5 ms·

Does such caloric restricted diet allow one to maintain muscles and/or strength? If yes, I am mighty interested....

by inawarminister 4y ago

TimSchumann 4y ago
Calorie restriction tends to be worse for maintaining muscle mass than outright fasting.
sdze 4y ago
I can’t believe his basal metabolic rate is under or at 1500cal. Smaller women might have that.
- Enginerrrd 4y ago
  You'd be surprised... There's quite a bit of genetic variation. I can maintain my weight at around 190lbs on ~1900 kCal as an active man. That's measuring absolutely everything religiously with a scale, and assuming all oil into every pan is ingested, etc. My sister is quite overweight and she can maintain weight easily around 1200 kCal.
xwdv 4y ago
It does not.
twawaaay 4y ago
I think you are confusing calorie restriction with fasting. You can be regularly fasting AND eating the same amount of calories on average. You just eat more between fasts. Fasting just means there is enough period between your meals for your body to get stressed a bit and to have to go into fasting mode. The idea here is that the act of fasting alone promotes positive changes. A side effect is that most people, usually, are not able to make up all of the calories in a short time. Meaning if you eat only every other day, it actually is quite hard to eat two days of calories within one day. For me fasting is much more bearable than "dieting". For me dieting just means I am hungry constantly while fasting means I just need to survive until the next meal when I will be able to eat as much as I want and feel satisfied. Also fasting is sort of self-regulating. As long as I can keep to the fasting period and I am not criminally overeating outside of it, I can reap the benefits of weight loss as if I was on caloric restriction but without having to think about it or counting calories. Neither caloric restriction nor fasting necessarily means wasting of your muscles. Though if you fast long enough or restrict your calories enough at some point it will become unavoidable. I personally think it all depends on your cost/benefit. Fasting brings positive effects you can't emulate in any other way. But you don't need to be fasting constantly, I personally think you can get a lot of effects by fasting occasionally (like one day a week, for example). And without getting too much into details, I think if you are absolutely unwilling to do fasting and would prefer caloric restriction there still are better ways to do it. It is better to reduce your calorie ingestion by reducing hunger relative to your output. For example, jogging every day in the morning, eating whole fresh fruit and vegetables some time before your meals, will have effect of reducing your hunger and making you eat less without having to be constantly hungry.
- FartyMcFarter 4y ago
  > I think you are mistaking calorie restriction with fasting. I don't think so - the comment said "one meal a day" which is clearly a kind of fasting. Even the "16:8 diet" is referred to as intermittent fasting, and it's not as extreme as eating only one meal a day.
  - twawaaay 4y ago
    You are right about the fact this is fasting. But the parent wrote "Does such caloric restricted diet allow one to maintain muscles and/or strength?" Which means he is asking about caloric restriction responding to comment about fasting.
    - dspillett 4y ago
      I'd say the parent's question is perfectly valid: “He gets by on one meal a day of 1500 calories.” implies, in fact outright states, a calorie restricted diet as well as a temporally restricted one.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - naasking 4y ago
      > Which means he is asking about caloric restriction responding to comment about fasting 1,500 calories per day is calorie restriction for an adult male of this size.
  - FredPret 4y ago
    You can eat 5000 calories in one big meal after fasting, or spread put over smaller meals without fasting.
    - FartyMcFarter 4y ago
      True, but the topic was "one meal a day of 1500 calories" for a muscular individual, i.e. fasting together with a calorie deficit.
guerby 4y ago
Table 2 of the paper in low carb + time restricted weight loss in kg at three month was -5.0 +/- 0.4 while body fat -3.0 +/- 0.5 and muscle -0.5 +/- 0.2.
FartyMcFarter 4y ago
If your body fat percentage is high enough (25% or more for example) it is even possible to gain muscle on a calorie deficit. Many studies have shown it's possible to lose fat while gaining muscle for such individuals. I'm not sure about the "one meal per day" part though - not sure if there are studies for that combined with a calorie deficit. The lower your body fat percentage is, the harder it is to diet without losing muscle.
- 988747 4y ago
