Do fat burners actually work?

Joined
Sep 14, 2021
Messages
23
Reaction score
11
Points
3
I've been trying to lose weight naturally and sustainably for the past few months while also gaining muscle, I have been looking into using DNP but to be honest I didnt even look into the more attainable options that are available like l-carnitine, are there any supplements that actually work without messing with hormones?
 

sfw509

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
1,036
Reaction score
918
Points
83
I used to use fat burners. The only supplement that was ever worth a damn was the old eca stack. Everything out there today is questionable in my humble opinion.

It seems there has been a lot of info on injectable l carnitine lately. I ave not tried it and dont know enough to recommend it but you may want to look into thgat.

At the end of the day diet and training are what will get the job done. A very wise man once told me "Your diet is the hammer, your workouts are the chisel, everyhing else is sandpaper."
 

dk8594

Elite
SI Founding Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
2,986
Reaction score
4,815
Points
153
Most will not do anything other than make your wallet lighter.

For the most part their they are herbs and vitamins. The only exception are those containing stimulants such as caffeine, which will have a low to moderate impact on your metabolism is an appetite suppressant. Save your money and have some coffee.

Overall, however, it’s a heck of a lot easier to eat fewer calories than to burn more so if you want a zero cost option than eat less.
 

Oblivious

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
265
Reaction score
75
Points
28
a few years ago I used DNP,.
Does it work? Yes
Is it worth it? Not really
first thing is, unless you are super experienced(or on da juice) , you'll lose muscle mass, mainly because how much you'll hate life and how much harder your regular workouts are gonna be, even after you are done using its gonna throw off your routine for a few weeks at least. And a lot of people seem to rebound right after.
I used it during winter thinking it was the smart the thing to do, I was walking around in tank tops sweating 24/7 while everyone was wearing jackets. I looked like I was on drugs, everything I touch turned gold (musty yellow) .
My recommendation would be intermittent fasting , carb limitation and fasted cardio in the morning.
And for the love of god dont try to gain muscle and lose fat at the same time.
If you consider yourself fat, lose the fat before you start building muscle, it makes life so much easier later on.
Also, Caffeine is a slight metabolism booster, so is getting your peen wet daily (doesnt work if married)
 

dirtys1x

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2021
Messages
376
Reaction score
434
Points
43
Save your money. Caloric deficit is the only thing known to work to lose weight. However, gaining muscle and also losing weight in a caloric deficit is a difficult task to do. It’s possible since muscle gain is a signal dependent process - not an energy dependent process. However, more energy = longer workouts, better recovery, more strength.. a much better formula for putting on muscle.

Clean up your diet and you’ll get what you want.
 

Skullcrusher

Elite
Joined
Apr 1, 2020
Messages
1,850
Reaction score
2,208
Points
153
They can but only if you believe...and you must combine with one or more of the following...

1. calorie deficit
2. fasted cardio
3. skipped meals
 

eazy

Elite
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
1,160
Reaction score
2,297
Points
153
If it isn't one of these it probably doesn't work:

DNP, ECA stack, yohimbine, clen, salbutamol, caffeine, AOD 9604, injectable L-Carnitine

In no particular order. Can't speak to the effect on hormones.

None of these will do anything if you are not in a calorie deficit.
 

Send0

Taskmaster (Moderator)
Joined
Oct 28, 2020
Messages
2,407
Reaction score
2,863
Points
153
Save your money. Caloric deficit is the only thing known to work to lose weight. However, gaining muscle and also losing weight in a caloric deficit is a difficult task to do. It’s possible since muscle gain is a signal dependent process - not an energy dependent process. However, more energy = longer workouts, better recovery, more strength.. a much better formula for putting on muscle.

Clean up your diet and you’ll get what you want.
I can't help but think that maybe I've misunderstood something about your post. Can you elaborate on "energy dependent process" as it relates to building muscle?

Technically everything we do requires energy. Even sleeping requires energy.. so building muscle certainly requires energy.... energy expended to perform lifts, energy to process caloric intake, etc. In addition, to build muscle requires taking in materials to create that lean tissue... i.e. energy in the form of caloric surplus. The act of repairing muscle tissue, recruitment of satellite cells, hypertrophy, and hyperplasia, all are energy dependent processes.

I don't disagree that it's impossible to put on muscle while in a deficit, but I think that requires a very specific set of circumstances to become true. For the most part, with PEDs involved, most people will only be able to maintain their lean mass... and very rarely be able to add onto it while in a deficit.
 

