The Fat Loss TroubleshootThis is your place to troubleshoot your fat loss problems from nutrition to training. This section is led by Leigh Peele, author of "The Fat Loss Troubleshoot," the ultimate fat loss manual. If your results have slowed or stalled this is the place to come for advice for all your fat loss needs.
And SURE if you believe the marketing hype you won't lose ANY LBM no maatter how much weight per week you lose. Personally, I have not yet seen any convincing testimonials to back the claims of these rapid fat loss plans. At least they are not convincing enough for me to try them. For Doug's case this might be just fine though. Like I said before he can afford to lose some LBM and in the grand scheme of things will not matter. For me, it can be the difference between the class so is a much bigger deal. In any case, the diet is going to really suck so be prepared to embrace the suck.
__________________
The BIGGER I get the smaller you look
Oh, the 100g of carbs per day is the "mass gain" variation of UD2.
Really? Interesting... He specifically told me it was a variation on the cutting plan for people who cannot stand low carb in this post. He is WELL AWARE of the fact I am on a severe cut plan and that I have competition goals. I have not read the book well enough to know for sure where the 100g a day option is given... just going by what Lyle told me. 50g a day would absolutely destroy me. I am pretty sure I can do the 100g a day plan now though. Even at 120g a day (and no carb up) it is major suckage for me on a lot of levels. I am pretty sure I will resist going even that low again. 150g a day or more for this insuline sensitive NEAT queen thank you very much....
And yes Doug you can always quit if you can't hang with the plan. That really shouldn't hurt you to try it. It will be fun to watch it from this side as you do try it. Some people have mega good results from it for fat loss...
__________________
The BIGGER I get the smaller you look
. Even at 120g a day I suffer from terrible mood swings and energy crashes.
karla, I didn't realize alan had your carbs at 120 grams a day. is this what you take in on most days, or does it cycle?
speaking of alan, I have learned the most about this subject from reading past AARR issues. from what I understand, keeping protein up and lifting weights are really the critical variables with maintaining LBM.
dougz also has the advantage of being a young male who already carries a nice amount of lean tissue. the great thing is, when he returns to a building phase, he's got testosterone on his side, and will be able to train hard and recover nicely, great advantages when one is trying to build muscle!!
the critical issue would be whether bigger deficits trigger compensatory overeating--this varies greatly by individual--some people can cycle out of a big deficit, put on the obligatory water/glycogen scale weight, but they don't revert back to calorie excesses and subsequent fat regains.
you are an experiment of one, dougz, time will tell!
Jane: Okay now you made me look it up.... (Pardon the hi-jack Doug) On page 54 of my version Lyle says....
Be forewarned, if you've never done a very low-carbohydrate diet, you're in for a shock. Don't be surprised if you feel mentally fuzzy or a little bit brain dead (This is why I suggest at least 2 weeks on a moderate carb/moderate fat diet before you jump into UD2). If this is the case you may want to increase the carbohydrates to 100 grams/day. This usually goes away after a few cycles....
We cross posted Wendy: Love your post (Whole thing) To answer your question I am on 120g of carbs linear a day. I have the option to do 230g on one day of the week maximum. I don't do it. I just hang out at 120g a day. I am cycling protein instead of carbs and also on a REALLY high protein diet overall (I think I am averaging 230g a day). This is some sort of weird experiement that Alan is doing. He talked about it at the Summit and titled my diet plan, "As Bro as it gets" or some such thing.
__________________
The BIGGER I get the smaller you look
Sorry, Karla....guess I skimmed over that. I do so well on very low carbs that I probably just glossed right over that as "inapplicable" to me. Now, when it comes time for the mass gain alternative at the back of the book, then I will up them.
'tis okay Jane... I actually never even looked for it before so did not even verify it. I just assumed since he told me it was there that it was. But you made me curious enough to do the search... LOL!
I wish like mad I could do as well as you on low carbs since there are so many cool diets to try that are low carb... oh well. Guess I'll have to stick to my custom plan for now. I am fine with this plan this time but even at 120g a day it totally sucks for me oftentimes. Next time I am going to try upping my carbs even more. Alan said he'd work with me on that if I want to go for it. I want to run 100% with Alan's "bro diet" recommendation for this first time down but after that.... Then we'll try a few things differently. I really feel like with my ability to process and need for carbs that having more would actually keep my energy levels higher and make me do better. I guess only time is going to tell for this one though 'cause I (Like all of us) am an experiment of one.
