has anyone had any luck with it or does anyone have any idea what type of fatloss per month could reasonably be expected?

has anyone had any luck with it or does anyone have any idea what type of fatloss per month could reasonably be expected?

I am curious about this as well. My weight loss has stalled in the past couple months but I continue to eat clean, do 3-4 days of weight lifting and a couple days of cardio. In the past month I have definitely seen improvements in the mirror, and my lifts have gone up steadily.

Until you reach a certain body fat percentage, I think this plan works great. The key thing to remember is that in order to be losing fat while eating at maintenance, you need to be building muscle mass. So strength training and clean eating are both crucial.

"Cutting" and "bulking" are things I will try for again when I reach a more advanced level. I think for the majority of (non over-weight) people, eating at maintenance in the context of a good exercise program will work great.

has anyone had any luck with it or does anyone have any idea what type of fatloss per month could reasonably be expected?

Calories in / calories out. In order to lose weight while consuming "maintenance" calories you must increase your activity level.

Calories in / calories out. In order to lose weight while consuming "maintenance" calories you must increase your activity level.

Seconded. :tucool:

I have found that if I eat more, I obviously have more energy - but I have to add a couple of cardio sessions per week as well as lengthen them to overcome the extra calories. Calories in must be less than calories output... or you won't lose weight, period. Personally, I'd rather lower the calories and do less cardio to lose weight than up 'em and spend more time on the treadmill.

-R

Seconded. :tucool:

. Calories in must be less than calories output... or you won't lose weight, period.

-R


I'm not sure if the poster meant it this way, but he asked about fat loss while eating at caloric maintenance. That doesn't necessarrily mean weight loss.

I'm not sure if the poster meant it this way, but he asked about fat loss while eating at caloric maintenance. That doesn't necessarrily mean weight loss.

It's still the same principle - he/she has to expend more than they take in. The terms "fat loss" and "weight loss" are relatively interchangeable on this forum, mainly because it's implied that no one wants to lose lean mass - so when we use the words "weight loss", or at least when I do, you could substitute "fat loss" in its place.

Eating at maintenance, at least for me, requires no adjustment from eating while on a deficit, so your nutritional protocol doesn't change.

-R

It's still the same principle - he/she has to expend more than they take in. The terms "fat loss" and "weight loss" are relatively interchangeable on this forum, mainly because it's implied that no one wants to lose lean mass - so when we use the words "weight loss", or at least when I do, you could substitute "fat loss" in its place.

Eating at maintenance, at least for me, requires no adjustment from eating while on a deficit, so your nutritional protocol doesn't change.

-R

6 in 1 - half dozen in the other.

let's think about it....

+ he does fasted LISS, which will burn fat for energy while doing it - right?
+ he eats 100% perfect, which means he only eats for what his body will use, and not store any fat during the day, as well as not using any fat during the day.
+ he eats enough carbs/protein PWO to rebuild and grow muscle <slightly>.

I dunno.. it just seems very possible if executed perfectly.

let's think about it....

+ he does fasted LISS, which will burn fat for energy while doing it - right?
+ he eats 100% perfect, which means he only eats for what his body will use, and not store any fat during the day, as well as not using any fat during the day.
+ he eats enough carbs/protein PWO to rebuild and grow muscle <slightly>.

I dunno.. it just seems very possible if executed perfectly.

There's no doubt. It's absolutely possible! And very doable.

i also think the same thing can be applyed for a slow bulk as well, as long as you're doing cardio.

It's still the same principle - he/she has to expend more than they take in. The terms "fat loss" and "weight loss" are relatively interchangeable on this forum, mainly because it's implied that no one wants to lose lean mass - so when we use the words "weight loss", or at least when I do, you could substitute "fat loss" in its place.

Eating at maintenance, at least for me, requires no adjustment from eating while on a deficit, so your nutritional protocol doesn't change.

-R

What I was saying is that it is possible for many people to improve their body fat percentage while staying at the same weight. In this case, "fat loss" and "weight loss" are not interchangeable, because actually bodily mass never changes.

Also just a question. . .how are your maintenance calories and deficit calories the same? Doesn't the word "deficit" imply "below maintenance"?

Also just a question. . .how are your maintenance calories and deficit calories the same? Doesn't the word "deficit" imply "below maintenance"?
he said his nutritional protocol doesnt change - which simply means he is eating the same healthy foods, only more of them.

