How long would it take to go from 19-20% bf to 10-12%?
upto 8 weeks if you go hard
upto 14 weeks of you go soft
upto 20 weeks if you go nice an easy
Depends on caloric intake and exercise
Assuming I'm trying to keep all the muscle I can
>>36614944
upto 8 weeks if you go hard with drugs to hold onto ur LBM while very low calories
upto 14 weeks of you go soft with lots of sleep
upto 20 weeks if you go nice an easy natty
>>36614952
3 MONTHS? ffs.. i thought i will make it in two max.
Not OP though
>>36614952
Does sleep matters that much? Wait I didn't know. Is 7-8 hrs/night enough?
>>36614967
It is.
Last time I cut from 25% or so down to 10% by the time I got under 15% I was basically sleeping 10 hours a day, at 10% I was falling asleep by 2-3pm or so.
This took me about 5 months.
>>36614978
At what ratio fat:muscle did you lose weight? (Starting weight vs ending weight)
Your whole life if you're natty, assuming you want to actually maintain the muscle you already have. Enjoy the pipe dream anon, unless you don't mind your dick not working and being an irritable bitch with all sorts of health problems.
>>36614995
That's so helpful
>>36614991
I went from 195 to 165.
Im 5'7.
I was pretty damn shredded for normie standards, not stage-shredded, still had fat on glutes. Was around 10%, had veins on abs. I'd probably have had to get down to 155 or so to of had striated glutes.
It took me about 5 months, so it was fairly slow. I did it natty though, people on drugs do the same thing within 3 months or less.
Ah just shut up and lift.
>>36614930
About a month if you YOLO it and do high dose DNP, more like 3-6 months of you do a normal cut
>>36615072
This.
But still, I'd rather cut for 6 months slowly, than ever do DNP.
I'd rather a comfy 6 months of slow cutting over 1 month of extremely uncomfortable circumstances AND low calories.
Im a pussy when it comes to dieting though, I like to make it as painless as possible. I am the type of guy that does like 200 calorie deficit cuts, I wont even do 500 cal deficits lel.
>>36615092
Eating roughly maintainence calories and then exercising enough to burn 500+ calories a day is the true masterrace, that's how old school bodybuilders cut, people today are just too lazy
>>36615092
Op here I'm 158 lbs 19% bf that can't lift rn. I thought about lowering my weight by 2 lbs per week, going down to around 140-something before i can start lifting again so i can bulk up w/o worrying about bf. Hoping to get under 13% by that weight. Thought I would lose around 20 lbs by june.
>>36615110
can you still gain muscle that way?
>>36615092
Also I have no probs when it comes to diet ( both not eating and eating a shitton food) so I am on a 1550-ish kcal diet + 1hr swimming or jogging everyday
About two months.
>>36615141
Yeah, gains are much slower tho, like 2kg in six months
>>36615110
That's actually really smart way to go about it. But my question is, wont your body develop adaptions to the cardio?
I've heard if you do consistent cardio daily your body becomes efficient at it so your body ends up burning less calories to perform the activity because the body adapts to it for survival purposes.
Like for the first month your 500 cal burn from cardio might be 100% 500, but the second month, your body will start adapting and soon enough that 500 calorie burn will end up being more like 400 calories....and even less the more you do it and the longer you do it for.
I've read some shit where this is a biological/hormonal response in the body that switches on when you're moving long distances, it's like, but into humans from the old years of traveling long distances all day finding new food sources/water etc.
>>36615190
Lel no you must burn same amount of energy to perform a movement
https://www.supertracker.usda.gov/bwp/
>>36615190
Vary your cardio. Some days you run or skip rope, others you swim.
Cross country and orienteering is GOAT to prevent the body adapting. Variation also prevents injury.
>>36615190
So you're saying that you can exert force without using up energy? Maybe you should go to NASA about that, I'm sure they'd like to use your powers of physics-breakage
>>36615190
>>36615213
Your economy improves. It is an adaptation of the body google "running economy". Diet neegs.
>>36615213
>>36615249
Hmmm.....it's a hormonal thing.......the adaptations...the hormones actually use the energy in more efficient ways.
Just look at steroid users, they can drastically increase the capability of their body by injecting synthetic hormones, that alters their body so much. They store less fat, more calories to towards muscle building. Their overall nutrient partitioning is better.
This is what happens with cardio, your hormones adapt once they realize you're always consistently moving long-distances. The body needs to adapt in order to not kill itself burning energy, so hormones change/react in a way to make your body much more efficient at moving long distances without needing to use as much energy to do it.
