|
By Tom Venuto, NSCA-CPT, CSCS
www.BurnTheFat.com
|

|
|
Tom
Venuto |
|
3.7%
Body Fat |
|
Most fitness conscious people have
heard that there are 3,500 calories in a pound of fat, so if you
create a deficit of 3500 calories in a week, you lose a pound of
weight. If you create a deficit of 7000 calories in a week, you lose
two pounds, and so on. Right? Well, not so fast…
Dr. Kevin Hall, an
investigator at the National Institute of Health in Bethesda has
done some interesting research about the mechanisms regulating human
body weight. He recently published a new paper in the International
Journal of Obesity that throws a wrench in works of the “3500
calories to lose a pound” idea.
Some of the equations in his paper
made my head hurt, but despite the complex math he used to come to
his conclusions, his article clearly prompts the question,
"3500 calories to lose a pound of WHAT?" |
His paper also
contained a lot of simple and practical tips you can use to properly
balance your caloric intake with output, fine tune your calorie
deficit and help you retain more muscle when you diet.
Below, I’ve distilled some of the
information into a simple bullet-point summary that any
non-scientist can understand. Then I wrap up with my interpretation
of how you can apply this data in your own fat loss program:
Calculating the calories required
to lose a pound and fine-tuning your caloric deficit
- 3500 calories to lose a pound has
always been the rule of thumb. However, this 3500 calories
figure goes back to research which assumed that all the weight
lost would be adipose tissue (which would be ideal, of course).
- But as we all know
(unfortunately), lean body mass is lost along with body fat,
which would indicate that the 3500 calorie figure could be an
oversimplification.
- The amount of lean body mass lost
is based on initial body fat level and size of the calorie
deficit
- Lean people tend to lose more lean
body mass and retain more fat.
- Fat people tend to lose more body
fat and retain more lean tissue (revealing why obese people can
tolerate aggressive low calorie diets better than already lean
people)
- Very aggressive low calorie diets
tend to erode lean body mass to a greater degree than more
conservative diets.
- whether the weight loss is lean or
fat gives you the real answer of what is the required energy
deficit per unit of weight loss
- The metabolizable energy in fat is
different than the metabolizable energy in muscle tissue. A
pound of muscle is not 3500 calories. A pound of muscle yields
about 600 calories.
- If you lose lean body mass, then
you lose more weight than if you lose fat.
- If you create a 3500 calorie
deficit in one week and you lose 100% body fat, you will lose
one pound.
- But if you create a 3500 calorie
weekly deficit and as a result of that deficit, lose 100%
muscle, you would lose almost 6 pounds of body weight! (of
course, if you manage to lose 100% muscle, you will be forced to
wear the Dieter’s Dunce cap)
- If you have a high initial body
fat percentage, then you are going to lose more fat relative to
lean, so you may need a larger deficit to lose the same amount
of weight as compared to a lean person
- Creating a calorie deficit once at
the beginning of a diet and maintaining that same caloric intake
for the duration of the diet and after major weight loss fails
to account for how your body decreases energy expenditure with
reduced body weight
- Weight loss typically slows down
over time for a prescribed constant diet (the “plateau”).
This is either due to the decreased metabolism mentioned above,
or a relaxing of the diet compliance, or both (most people just
can’t hack aggressive calorie reductions for long)
- Progressive resistance training
and or high protein diets can modify the proportion of weight
lost from body fat versus lean tissue (which is why weight
training and sufficient protein while on calorie restricted
diets are absolute musts!)
So, based on this info, should you
throw out the old calorie formulas?
Well, not necessarily. You can still
use the standard calorie formulas to figure out how much you should
eat, and you can use a 500-1000 calorie per day deficit (below
maintenance) as a generic guideline to figure where to set your
calories to lose one or two pounds per week respectively (at least
that works “on paper” anyway).
Even better however, you could use
this info to fine tune your caloric deficit using a percentage
method and also base your deficit on your starting body fat level,
to get a much more personalized and effective approach:
15-20% below maintenance calories =
conservative deficit
20-25% below maintenance calories = moderate deficit
25-30% below maintenance calories = aggressive deficit
31-40% below maintenance calories = very aggressive deficit (risky)
50%+ below maintenance calories = semi starvation/starvation
(potentially dangerous and unhealthy)
(Note: According to exercise
physiologists Katch & Mcardle, the average female between the
ages of 23 and 50 has a maintenance level of about 2000-2100
calories per day and the average male about 2700-2900 calories per
day)
Usually, we would suggest starting
with a conservative deficit of around 15-20% below maintenance.
Based on this research, however, we see that there can be a big
difference between lean and overweight people in how many calories
they can or should cut.
If you have very high body fat to
begin with, the typical rule of thumb on calorie deficits may
underestimate the deficit required to lose a pound. It may also be
too conservative, and you can probably use a more aggressive deficit
safely without as much worry about muscle loss or metabolic
slowdown.
If you are extremely lean, like a
bodybuilder trying to get ready for competition, you would want to
be very cautious about using aggressive calorie deficits. You’d be
better off keeping the deficit conservative and starting your
diet/cutting phase earlier to allow for a slow, but safe rate of fat
loss, with maximum retention of muscle tissue.
The bottom line is that it’s not
quite so simple as 3,500 calories being the deficit to lose a pound.
Like lots of other things in nutrition that vary from person to
person, the ideal amount of calories to cut “depends”…
Note: The Burn the Fat, Feed The
Muscle program not only has an entire chapter dedicated to helping
you calculate your exact calorie needs, it was designed very
specifically to keep a fairly conservative approach to caloric
deficits and to maximize the amount of lean tissue you retain and
minimize the amount of metabolic adaptation that occurs when
you’re dieting. The approach may be more conservative, and the fat
loss may be slower, but it has a better long term track record…
You can either lose weight fast, sacrifice muscle and gain the fat
back like 95% of people do, or lose fat slow and keep it off forever
like the 5% of the people who know the secrets. The choice is yours.
For more information, visit: www.burnthefat.com
References:
Forbes GB. Body fat content
influences the body composition response to nutrition and exercise.
Ann NY Acad Sci. 904: 359-365. 2000
Hall, KD., What is the required
energy deficit per unit of weight loss? Int J Obesity. 2007 Epub
ahead of print.
McArdle WD. Exercise physiology:
Energy, Nutrition, and Human performance. 4td ed. Williams &
Wilkins. 1996.
Wishnofsky M. Caloric equivalents of
gained or lost weight. Am J Clin Nutr. 6: 542-546.
Tom Venuto is a natural bodybuilder,
certified strength and conditioning specialist (CSCS) and a
certified personal trainer (CPT). Tom is the author of "Burn
the Fat, Feed The Muscle,” which teaches you how to get lean
without drugs or supplements using methods of the world's best
bodybuilders and fitness models. Learn how to get rid of stubborn
fat and increase your metabolism by visiting: www.BurnTheFat.com |