What I was saying is that it is possible for many people to improve their body fat percentage while staying at the same weight. In this case, "fat loss" and "weight loss" are not interchangeable, because actually bodily mass never changes.

Also just a question. . .how are your maintenance calories and deficit calories the same? Doesn't the word "deficit" imply "below maintenance"?

Activity level increase/decrease

I'm a strong believer in game and metagame when it comes to fatloss. There's the basic rules of the game you play to lose fat, and then there are other rules you follow because you know the way you're going to play the game, and you want to adjust that so that you get better results.

Imagine you're always playing one on one against the same person. Eventually you're going to notice weaknesses, and eventually he's going to notice yours, and eventually you'll try to adapt to each other. The game is getting the ball in the basket and preventing the other guy from getting the ball in the basket. The metagame comes from knowing that a stutter step always breaks the guys ankles, or that he won't try to block your outside shots.

In the sense of the game, you shouldn't always take outside shots - they're going to be more predictable and lower percentage than taking shots from all over the court. But if the guy won't guard you, there's something to be said for just taking the three pointer all day until he does - if you can make it. That's metagame - structuring new rules of a higher-level game in relation to how somebody else plays the core rules.

Now, in fat loss, you always play against yourself. You should try to figure out what how your body works, sure (the game), but you should also find out what your psychological strengths and weaknesses are. You should look at how you managed to gain the weight you want to lose, and you shouldn't just play against the clock - you shouldn't just play against the calorie numbers - you should also play against that version of yourself who gained all that weight! You should try to encourage yourself to do things that will help you and prevent yourself from doing things that will harm you -- create the circumstances for success, rather than failure, in the main game.

Generally, I think eating maintenance and expecting to lose fat from food timing and exercise is a poor metagame move for almost everybody - it's a much worse move in context than it is scientifically.

Most people are not very good at eating at maintenance - especially people still looking to lose weight. Check out the tomato soup experiment (http://www.thebatt.com/media/paper657/news/2004/03/04/Aggielife/Tricky.With.Treats-625513.shtml) and tell me you've never noticed that in your own life.

People are better at eating on calorie restriction, I think, than they are at eating on maintenance. On maintenance, people will drift toward overeating - however unsuccessful most diets are, I think people are better at sticking to a deficit than they are at sticking to maintenance.

"I'll just eat when I'm hungry" - might work in the abstract, doesn't work in the metagame. You'll get "hungry" too often.

"I'll just eat maintenance and exercise more" - might work on paper, doesn't work in the metagame. You'll eat over maintenance and not lose weight.

"I'll look at the calories on the treadmill and make sure they add up to more than the calories I eat above maintenance." Doesn't work, doesn't work, doesn't work!

You know from the fact that you have weight to lose that you need to put extra effort into controlling what you eat. A diet that allows you to be lax on food will tempt you to return to your old behavior, which will hurt, not help or even be neutral. Most people who say they're going to eat maintenance think on the meta level that they're relaxing the restraints on how they eat - that they're not dieting, they're just doing what is normal. Most people who are normal in America are overweight.

No, maintenance is as strict a diet as deficit is - a loose maintenance becomes overeating, just like a diet you don't intend to follow. There is no good reason to be on maintenance when your main goal is still to lose significant fat.

Do the things that will put you in a mindset of being strict with yourself. John is a great example of somebody who played the metagame - he put his picture up there on the internet to force him to be strict with himself and take things seriously. There is no scientific proof that putting your picture on the internet will help you lose weight, but I bet people who put up pictures do a lot better than people who don't, on average.

Well, i've gotten myself into a situation of being skinnyfat. I dont really want to bulk with a lot of fat on my body and i'm not sure how much more weight i can drop.

Skinny fat + Fall Season = Slow Bulk until spring :tu:

Trust me, im in the same situation, and decided to say screw it, and bulk.
And i'm very glad i made that choice.
I kept trying and trying to cut, but notta.

so... put on some muscle before spring so you can have some to show off after you cut.

he said his nutritional protocol doesnt change - which simply means he is eating the same healthy foods, only more of them.

The most applicable definition of protocol from dictionary.com com is:
"A code of correct conduct: safety protocols; academic protocol." That doesn't really specifiy whether he's referring to calories, macronutrients, exercise etc.

You guys really like to defend your elders :p

The most applicable definition of protocol from dictionary.com com is:
"A code of correct conduct: safety protocols; academic protocol." That doesn't really specifiy whether he's referring to calories, macronutrients, exercise etc.