I am a calories in vs calories out (macros as well) person, so don't think I am some random broscience-fag. I am actually trying to discuss more in-dept science here as to how the human body reacts to consistent cardio.
>>36614930
Doing PSMF maybe a month
People here knows nothing about the limits of cuttig without losing any muscle and without any side effects
First of all if potein intake a adecuate and you do. proper strength training you wont lose any muscle cutting (this is only true in not so lean people,not talking about 1 digit body fat %)
So yeah,just read the rapid fat loss diet by lyle mcdonald and do the diet for a month following all the instructios and you will be there in no time
I went from + 20%bf to 13% or so in only one month doing it (weighed myself after a refeed,for the fags that are gonna come and tell me its water weight)
>>36615213
I appreciate cico as the average retard /shitizen/ but you're wrong.
>>36615292
Hormones only signal. They may alter the body at a cellular level in the long term due to a response but they do not directly affect metabolism rate (usually. Exempt example would be thyroid hormones)
>>36615316
I am not saying that you'd get a drastic reduction that cardio wouldn't burn anything anymore.
I know you're moving X weight so energy has to be expended for that to move...but I feel like your hormones will signal your body to use less energy.
Wasn't this the main reasons why HIIT came into existence? The point being that the body doesn't adapt anywhere near as much with HIIT as it does with LISS?
>>36615316
Bro it's not exactly ground breaking fucking science.
The fitter you are the less calories you exert doing the same exercise as your clone who is less fit.
Efficiency = less exertion = less calories burnt.
This is like a 101 exercise science thing.
>>36615335
Hiit came into play because its more of an anaerobic form of training type ii vs type i muscle fiber aka gainessaver compared to liss
>>36615337
And brofessor comes out from the left field instead of following the thread
>>36615110
I also do this, I am 200kcal under maintenance and work out 3-4x a week. I still feel great and energetic and have no real food cravings.
>>36615355
>>36615190 -> >>36615213 -> >>36615292
-> >>36615316 -> >>36615337
>>36615355
what part of that is broscience to you?
It depends on how much muscle mass you have and how often you work out.
Pic related I'm not sure how high my bodyfat was but the left I was at 9%.
The majority of the progress happened between March and June when I started counting calories.
March I was around 20%.
April/May I was on EC.
Now I'm 17% and hoping to hit 10% within 45 days.
Six day split.
Hiit for cardio.
Calories intake starting at 2800 and down to 2500 the closer I get to my objective.
Plus I'll eat what I burn in cardio.
Is losing 1 part fat 1 part muscle bad? Is it possible to do worse?
>have shitty cheap scale that tells me I am at 14% bodyfat
>"okay then, time to fast, and push myself to the limit"
>doesnt decrease
>wonder why
>go to a dietologist
>use professional scales
>tell me that I am at 9% bodyfat
>2 more weeks of fasting and I would have gone into a danger area
whew lad, but at least I am below 10%
>>36615215
Thanks, really cool site.
>>36615559
so if you lost 5kg of fat youd also lose 5kg of muscle yeah thats bad
>>36615417
shieeett that cut
goes to show how much a higher fat% can make you seem dyel
>>36615559
With EC stack I lost 20lbs of fat and less than a quarter pound of muscle.
If your losing 1/1 you're doing it wrong.
If you're losing more muscle than fat you should probably just kill yourself.
>>36615636
Especially considering how fucking long it takes to put 5kg of muscle on as a natty.
Many can't put that much on in a year once they get past noob gains phase.
5kg of fat on the other hand, you could do it in less then a month.
It's not fucking fair.
>>36615639
Funny enough since in fat mode I weighted 30lbs more yet look bigger when lighter.
>>36615675
weight for before and after?
>>36615692
200 to 170.
Might have been slightly heavier than 200.
>>36615406
The idea that you just keep needing fewer and fewer calories to do the same task.
Even at 100% efficiency, energy is needed to perform work. The graph is asymptotic towards the mechanical minimum, not towards zero.
>>36615712
that's not what was said, infact if you're the same guy you're the person who introduced that idea, and yet you're now arguing against it? wtf?
this post u r referring to is a perfect example of a strawman: >>36615249
point: fitter people burn less calories than unfit people
rebuttal: oh so you're saying you can literally burn no calories by doing exercise if you're fit enough?
>>36615417
Fuckin merlin dude.
