You both agree a calorie deficit causes weight loss.

This forum was meant to discuss macronutrient ratios (mainly fat vs carbs as we all know Protein is important).

BCBill, most of us posting on BFL know reduced calories = weight loss but.... we are focus on fat loss. BMI does not show body composition but anyone would agree a 5'6" 235 lb person is obese and out of shape. But how about me? A 5'6" 175-185 pound male with 16%-19% body fat and a BMI between 27-29, am I overweight? If I weight over 191 pounds am I obese? BMI is crap for physically fit people with muscle mass.

Excellent post with good points.  Thanks Bryan.  

Thanks for bringing us back to what matters and to recapping the information in a way that frames what is important.  

Since this is your thread.  What are your goals?  How low were you wanting to get that body fat %?  

Since Paleo...

Have you lost scale weight?

Has your body fat % decreased?

Do you feel stronger?  (which can lead to others as your body transitions)

How is your energy level?

Jessica - Mighty Max

I NEVER said you ate a 2000 calorie meal.  I was giving an example.  You are once again falsely accusing me.  You said number or meals didn't matter originally.  You failed to give reasonable parameters.  That wasn't something I made up.  I get intermittent fasting, but it isn't what you said.  

You haven't proven your points and just because you claim you have doesn't make it so.  You were the one who said you would.  The studies show reducing calories aids in weight loss and I NEVER QUESTIONED THAT.  For you to say the studies proved your point is to also say that I didn't agree that a calorie reduction would aid in weight loss and that's a lie.  

Did I ever say a BMI of 37 would be coupled with a good BF%?  No.  What I said was there needed to be more specifics because the variations and details matter.  Without them the information is moot.  

Now you're acting like it's me who didn't come through, but the reality is that you're frustrated that I know you didn't come through.  

here I will quote myself

OMG blasphamy! It doesn't matter if you eat 3x or 6x a day as long as you eat the appropriate kcals! Egads!

Looks like I established some pretty reasonable perameters.

What specifics are you looking for to make that study releveant in your eyes? You need the waist measurements of every participant? Their complete medical history? Before and after photos? Name of their dog?

On the very first page is give the mean age, weight, fat mass, lean muscle and BMI. What more do you need? They even give a break down medically of those recruited for the study:

They were obese (30 kg/m2, BMI , 45 kg/m2)), non-diabetic, nonsmokers, non-pregnant, sedentary (,30 min of continuous exercise performed #2 times/week), weight stable for 6months (^2 kg) and aged between 18 and 55 years. Only pre-menopausal women with a regular menstrual cycle (28–35 d) were recruited.

Again, what is it you need their first names? Do you need to personally know them for it to mean something?

Enough of the patronizing!  You are doing it to cover for not having relevant information.  I'm not interested.  I was clear what information was needed.  All you have proven is that a calorie deficit causes weight loss and I said that from beginning.  It's like "proving" the sky is blue.  You missed my point completely.  My original point was that there were many factors and knowing all the information was the only way to weigh those factors.  Calories as a stand alone is not the only factor.  You just keep repeating yourself.  I am not interested.  

What you keep doing is to continually make claims about something that isn't in question.  It was never the original question.  That's not helpful. 

Now it's also hindering this thread from going in the direction the original poster needed.

Max -

Have you lost scale weight? I have only been eating Paleo since I got back from my Honeymoon July 4th weekend. My scale weight has not changed much but also I do not have the 6-10 pound daily weight fluctuations.

Has your body fat % decreased? I have lost almost half a pound of fat in the past 6 days

Do you feel stronger?  (which can lead to others as your body transitions) I lifted for the first time in 3 weeks (taking a 2 week vacation inspired an extra week a laziness) and I felt pretty good and could lift with 5-10 lbs of my previous 10s on my 6 rep sets.

How is your energy level? My energy level is pretty much the same as it was during my last challenge that ended in May.

Okay, so it looks like you haven't had enough time to know.  I didn't realize it was only since your return.  

What provoked you to do Paleo?

Now I'm not a supported, but that doesn't mean it's not right for some.  Also, I think there are variations and it definitely has some substantial merits.  

