Biotest

Fat Loss: Training with Plazma vs Without


#1

So the past four weeks I’ve done some experimentation with the following goals in mind, in order of importance:

  1. Maintain Muscle or try and GAIN muscle.
  2. Burn fat
  3. Maintain strength

Diet: Calorie and Carb cycling approach WITH Intermittent Fasting. I fast everyday from 8pm to 12pm the next day.

4 Lift days get 2000 - 2400 calories with macro ratios of 40% carbs / 20% Fat / 40% Protein. This includes all supplementation.

3 Non lift days get about 1300 calories with macro ratio targets of 10% carbs / 45% Fat / 45% Protein. This includes all supplementation.

Protein intake on lift days is over 200 grams (I’m 168 pounds now).
Protein intake on non lift days is generally around 150grams.

Training 4 days a week.
Mondays I do all 5/3/1 stuff only
Tuesdays I do 8x8 Gironda style full body
Wednesday off
Thursdays I do Eiferman/Colebert style training Full body
Fridays I do 4x6 of core lifts only
Saturday & Sundays Off.

Weeks 1 and 3:
NO plazma.
BCAA’s pre and post workout.
I3G only on lift days
MAG-10 on lift days only
Lost 1 pound on week 1.
Lost 1.4 pounds on week 3.

Weeks 2 and 4:
I trained WITH Plazma on lift days only
I3G only on lift days as they are also high calorie/high carb days.
Week 2 and 4, again, I trained with Plazma so I did not train in fasted state.
MAG-10 after lifts.
Lost 2 pounds week 2
Lost 2.4 pounds week 4.

Caloric intakes on weeks 1-4 NEARLY IDENTICAL. I’m tracking everything on fitbit. I was surprised to see that I lost more weight when training WITH plazma. Experiment over. I will be training WITH Plazma at all times.

Here’s my question/problem: I think it’s physically impossible to have burned 2.4 pounds of fat in one week, right? I mean…it’s possible to burn 2.5 pounds of pure fat but IDK, I"m a pessimist so I think maybe 1.5 pounds of fat loss is more likely, which even more importantly means I might have lost a full pound of muscle last week. And that would be highly upsetting.

Thing is…my caloric intake is quite high overall. Here’s a breakdown of last week:

Monday (lift day) - 2039 calories. 35% carbs / 25% Fat / 43% Protein (little too much fat but within limits)

Tuesday (lift day) - 2323 calories. 39% carbs / 20% Fat / 41% Protein (near perfect macros for the lift day)

Wednesday (off day) - 1316 calories. 16% carbs / 42% Fat / 42% Protein (near perfect macros for the off day)

Thursday (lift day) - 2425 calories. 37% carbs / 23% Fat / 40% Protein (tiny bit over on fat, tiny bit short on carbs)

Friday (lift day) - 2033 calories. 37% carbs / 28% Fat / 35% Protein (Had one “dirty” meal, which was a 10inch Italian sub on a hero with all the fixins plus roast peppers from Wawa…Wawa makes a surprisingly delicious hero)

Saturday (off day) - 1265 calories. 23% carbs / 36% Fat / 41% Protein. (Had one “dirty” meal, which was a 8 inch Turkey Tom hero from JImmy Johns. I love JJ’s)

Sunday (off day) - 1645 calories. 15% carbs / 47% Fat / 38% Protein. (No “dirty” meals but had a large handful of veggie chips, large handful of pistachios, 80grams of light vanilla ice cream, which is basically one nice scoop.)

I’m debating right now…add more calories to off days, specifically on Saturday? Or run everything the same way to truly establish a baseline but then risk losing potentially another pound of muscle. What do you guys think? How should I fine tune going forward?

Remember my goals in order of importance:

  1. Maintain Muscle or try and GAIN muscle.
  2. Burn fat
  3. Maintain strength

All advice welcome.


#2

Weight and body composition cannot be measured so accurately as to decide whether a pound of muscle was or was not lost, or whether the issue is that in the first weighing you were better hydrated to the extent of a single 16 ounce glass of water, or had more food in the GI tract.

If not seeing any appearance, measurement, or strength reason to suspect muscle loss, I wouldn’t suspect it from such a result.

The fat loss indeed might have been less, for the above reasons.

Since what you’ve been doing has been working, why not continue it until seeing a reason to change?

There might be reason already, but not knowing your weight or bodyfat percentage, and knowing only that you’ve been getting good results, it seems you’re on a good track.


#3

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Weight and body composition cannot be measured so accurately as to decide whether a pound of muscle was or was not lost, or whether the issue is that in the first weighing you were better hydrated to the extent of a single 16 ounce glass of water, or had more food in the GI tract.

If not seeing any appearance, measurement, or strength reason to suspect muscle loss, I wouldn’t suspect it from such a result.

The fat loss indeed might have been less, for the above reasons.

Since what you’ve been doing has been working, why not continue it until seeing a reason to change?

There might be reason already, but not knowing your weight or bodyfat percentage, and knowing only that you’ve been getting good results, it seems you’re on a good track.[/quote]

Thanks Bill. Probably sound advice. Although I do have some strength loss with deads.

I’ll take measurements tonight and continue what I’m doing.

Where exactly should I be measuring myself though?

Upper arm, lower arm, upper leg, lower leg, chest, waist and neck cover everything?