  "One meal per day" probably won't cut it. I think the idea here is that: 1. you have to do resistance training (lifting weights) 2. you need to consume enough protein so that it can be used to build the muscle mass (100-150g per day) 3. you limit calorie intake by skipping carbohydrates and fats - this is what your body fat can easily replace. You probably cannot limit yourself to just one meal per day, or skipping eating some days - your body being in the "fasting mode" is the opposite of "muscle building mode". another problem here is: high fat percentage lowers the testosterone levels, which is not great for gaining muscle. Some testosterone-boosting supplements, like zinc might be useful here.
  - FartyMcFarter 4y ago
    Sounds about right. Regarding point 3, 1500 kcal per day leaves more than enough budget to have some fats and carbs - 150g of protein is only 600 kcal. > high fat percentage lowers the testosterone levels, which is not great for gaining muscle. Anecdotally speaking, I was able to gain muscle / increase strength just fine when I started dieting, and I was definitely above 30% fat. Even if this isn't the case, the fat should melt away quickly on a good diet, so it probably isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
    - Enginerrrd 4y ago
      For what it's worth, are you sure you were gaining muscle and not just gaining strength? There are many possible strength-gaining adaptations that can happen in an individual who is gaining no muscle. Actually gaining lean body mass while losing weight is very unlikely. It requires a very untrained, overweight individual with a relatively modest caloric deficit.
fjabre 4y ago
They are opposites. You want to get bigger or maintain muscle mass and simultaneously you want to fast (get smaller) and lose mass. Fasting will definitely cause you to lose mass - some fat and/or muscle. While working out or lifting will cause you to increase your need for calories and food intake. They are opposing forces. You cannot have it both ways. Fasting = less mass less food intake. Lifting/muscle mass = more food intake more mass
- godshatter 4y ago
  Fasting doesn't imply eating less (on a larger time scale). You can, for example, eat the same number of calories all at once or spread out over the day.
ivanhoe 4y ago
Perhaps if you're obese and your body can burn enough of its stored fat you could maintain it for a while, but 1500 kcal/day is too low for an active person - for most people it barely covers the BMR needs. In order to stop body from reducing your muscle mass you need to stimulate those muscles a lot, you need to use them hard, so your real caloric needs would be significantly higher. Big problem with such extreme restrictions is that in 6 months body will adapt to low calorie intake (shed the unneeded muscles, slow down metabolism), so if you ever decide to stop the program and go back to the normal dietary regime, you'll be in a big problem how not to get overweight really quickly.
hedora 4y ago
Muscle burns calories. My base metabolism increased by 100-200 calories (from < 1400) after six months of strength training 3 days a week for 30 minutes. (Computer programmer with very little muscle mass...) Anyway, if you want to lose weight and maintain muscle mass, add protein shakes + creatine + strength training to whatever calorie restrictions you are doing. Get your body fat percentage tested every few weeks. Adjust calories as appropriate to draw down fat or build up muscle. In steady state, most people can either gain muscle or lose fat, but not both at the same time. (The above works OK for absolute beginners; it gets harder to improve as you improve.) The "A Workout Routine" book is ranty but has decent introductory routines and links to decent YouTube videos. You'll also need about $150 worth of exercise bands to get started. (Cheap Amazon ones are dangerous, so go to a reputable brick and mortar store's website to choose a brand.)
scns 4y ago
Forgot to say that he is a world record holder in weightlifting and pretty buff.
haywood 4y ago
You can't cheat the laws of metabolism. If you're in a large caloric deficit, the body will not waste energy building muscle, which is an EXTREMELY expensive process. If you weight train and consume hundreds of grams of protein per day, you can work to maintain the lean tissue, and in some cases if you're a beginner and/or obese, you can put on some muscle in the beginning, but it won't last. Building muscle requires a slight caloric surplus and sufficient protein intake spread out through the day (last part is more about optimization)
- FartyMcFarter 4y ago
  > Building muscle requires a slight caloric surplus It doesn't: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10838463/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10838463/ There are other similar studies, plus lots of anecdotal data from people who were able to gain muscle while losing weight.
  - haywood 4y ago
    Exactly, like I said, if you're overweight like the cops in the study, or new to training, or you take steroids, you can build muscle and lose fat. But it's not forever, at some point you'll plateau and need to pick a lane: lose fat and maintain LMB, gain some fat and gain muscle. We're not talking insane caloric surpluses for the latter either.
    - FartyMcFarter 4y ago
      True - I was just pointing out that the particular part I quoted was contradictory with that point.