BryanL

You both agree a calorie deficit causes weight loss.

This forum was meant to discuss macronutrient ratios (mainly fat vs carbs as we all know Protein is important).

BCBill, most of us posting on BFL know reduced calories = weight loss but.... we are focus on fat loss. BMI does not show body composition but anyone would agree a 5'6" 235 lb person is obese and out of shape. But how about me? A 5'6" 175-185 pound male with 16%-19% body fat and a BMI between 27-29, am I overweight? If I weight over 191 pounds am I obese? BMI is crap for physically fit people with muscle mass.

As I said, BM is not the be all end all and can not be indicative of actual fitness levels.  But in the study I linked it is obvious by the incredibly high BMI along with the fat mass means (114kg mean weight  49.8kg neam fat mass, we are talking in the 40% BF range), these were obese, as in fat with a capital F, not heavily muscled as to throw the study out the window because you don't believe BMI is worth anything.

BMI without the other measureables doesn't really tell the tale I agree. At 205lbs 6'0 my BMI says I am overweight as well by BMI alone. But my other measurables, ~170lbs of lean body weight, ~34lbs of BF puts it more into perspective. In the morbidly obese (35%+BF), as was the case in this study BMI is pretty indicative of the state these people were in. 

(Repost)

Carbs = Energy

Unused energy gets stored (excess carbs)

The body stores unused energy as fat

If the body gets the minimum amount of energy thru diet then

The body uses stored body fat or muscle mas for energy

If you are eating enough dietary fat then body will be more likely to use stored body fat

I would love comments and opinions on this philosophy!

THIS is about FAT LOSS and not just scale weight loss (Total Body Weight)

(I am keeping it simple and not mentioning high vs low glycemic, good vs bad fats, and insulin but I am aware of them and want to start some discussion)

I am trying out something new for a month to see how it works for me (an individual not the masses)

Bryan -

Thanks for the repost!  Let's get back to the topic at hand. 

I have a few good studies to share.  Let me find them.  I did a poor job when categorizing things on my laptop and now am having trouble easily pulling something.  I have some stuff by Charles Poliquin.  Poliquin is the number one strength coach in the US, if you agree to define that by number of Olympic medalist under his coaching. 

I like his information in general and especially like that he tends to pull German studies, which I've found best, but do warn that sometimes he's got broscience going on.  He sells his own line of super high end supplements and think he has an angle.  That's why I prefer his non supplement information.  He tends to be extreme though.  He is a supporter of Paleo so that might be good for you.  I have several books on Paleo that were suggested by a Poliquin certified trainer. 

I will give you a for instance on his thinking.  He will swear up and down that you don't get cholesterol from food.  A study was done in the NEJM that "showed" this.  The study was done with ONE yolk per day.  Studies can be deceiving. 

The study was later done again with 3 yolks and it showed that there was little impact on cholesterol, but that there was an increase.  That increase was only in the larger pieces.  I personally do eat yolks and think that your belly is a bigger factor in cholesterol than eating eggs or shrimp, but I digress. 

Tom Venuto wrote a great article clarifying the position. I think Poliquin pulls more studies, but sometimes the point gets lost in the facts, if that makes sense.  Venuto doesn't cite enough for my liking, but I have yet to read anything by him that didn't simply make good sense. 

I would suggest Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle as a resource to you.  It discusses carb cycling, which I personally highly support.  That doesn't mean it's right for you. 

As Charlie pointed out, Tom eats a lot of carbs.  That does NOT mean that you must or that it's right for you.  Tom has a different workout plan, body type, etc.  I just think his information will be useful. 

I should add that Poliquin strongly believes that many factors are at play when it comes to weight loss, muscle gain, etc.  

When a man swears he only needs 6 hours (or whatever) of sleep and if that man has a belly, Charles will point to it and tell him that their gut tells him otherwise.  

Although, again, some broscience, I should be fair and say that he has his own lab.  It's not just a marketing thing with his supplements.  He genuinely studies things.  I just think he likes to show a broader picture than was originally proven.  

