Rapid Fat Loss vs. V-Diet

Diet and Nutrition
21

Being that I’m lazy with anthropometrics, I just estimated my bodyfat both times and calculated the meal plan. Plus - and this sounds pathetic coming from a fitness buff and RD - I don’t know many people who even know how to give a 12-site bodyfat test. And I’m not hunting down some exercise physiology lab or hospital bed for a DEXA.

I haven’t tried a thermogenic aid in 9 years. I’m not designed for a thermogenic; I’m a high-strung, motivated, energetic guy as it is; I’m not described as laid back; if I took a thermogenic aid now, I’d probably be hanging from a chandelier somewhere.

22

How have you measured progress then?

And how did you deal with metabolic slowdown?

23

Hello McNulty,

You might not have read my posts in their entirety.

Metabolic slowdown and muscle loss is offset by consuming one cheat meal and having one five-hour carb-up per week.

I measure progress with the scale, performance, the mirror, and the tape measure. It works good enough for me. Like I said, I don’t hang with personal trainers or exercise physiologists; besides, the trainers in the gym I go to probably don’t even know how to take a 12-site test. What I have done sometimes is used the Accumeasure on a few sites myself, just to gauge some progress without calculating anything: abs, tricep, thigh.

24

See my second post in this thread outlining a carbup and cheat meal.

25

The diets sound very similar. “Cheat” meal is basically the HSM on the V. The metabolic cost of digesting the solid food would probably give the rapid fat loss an advantage.

Personally, I would recommend V-Dieters substitute more fish oils for nut butter. The 200 or so calories make a world of a difference.

Rapid fat loss is certainly the most extreme I’ve come across in all my experience with dieting, aside from fasting altogether. I wouldn’t recommend it. McDonald even acknowledges it’s a “Crash Diet.”

Naturally I thought the same about the Velocity diet before I started…it was just too simple to pass up.

26

Thanks a lot for answering my question, and yeah, I totally agree with the verbal abuse part, that’s why I asked you instead of Lyle. Haha

27

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
Hello McNulty,

You might not have read my posts in their entirety.

Metabolic slowdown and muscle loss is offset by consuming one cheat meal and having one five-hour carb-up per week.

I measure progress with the scale, performance, the mirror, and the tape measure. It works good enough for me. Like I said, I don’t hang with personal trainers or exercise physiologists; besides, the trainers in the gym I go to probably don’t even know how to take a 12-site test. What I have done sometimes is used the Accumeasure on a few sites myself, just to gauge some progress without calculating anything: abs, tricep, thigh. [/quote]

Well that’s encouraging. How long has each cycle been?

28

[quote]McNulty wrote:
Bricknyce wrote:
Hello McNulty,

You might not have read my posts in their entirety.

Metabolic slowdown and muscle loss is offset by consuming one cheat meal and having one five-hour carb-up per week.

I measure progress with the scale, performance, the mirror, and the tape measure. It works good enough for me. Like I said, I don’t hang with personal trainers or exercise physiologists; besides, the trainers in the gym I go to probably don’t even know how to take a 12-site test. What I have done sometimes is used the Accumeasure on a few sites myself, just to gauge some progress without calculating anything: abs, tricep, thigh.

Well that’s encouraging. How long has each cycle been?
[/quote]

Again, McNulty, you might not have read my posts. :slight_smile:

The first time I ran it for 4 weeks; this time I might run it for 6 weeks.

29

Ah sorry man, I need to be more thorough!

I’m trying to figure out if this diet is for me. I’ve been dieting basically straight for over a year and a half, anywhere from 1600-2500 calories a day most weeks. I made a lot of progress the first time I went low-calorie but the last 15 months or so have shown little progress.

So I’m almost at the week three point in my at-maintenance break, and I want to lose fat badly. I’d say that I’m around 23-26% bf. I’m so motivated to lose weight that I know I can handle any diet, it’s just a matter of figuring out what’s okay for me. I’m really leaning towards this one, at least for 3-4 weeks. I’m just frustrated and desperate at this point.

