intuitively feel that I am up to weight training again and have tracked temp and pulse while eating at 1770 calories for a week and they didn't suffer which tells me that my body can handle the deficit. I already had a pretty muscular build before the weight gain and even with the extra weight now, I can tell I have adequate muscle development under the fat. So when you say that muscles will raise the TDEE, how can I figure that into the the TDEE I got from the Katch-Mcardle calculator you posted?

I would very much look forward to your workout programs. Another question I have is that I have had female friends in the past who were doing bikini and figure competitions and their training was more geared to working an individual muscle group per workout. I am wondering if a similar composition can be achieved with the types of workouts you were mentioning?

 

[Jon]

Good advice, per usual but something I'm not quite understanding is that you say to build muscle while on maintenance calories for 6-12 months to shoot for muscle gain and then implement a caloric deficit to achieve fat loss.

I don't feel that I need to build muscle, I only stopped weight training for about 2.5 months while my energy was too low to continue without furthering my issues. I intuitively feel that I am up to weight training again and have tracked temp and pulse while eating at 1770 calories for a week and they didn't suffer which tells me that my body can handle the deficit. I already had a pretty muscular build before the weight gain and even with the extra weight now, I can tell I have adequate muscle development under the fat. So when you say that muscles will raise the TDEE, how can I figure that into the the TDEE I got from the Katch-Mcardle calculator you posted?

I would very much look forward to your workout programs. Another question I have is that I have had female friends in the past who were doing bikini and figure competitions and their training was more geared to working an individual muscle group per workout. I am wondering if a similar composition can be achieved with the types of workouts you were mentioning?

I explained how muscle gain would do this here:

Muscle also consumes about 50calories per lb per day so 6-12 more lbs of muscle should equate to 300-600 more calories burned a day by BMR and should also raise your TDEE through strength training by roughly 500-750 calories a week if you weight train 45mins-1hr 2-3x a week. Overall this would raise your TDEE per day by 370-700 calories a day. @DanielleB

Nice investigative work with your temps pertaining to your calories! Hey if you can handle it then who am I to stop you! I only suggested further muscle gain because it would give you more calories to cut from for a deficit which would allow you to consume adequate micro nutrients you might otherwise have issue getting enough of from food alone with such a small calorie intake especially if you have any intolerances that make food choice already limited.

The short answer is yes lol the recommendations I make for training are optimal for muscle gain no matter your gender.

However, just like each person follows a unique diet plan cut out for their individual health, so to must a person follow a training regiment tailored to what is optimal for them pertaining to their individual goals. Like most things with a scientific basis laid over the course of decades, hypertrophic and strength training have some hard guidelines established by multiple studies replicating similar or the same experiments with the same or similar outcomes In Which a person SHOULD operate to have a starting point of a more accurate specificity to undertake progression for their unique circumstances (i.e. Physiology, health, goals for adaptation). All this said, what you see your friends doing may be optimal for them and their results, but possibly not for you. That's not to say you can't attain the same or similar adaptations as them, you just may have to have a different progression scheme to attain such (i.e. Skin the cat a different way)

 

[Jon]

@DanielleB something else I should add is that the deficit you start with will not always yield the same rate of weightloss through a fatloss phase. As your bodymass decreases, so too does your BMR.
Eventually to have substantial enough weightloss to be worth your time and effort in a 4 week phase you will have to lower calories further.

This is another reason I had suggested increasing lean mass prior to a fatloss phase.

1 lb of bodyfat contains roughly 3500 calories and so you must eat 3500 calories LESS to lose a lb of fat. Usually this total deficit requirement of 3500 calories is spread over a weeks time and so a person would eat 500 calories less from maintenance a day for 7 days to equate the 3500 calorie deficit required for a lb of fatloss.

At your current calorie maintenance a 500 calorie deficit would put you at 1200 calories a day. At your current rate of weightloss (-100cals/day) you would loose 0.8lbs of FAT in 4 weeks and most likely some water weight. To me this rate of weightloss is not worth the effort, especially since your deficit has a diminishing point of returns the lower your bmr goes.

 

[Evandrojr]

@DanielleB something else I should add is that the deficit you start with will not always yield the same rate of weightloss through a fatloss phase. As your bodymass decreases, so too does your BMR.
Eventually to have substantial enough weightloss to be worth your time and effort in a 4 week phase you will have to lower calories further.

This is another reason I had suggested increasing lean mass prior to a fatloss phase.

1 lb of bodyfat contains roughly 3500 calories and so you must eat 3500 calories LESS to lose a lb of fat. Usually this total deficit requirement of 3500 calories is spread over a weeks time and so a person would eat 500 calories less from maintenance a day for 7 days to equate the 3500 calorie deficit required for a lb of fatloss.

At your current calorie maintenance a 500 calorie deficit would put you at 1200 calories a day. At your current rate of weightloss (-100cals/day) you would loose 0.8lbs of FAT in 4 weeks and most likely some water weight. To me this rate of weightloss is not worth the effort, especially since your deficit has a diminishing point of returns the lower your bmr goes.

@Jon, thank you so mugh for your incredibly insightful comments! I tend to agree with you in terms of the macro balance, fat requirements for men and...well, pretty much everything you’ve been saying!

I do however struggle a bit to form my meals and still keep in mind other important factors such as Na/K ratio, SaFa/Pufa ratio, Ca/ph ratio, etc. So if you don’t mind, would you be so kind as to outline what a day of eating looks like to you? (maybe a training day?).

Thanks!!!