Altough, im presuming your lifts are through the roof in both pics.
wat r stats?
>>36615696
so you're like 5'8?
>>36615732
My PRs are decent by /fit/ standards.
200lbs overhead press
315lbs bench
375lbs squat
475lbs deadlift
>>36615740
Pretty close.
5'9 manlet.
>>36614963
lol, you can do it faster, but you will feel weak and feel like shit all the time. you'll also loose more muscle mass unless you are on some drugs. go slow, it's worth it.
>>36614995
somebody isn't going to make it
>>36615123
you can increase your lifts while cutting if you don't cut too hard. it's when you cut hard that you become a week piece of shit. just take your time. 2 lbs is too much unless you are a fatass. if you are below 20%bf aim for .5lbs a week or even maintenence while increasing lifts or reps.
>>36614963
Think of it like this.
You have experienced three months before, you know how long it feels.
You can either spend those three months achieving your goals by doing something moderately hard and transform yourself
or you can let them fly by and look by three months ahead and say to yourself 'shit i could have been shredded by now if i followed through'
>>36615123
also, if you don't lift you will lose significant muscle
>>36615646
What is EC?
>>36615813
I know but since injury it's been more than 2 years without lifting, so if I maintain what im doing I don't think I will lose too much muscle
>>36615822
Ephedrine/caffeine
Some people add aspirin so they don't have an embolism on the deadlift platform.
>>36615822
Ephedrine and caffeine.
Ephedrine (ih-fed-rin) is one of the four active components of the herb Ephedra. It is able to induce fat loss via increasing the amount of fat available for fuel as well as by increasing heat expenditure. It has been implicated in increasing the Metabolic Rate by up to 5% in humans.
Ephedrine also interacts with muscle cells, increasing heat expenditure in them as well as fat cells. It can also prevent the breakdown of muscle tissue to a small degree.
Ephedrine is highly synergistic with Caffeine, and for this reason is commonly found in something called an ECA stack (Ephedrine, Caffeine, and Aspirin).
Side effects include an increase in Blood Pressure that goes away with cessation and increases in some blood parameters (Glucosamine, Insulin) that also go away with cessation of use. It has been reported to be a hyperstimulant when taken in doses above what is recommended.
Ephedrine is well studied and a fairly reliable compound for short- to medium-term weight loss (less than 6 months) and mild performance improvements, usually in trained individuals. However, it does not work under all situations; longer-term weight loss and effects in untrained individuals have not been studied much and sometimes produce negative results. While it has been implicated in weight reduction independent of exercise and diet changes, efficacy is maximized with minimal side-effects when ephedrine is combined with diet and exercise.
>>36615842
> have an embolism
>>36615860
Maybe he meant aneurysm?
It's a vaso-constrictor, can even fuck with your boners.
So the aspirin helps keep your blood thin.
>>36615897
it's just a weird thing to say, suggesting the person doesn't know how to utilize the word appropiately.
the clot is the mechanism but not the actual injury.
you'd say heart attack, stroke, etc.
>>36615860
>>36615897
>>36615949
Embolism's just my go-to word for fucking your shit up since pic related. I know it's wildly off
>>36615851
>Ephedrine (ih-fed-rin)
Please don't attempt phonetic spelling.
>>36614930
One day if your caloric deficit is high enough
>>36615712
You're the only person who's said it tends towards zero. No one else explicitly suggested that you fucking imbecile.
>>36615851
That was really a good explaination man, thanks
>>36616006
Then what is the point?
Here are efficiency gains for Lance Armstrong (!)
>It appears that an 8% improvement in muscular efficiency and thus power production when cycling at a given oxygen uptake (Vo(2)) is the characteristic that improved most as this athlete matured from ages 21 to 28 yr
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16160031?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
For you, it's fucking nothing.
>>36615977
>>36616069
It's off of www.examine.com
A really amazing website to research supplements without shit products being shilled.
>>36616088
your reference supports their argument, not yours.
why are you even bothering to argue at this stage?
never understood people like you.
you're obviously wrong and being called out by multiple people, but you just stubbornly cling to the argument for no reason.
>>36615646
Would you recommend EC while cutting?
Does it actually does something? An example of with without?
Are there any circumstances it's useless/hurtful?
>>36616112
It doesn't support their argument. They are arguing over noise. Efficiency gains are insignificant.
>>36616125
insignificant is regardless, there was an 8% improvement.
ergo their point that adaptation occurs is correct, and yours that it doesn't is wrong.
that's case close.
move on with your life
>>36616142
Anon's opening bid was that it shaved off 20% a month.
