Mission 2, Day 73: Fasting...a response
I have gotten several comments (all disagreeing with me) about my fasting research. I wanted to respond in one place, hence this entry.
As those of you who "know" me already know, I don't post something like that without looking at all sides. I have read Eat Stop Eat and a few other "freebie" fasting manuals on the web. I read the positive articles and the negative articles and that's how I came to the conclusion I came to. Yes, everyone is attached to their fasting and that's fine, but the point I am trying to bring up, the information I am trying to share is important and one that should not be ignored.
When you measure your results after fasting, how do you know you couldn't have increased your LBM even more? What I'd like to see is each of you who are fasting show me your numbers. Show me what your weight and fat % was when you started and what it was when you finished. My guess is that you are going to show LBM loss. Why? Well, just going into any caloric deficit causes this to happen. It is why I've gone to the Chris Aceto method—he is a highly paid expert and the reason he is a highly paid expert is that he can cut the fat and preserve the muscle. That's even the point of Tom Venuto's book, Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle—you burn fat while keeping the muscle to the best of your ability.
Yes, each person is different, but physiology is the same for every human body. If I can drop my calories 20% and cause LBM loss, what is going to happen if I completely lose 2 days of eating and cut my calories by 20% on top of that? I'm creating a larger caloric deficit than normal, which drops my LBM even faster than normal.
The bottomline: I am not here to condemn what anyone is doing, I'm here to play the devil's advocate. I say what is on my mind and this fasting issue has bothered me for a long time. Everyone talks about the results they get, but all I see is scale measurements and honestly, the scale means nothing to me as long as I'm losing fat. Look at my latest results. I lost fat and maintained muscle for the first time in weeks because I upped my calories and controlled my carbs.
There is no one way to do this, but fasting just doesn't make sense to me and I wanted to be sure the opposing viewpoint got out there. I plan to post a question on BTFIC and see what the response is. I will report back at that time.
As those of you who "know" me already know, I don't post something like that without looking at all sides. I have read Eat Stop Eat and a few other "freebie" fasting manuals on the web. I read the positive articles and the negative articles and that's how I came to the conclusion I came to. Yes, everyone is attached to their fasting and that's fine, but the point I am trying to bring up, the information I am trying to share is important and one that should not be ignored.
When you measure your results after fasting, how do you know you couldn't have increased your LBM even more? What I'd like to see is each of you who are fasting show me your numbers. Show me what your weight and fat % was when you started and what it was when you finished. My guess is that you are going to show LBM loss. Why? Well, just going into any caloric deficit causes this to happen. It is why I've gone to the Chris Aceto method—he is a highly paid expert and the reason he is a highly paid expert is that he can cut the fat and preserve the muscle. That's even the point of Tom Venuto's book, Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle—you burn fat while keeping the muscle to the best of your ability.
Yes, each person is different, but physiology is the same for every human body. If I can drop my calories 20% and cause LBM loss, what is going to happen if I completely lose 2 days of eating and cut my calories by 20% on top of that? I'm creating a larger caloric deficit than normal, which drops my LBM even faster than normal.
The bottomline: I am not here to condemn what anyone is doing, I'm here to play the devil's advocate. I say what is on my mind and this fasting issue has bothered me for a long time. Everyone talks about the results they get, but all I see is scale measurements and honestly, the scale means nothing to me as long as I'm losing fat. Look at my latest results. I lost fat and maintained muscle for the first time in weeks because I upped my calories and controlled my carbs.
There is no one way to do this, but fasting just doesn't make sense to me and I wanted to be sure the opposing viewpoint got out there. I plan to post a question on BTFIC and see what the response is. I will report back at that time.
i've always looked at fasting from a biblical perspective and have never considered it as a way of losing weight.
Reply to this
Yes, but religious fasting is much different from fasting for fat loss.
Reply to this
"if I completely lose 2 days of eating and cut my calories by 20% on top of that"
1)ESE promotes regular eating (NO add'l caloire deficit) over the 1-2 fasting days.
"What I'd like to see is each of you who are fasting show me your numbers."
1) I dropped 1% bodyfat during my TT transformation contest period while doing ESE. Granted this is only the equivalent of 1.05lbs of lean muscle, but I lost fat at the same time and that is significant to me.
2) Many TT contestants are using ESE. Their numbers will be coming out shortly.
3) I think our own resident shredder Mike will show some impressive numbers.
Reply to this
Lilla, I will start by saying that I am very impressed with how you've lost the weight you want to lose, but at the same time, I will say that your stats pretty much prove my point.
You lost 8 pounds. 23% of that was LBM and 77% was fat. This is impressive to an extent, but what would have happened if you had eaten 5 to 6 meals every single day? My guess is that your results as far as weight loss would have been very much the same, but I think you would have lost more fat. Probably around 1 percent a week (at least that's the potential). I believe that in the end you would have had more LBM at about the same (or slightly lower) weight. To me (and this is just me) this would be more desireable because you then have more muscle to assist with the fat burning.
Regarding your comment "ESE promotes regular eating (NO add'l caloire deficit) over the 1-2 fasting days" I am well aware of this. However, have you ever crunched the numbers on this? Let's say you should be at 2000 calories a day. That equates to 14,000 calories a week. However, on ESE you go two days without eating. That means you only take in 10,000 calories a week on ESE when you stick to "regular eating (NO add'l calorie deficit)". That is a 29% caloric deficit and is pretty drastic. That's also assuming that you actually hit the 2000 calories each of the other days. If you were to average just 200 calories less per day you are up to a 35% deficit which is extremely drastic. I'd say you are flirting with the starvation response at this point. I'd actually say that at 29% you are flirting with the starvation response.