Bro Bundy

Elite
SI Founding Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2012
Messages
14,823
Reaction score
9,939
Points
333
I never saw any fat burner work before . Some aas aid in helping burn fat
 

dirtys1x

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2021
Messages
376
Reaction score
434
Points
43
I can't help but think that maybe I've misunderstood something about your post. Can you elaborate on "energy dependent process" as it relates to building muscle?

Technically everything we do requires energy. Even sleeping requires energy.. so building muscle certainly requires energy.... energy expended to perform lifts, energy to process caloric intake, etc. In addition, to build muscle requires taking in materials to create that lean tissue... i.e. energy in the form of caloric surplus. The act of repairing muscle tissue, recruitment of satellite cells, hypertrophy, and hyperplasia, all are energy dependent processes.

I don't disagree that it's impossible to put on muscle while in a deficit, but I think that requires a very specific set of circumstances to become true. For the most part, with PEDs involved, most people will only be able to maintain their lean mass... and very rarely be able to add onto it while in a deficit.
Building muscle is signal dependent - progressive overloads/intensity of exercise/mode of contraction etc. It’s more of an adaptation process. We’ve come to realize that it’s easier to do this when we are in an energy surplus. Because you kind of disregard other catabolic effects of being in a deficit. But technically it’s not needed. The process is quicker in a caloric surplus because of all the great things that come in being in a high fed state. But no where in the signaling pathway is it a requirement that you be in a caloric surplus. Ofc, you still need enough fuel for basic metabolic processes.. but it’s not like being in a 300 calorie deficit automatically means you don’t gain muscle at all.

And yes, with PEDs it’s MUCH easier. That’s because building muscle relies on anabolic pathways that require tons of hormonal signaling - not energy signaling.

Also, I want to make it clear that when I talk about a calorie deficit, I’m not talking about 1000 calories under your baseline. Obviously then you don’t have enough energy then to expend on protein synthesis. I’m talking about mild caloric deficits
 
Last edited:

Send0

Taskmaster (Moderator)
Joined
Oct 28, 2020
Messages
2,407
Reaction score
2,863
Points
153
Building muscle is signal dependent - progressive overloads/intensity of exercise/mode of contraction etc. It’s more of an adaptation process. We’ve come to realize that it’s easier to do this when we are in an energy surplus. Because you kind of disregard other catabolic effects of being in a deficit. But technically it’s not needed. The process is quicker in a caloric surplus because of all the great things that come in being in a high fed state. But no where in the signaling pathway is it a requirement that you be in a caloric surplus. Ofc, you still need enough fuel for basic metabolic processes.. but it’s not like being in a 300 calorie deficit automatically means you don’t gain muscle at all.

And yes, with PEDs it’s MUCH easier. That’s because this pathway relies on a ton of anabolic pathways that require tons of hormonal signaling - not energy signaling.
but people on a cut aren't just on a 300 calorie dietary deficit. Most are doing 500 calories or more. In addition, we are typically also doing cardio most days of the week, in addition to lifting weights. So a 300-500 calorie deficit turns into an 800-1000 calorie deficit.

Ignoring PEDs, I just don't see a person being able to gain lean mass while in a deficit and doing all the other activity involved with a seasonal cut. Only situation I see this happening is when someone is extremely out of shape, new to working out or just getting back into it after a long time off, AND they are also on PEDs that have the strongest anti-catabolic effects. Or said another way... this is the only scenario where I have personally seen first hand where the outcome of what you described become true.

Maybe my science is old... or maybe I just don't have enough exposure to experienced bodybuilders who have accomplished what you described.
 

CJ275

Mod Squad
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Messages
9,572
Reaction score
12,895
Points
333
If you couldn't build tissue on a deficit, no injury would ever heal if on a diet.

But when the dial is turned up or down, so isn't the other one
 

Bro Bundy

Elite
SI Founding Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2012
Messages
14,823
Reaction score
9,939
Points
333
Tren is the only steroid u can build muscle on a calorie deficit
 

dirtys1x

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2021
Messages
376
Reaction score
434
Points
43
but people on a cut aren't just on a 300 calorie dietary deficit. Most are doing 500 calories or more. In addition, we are typically also doing cardio most days of the week, in addition to lifting weights. So a 300-500 calorie deficit turns into an 800-1000 calorie deficit.