Lance -- training 6 hours a day with every boost known to science -- managed 8% in seven years.
Recompute caloric expenditure as your weight changes and just forget about efficiency.
>>36616123
Well my before/after speaks for itself.
You'll have the DnP faggots say it's useless but that's simply because the results aren't nuclear.
I use it exclusively for cutting.
I wouldn't recommend it for a skinny fat person who for some reason wants to cut before building muscle mass.
I love it because it helps curb my appetite, it gives me a boost for my workouts without making me feel like I might die if I push myself hard.
I've experienced no problems but you need to go about it smart.
Do half dosages at first.
There are guidelines online.
The main benefit for me was minimizing muscle loss. Less than a quarter pound loss for over 15lbs of fat loss.
>>36616158
nope, it was pure hypothetical/speculation on the posters behalf.
you're arguing the semantics now for no reason, this is an anonymous imageboard you don't need to save face.
there is no post history on this website.
MOVE - ON.
>>36615800
>2lbs is too much unless you are a fatass
And where are you getting this from? for me to lose 2lbs i'd have to eat 1500 calories, thats perfectly fine and wont have no negative impact in my muscle mass as long as i had a consistent diet and exercise routine
>>36616194
Well when you're a hamplanet your body is sort of eager to lose the fat.
But when you're below 20% bodyfat and still cutting to the degree that has you losing 2lbs a week you are likely cutting into your gains.
You want to hit a sweet spot where you have energy to consistently lift and aren't losing muscle anywhere near the ratio at which you lose fat.
>>36616190
20% / month = significant
< 1% / year = insignificant
Get over it.
>>36616171
I have no problem with hunder problems or remaining constant with the exercises I do. But since i can't lift and i can only do pushups and leg/abs exercises, I wanted to make sure I'm losing the least amount of muscle possible (i am eating 160 g proteins/day)
>>36616295
EC should be good for you.
High protein, eating under maintenance.
>>36616227
>losing 2lbs a week you are likely cutting into your gains.
This is what i'm talking about, where are you getting this information from? 2lbs isn't that extreme.
>>36614930
Just cook your broccoli in the microwave ya ning nong. Quicker and you'd lose less water soluble vitamins in the water too. And it saves dirtying a pot
>>36615292
>I am a calories in vs calories out (macros as well) person
so everything you say is inherently wrong, got it
>>36616365
2lbs is 7,000 calories.
If you have a 2500 calorie maintenance, that's 17,500 weekly - 7000 = 10,500/7 = 1500 cals a day.
Have fun dropping 20-30% of your strength and losing more muscle than you needed to just so you could cut faster. O
Or you could just cut at 2200-2500 and 30-60minutes of walking everyday, better for your health and you'll lose 99% fat 1% muscle, instead of 50% fat 50% muscle.
>>36616560
you won't start losing much muscle unless you're under ~10% and on really low calories.
if you get a decent amount of protein and continue to lift heavy and frequently you wont lose as much muscle as you think
you can do a 700-1k cal deficit and be fine
So me doing 1 hr cardio everyday and eating 1550 kcals/day (163 lbs weight so ~5-600 kcal deficit) is too much? I don't feel bad or starved, quite good instead
>>36616975
You're doing it right. Keep at it.
>>36617099
I don't know if troll. This place changed me.
>>36616851
Pretty hard to keep lifting heavy on a 1k deficit unless you're on gear.
>>36617214
i've done it before, you just have to be smart with meal/snack placement and use of stimulants.
not sure if it's good but when im cutting hard i take a good preworkout and have ~40g+ carbs before workouts and it gives me a good amount of fuel. refeeds are also necessary at that deficit, it can be done.
>>36617202
Not a troll. Trust the numbers and feel good about feeling good. The people who feel like shit when cutting are usually the ones fucking up their diet.
I've seen these thermocaps tablets with "ECA system/ ephedra free" written on it like pic related. Opinions? It has carnitine green tea and other things like that inside.
>>36617214
i'm on about an 800 deficit and i'm lifting fine, maybe lost about 5% strength but i've been cutting for about 2 weeks now and i'm still ok
>>36617927
bump for that what are those
>>36618724
overpriced do nothing shit capsules
>>36617927
>ECA system
>ephedra free
So I guess it's got synephrine in it? Otherwise it's just bullshit package art.
Just get some DNP and GW501516 and overheat/cancer yourself thin...
Or eat properly.
