I’m not sure why that statement makes you skeptical, but did you not find the linked to studies convincing that fat loss and muscle gain at the same time is possible? At first you said it was impossible, followed by or at least very difficult, again followed by
“can’t do both at once.” Both can be done at once, and with very good results.
I did. With a warning to not eat less. For a burly guy. Sure.
I doubt what you described is typically considered a form of HIIT and I don’t believe there is evidence that a plan similar to what you laid out is going to keep someone’s metabolic rate boosted throughout the day. If you have some, I’m genuinely interested in seeing it.
Is there sufficient evidence for that claim? I can’t think of any reasons why it would be so (other than maybe people on quick weight loss schemes don’t have long term discipline). I have found some evidence that it isn’t.
To be entirely honest, the initial site raised som many “Woo” flags that I did not read them. So let us look at them:
The first one reports some gains while losing fat. However there were thee groups placed on the same hypocalorific diet -and then two of them were given additional protein supplements. These two experienced lean mass increase.
If you don’t believe that a body in calorie deficit will scarf up protein and convert it to fuel, or that bodies are not heavily evolutionary incentivized to do exactly that I suppose is the same as a calorific deficit. Which seems deeply counterintuitive to me.
The second study involves a ketogenic diet. These can often be very heavy in calories and I cannot initially see any numbers for how much energy the subjects were getting. In any case, the abstract specifies that there were no significant increases in muscle mass.
The third study compares two groups combining exercise and a calorie deficit. It shows that the group with the lesser calorie restriction shows some gains in lean body mass, the one with a greater calorie restriction has no gain in lean body mass.
The next one is about training frequency, and at least the abstract that is not behind a pay wall does not mention nutrition at all.
The last one, as far as I can see says exactly the opposite of what the site claims. “Unlike body mass and fat mass, diet or the recovery period did not significantly alter lean mass measured by DXA. There was, however, a small, but statistically significant decrease in lean mass, fat-free mass (Table 3), and VL-muscle CSA (Figure 2C) measured by bioimpedance, skinfolds, and ultrasonography, respectively.”
This study appears to be the only one that has a passable n number.
My impression is that this site is trying to sell something. I don’t see that these cites support their claims much. The first one is probably the best.
In any case, ALL these studies involve participants that have large opportunities to train or are in fact professional athletes, who are further on controlled calorie diets as part of studies. I therefore think it is reasonable to postulate that lean mass gains they made were very very difficult.
A more convincing study would compare participants on restricted calorie diets with participants alternating restricted calories and maintenance exercise with a surplus and heavy work.
To kibbitz … that statement is not just something to make one skeptical: it is just absurdly untrue.
And did you actually read the linked to articles? They do not in each case quite say what is claimed.
Take the description of the eight gymnasts and the ketogenic diet study. Were they actually put on a “drastic” 1,971 calorie, ketogenic diet? No. Both the Western Diet control and the Very Low Carbohydrate Ketogenic Diet were ad lib diets. The ketogenic diet condition did result in fewer calories taken in, as ketogenic diets often do. It eneded up being moderately hypocaloric compared to the control, a 2276 Kilojoule/d (303 KCal/d) difference. Were there strength gains or muscle mass gains during the ketogenic diet period? No. Now the actual result is still significant: there was about 2 kg of fat mass loss over 30 days with preservation of muscle mass while on a modestly hypocaloric ketogenic diet with about 40% (!) of calories coming from protein while the athletes were working out about 30 hours a week.
The guy is clearly selling something - he’s a trainer trying to make his services of exercise and nutrition tweaking a brand.
That said the studies linked are not worthless. They do demonstrate that an overweight person can lose fat mass while gaining muscle mass if they have adequate protein (varying in the studies but 1.2 g/kg/d was one “high protein” condition, drinking 500 ml of skim milk containing 18g of protein after training was another, for example), at most a moderately hypocaloric diet, and resistance exercise, and that a more fit person can at least avoid muscle loss doing much the same.
Oh, I’m still here, laying low, taking some notes and reflecting on human nature. I think if I eventually get somewhere with this, and then post what worked for me, I’ll be told that I’m gravely mistaken.
In my experience in fitness, any time you hear the words “The only way …” your fingers should be in your ears before the next word comes out.
You already know how to eat food. You might even be TOO good at that. Why add supplements to the mix? Especially when you haven’t really balanced your normal diet yet. Read the labels on the food you eat and work from there first. Bump up the cardio, bump up the weights and call it a day.