Ignoring PEDs, I just don't see a person being able to gain lean mass while in a deficit and doing all the other activity involved with a seasonal cut. Only situation I see this happening is when someone is extremely out of shape, new to working out or just getting back into it after a long time off, AND they are also on PEDs that have the strongest anti-catabolic effects. Or said another way... this is the only scenario where I have personally seen first hand where the outcome of what you described become true.

Maybe my science is old... or maybe I just don't have enough exposure to experienced bodybuilders who have accomplished what you described.
Most of my cuts start out at 200 calorie deficits. We may have just different ideas of the term deficit. Also, I hold an 8k step baseline no matter what through my bulk or cuts with 3 cardio days a week. This allows me to understand my true maintenance and so when I’m 200 calories under I’m ONLY 200 calories under.

Anyway, besides that. Yeah a mild 300-500 deficit is definitely possible to gain muscle. If you weren’t regulating your maintenance level accordingly and you’re 500 calories under and your cardio regimen is all over the place.. then yeah you could be looking at sometimes being in a net negative 1k. You certainly won’t be gaining much or if any muscle at all in a deficit that low. The process isn’t crazy fast either, that’s why you see guys who do natural body recomps their progress takes years to achieve a good physique.

Also, for me, when I did my last cut, I started at about 2600 maintenece calories. I ended at about 1700 calories a day. However, at that point, my body has recreated a new maintenance. That’s why I wasn’t losing anymore weight. So if I added 100 calories I’m now technically in a caloric surplus. Im pretty sure on my way up from 1700 to 3100 calories ovsr the course of the last 5 months that I’ve put on some lean mass too. Even though technically I’m only 500 calories above my starting maintenece last year.
 

Send0

Taskmaster (Moderator)
Joined
Oct 28, 2020
Messages
2,407
Reaction score
2,863
Points
153
If you couldn't build tissue on a deficit, no injury would ever heal if on a diet.

But when the dial is turned up or down, so isn't the other one
healing/repair... while the process is the same, is not the same thing I think about when someone says it's possible to put on lean tissue while in a deficit.

I'm sure you can gain something... but what are we talking about, grams? Maybe 1-2 ounces? It's really difficult, and I don't see the reason for even trying. Maybe this is more likely to be true if someone is obese, or new to the gym/dieting.

Now if the conversation was about eating at maintenance, then my opinion on this changes.
 
Last edited:

Send0

Taskmaster (Moderator)
Joined
Oct 28, 2020
Messages
2,407
Reaction score
2,863
Points
153
Most of my cuts start out at 200 calorie deficits. We may have just different ideas of the term deficit. Also, I hold an 8k step baseline no matter what through my bulk or cuts with 3 cardio days a week. This allows me to understand my true maintenance and so when I’m 200 calories under I’m ONLY 200 calories under.

Anyway, besides that. Yeah a mild 300-500 deficit is definitely possible to gain muscle. If you weren’t regulating your maintenance level accordingly and you’re 500 calories under and your cardio regimen is all over the place.. then yeah you could be looking at sometimes being in a net negative 1k. You certainly won’t be gaining much or if any muscle at all in a deficit that low. The process isn’t crazy fast either, that’s why you see guys who do natural body recomps their progress takes years to achieve a good physique.

Also, for me, when I did my last cut, I started at about 2600 maintenece calories. I ended at about 1700 calories a day. However, at that point, my body has recreated a new maintenance. That’s why I wasn’t losing anymore weight. So if I added 100 calories I’m now technically in a caloric surplus. Im pretty sure on my way up from 1700 to 3100 calories ovsr the course of the last 5 months that I’ve put on some lean mass too. Even though technically I’m only 500 calories above my starting maintenece last year.
LOL... pretty sure when the OP asked the question, he wasn't wanting to wait years to see the effect. This is the perspective I'm coming from. So another question... why even eat at a deficit to recomp? It's so much more effective to do this at maintenance calories, assuming someone was really chasing after a true recomp.

Also your body creating a new maintenance at 1700 calories, is probably not really a maintenance. You probably hit the start of aspects of metabolic syndrome from being on such a deficit for that period of time. The only way to fix that is by reverse dieting; which you seem to have been doing over the past 5 months. No doubt you've accrued some lean tissue... but also no doubt a portion of that are your glycogen stores being replenished after eating only 1700 calories for a while. 😂
 
Top