Starting Obese

[Gary Gibson]

Continuing our discussion on overfeeding for endomorphs...

Surely there are some of you reading this forum who started out both weak and obese. SS is so straightforward for those of you who start out weak and skinny, but those among you who have a natural tendency to store fat without much muscle (endomorphic types), how'd the overeating work for you?

I know at least one of you "sings" often about how SS/70's Big just made you fatter and unhappier. Anyone else?

[Koalala]

5000kj a day is merely an excuse to eat all the junkfood you want.
It's not needed really.
Go cleanbulking if you got the cash.

[Nauticus]

5000kj a day is merely an excuse to eat all the junkfood you want.
It's not needed really.
Go cleanbulking if you got the cash.

Oh boy.

[Mr.City]

I was a very fat man, or boy actually. I got up to 270 by the time I was 13 or 14. I lost weight rapidly thanks to the Men's Health philosophy of skim and chicken salads (got to make those abs pop!). I got down to around 200 ish but it felt me with a lot of loose skin. It looks like a deflated beach ball around my midsection.

Around community college, I got back up to 240ish when I got on the school newspaper. It was stressful and I didn't have time to work out( I cringe as I write this silly bullshit phrase). It was around June that I found SS. I lost 10 lbs within the first couple weeks since I wasn't pay too much attention diet. People have complemented me on how I look more muscular and thinner.

I weigh about 230 ish now, and according to those BMI calculators out there, I should be borderline obese. I can't comment on fat accumulation on SS since loose skin makes it hard to gauge.

[Mr.City]

5000kj a day is merely an excuse to eat all the junkfood you want.
It's not needed really.
Go cleanbulking if you got the cash.

5000 calories of clean food? That's a lot of chicken breasts.

[nisora33]

5000kj a day is merely an excuse to eat all the junkfood you want.
It's not needed really.
Go cleanbulking if you got the cash.

Go the fuck away. You're sole existence on this board so far has been to encourage people not to eat as much. There's been no indication that you've actually read any of Rip's books or that you even train.

No one fucking wants you here, okay? There's plenty of your type elsewhere.

[nisora33]

And for the record, anyone who loses a fuck-ton of weight low carbing has done so because any time you take a macronutrient out of the equation, you're losing a bunch of fucking calories from your daily intake. Low carb only works for about a couple of weeks to upregulate fat metabolism, then you start burning ketones for energy, not increased fat. You have to carb cycle to continue to get those effects.

Stop talking about "clean" bulking now, you dipshit. It doesn't work. Nobody has the money or the time, except spoiled little shits like you who still live at home with mommy and daddy, koalala, or whatever the fuck your name is.

[Mr.City]

5000kj a day is merely an excuse to eat all the junkfood you want.
It's not needed really.
Go cleanbulking if you got the cash.

By the way, you don't happen to post on the bb.com forums, do you? I've been there, and let me tell you guys, it's fucking weird there. I would advise checking it out at least once just to see the freak show.

[Koalala]

We're talking about somebody who is beginning the program and who's already obese.
I have read the book and it clearly states that in this situation you should try to maintain your bodyweight and upgrade your diet to a cleaner version.

[nisora33]

5000kj a day is merely an excuse to eat all the junkfood you want.
It's not needed really.
Go cleanbulking if you got the cash.

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f399/myfask/258Troll_spray.jpg

[Mr.City]

Yes, but Gary mentioned nothing about an all junk food diet.

[Koalala]

No but it's obvious he wants to lead the discussion that way.

[Gary Gibson]

5000kj a day is merely an excuse to eat all the junkfood you want.
It's not needed really.
Go cleanbulking if you got the cash.

This is an opinion, not an account from experience. If you read my initial post, you'll see I asked for the latter.

But it's okay because it got Stacey to post.


Go the fuck away. You're sole existence on this board so far has been to encourage people not to eat as much. There's been no indication that you've actually read any of Rip's books or that you even train.

No one fucking wants you here, okay? There's plenty of your type elsewhere.


And for the record, anyone who loses a fuck-ton of weight low carbing has done so because any time you take a macronutrient out of the equation, you're losing a bunch of fucking calories from your daily intake. Low carb only works for about a couple of weeks to upregulate fat metabolism, then you start burning ketones for energy, not increased fat. You have to carb cycle to continue to get those effects.

