Re: What do you mean?
I meant that you can't compare the calories needs for a man (or woman) without knowing enough facts, no 2 people are alike, just like 200 pounds on one guy will mean one sexy beach body and on another body that is screaming to be whipped into shape.
Right.
The problem is, this person is not going to to give you enough information to determine how many calories they need. It doesn't work like that. To determine exact energy requirements, you need medical equipment.
So....
Working with averages based on sex and size is best for now. Determine an estimated starting point, track, and tweak.
Re: seriously wrong. Nope, didn't think he did have a thyroid issue, I meant seriously wrong like he isn't properly tracking his calories
Haha, oh, okay.... you were exaggerating, sorry.
Re: Sorry, what numbers are you referring to?
That an extremely unhealthy man can maintain body wieght at 1,800-2,000 calories per day if the conditions are right.
Agreed.
What conditions are you referring to?
Re: hormones Are you hinting his testosterone levels may be low? If it's a possibility, it would be wise to go to his phsycial and get a good phsycial and bloodwork. I didn't think of this personally.
Certainly not what I was referring to.
I was referring to the hormones that are associated with metabolism and hunger..... the ones that fluctuate in ALL of us when we diet.
Re: Gaining muscle or at least keeping it while loosing fat
It's not easy because cut and gain cycles require different types of food and different types of work outs.
What do you mean by different types of food? What do you mean by different types of workouts?
And if we're talking about cyclical diets where you are bouncing between deficit and surplus dieting with the hope of gaining muscle and losing fat simultaneously.... I don't really agree with this approach. Certainly you can do this.... but in my experience, it's the least optimal approach for body recomposition.
I will assume some things here, but in the end I believe it requires cycling weight gain with cardio and while doing this cycling your diet accordingly. As far as length of cycles, I can't tell you that because I have not personally done it and it's geared more to men and I'm not a man.
Why is it geared toward men only? Women gain muscle and lose fat just as men do. Certainly men have hormonal dispositions geared for putting on muscle faster. But that doesn't change the mechanisms of muscle gain and fat loss between muscle and women.
However, I also feel it may be possible to gain muscle and loose weight with proper weight training depending on your genetics if your body fat is high enough, however you will reach a limit to weight loss.
I'm not to sure what you're trying to say here.
Weight gain or loss is a function of energy balance.
If you want to put on muscle, you must generally be in a caloric surplus..... meaning more energy in than out.
If you want to lose fat, you must generally be in a caloric deficit..... meaning more energy out than in.
Now with the new lifter, skinny or fat..... there are various mechanisms that are not yet known that allow one to gain muscle and lose fat simultaneously. It has something to do with the "stress shock" strength training has systemically which invokes hypertrophy.
However, this will be short lived and not something one should expect. Reason being: Thermodynamics rule all.... and even if you are gaining muscle and losing fat initially..... the dream will end and you will once again be bound by these laws.
I think to be successful with losing weight, you HAVE to gain muscle and cycle things,
No, I've seen plenty of people lose weight without gaining muscle.... so that proves this notion wrong. And I promise, I am not trying to "tear you up." I'm just intrigued with your point of view on some of these things.
Why do you *believe* that you MUST gain muscle in order to lose weight?
if at the very least try to minimize muscle loss as much as possible.
This I agree with, which I "preach" about constantly on this forum.
In fact, right now would be a prime time for him to do a muscle gain cycle and yank his body out of it's little starvation mode it's going through.
By muscle gain cycle, what do you mean? If you mean what I think you mean.... I would agree.
ETA: Ahh, I see you explain below.....
Dump the jogging and severe calorie reduction and start eating healthy proteins and fats and carbs (think non-icecream based carbs ha ha) and hit the weights.
This is far from an extreme calorie restriction. VLCD (very low calorie diets) are based on less than 800 calorie intakes daily. These are what I would consider "severe."
And a week of bumping up his cals would reverse any survival adaptations that kicked in due to the diet. Especially at his size, where these adaptations don't kick in easily at all.
For this, I would suggest he see a personal trainer. He would need a gym membership, access to weights, and a proper meal plan done by a professional. If he wants to continue to cut, he will need to up his cardio, walking does not cut it - and yes he will still need to do weight training even when on a cut cycle.
Most personal trainers are shit.
Access to weights, yes. I agree with you.... anyone should be lifting if capable.
However, upping cardio is the LAST step in a cut. It's the least effective approach.
As far as diet, I know when I eat the same amount of calories, if they are clean calories I loose weight. If I eat bad carb or fat calories, I don't.
Impossible.
As I said above, thermodynamics rule all.
2000 calories of shit will give you the same weight as 2000 calories of non-shit. The physique-outcome may not be the same. But weight is directly related to stored energy in the form of fat, muscle, etc. Calories are energy.
Follow me.
Eating shit usually accompanies more calories, since shit food is more calorie dense.... which could explain your weight gain. Plus they tend to screw with appetite a bit more through blood sugar fluctuations and whatnot..... causing hunger pangs..... leading to increased food intake.
However, that's not what you said. You said with equal cals of each (shit vs non-shit), you have different outcomes in weight.
That just can't be so.
A calorie is a calorie. Certainly a nutrient is not a nutrient.... but nutrients don't really effect weight.
Think pasta, icecream, etc. Protein is extremely important when it comes to building and keeping muscle. Good carbs are also important, but most new people don't realize that many fruits and veggies have carbs - the good kind. When I refer to a bad carb/fat diet, I mean Jr Bacon Cheeseburgers at Wendy's and frosties vs other far more healthy options such as whole wheat pita bread, beans and rice, tomatoes, flax oil, fish oils and spinach.
You'll never see me recommend someone eat the "bad" foods you mentioned above. However, I have to remind you that a calorie is calorie, no matter which way you slice it. You could eat shit each and every day, and if you controlled calories to assure an energy deficit on a consistent basis.... you'd still lose weight.