__________________
The BIGGER I get the smaller you look
My maintenence cals, according to Lyle's formula =
210 lbs x 12 (moderate activity. weights 3x per week, no cardio) = ..... 2520??
Did I do that right?
So a 500 cal deficit should really be 2020 cals??
By comparison, the Harris Benedict Equation (BMR x activity 1.55) puts my maintenence at 3240, and a 500 cal deficit at 2740..
Quite the discrepancy..
According to Lyle's calculations (if I did them right), I should have been GAINING .5 lbs a week, eating 2700 calories..
But instead I lost 20lbs..
??
I realize these are approximate estimates, but if my results of eating at 2700 are any indication (mind you I did have 3100-3200 "refeeds" sprinkled in, but Lyle accounts for and recommends this as well) then I'm left wondering where I SHOULD aim for, maintenence-wise, when I finish the RFL diet, if this formula appears to be off by this wide margin already..
Or 210 x 13 = 2730 (moderate is 12-13 cals per lb.) But remember:
Quote:
Quite simply, if you’re regaining weight (this doesn’t include the rapid water weight gain that accompanies high carb or salt intakes), you need to cut your calories back a bit; if you’re still losing at supposed “maintenance” levels, you need to increase calories slightly.
Your weight should be lower after RFL so figuring at 210 is an exercise in futility.
__________________
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."
Your weight should be lower after RFL so figuring at 210 is an exercise in futility.
I clarified my question (see above edit)..
But it remains the same question..
If following this formula shouldn't have worked back when I was 230 (like I say, I should have GAINED weight, apparently), how am I supposed to use when I come off the diet?
Like I say, I appreciate that it's an estimate, and that I'll have to tweak it..
But, ye Gods! That's quite the margin of error, compared to the HB equation, which looks like it fairly accurately predicted the resulting weight loss..
oh - I misread
2 week break after my 1st cycle
to be
my break after my 1st 2 week cycle
(that is, that your first cycle was going to be just the 2 weeks (which I think is a category 2 option) )
my apologies for the misread and subsequent question
This is why people like the Gowear fit. With a reasonable amount of accuracy it tells you how many calories you're burning daily.
Forumlas are just a starting point. When you factor in water rention it becomes pretty difficult to figure out how many calories you need to maintain your weight without careful long term food tracking.
and that assumes accuracy in food measurement and in the food nutrient tables - just take it for what it is, a ballpark number and if it doesn't match your reality, adjust as needed.
just take it for what it is, a ballpark number and if it doesn't match your reality, adjust as needed.
Yes, I can agree with that..
But the kicker is, after my 1st cycle I only have a 2 week break, and I'll want a pretty good estimate right then and there, as I'll be heading into another cycle after, and won't have time to make adjustments as I would just going into maintenance..
By the data that I've accumulated over the 3 months of a more or less linear 2600-2700 calories a day, the logical thing to do would be to go with the formula that best predicted the results (HB)..
I'm just thinking that after 6 weeks of ~800 calories a day (even with the free meals and/or refeeds) that a ballpark guess by whatever method of how much to eat on days 37-51 is probably fine. The difference of 3200 to 2700 is only 500, the difference from 800 to 2700 is 1900 - and that's the point. Eat more like maintenance for a couple of weeks. You won't fail your break if you under or overshoot by 500 calories for 14 days. Besides which, you don't know what your activity levels will be after 6 weeks of RFL nor do you know what your weight will be. My advice, Just Chill.
Or obsess. Whichever you prefer.
You really are overthinking this... There is a limit to how much real damage you can do in only 2 weeks anyway... choose a method, use that estimate, track, and just do it. If it isn't perfect, learn from it and adjust next time...
I am fine with this plan this time but even at 120g a day it totally sucks for me oftentimes. Next time I am going to try upping my carbs even more. Alan said he'd work with me on that if I want to go for it. I want to run 100% with Alan's "bro diet" recommendation for this first time down but after that.... Then we'll try a few things differently. I really feel like with my ability to process and need for carbs that having more would actually keep my energy levels higher and make me do better. I guess only time is going to tell for this one though 'cause I (Like all of us) am an experiment of one. 
Linear Mode