Stop talking about "clean" bulking now, you dipshit. It doesn't work. Nobody has the money or the time, except spoiled little shits like you who still live at home with mommy and daddy, koalala, or whatever the fuck your name is.

Heh.

As long as we're doling out opinions, allow me to reveal mine and my bias.

I don't think it matters what your individual calorie-partitioning profile is. I believe that if you squat diligently, your body will sort it all out. At some point gains in the squat will mean you sacrifice other things...but at that point you're probably a competitive powerlifter at the top of your game. Most people here don't have the drive or talent to get anywhere near that far...and that's fine. The rest of us would be amazed at how well heavy squatting and extra calories treat our strength and appearance.

[Gary Gibson]

No but it's obvious he wants to lead the discussion that way.

It is?

[coldfire]

5000kj a day is merely an excuse to eat all the junkfood you want.
It's not needed really.
Go cleanbulking if you got the cash.

Excuses are for pussies. We eat whatever we want. Fuck off.

[Raskolnikov]

This is purely anecdotal, but I have a friend who, at 5'9" and a very soft 240, started a program similar to SS and by eating basically an unmeasured paleo-ish diet got pretty fucking strong, put on some serious muscle, and lost quite a bit of fat. Obviously, much of the strength and muscle can be attributed to newbie gains, but I think there is something to be said for a lower carb, high protein/fat diet for someone who is pretty overweight at the start of SS. He still ate shitloads (lots of red meat, eggs, nuts, even quite a bit of dairy), but his body responded really well to less processed/starchy carbs. Call it better nutrient partitioning, increased insulin sensitivity, or whatever -- hell, he might have attained the same results with a completely different approach -- but his results impressed the shit out of me.

[nisora33]

...but I think there is something to be said for a lower carb, high protein/fat diet for someone who is pretty overweight at the start of SS. He still ate shitloads (lots of red meat, eggs, nuts, even quite a bit of dairy), but his body responded really well to less processed/starchy carbs.

It's true, any blanket dietary approach may not work for everyone. But let me ask you this, how smart do you think you have to be to understand that, if you're already super-duper-mega-obese, then overfeeding like mad isn't the right approach? Doing more of the very thing that got you to the point of obesity isn't smart. In fact, if you think it is, then you've got more problems than just you're weight.

The super-obese are a special population, they've eaten themselves up to a very specific set of metabolic circumstances that you want find in the average to slightly pudgy trainee.

[Gary Gibson]

This is purely anecdotal, but I have a friend who, at 5'9" and a very soft 240, started a program similar to SS and by eating basically an unmeasured paleo-ish diet got pretty fucking strong, put on some serious muscle, and lost quite a bit of fat. Obviously, much of the strength and muscle can be attributed to newbie gains, but I think there is something to be said for a lower carb, high protein/fat diet for someone who is pretty overweight at the start of SS. He still ate shitloads (lots of red meat, eggs, nuts, even quite a bit of dairy), but his body responded really well to less processed/starchy carbs. Call it better nutrient partitioning, increased insulin sensitivity, or whatever -- hell, he might have attained the same results with a completely different approach -- but his results impressed the shit out of me.

Thank you so very much. This is the sort of anecdotal account for which I'd been searching (and keep in mind that every single internet account and testimonial you read is anecdotal and any credence you give it is inherently a matter of faith).

It's easy for me to justify eating everything in sight when I start at 5'9" and 130 lbs (ectomorph lacking fat and muscle both), but what about "skinny fat" (endomorphic) types starting at 5'9" and 240? I suspect that squatting alters your partitioning to make it the best it can be within the confines of your genetically-controlled system. Squatting does this because it is the exercise that causes the most system-wide positive adaptations. It's fuckin' magic. My assertion is the same as millions who've gotten stronger than literally the entire rest of humanity: squat properly and heavily, and drink your milk...lots of it; the rest will sort itself out.

[Alyion]

Wait a minute now guys, do you really suggest eating with reckless abandon even for bigger guys? I honestly apologise if i've misread something, but Rip has said that eating a diet designed to produce weight gain is not needed for those who don't need to gain weight.
Now don't get me wrong I do believe that a shit ton of calories are needed for skinny weak newbies but i'm surprised if its also recommend for the other end of the spectrum.

