4 Day Water Only Fast

[Ruffdaddy]

If you're fasting and working out...you are certainly going to lose muscle. Its similar to how incredibly difficult it is to lose fat and gain muscle (body recomposition) unless you're a total noob. When I'm dropping weight I have to be incredibly religious about not cutting too fast because I have ran into more muscle loss than I was happy with when dropping to 1500 calories a day.

Simply cutting sodium alone will likely make you drop 3-5 lbs if you're a 200lb guy...add in a little dat and muscle loss and of course it will look like an accomplishment.

If your only goal is weight loss and you don't care about muscle loss...by all means fast away. But if you're trying to hang onto hard earned muscle...read up on proper recomposition. Losing more than 1% per week puts you in the muscle loss danger zone.

[Big A]

A relatively short-term fast shouldn't be considered a fat-loss tool at all imo, I was merely concerned with the damage that could be done, should I do one to cleanse and reset. I totally agree that cutting weight should be regimented over a matter of months, not a matter of days. It's all of the other things being mentioned that intrigue me.

I think I'll save it for when I hit the next plateau though, or perhaps once I've reached my goal, as not to disrupt progress.

[D. Lil]

Originally Posted by Ruffdaddy

If you're fasting and working out...you are certainly going to lose muscle. Its similar to how incredibly difficult it is to lose fat and gain muscle (body recomposition) unless you're a total noob. When I'm dropping weight I have to be incredibly religious about not cutting too fast because I have ran into more muscle loss than I was happy with when dropping to 1500 calories a day.

If your only goal is weight loss and you don't care about muscle loss...by all means fast away. But if you're trying to hang onto hard earned muscle...read up on proper recomposition. Losing more than 1% per week puts you in the muscle loss danger zone.

That's because you are talking about caloric reduction which is different from fasting. I saw a study where this dude didn't eat for 3 weeks and his lean tissue mass stayed the same.

“From the studies reviewed here, it would appear as though a lower proportion of lean mass is lost in response to intermittent calorie restriction (90% weight lost as fat, 10% weight loss as fat free mass) when compared to daily calorie restriction (75% weight lost as fat, 25% weight loss as fat free mass).”

[KBScobravert]

I recognize that I'm not going to build muscle at the same rate as a person who eats 3,000 calories a day and consumes more protein than I do when I'm intermittent fasting or fasting for a longer period (24 to 36 hrs).

My weight is near a goal weight I've set for myself while intermittently fasting and weight training in the gym.

Once I get my body fat down and my body weight into the 170s, I will start increasing the calories and protein to focus more on building muscle vs dropping fat.

I've been documenting every gym routine for the past year. I can tell each week I am stronger than the last, both in number of reps and the weights plus the mirror and belt/clothes tests.

[Ruffdaddy]

Originally Posted by D. Lil

That's because you are talking about caloric reduction which is different from fasting. I saw a study where this dude didn't eat for 3 weeks and his lean tissue mass stayed the same.

“From the studies reviewed here, it would appear as though a lower proportion of lean mass is lost in response to intermittent calorie restriction (90% weight lost as fat, 10% weight loss as fat free mass) when compared to daily calorie restriction (75% weight lost as fat, 25% weight loss as fat free mass).”

Do you have a link to that study? The biggest difference is the short duration of fasting vs a sustained slow loss diet, but you're still going to consume muscle mass.

I've never seen a true scientific study that suggests you can fast and workout without relatively aggressive muscle loss.

Originally Posted by KBScobravert

I recognize that I'm not going to build muscle at the same rate as a person who eats 3,000 calories a day and consumes more protein than I do when I'm intermittent fasting or fasting for a longer period (24 to 36 hrs).

My weight is near a goal weight I've set for myself while intermittently fasting and weight training in the gym.

Once I get my body fat down and my body weight into the 170s, I will start increasing the calories and protein to focus more on building muscle vs dropping fat.

I've been documenting every gym routine for the past year. I can tell each week I am stronger than the last, both in number of reps and the weights plus the mirror and belt/clothes tests.

There's 2 big differences in your case:

1 - you're only "fasting" for 17 hours. Everything I've read indicates this isn't long enough to even deplete glycogen stores.

2 - You're on hormone therapy which definitely changes the dynamics.

I should have specified that I'm referring to the multi-day fasting referenced in this thread and all natural.

[Chas_svo]

Originally Posted by D. Lil

Meaning it's in their genetics but I could be wrong

That's correct. Born genetically susceptible.