30

If you want to know if the diet is for you, buy the book. It’s cheap.

Dieting for weight loss is not just a matter of caloric restriction; it’s also a matter of activity and food choices and combinations.

Do you mean you’ve been RESTRICTIVE dieting for the past year or are you implying that you’ve been “watching what you eat” for the past year?

A bodyfat percentage of 23 to 26 is relatively high for a man; so you can definitely stay on a very restrictive diet for more than 3 to 4 weeks.

31

In 2008 I averaged around 2000 calories a day, and never took extended (10+ days) breaks. I didn’t eat super clean though, not until this year.

I got the book, I just want to make sure that it won’t wreak my metabolism or thyroid (if it’s been damaged from dieting for so long with few breaks).

For six weeks I was following Thib’s Refined Physique Training guidelines, and I went from 220 to about 210 lbs in about a week (most if not all of it water weight, etc. from going keto), but for the next 4 or 5 weeks I lost nothing.

I asked Thib for advice and he suggested I take a break, at least two weeks (more was suggested) and take some supplements to help with possible thyroid and adrenal gland damage. I’ve been doing that, went up to 219 pounds (sigh), and am anxious to lose a lot of fat now. As fast as possible, but only if it won’t ruin my system. If it’s safe to go by this RFL plan, I’ll do it.

32

Read through the thread and didn’t see how much weight you lost before while on this diet, only that you were very pleased (lost weight at warp speed lol)

Can you tell us how much you were able to lose in the 4 weeks? Thanks

33

Brick, I think it should be quite evident why the V-Diet advocates for so much supplementation.

Any diet whose very first guideline is ‘xxx supplements MUST be purchased in order for the diet to work’ should be seen for what it really is. I am by no means disqualifying or underestimating the effectiveness of this diet but merely trying to remind that there is nothing extraordinary in supplements that can not be obtained from other sources (like real god damn food).

Lyle McDonald is a true guru when it comes to nutrition and his ideas should be highly sought after by anyone who wants to succeed in dieting.

34

[quote]MeinHerzBrennt wrote:
Read through the thread and didn’t see how much weight you lost before while on this diet, only that you were very pleased (lost weight at warp speed lol)

Can you tell us how much you were able to lose in the 4 weeks? Thanks[/quote]

I lost 15 pounds the first time.

35

I would say Lyle isn’t that much of a guru besides his views on carbohydrates and refeeds. He’s basically taken a few different guru’s ideas (low carb, low calorie, high protein) and shaped them into something that works for bodybuilders and active people in general.

The average dieter wouldn’t look at McDonald’s work because it’s too extreme and the refeeds are such an abstract concept! Most fat asses trying to lose weight won’t step foot in a gym and are looking for an alternative to gastrointestinal bypass or lypo.

As far as the members of this site are concerned, his philosophies are awesome and definitely fit in to bodybuilding nutrition.

36

Thanks, Jason.

NOTE

By the way everyone, the reason why I’m posting a lot right now is because I’m now a statistic, one of millions of unemployed Americans; and there is only so much resume sending I can do.

Fifteen minutes ago, I just received a phone call from an HR person saying I haven’t been accepted for a position in one of the largest PR firm’s nutrition practice. Whatever! Only one applicant can fill one spot!

Moving on…

Jason, I am in agreement with you. The V-Diet is effective. But I just don’t understand what makes Flameout, Superfood, and protein powder superior to a large vegetable intake, a serving of salmon, trout, mackerel, or sardines, and other low-fat protein items.

I’d like to discuss this with Chris in the V-Diet forum, but I will not be some big pest that tries to derail a service that he is offering in a very generous way.

Just as an aside, I’m going to start posting more cautiously on the net. I’m no longer in the mood to defame or negatively criticize people in print anymore if it’s not called for.

37

[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
If you want to know if the diet is for you, buy the book. It’s cheap.

Dieting for weight loss is not just a matter of caloric restriction; it’s also a matter of activity and food choices and combinations.

Do you mean you’ve been RESTRICTIVE dieting for the past year or are you implying that you’ve been “watching what you eat” for the past year?