Please understand that my comment about cutting calories further came directly from a post Mike had wherein he stated that the fasting days gave him an additional caloric deficit. My assumption (which could be wrong) is that in order for the fasting days to be an "additional caloric deficit" he had to have a caloric deficit to begin with. Based on the numbers above, I'd be very concerned about losing muscle with this type of nutritional plan.
Finally, you can cite this or that person who lost this many pounds and that much fat, but the bottomline (and the most important aspect to me) is could they have done a better job at preserving their LBM by eating more? I believe the answer is generally going to be an emphatic yes. Anyone who has tried to put on muscle will tell you -- you gotta eat. I think the science supports the BFFM methodology more than the ESE methodology and that opinion is based on several weeks of research and reading that I've done.
Reply to this
First you say you want hard proof i.e. "show me your numbers" but then you say "My GUESS is that your results as far as weight loss would have been very much the same..." and "I BELIEVE that in the end you would have..." So I give you hard proof and you give me guesses that PERHAPS I could have done better??
Admittedly a 30% deficit is aggressive but even TV believes 30% is ok short term. I do 1 day/week of ESE as do many of my fellow TT contestants and that is a 15% deficit. And I do take breaks from ESE.
"...what is going to happen if I completely lose 2 days of eating and cut my calories by 20% on top of that..." -
If you were referring to something Mike wrote then you should place it in that context or ask Mike for clarification before posting this comment. Otherwise you are "misquoting" ESE.
Michael, haven't you lost more LBM than fat according to your stats?
Reply to this
Lilla, comments like this are extremely frustrating to me. It makes me wonder how carefully you have considered what I wrote..
First, I gave you YOUR actual numbers back and commented on them. I showed that 1/3 of the weight you lost was muscle mass and that's just in 8 pounds of weight loss. My speculations were regarding what would have happened had you eaten 5 to 6 meals a day without fasting. Of course I have to speculate becuase you DIDN'T eat 5 to 6 meals a day without fasting, so I'd have no way of giving you hard facts on that issue. As for my comments about adding a caloric deficit on top of fasting, I did not quote ESE at all. Do you see anything in my posts that has a citation to ESE? No, you don't because I never once quoted that piece of work. I was responding to how someone (Mike in this case) stated they were handling the situation. It is extremely relevant to the underlying message of my post. Instead of getting so defensive about fasting, why not address the facts that I presented the way Mike has done in his recent blog post? You've obviously missed the point. We all have a responsibility here. We have many people reading our blogs who don't comment or ask questions for whatever reason. They take what we say at face value and give it a shot.
Yes, Lilla, my stats are public knowledge because I make them public knowledge. I have lost more LBM than fat and that's EXACTLY why I'm changing up my nutritional approach to the one recommended by Chris Aceto. Chris is the master of cutting fat and maintaining LBM. I practiced what I preach--I stuck with the plan I was on and analyzed my results. I did not panic. I made small adjustments and saw different types of results. However, when it got to a point that I felt I'd tried long enough, I began investigating other ways of doing it. I realized around the week of March 16, 2008 that I needed a change. Instead of going into panic mode and switching things up immediately like alot of people do, I took the measured approach and did my research. After doing my research I got what was missing from my program--enough calories to get the job done. Even you, at one point, admitted that you got better results when eating more calories. I note that nowhere on your blog do you document what your current caloric intake is. Thus, I have no idea whether you are on a deficit or not. I do recall you were supposed to be at around 1800 calories (if memory serves me correct).
To quote Tom Venuto:
"At times, an aggressive calorie deficit greater than 20% may be called for, but calorie cuts greater than 20% are much more likely to cause muscle loss and metabolic slowdown. If you do use a calorie deficit greater than 20%, then it’s wise to raise calories at regular intervals using the “zig-zag method” you’ll learn about in chapter six. This will “trick your body” and prevent your metabolism from slowing down when you have a large calorie deficit."
This is interesting stuff and matches perfectly to what Chris Aceto recommends for maximum fat loss. John Bartlett (someone who followed Venuto's plan) is an expert at this type of fat loss and he managed to lose 40 pounds of fat while gaining 10 pounds of muscle. He did it using the "zig zag" or "carb cycling" method. When you read John's articles on this methodology it fits exactly what Chris Aceto says. In fact, studies have shown that by following the plan Chris Aceto is suggesting it is possible to increase the level of testosterone in the body and that obviously aides in muscle building.
You can fast if you want, but you won't ever convince me that it is as effective as actually eating. I changed my nutritional approach and already have seen an increase in LBM. I had my largest drop in fat percentage since March 2, 2008 and my first increase in LBM since that same date. I did that and was still using a caloric deficit. This week I've switched up everything, following Chris Aceto's plan to the letter and I can tell you that you should expect some radical results from me this coming week (I've been checking up on myself all week).
Just to clarify, when I asked for the numbers it was to assist with a comparison, but as I just commented to Mike, without having one group fasting while another is not, we won't be able to really settle this disagreement. At the same time, I find it interesting how defensive you've gotten about this issue. Oh! And thanks for reminding me (and the world) that I've lost far too much LBM during this mission. Much appreciated.
Reply to this
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Reply to this
Wow, isn't THIS interesting! The author of Eat Stop Eat has a blog and in that blog he makes it pretty clear that Tom Venuto completely disagrees with the Eat Stop Eat concept (http://nutritionhelp.blogspot.com/2007/11/tom-venuto-vs-grrlathlete-and-eat-stop.html). In fact, in that blog post he links to Tom's rebuttal and low and behold, the rebuttal is an article about--starvation mode (http://www.burnthefatblog.com/archives/2007/11/is_starvation_mode_a_myth_no_i.php). It appears that TV doesn't like fasting.
Reply to this