Actual Calorie Content Of Human Fat

[omanaman]

i would agree with mr. x's 50/30/20 ratio

i have maintained these percentages since i started cutting in april and have seen excellent results -- although i did see an initial strength loss - my muscle mass remained consistent and the fat melted away (i was doing 30-40 of cardio 5 time times a week in addition to weight training)

I think people are always looking for a way to see the fastest results in the shortest amount of time. Patience and persistence is the key. I considered a keto diet for my cutting cycle but i wanted something i could maintain for the entire summer. I saw switching diets after 6 weeks to be too much of a distraction from my program. Plus, I found the best way to slim down and cut up is with a consistant program.

 

[MS]

Oh I see where the differences in results come from now. Of course giving most people a set calorie intake and macronutrient ratio will not be optimal for long term sustained fatloss. For my clients I meet with them weekly, have a look at them and chat with them and change the diet sometimes weekly if need be. Maybe this week their looking flat and listless and need more carbs or fat, maybe less cardio. Maybe now looks a good time to add glutamine and aminos into the program. Maybe now is the time to start the thermogenics. Maybe now they need to cut way back on the carbs and increase their cardio. Maybe this client here needs to take a whole week, or even 2 weeks completely off dieting. Sustained fatloss/muscle retention is not a static thing, but if you want to put a client on autopilot and have minimum input or contact then I guess keto would be the 'easiest' to get the most fatloss. And I'm guessing (you'll correct me if I'm wrong) that working with over 500 women over the past few years (how many men???) that you wouldn't really have the time to tweak everyone's diet as they go.

 

[Mr.X]

MS, I'll make this short:
This way we can never have this misunderstanding again. I am NOT a personal trainer, although I do train people in person at times, (have been a personal trainer in the past), so, in turn, I do not have your privilege of personal contact. (Because of legal problems I rather not talk about)...The "500" women I worker with were a part of one of a late guru's clientele (god bless his soul), this guru mostly worked with women (he thought he was a lesbian in men's body, but that's another story)....I have worker with more men then I can even recall, I usually work with main-stream bodybuilders and people with "hardcore" goals. This is why I advocate the CKD so much. It's my own view; again, like the saying goes: To each his own.

Mr.X

 

[Vageta]

Maybe I misunderstood a little bit, but saying you lose 5-6 pounds of water for every pound of fat is definately not the case. If it were true then losing 10 pounds of fat would equate to 60 pounds in total and that's a bit over the top. I don't think you lose much in the way of water once your initial hydration level balances out. We all lose massive weight the first 2 weeks of dieting, but it usually levels out after that. Last year I lost 48 pounds in 14 weeks and by week 3 I saw a steady decrease in weight from week to week in the range of 2-3 pounds. I'm sure some of it was water with the fat, but not that much.

Also I've always thought the known energy in 1lb of fat was 3500 calories, not 4000. I don't remember how much energy is in 1 pound muscle but I seem to recall the number 700 being thrown around(remember most of muscle is water). Which is why burning muscle is so efficient in weight loss. Burning 2 pounds of muscle doesn't take much because it is not as calorie dense as fat. If you only wanted to lose weight in general then burning muscle is the way to go as you will lose a lot of water for sure doing that.