A bodyfat percentage of 23 to 26 is relatively high for a man; so you can definitely stay on a very restrictive diet for more than 3 to 4 weeks. [/quote]

No offense man, but I wouldn’t expect something like (i.e. the food choices/combinations thing) that from someone familiar with lyle’s work.

Yes, macronutrient amounts matter with regards to fat loss (essentially adequate vs inadequate protein intake). But come on, food combinations? are you serious?

I’d like to hear what exactly you mean by that. Please don’t tell me you believe in the P+C P+F thing…

On another note, good luck with the diet. It’s a tough one, that’s for sure. Are you really doing HIIT while on it? I think thats a recipe for disaster myself, but if its working, more power to ya I guess. Just remember to incorporate those diet breaks often.

38

[quote]Taufiq wrote:
Thanks a lot for answering my question, and yeah, I totally agree with the verbal abuse part, that’s why I asked you instead of Lyle. Haha

[/quote]

I don’t know he’s like that, but it’s funny.

39

JM,

I was not referring to P-C and P-F combos; I was referring to other types of combos.

For example, some people think that a bowl of cereal with full-fat milk and a glass of orange juice is a good meal. Some think a bagel with cream cheese is a good meal. I don’t think these are meals. The items aren’t ideal and they don’t have much protein.

An apple isn’t a meal. An apple and a cup of cottage cheese is a meal. See what I mean?

40

Jamie Hale interviewing Lyle:

JH: Do you agree with the food combining theory of high fat/ high protein, high protein/ high carb, but never high fat/ high carb?

LM: Short answer: no. Although I don’t disagree that eating too many calories (which can occur with certain carb/fat foods) is probably a bad idea (see comments below).

Longer answer: The newest version of this fad appears to be based on a 10 year old outdate model where only insulin is important in storing calories as the rationale is that you don’t want to increase insulin when there is dietary fat in your system. As the logic goes: insulin is a storage hormone, insulin stores fat, if you raise insulin when you eat fat, you get fat.

A couple of problems right off the bat:

#1: Protein does a decent job of raising insulin and it takes very little insulin to affect fat cell metabolism.

#2: Dietary fat affects fat cell metabolism with NO INCREASE in insulin. At least two studies, using oral fat loading found a decrease in HSL and an activation of fat storage despite no increase in insulin. The apparent culprit, a little bastard called acylation stimulation protein (ASP) which is activated by the presence of chylomicrons (basically packaged triglycerides that are found in the bloodstream after the meal). ASP increases glucose uptake into the fat cell, increases insulin release from the pancreas and has been described as ‘the most potent stimulator of triglyceride storage’ in the fat cells.

I think that if food combining works in any fashion, it’s because it controls people’s food intake. Basically, compared to a diet where you can eat carbs and fat (the primary energy providing nutrients to the body) at all of your meals, setting up a diet where you can only eat one or the other at any given meal automatically tends to limit calorie intake even if people think they are ‘eating as much as they want’. Since you can only eat fat at three meals/day, you end up eating less of it than you would eating an uncontrolled diet where you can eat fat at every meal. Same for concentrated carbs (which can easily provide a lot of calories).

Also, a lot of people turn stupid when they bulk, they rationalize that they ‘need’ that pint of ice cream or tray of cookies to gain weight. Which means that they eat too many calories and that’s why they get fat. If food combining prevents them from doing that (and it does, but so does not eating like a lazy ass pig), of course it will ‘work’ in some fashion.

I think it’s important to note that the primary advocate of food combining (at least, the guy who repopularized what is really a very old idea) has recently made modifications to his original scheme. Now unprocessed carbs such as potatoes and beans and other low GI fare (veggies, of course) are allows with the protein/fat meals.

My question to him: What did he think people were eating with their protein/fat meals? Jelly beans and cake? So, basically, his food combining plan now allows meals to consist of protein, vegetables, low GI/unprocessed carbs and fat. Meaning that it took him several years to get right back to what just about every bodybuilding nutritionist ever has been recommending. Hooray for progress.