Just my two cents, I don't really have an opinion on the matter - I use to be 145 and 6'2 so im not exactly a super endomorph.

[nisora33]

Wait a minute now guys, do you really suggest eating with reckless abandon even for bigger guys? I honestly apologise if i've misread something, but Rip has said that eating a diet designed to produce weight gain is not needed for those who don't need to gain weight.
Now don't get me wrong I do believe that a shit ton of calories are needed for skinny weak newbies but i'm surprised if its also recommend for the other end of the spectrum.

Just my two cents, I don't really have an opinion on the matter - I use to be 145 and 6'2 so im not exactly a super endomorph.

You have not read this thread.

[Raskolnikov]

Squatting does this because it is the exercise that causes the most system-wide positive adaptations. It's fuckin' magic. My assertion is the same as millions who've gotten stronger than literally the entire rest of humanity: squat properly and heavily, and drink your milk...lots of it; the rest will sort itself out.

No kidding. I'm sort of learning this lesson the hard way. I'm eating roughly in the same fashion as I did a number of years ago to go from 185 to 230. Now, after a number of weeks on SS, I've managed to make almost zero progress in terms of gaining weight (hovering right around 190, despite eating an inordinate amount of pure junk food over the last week or so) -- so I obviously need to reevaluate what I think "lots" of food is.

I have a feeling that if someone actually follows SS, getting fat is a pretty damn hard thing to do.

[stronger]

And for the record, anyone who loses a fuck-ton of weight low carbing has done so because any time you take a macronutrient out of the equation, you're losing a bunch of fucking calories from your daily intake. Low carb only works for about a couple of weeks to upregulate fat metabolism, then you start burning ketones for energy, not increased fat. You have to carb cycle to continue to get those effects.


I dunno, some of the things Gary Taubes has said seem to indicate that low carb can work indefinitely. Certainly makes sense considering the lack of many carbs in the diet for most of our evolutionary profile.

[ChrisM]

I started linear progression while obese, and I'd love to have a story full of rapidly decreasing scale numbers and rapidly increasing squat numbers to share. Unfortunatly like most people in my bodyfat category I lack the willpower to stick to a decent diet.

I've put on 12-14lbs in the past few months. So just to reiterate, fatty + loads of food = even fattyer, even with linear progression. Shocking right?

[nisora33]

I dunno, some of the things Gary Taubes has said seem to indicate that low carb can work indefinitely. Certainly makes sense considering the lack of many carbs in the diet for most of our evolutionary profile.

It does not work indefinitely. Now, carbs are not necessary in order to survive, I'll grant you that. But that's not the same thing as claiming that not eating them will confer any special metabolic advantages on you.

[nisora33]

I dunno, some of the things Gary Taubes has said seem to indicate that low carb can work indefinitely. Certainly makes sense considering the lack of many carbs in the diet for most of our evolutionary profile.

Read this regarding Taubes: http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=36099&postcount=17

...and this: http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=36116&postcount=19

[nisora33]

In that same thread, Lyle summarizes things regarding Taubes nicely:

Because it's wrong, that's how. Taubes started with his conclusion: fat people eat the same as lean. Then he went looking for data to support it.

We know that his conclusion is completely utterly wrong as data that he apparently was unable to find in his '5 years of research' clearly shows.

If he read as widely as he claims in researching his book, he should have come across the fact at some piont that hte obese do in fact eat more than the lean and that looking fo an explanation of his utterly incorrect conclusion was leading him down the wrong path.

Yet somehow, magically, he didn't. Either he's incompetent or a liar, take your pick.

At that point I don't really care about the rest of what he has to say.

If you can't understand what I'm saying, I can't explain it any more simply.

[Alyion]

So are we talking about people who naturally store more fat than muscle then, not really counting actually bodyweight? I suppose if thats the case I suppose it's more a case of priorites and what that person wants.

Well whatever really - Gary posed a question and it turned into a trolling attempt and pointless debate we have had before and will probably always will have.