Does such caloric restricted diet allow one to maintain muscles and/or strength? If yes, I am mighty interested....

TimSchumann 4y ago

Calorie restriction tends to be worse for maintaining muscle mass than outright fasting.

sdze 4y ago

I can’t believe his basal metabolic rate is under or at 1500cal. Smaller women might have that.

Enginerrrd 4y ago
You'd be surprised... There's quite a bit of genetic variation. I can maintain my weight at around 190lbs on ~1900 kCal as an active man. That's measuring absolutely everything religiously with a scale, and assuming all oil into every pan is ingested, etc. My sister is quite overweight and she can maintain weight easily around 1200 kCal.

xwdv 4y ago

It does not.

twawaaay 4y ago

I think you are confusing calorie restriction with fasting. You can be regularly fasting AND eating the same amount of calories on average. You just eat more between fasts. Fasting just means there is enough period between your meals for your body to get stressed a bit and to have to go into fasting mode. The idea here is that the act of fasting alone promotes positive changes. A side effect is that most people, usually, are not able to make up all of the calories in a short time. Meaning if you eat only every other day, it actually is quite hard to eat two days of calories within one day. For me fasting is much more bearable than "dieting". For me dieting just means I am hungry constantly while fasting means I just need to survive until the next meal when I will be able to eat as much as I want and feel satisfied. Also fasting is sort of self-regulating. As long as I can keep to the fasting period and I am not criminally overeating outside of it, I can reap the benefits of weight loss as if I was on caloric restriction but without having to think about it or counting calories. Neither caloric restriction nor fasting necessarily means wasting of your muscles. Though if you fast long enough or restrict your calories enough at some point it will become unavoidable. I personally think it all depends on your cost/benefit. Fasting brings positive effects you can't emulate in any other way. But you don't need to be fasting constantly, I personally think you can get a lot of effects by fasting occasionally (like one day a week, for example). And without getting too much into details, I think if you are absolutely unwilling to do fasting and would prefer caloric restriction there still are better ways to do it. It is better to reduce your calorie ingestion by reducing hunger relative to your output. For example, jogging every day in the morning, eating whole fresh fruit and vegetables some time before your meals, will have effect of reducing your hunger and making you eat less without having to be constantly hungry.

FartyMcFarter 4y ago
> I think you are mistaking calorie restriction with fasting. I don't think so - the comment said "one meal a day" which is clearly a kind of fasting. Even the "16:8 diet" is referred to as intermittent fasting, and it's not as extreme as eating only one meal a day.
- twawaaay 4y ago
  You are right about the fact this is fasting. But the parent wrote "Does such caloric restricted diet allow one to maintain muscles and/or strength?" Which means he is asking about caloric restriction responding to comment about fasting.
  - dspillett 4y ago
    I'd say the parent's question is perfectly valid: “He gets by on one meal a day of 1500 calories.” implies, in fact outright states, a calorie restricted diet as well as a temporally restricted one.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - naasking 4y ago
    > Which means he is asking about caloric restriction responding to comment about fasting 1,500 calories per day is calorie restriction for an adult male of this size.
- FredPret 4y ago
  You can eat 5000 calories in one big meal after fasting, or spread put over smaller meals without fasting.
  - FartyMcFarter 4y ago
    True, but the topic was "one meal a day of 1500 calories" for a muscular individual, i.e. fasting together with a calorie deficit.

guerby 4y ago

Table 2 of the paper in low carb + time restricted weight loss in kg at three month was -5.0 +/- 0.4 while body fat -3.0 +/- 0.5 and muscle -0.5 +/- 0.2.

FartyMcFarter 4y ago

If your body fat percentage is high enough (25% or more for example) it is even possible to gain muscle on a calorie deficit. Many studies have shown it's possible to lose fat while gaining muscle for such individuals. I'm not sure about the "one meal per day" part though - not sure if there are studies for that combined with a calorie deficit. The lower your body fat percentage is, the harder it is to diet without losing muscle.

