A little about Body Fat for the beginner.

[Mr.Silverback]

Exactly...no denial here...lol

[Chillen]

Originally Posted by Rich Knapp

Burn Fat, Not Muscle
An individual looking to rid him or herself of a pound of fat needs to burn 3,500 calories more than he/she consumes. To lose one pound of fat and not lose lean tissue (muscle), you must have a delicate balance in your diet and exercise regimen.
1 lb is about the size of a coffee cup.

Numerically, this is the common number thrown around in the profession; however, in the real world, it doesnt take into account metabolic adaptions as body weight and body fat drops, and other personal considerations. And, personally, I feel protein is more important in a deficit diet (be it a deficit in calories, or manipulating macros). In addition, if it were as easy as a deleicate balance betweeb diet and exercise regime to prevent muscle loss (all together), everyone would be doing it, but its not this simple.

Just my opinion.

[Rich Knapp]

Originally Posted by Chillen

Numerically, this is the common number thrown around in the profession; however, in the real world, it doesnt take into account metabolic adaptions as body weight and body fat drops, and other personal considerations. And, personally, I feel protein is more important in a deficit diet (be it a deficit in calories, or manipulating macros). In addition, if it were as easy as a deleicate balance betweeb diet and exercise regime to prevent muscle loss (all together), everyone would be doing it, but its not this simple.

Just my opinion.

Again this was for beginners. If I wanted to get that detailed it would be in Advanced or the BBer thread.

[jslep]

Originally Posted by Rich Knapp

Again this was for beginners. If I wanted to get that detailed it would be in Advanced or the BBer thread.

You're exactly right Rich. With too much detail comes too much complication which leads to frustration....which leads to failure. Keeping things simple for a person who is just begining is critical to their success.

[Shadowschmadow]

Originally Posted by Chillen

Numerically, this is the common number thrown around in the profession; however, in the real world, it doesnt take into account metabolic adaptions as body weight and body fat drops, and other personal considerations.

Its a solid rule for most to follow.

[Soldier]

I find that the leaner you get, the more detailed you have to be in both planning and tracking. I'm a member of myfitnesspal.com, which is where I track my intake. I also check in on the forum every now and then. I've seen some very "interesting" things said by people who thought they knew something because they lost a ton of weight, but I think it's much more impressive and hard to go from 15 to 8% than it is to go from 70 to 30%.

The people who are extremely obese can get by just by tracking calories. Once you get down below 20%, however, you usually can't just watch calories. You have to start paying attention to macros as well. And once you get down below 15% you have to start thinking about things like timing in either the daily or weekly sense.

[Shadowschmadow]

Originally Posted by Soldier

but I think it's much more impressive and hard to go from 15 to 8% than it is to go from 70 to 30%.

I would almost agree. Well part of me does, part of me doesn't. It takes a lot of dedication and hard work to do both.

[Soldier]

Shadow, when I see your signature it makes me think of something I heard a long time ago; "When I die I want to go like my grandpa, in my sleep, not screaming in terror like the passengers in his car."

/threadjack

[Chillen]

Originally Posted by Rich Knapp

Again this was for beginners. If I wanted to get that detailed it would be in Advanced or the BBer thread.

This is cool, it begins with ones numerical numbers attached to ones personal particulars, and they need to understand the approximate calories in a pound of fat tissue, to get an "idea" of rate of loss as it relates to the deficit content they are stipulating in their diet.

These are basic mechanics in action.

However, they need to be told point blank, that some of the numerical numbers will not match up to real world fat loss. For example--fat loss can be more than what the numerical data outlines in their diet (such is the case for alot of beginners in setting fat loss goals), and in some cases right on par, and in others, less. This prevents a let down, and sets up reality.

[Shadowschmadow]

Everything we do is approximates. People just need to understand this in general. I don't think that Rich's post implied anything more than an approximate that is applicable to most. I know he agrees that naturally lean people will have to follow stricter guidelines to have great success, and that there are people with different metabolic issues that do not respond the same way as the typical person, and that results for all will differ.

I don't think Rich's intentions were to use this thread as a blanket statement, but to provide an approximate that will get the ball rolling.