He is really big into hormones and how our different behaviors impact them and how those hormones then reflect in where we gain weight and our ability to gain / lose.  He swears you can spot reduce if you eat according to your individual hormonal needs.  Now I don't know.  There seems to be some evidence of that, but I don't think enough to support that bold of a claim.  

BryanL

(Repost)

Carbs = Energy

Unused energy gets stored (excess carbs)

The body stores unused energy as fat

If the body gets the minimum amount of energy thru diet then

The body uses stored body fat or muscle mas for energy

If you are eating enough dietary fat then body will be more likely to use stored body fat

I would love comments and opinions on this philosophy!

THIS is about FAT LOSS and not just scale weight loss (Total Body Weight)

(I am keeping it simple and not mentioning high vs low glycemic, good vs bad fats, and insulin but I am aware of them and want to start some discussion)

I am trying out something new for a month to see how it works for me (an individual not the masses)

First, apologies for the thread derail. In the end the point I was trying to get across is don't be afraid of trying something new just because it doesn't follow the BFL "dogma" if you will. Especially in a case like yours where you have done multiple cycles.

Don't be afraid of changing up the balance of macros, as long as your protein content is at appropriate levels to prevent muscle loss while in a caloric deficit, which as I understand Paleo shouldn't be a problem  In the end the only way for YOU to find what works for YOU is experiment. As long as there is some sanity in the nutrition plan you are looking to follow you are not going to crash your metabolism or whatever by experimenting with macros, meal timing, exercise routines, caloric intakes etc.  As I said, I'm looking forward to reading your blog about how it goes.

The only thing i would caution is try to avoid absolutes, which is one issue I do have with hard core Paleo (or any hard core follower of any nutrition plan). Having a piece of cake or some toast now and again is not going to send you to a early grave as some low carb folks would have you believe. 

From what I can gather you are looking to shed the last say 4% -6% of body fat. Lots of discussion about nutrition as I think most agree it is 75-80% of the equation. But, have you looked at changing up your exercise regime? Are you still doing the BFL system and are you still making gains in weights and cardio? It could be adding 5-6lbs of muscle mass is the catalyst you need to help shed the remaining fat you are looking to get rid of. If you are not achieving constant progressive overload in your lifting routine ie: making regular gains be it # of reps or lbs of weight per rep you are at best maintaing muscle mass and strength. Do you find you still lift what you could say 3 months ago or is it harder to lift the same weights? Have you looked into changing things up?

Jessica,

That's not what you appeared to say.  Bill was right, though.  Sorry...

From what you said earlier, the reason for weight gain was because people were eating more carbs, and leaving out healthy fats.  Thus, producing insulin spikes. These spikes may be curbed by adding more fats, but that doesn't aid in fat loss.  Fats, just like carbs DO NOT build muscle, the only thing that does is protein.  Carbs and fats are for fuel and nutrients. So, my point was Bill was initially correct, calories in vs calories out produces weight loss.  However, I do agree with you that can't build muscles without protein, which will lead to healthy prolonged weight loss.  

I will reiterate, excess insulin does not lead to fast stores, unless it's more than the calories you can burn off.  Usually, insulin spike lead to overeating, which leads to excess calories.

I said that was a factor, not the exclusive reason for weight gain.  That would be silly.  

Without carbs you cannot build muscle.  That's important to note.  It's true that it's protein that does the building, but only with the carbs to help.  

No.  You made an inference from something I did not even remotely imply.  I did not link all that together the way you have claimed.  I was talking insulin in an isolated extreme case, not saying carbs just spike it, which is the only reason for weight gain.  I'm not sure how you extrapolated that from what I said.

Getting enough healthy fat does aid in fat loss.

Calories in vs. calories out is not the only factor.  Bill is wrong.  Yes, a calorie deficit does create scale loss.  I NEVER SAID OTHERWISE.  There are also many other factors.

Let's get back to the thread as intended, as Bryan has tried to do.

Yeah, but that's what Bill explained perfectly the first time.  I got what he said.  I just can personally attest that he is correct.    

That isn't even remotely close to what Bill explained the first time.  What he explained is incorrect.  

Had he explained it that way, that there are many factors, but ultimately you do need a deficit then I would have never disagreed and we would not be discussing this now.