You guys really like to defend your elders :p

Oh Shit !!!!!!!!!!

You guys really like to defend your elders :p



Damn Newskin, If you consider Roger an elder I must belong in the geriatric ward! :confused:

A good reason to be on maintenance while builiding muscle is not to feel deprived. Some people do not do well when they're strict with themselves. If I had set a goal to eat at deficit, it would suddenly be me against the tuna, and, I tell ya, I aint gonna let that stinky fish win.

I've never considered myself an exceptional person, yet I've managed to quite easily eat at close to maintenance and still lose fat. I lost about 15 pounds in the first six months, and in the year and a half since then, I've gained about 3 pounds, but at least half of it has been muscle. I will check out the tomato soup link and see if it doesn't sound like me. Keeping reports and photos here helps to keep me accountable.

I think there are too many people who insist on calculating the mathematical formula for weight loss, then trying to follow it to the letter. Just the word defecit irks me. It's not necessary to deprive yourself to be healthy. You can eat what you enjoy and still reach a healthy weight if you listen to your bodies cues and eat for hunger only rather than other pangs like boredom, stress, sadness, etc.

The average person is overweight not because he eats past the point he's hungry, but because he eats the wrong foods, and eats for other reasons than hunger. Bodies generally will maintain themselves pretty well if we listen to their needs.

The most applicable definition of protocol from dictionary.com com is:
"A code of correct conduct: safety protocols; academic protocol." That doesn't really specifiy whether he's referring to calories, macronutrients, exercise etc.

You guys really like to defend your elders :p
pshhh.... defend my elders?

Sure, I usually automatically respect anyone older than me just based on how much i learn about life each and every year.
Since Roger is about 10 yrs older than me, I can think about how much i learned about life since i was 13 (10 years ago).
lol... I think elders deserve FAR more respect than what is usually given.

Anyway - i was just re-iterating what i thought he meant because you showed confusion in your previous post.
I wasnt sticking up for him. :D

A good reason to be on maintenance while builiding muscle is not to feel deprived. Some people do not do well when they're strict with themselves. If I had set a goal to eat at deficit, it would suddenly be me against the tuna, and, I tell ya, I aint gonna let that stinky fish win.

I've never considered myself an exceptional person, yet I've managed to quite easily eat at close to maintenance and still lose fat. I lost about 15 pounds in the first six months, and in the year and a half since then, I've gained about 3 pounds, but at least half of it has been muscle. I will check out the tomato soup link and see if it doesn't sound like me. Keeping reports and photos here helps to keep me accountable.

I think there are too many people who insist on calculating the mathematical formula for weight loss, then trying to follow it to the letter. Just the word defecit irks me. It's not necessary to deprive yourself to be healthy. You can eat what you enjoy and still reach a healthy weight if you listen to your bodies cues and eat for hunger only rather than other pangs like boredom, stress, sadness, etc.

The average person is overweight not because he eats past the point he's hungry, but because he eats the wrong foods, and eats for other reasons than hunger. Bodies generally will maintain themselves pretty well if we listen to their needs.
Good points.

and about eating at maintanance....
the exact act of eating exactly the amount of calories as your body uses is impossible.
no one knows how many calories we actually burn a day, even if each day is the same.
so it's sooooo much easier for someone to say "ok, i want to lose some weight. i'm going to try to eat under 2700 calories a day, get some excersize in there, eat healthy, and i'll be all good"

that's why people apply science to it.
people need that concrete assurance and confidence that if they burn more calories than they take in, they will lose fat.
and now they have this number to go by.

The 1 and only reason diets fail is that people want to lose fat as fast as possible, and their results can never live up to their expectations. Period.
I've seen it in myself as well, even with everything i think i know about this stuff.
I get too impatient.

I haven't seen this thread since yesterday. :lol:

Elder? :lol: Maybe... in a sense. I'm nowhere near the same person I was when I was ten years younger, just as I won't be who I am today... ten years from today. And if there is a wisdom that comes with age, it has yet to show up on my doorstep... I still screw up with the best of 'em.

wh0 nailed the replies I would have posted since I last viewed this thread, so I'll leave it at that.

