Where would you start?

[RiR0]

He gave two options.. clearly he is open to both ideas. He asked the forum because he wanted feedback in general. He didn't ask for a singular myopic point of view. Which is good that you chimed in because we were all giving him advice from a singular perspective.

Let's not turn someone else's thread into a battleground.

Arguments from differing perspectives is fine, trying to dictate who can participate or who is worthy is not.

You should not give advice. Look at the retard advice you gave.
His original question get 40lbs off in 8 weeks. So as fast as possible. You said eat at maintenance or slightly below. That’s dumb as fuck. You couldn’t even do a dc leg day correctly because you don’t have the ability to train hard

 

[Send0]

You should not give advice. Look at the retard advice you gave.
His original question get 40lbs off in 8 weeks. So as fast as possible. You said eat at maintenance or slightly below. That’s dumb as fuck. You couldn’t even do a dc leg day correctly because you don’t have the ability to train hard

Here, I've requoted the part of his original post that's relevant... since you clearly didn't read it in full.

You can still train hard while in a deficit. Also, you're banned from chat. How are you seeing things mentioned in chat unless you are creating alt accounts... Tucker?

Would you.....

A) go on an aggressive cut and get that first 40lbs off asap then slowly taper carbs back in to recomp? I could drop 40lbs in 8 weeks or less.
Orr....
B) train like normal while building muscle and losing fat at the same time from this current weight? Doing it this way it would take me about 24 weeks to drop the 40lbs but I'd gain muscle also.

 

[Send0]

Fuck I wish I could put you on ignore. You’re 6’180lbs skinny fat, can’t squat don’t know basic information and Take drugs.

You purposely either get my height, or my weight wrong. I'm 5'8", 185 lbs.

Only a certain kind of people resort to attacks to try to win an argument; which is confusing in this case because there are multiple ways to do this.

Just eat at maintenance calories? wtf?

Eating at maintenance as a starting point. Then add in cardio and bust your ass on top of that and you will create a deficit. Any activity you add into your daily routine that you weren't doing before will put you in a deficit, provided you don't outeat the activities you are adding. You will lose weight over time. People do it every day

 

[TomJ]

Eating at maintenance as a starting point. Then add in cardio and bust your ass on top of that and you will create a deficit. Any activity you add into your daily routine that you weren't doing before will put you in a deficit, provided you don't outeat the activities you are adding. You will lose weight over time. People do it every day

I try to stay out of these pissing matches to not get wet.
But that's literally not maintenance then.

If you "bust your ass" then what you're eating is no longer maintenance.

 

[Send0]

I try to stay out of these pissing matches to not get wet.
But that's literally not maintenance then.

If you "bust your ass" then what you're eating is no longer maintenance.

That's not what I said. I said eat at whatever your maintenance is today and add in more activity to create the deficit.

 

[TomJ]

Maintenance =calories in - calories out

To determine maintenance calories, expenditure needs to be considered

 

[Send0]

Maintenance =calories in - calories out

To determine maintenance calories, expenditure needs to be considered

Do you know how many calories you're going to burn when you add in cardio that you aren't doing today? What type of cardio? What's the sustained heart rate? What duration?

No, you estimate a starting point. If a person uses their current maintenance as a starting point, then adds in activity they aren't doing today, they will effectively create a deficit. Then they can adjust calories down further to match whatever their goal is for weight lost per week.

We're arguing semantics over how I chose to phrase things, and derailing the thread having a "pissing match" because of it.

 

[RiR0]

You know why most diets fail? Because they don’t get results fast enough.
You know the great thing about drugs they allow you to diet much harder and to hold on to muscle if protein and training stimulus is adequate.
Why in the fuck should it take 24 weeks or more?

 

[Send0]

You know why most diets fail? Because they don’t get results fast enough.
You know the great thing about drugs they allow you to diet much harder and to hold on to muscle if protein and training stimulus is adequate.
Why in the fuck should it take 24 weeks or more?

Diets also fail when people can't adhere to them.

Like I said, the OP is an adult. Everyone gave the slow approach, and you gave a faster option. This is good; now he can decide what he wants to do.

 

[RiR0]

Diets also fail when people can't adhere to them.

Like I said, the OP is an adult. Everyone gave the slow approach, and you gave a faster option. This is good; now he can decide what he wants to do.

Fat loss phases aren’t supposed to be sustainable. Tell me who have you dieted and what experience do you have to come to any conclusion?

 

[Send0]

Fat loss phases aren’t supposed to be sustainable. Tell me who have you dieted and what experience do you have to come to any conclusion?

Well, I helped my morbidly obese friend diet down from 400lbs down to 235lbs over the course of a 1.25 years. My neighbor who was 280lbs in April is now 218lbs as of this morning. I've helped a lot of people lose weight/fat over the years.

It's actually something I'm good at and have been doing for 2 decades now. With that said, it doesn't mean my approach is the only approach.

At a high level the conclusion I've come to is that diet is a lifestyle, developing healthy habits with food is important, and making a diet that is easy to sustain is key to long term success. I don't believe diets should ever be extreme surpluses or deficits; that's not a lifestyle.

At a lower level, high protein is very important. In addition creating a deficit, whether through extreme diet (I don't recommend, but it's not wrong), or increased activity is critical.

TLDR; it's about the amount of energy you take in, vs the amount of energy you output.

 

[Send0]

We spammed the guys thread. Cleaned it up and left the most relevant posts. Good discussion otherwise.

@Synyster there you have it. RiR0 gave you a good quick option, and everyone else gave you a moderate or conservative option. Pick which ever you feel suits you best; that's all that matters in the end.

 

[GreenAmine]

Your approach to training should be roughly the same whether you are in a deficit or if you are in a surplus

I do not agree with this. If I'm in a deficit, my energy and glycogen levels are much lower than if I'm eating in a surplus. I find that, for me at least, switching my training to high intensity and low volume during a cut is much easier to handle while still preserving muscle. Conversely, if I'm in a surplus, I'll up the volume because I have more glycogen available.

 

[Send0]

I do not agree with this. If I'm in a deficit, my energy and glycogen levels are much lower than if I'm eating in a surplus. I find that, for me at least, switching my training to high intensity and low volume during a cut is much easier to handle while still preserving muscle. Conversely, if I'm in a surplus, I'll up the volume because I have more glycogen available.

You still train as hard as possible right? Leaving nothing on the table, regardless of which way you train?

That's all I meant.

 

[GreenAmine]

Yes, that I agree with. I was afraid I was being a bit pedantic, which I why I tried to stay subjective.

Edit: forgot to directly reply to your post, so tagging you @Send0

 

[Send0]

Yes, that I agree with. I was afraid I was being a bit pedantic, which I why I tried to stay subjective.

Edit: forgot to directly reply to your post, so tagging you @Send0

No problem man. I assumed you were putting in 100%. It's my fault for not being clear in what I meant when I posted that.