#4

I really didn’t write that well! It’s not that measurements need to be taken now, it was a question of objective evidence of muscle loss versus guesses from the scale. In fact measurements can be tricky also, as fat loss will result in circumference loss. But with judgment, for example one might know that a given bodypart was pretty lean in the first place, so if it looks smaller and you measure that it in fact shrunk significantly, then that would be a basis to say yes, muscle was lost.

Another, better basis is skinfold measurement to assess body composition and calculate LBM, but again this won’t be accurate to 1 lb or anything like it.

Most commonly, it really is judgment by the eyeball, and strength in the gym. If the abs and everything else are looking exactly the same but you’re 5 lb heavier, it’s fair to say as a guess that you gained about 5 lb muscle, but that works much better in a fairly lean condition than when fatter.

Waist can be a good measurement for fat change. For example, for myself very consistently 1 extra inch on the waist means 6 pounds more total bodyfat. But, waist can’t be measured more accurately than within about 1/4 inch, so 1 lb of fat change is in the error range rather than necessarily being anything real.

You can probably find some good information with a Google search on “anthropometric bodybuilding waist chest” or something like that. There are specific ways that are standard. The important thing is being consistent in the method.


#5

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I really didn’t write that well! It’s not that measurements need to be taken now, it was a question of objective evidence of muscle loss versus guesses from the scale. In fact measurements can be tricky also, as fat loss will result in circumference loss. But with judgment, for example one might know that a given bodypart was pretty lean in the first place, so if it looks smaller and you measure that it in fact shrunk significantly, then that would be a basis to say yes, muscle was lost.

Another, better basis is skinfold measurement to assess body composition and calculate LBM, but again this won’t be accurate to 1 lb or anything like it.

Most commonly, it really is judgment by the eyeball, and strength in the gym. If the abs and everything else are looking exactly the same but you’re 5 lb heavier, it’s fair to say as a guess that you gained about 5 lb muscle, but that works much better in a fairly lean condition than when fatter.

Waist can be a good measurement for fat change. For example, for myself very consistently 1 extra inch on the waist means 6 pounds more total bodyfat. But, waist can’t be measured more accurately than within about 1/4 inch, so 1 lb of fat change is in the error range rather than necessarily being anything real.

You can probably find some good information with a Google search on “anthropometric bodybuilding waist chest” or something like that. There are specific ways that are standard. The important thing is being consistent in the method.[/quote]

Thanks again Bill.


#6

You’re welcome!


#7

Quick additions here:

  1. Christian Thibaudeau has made some great points about how ADDING workout nutrition during dieting is better for fat loss. See #6: https://www.t-nation.com/training/fasted-cardio-eats-muscle

  2. Be very careful with those devices like FitBit. At best, you’ll get ballpark estimates. I recall one blogger who wore 3-4 different brands of these fitness trackers and got numbers that were all over the place.

They’re like those bioelectrical impedance scales: very questionable and certainly not something I’d rely on when it comes to changing my diet and training. I’ve seen some people doing great harm to themselves when dieting and relying on the feedback of these wonky things, and I suspect the fitness tracker devices will have the same effect. Mirrors, tape measurements, and photos still rule the day (along with gym performances in some cases.)

I encourage food logging and all that, at least some of the time. It can really teach you a lot. But micromanaging can be self-limiting after a certain point. I think you’re tracking things closer than my wife was when she was preparing for a figure competition! If it’s working, go for it. Just be careful. It works on your mind after a while when you’re down to the decimal points and the difference in 15 and 16% carbs for the day.


#8

[quote]Chris Shugart wrote:
Quick additions here:

  1. Christian Thibaudeau has made some great points about how ADDING workout nutrition during dieting is better for fat loss. See #6: https://www.T-Nation.com/training/fasted-cardio-eats-muscle

  2. Be very careful with those devices like FitBit. At best, you’ll get ballpark estimates. I recall one blogger who wore 3-4 different brands of these fitness trackers and got numbers that were all over the place.

They’re like those bioelectrical impedance scales: very questionable and certainly not something I’d rely on when it comes to changing my diet and training. I’ve seen some people doing great harm to themselves when dieting and relying on the feedback of these wonky things, and I suspect the fitness tracker devices will have the same effect. Mirrors, tape measurements, and photos still rule the day (along with gym performances in some cases.)

I encourage food logging and all that, at least some of the time. It can really teach you a lot. But micromanaging can be self-limiting after a certain point. I think you’re tracking things closer than my wife was when she was preparing for a figure competition! If it’s working, go for it. Just be careful. It works on your mind after a while when you’re down to the decimal points and the difference in 15 and 16% carbs for the day. [/quote]

Thanks for the link. I actually read that article when it was first posted but I’ll read it again. IIRC, it’s why I modified my regiment and made my Friday workout a much easier one. I also was in the middle of my “experiment” when I read about workout nutrition carbs. It was a truly timely article for me and at the end of the day, as evidenced by my results stated above (small sample size caveats apply) the following excerpt from Thibs’ article held true:

But I do zero cardio currently. I want to use cardio as my next level type stuff.

In terms of fitbit though I don’t have any hardware. I only use the online log for logging food/nutritional values and I don’t even use the existing database as I log all of my own foods and nutritional values of each. The thing calculates my macros for me as I input or remove foods into my logs. It’s great. It’s been a real eye opener for me, the way I look at food now. Didn’t realize how much more volume I can consume when eating quality foods. Also, I’m totally addicted to logging all that stuff for some reason. haha.