-R

the exact act of eating exactly the amount of calories as your body uses is impossible.
no one knows how many calories we actually burn a day, even if each day is the same.
so it's sooooo much easier for someone to say "ok, i want to lose some weight. i'm going to try to eat under 2700 calories a day, get some excersize in there, eat healthy, and i'll be all good"

that's why people apply science to it.
people need that concrete assurance and confidence that if they burn more calories than they take in, they will lose fat.
and now they have this number to go by.

The 1 and only reason diets fail is that people want to lose fat as fast as possible, and their results can never live up to their expectations. Period.
I've seen it in myself as well, even with everything i think i know about this stuff.
I get too impatient.
That's not the only reason diets fail. Many diets only reach their failure at the point which the person reaches their goal weight and decides to go "off the diet". Then they have no idea how much to eat.

I don't like this diet mentality. If you want to lose fat PERMANENTLY, putting yourself at a deficit is not the answer. Losing fat "at maintenance" sounds much better to me, but in practice, it has to be near maintenance, not at maintenance.

It's impossible to calculate how many calories you need to eat to lose maintain your body fat, so that's why it makes sense to eat just enough so that you're not hungry. To lose weight, eat just enough that you're a little hungry, and to gain weight, eat just enough so that you're a little full. Much easier than pulling a number out of your butt and following those numbers, ignoring stomach grumblings and the like.

is it possible to lose fat on maintenance but maintain your weight?

is it possible to lose fat on maintenance but maintain your weight?

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!

is it possible to lose fat on maintenance but maintain your weight?
lol... looks like someone didnt read this thread :)
anything is possible.

lol
i read a bit but some of the guys were talking about losing fat/weight whilst eating at maintenance? (or thats what i think they were saying)

everything is possible.
you can also maintain your weight on a calorie deficit.

would your diet have to be very strict? i am trying to do this but i didnt count my calories so i was losing weight (my bench etc wasn't dropping but a lot of them haven't changed for like 3-4 wks)

I started another thread almost identical to this one - for some reason I didn't notice this one. Thanks Doordude for pointing it out. :)

So the concensus is that a balanced energy diet (="eating at maintenance") while following a good exercise program can be an effective way to improve body composition?

This isn't meant to be rude (only _honest_) - but I'm not interested in whether a particular approach makes you feel deprived or hungry, etc. As far as I know, feeling deprived or hungry doesn't much affect the end result.

So the concensus is that a balanced energy diet (="eating at maintenance") while following a good exercise program can be an effective way to improve body composition?

I would have to say yes...as close to a recomp as you will get (or think of it like a really slow bulk).

This isn't meant to be rude (only _honest_) - but I'm not interested in whether a particular approach makes you feel deprived or hungry, etc. As far as I know, feeling deprived or hungry doesn't much affect the end result.
If you don't mind feeling deprived, I think it's likely more efficient (ie. faster) to do a cut and then a bulk (or vice versa) to improve body composition. Either way will work, but there are different reasons for choosing each approach.

If you don't mind feeling deprived, I think it's likely more efficient (ie. faster) to do a cut and then a bulk (or vice versa) to improve body composition. Either way will work, but there are different reasons for choosing each approach.


I agree with this to a certain degree. As Guava said, an outright cut/bulk program will yield faster results. However, if you prefer maintaining your current weight and want to change body comp. that too can be accomplished. Keep in mind this can prove to be quite a balancing act. Make sure your diet and workout are dialed in and be patient. :tu:

Thanks for all the information so far. I find these perspectives very interesting and helpful.

I think a couple of people have touched on something that I've sometimes thought of commenting on, which is that to me a calorie deficit or surplus or balance is a situation that takes place, but won't be pre-planned with 100% precision because (as is noted by some of you) you can't predict how many calories you're going to burn. Actually, you also don't know EXACTLY how many calories you're going to eat, because food calories are not extremely precise or consistent, and you don't know how much you're going to fail to absorb, etc).

Anyway, for me, "maintenance" just means that (by luck or by judgment) my total weight happens to stay about the same. In that circumstance, it means that calories absorbed = calories burnt. This is my current situation. I just gradually increased how much I ate until I stopped losing weight.

Interesting thread! I agree with what's been said, it's impossible to calculate how many calories you burn exactly each day. If you did a little digging one day but didn't the next, you could be out on your maintenance by 200 calories or so. Its all relative.

A lot of people adopt the portion rule. Its great for cutting/maintaining or just living a healthy lifestyle, without all the calorie/gram counting. Not ideal for bulking however. Once I reach my cutting goal, I'm going straight on a bulk again but am considering the portion rule after that.