[KBScobravert]

Originally Posted by Ruffdaddy

There's 2 big differences in your case:

1 - you're only "fasting" for 17 hours. Everything I've read indicates this isn't long enough to even deplete glycogen stores.

2 - You're on hormone therapy which definitely changes the dynamics.

I should have specified that I'm referring to the multi-day fasting referenced in this thread and all natural.

Oh, no doubt. I was just responding in general.

1. you are right for most folks. I have been on low carbs for so long though and since a month ago dropped carbs and sugars completely out. At the 30hour mark of straight water, I can see ketones in my urine. So I deplete faster than average. I did read that the average person carries 2,000 calories in glucose and 40,000 in fat.

2. yep. which is why I think I am trading 1 for 1 fat for muscle since the scale hardly moves south despite what I see in the mirror and in the way my belt and clothes fit.

[DON SVO]

Originally Posted by Ruffdaddy

Do you have a link to that study? The biggest difference is the short duration of fasting vs a sustained slow loss diet, but you're still going to consume muscle mass.

I've never seen a true scientific study that suggests you can fast and workout without relatively aggressive muscle loss.

I think your disconnect is that, for some reason, you keep wanting to throw "working out" into a couple situations that were strictly fasts.

[Ruffdaddy]

Originally Posted by DON SVO

I think your disconnect is that, for some reason, you keep wanting to throw "working out" into a couple situations that were strictly fasts.

Did you even read the first post and half the second page? The first post specifically mentions weight loss and working out whereas the second page discusses the same information in further detail but with some bad "data".

Lastly...this is the pumping iron forum...not the "let's starve ourselves skinny" forum.

[Ruffdaddy]

Originally Posted by KBScobravert

Oh, no doubt. I was just responding in general.

1. you are right for most folks. I have been on low carbs for so long though and since a month ago dropped carbs and sugars completely out. At the 30hour mark of straight water, I can see ketones in my urine. So I deplete faster than average. I did read that the average person carries 2,000 calories in glucose and 40,000 in fat.

2. yep. which is why I think I am trading 1 for 1 fat for muscle since the scale hardly moves south despite what I see in the mirror and in the way my belt and clothes fit.

I wish I could do that (1 for 1). On my current cutting cycle I started too aggressive because I'm satisfied with my muscle mass (err thought I was) and didn't realize how easy it can be to lose on an aggressive deficit. It took a month to realize that I had lost a few lbs of lean mass that I really prefer to keep. Since then i read up on a lot of research to see where I should be diet wise and realized how many times I've messed up.

So now I try to make sure it's known that any hardcore rapid weight loss is going to come at the expense of muscle as well (barring no hormones or noob gains)

[DON SVO]

Originally Posted by Ruffdaddy

Did you even read the first post and half the second page? The first post specifically mentions weight loss and working out whereas the second page discusses the same information in further detail but with some bad "data".

Lastly...this is the pumping iron forum...not the "let's starve ourselves skinny" forum.

Yeah fasting without muscle loss means not expending muscle energy via working out. Pretty simple.

[no4njnk]

The extended period fasting isn't about hardcore weight loss, more with long term health. The Joe Rogan/Dr. Rhonda Patrick gives the best overview of the benefits. Dr dominic d'agostino is a better resource when it comes to long term fasting and it effects on muscle loss. Think he did a 7 day fast and then did something like 500 pound deadlift 10 times.

[Big A]

Originally Posted by no4njnk

The extended period fasting isn't about hardcore weight loss, more with long term health. The Joe Rogan/Dr. Rhonda Patrick gives the best overview of the benefits. Dr dominic d'agostino is a better resource when it comes to long term fasting and it effects on muscle loss. Think he did a 7 day fast and then did something like 500 pound deadlift 10 times.

This is the kind of answer that I'm looking for, though more specifically, what was Dr. D'Agostino's deadlift before the fast? If it was 500x10 then cool, but if it was 550x10 before the fast, and it took 3 months to work back up to that (extreme example to make a point), then the 500x10 is no longer such a great stat.

From what I'm reading though, it was the same or close to it before the fast, so I just need to pick a time that works and go for it. I'm thinking after we get back from Russia will be a good time to reset the system.

[no4njnk]

Not a clue what his deadlift was before. Eating to get as big and strong as possible vs to be healthy are not the same. Just have to set your priorities or periodize your nutrition throughout the year.