988747 4y ago
"One meal per day" probably won't cut it. I think the idea here is that: 1. you have to do resistance training (lifting weights) 2. you need to consume enough protein so that it can be used to build the muscle mass (100-150g per day) 3. you limit calorie intake by skipping carbohydrates and fats - this is what your body fat can easily replace. You probably cannot limit yourself to just one meal per day, or skipping eating some days - your body being in the "fasting mode" is the opposite of "muscle building mode". another problem here is: high fat percentage lowers the testosterone levels, which is not great for gaining muscle. Some testosterone-boosting supplements, like zinc might be useful here.
- FartyMcFarter 4y ago
  Sounds about right. Regarding point 3, 1500 kcal per day leaves more than enough budget to have some fats and carbs - 150g of protein is only 600 kcal. > high fat percentage lowers the testosterone levels, which is not great for gaining muscle. Anecdotally speaking, I was able to gain muscle / increase strength just fine when I started dieting, and I was definitely above 30% fat. Even if this isn't the case, the fat should melt away quickly on a good diet, so it probably isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
  - Enginerrrd 4y ago
    For what it's worth, are you sure you were gaining muscle and not just gaining strength? There are many possible strength-gaining adaptations that can happen in an individual who is gaining no muscle. Actually gaining lean body mass while losing weight is very unlikely. It requires a very untrained, overweight individual with a relatively modest caloric deficit.

fjabre 4y ago

They are opposites. You want to get bigger or maintain muscle mass and simultaneously you want to fast (get smaller) and lose mass. Fasting will definitely cause you to lose mass - some fat and/or muscle. While working out or lifting will cause you to increase your need for calories and food intake. They are opposing forces. You cannot have it both ways. Fasting = less mass less food intake. Lifting/muscle mass = more food intake more mass

godshatter 4y ago
Fasting doesn't imply eating less (on a larger time scale). You can, for example, eat the same number of calories all at once or spread out over the day.

ivanhoe 4y ago

Perhaps if you're obese and your body can burn enough of its stored fat you could maintain it for a while, but 1500 kcal/day is too low for an active person - for most people it barely covers the BMR needs. In order to stop body from reducing your muscle mass you need to stimulate those muscles a lot, you need to use them hard, so your real caloric needs would be significantly higher. Big problem with such extreme restrictions is that in 6 months body will adapt to low calorie intake (shed the unneeded muscles, slow down metabolism), so if you ever decide to stop the program and go back to the normal dietary regime, you'll be in a big problem how not to get overweight really quickly.

hedora 4y ago

Muscle burns calories. My base metabolism increased by 100-200 calories (from < 1400) after six months of strength training 3 days a week for 30 minutes. (Computer programmer with very little muscle mass...) Anyway, if you want to lose weight and maintain muscle mass, add protein shakes + creatine + strength training to whatever calorie restrictions you are doing. Get your body fat percentage tested every few weeks. Adjust calories as appropriate to draw down fat or build up muscle. In steady state, most people can either gain muscle or lose fat, but not both at the same time. (The above works OK for absolute beginners; it gets harder to improve as you improve.) The "A Workout Routine" book is ranty but has decent introductory routines and links to decent YouTube videos. You'll also need about $150 worth of exercise bands to get started. (Cheap Amazon ones are dangerous, so go to a reputable brick and mortar store's website to choose a brand.)

scns 4y ago

Forgot to say that he is a world record holder in weightlifting and pretty buff.

haywood 4y ago

You can't cheat the laws of metabolism. If you're in a large caloric deficit, the body will not waste energy building muscle, which is an EXTREMELY expensive process. If you weight train and consume hundreds of grams of protein per day, you can work to maintain the lean tissue, and in some cases if you're a beginner and/or obese, you can put on some muscle in the beginning, but it won't last. Building muscle requires a slight caloric surplus and sufficient protein intake spread out through the day (last part is more about optimization)

FartyMcFarter 4y ago
> Building muscle requires a slight caloric surplus It doesn't: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10838463/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10838463/ There are other similar studies, plus lots of anecdotal data from people who were able to gain muscle while losing weight.
- haywood 4y ago
  Exactly, like I said, if you're overweight like the cops in the study, or new to training, or you take steroids, you can build muscle and lose fat. But it's not forever, at some point you'll plateau and need to pick a lane: lose fat and maintain LMB, gain some fat and gain muscle. We're not talking insane caloric surpluses for the latter either.
  - FartyMcFarter 4y ago
    True - I was just pointing out that the particular part I quoted was contradictory with that point.