.....i'll shut up now ;)

[stronger]

It does not work indefinitely. Now, carbs are not necessary in order to survive, I'll grant you that. But that's not the same thing as claiming that not eating them will confer any special metabolic advantages on you.

interesting links, but yeah, I was just referring to carbs as a non-essential part in the diet. I disagree with Taubes' assessment of exercise, and find the statistics on under reporting of caloric intake highly interesting.

[nisora33]

I’m going to summarize the bulk of what I could find regarding this issue from stuff I’ve taken from Lyle’s forum. This is going to be difficult, as Lyle’s internet shorthand is difficult to sift through, and while all of the stuff that I’ve read there and brought back has--to lesser or greater extent--to do with what Gary, others and I have brought up, not all of it builds fluidly into a coherent statement. So it’s taken some finessing on my part to bring it all together, but here it goes.

Here’s a quote from Lyle that’s necessary if we’re all to be on the same page about what all of this means: “Insulin sensitivity refers to how well or poorly the body responds to the hormone insulin. Individuals who are insulin resistant tend to have higher baseline insulin levels because the body is releasing more in response to try and overcome the resistance.”

People who are insulin resistant, meaning they’re bodies have to release more insulin (insulin is responsible for transporting carbs to muscle and other tissues) in order to produce the same response as in a non-resistant person. When someone like this eats a shit-ton of carbs, massive amounts of insulin are released, insulin swoops in and takes away all those carbs, and then the person in question suffers a drastic drop in blood sugar. This, for those who don’t know, is bad. Lyle states many times that someone like this would far better on a diet lower in carbs and slightly higher in fats.

Guess what population (not the only one, granted) is largely insulin resistant? You guessed it: the obese. A combination of inactivity and excess calories (protein, fat AND carbs) will eventually lead to someone’s becoming fat, and all of this together leads to insulin resistance. Again, I’ll say it again because it bears repeating, as Lyle puts it, that “Someone who is severely insulin resistant will generally do better with less carbs and more fat.” I think this at least partially addresses Gary’s original query. But in reality, any diet that puts an overweight individual in a calorie deficit will yield fat loss, assuming that he or she can just adhere to the diet. It’s just that, for the insulin resistant, a low-carb diet may help some individuals adhere to a diet better.

But this is not the same as saying what Taube’s argues, which is that all folks everywhere should eat a low-carb diet. Taubes’ argument, as I pointed out earlier in this thread, is premised on a falsity. His starting point, which is that fat people and lean people eat the same amount of food or, at the very most, fat people actually eat less, is problematic. The report that Taubes used to determine this was based on self-reported accounts of caloric intake, and self-reporting consistently yields under-reported values: the actual amount of food consumed is substantially higher than reported, in most cases. If you accept Taubes’ original false premise, then you now have to go look for why it is that the obese, who actually eat less than lean people (not true), nevertheless gain enormous amounts of weight. And you end up cherry-picking data in order to support this view.

But to get back to Gary’s question, it would appear—at least according to Lyle—that exercise does improve insulin sensitivity over time. Exercise, coupled with calorie restriction, will improve insulin sensitivity for all tissues, if engaged in long enough.

Here’s a bit more on insulin sensitivity, for those interested:

Lyle states, “Insulin resistance can occur at many different tissues and does so in a fairly standard order.” The liver is the first to become insulin resistant, and it now takes more insulin secreted by the body to turn off glucose production. The next in line to become insulin resistant is skeletal muscle, and thereafter, nutrients can’t make it into muscle to be stored as well as they used to. Writes Lyle, “At this point, nutrient partitioning tends to go way south; if muscles can't store calories and more are still coming in, where to do they go? Fat cells.” Taken to the extreme, this growth of fat will lead to the final stage of resistance, in which fat cells themselves become insulin resistant. Finally, nutrients start accumulating in the bloodstream, and this is very, very bad. Sugars, triglycerides, and cholesterol sit in the blood stream where they cause severe damage. This is what is known as “whole body insulin resistance.”

So you start dieting and exercising. What happens? This part’s for you, Gary. According to Lyle: The insulin resistance in muscle keeps it from using glucose, this spares glucose for the brain. Skeletal muscle is using tons of fatty acids for fuel and you end up with a shunting effect from fat cells to skeletal muscle. This is more pronounced if you train, which is about the only thing in our power that will really preferentially improve muscle insulin sensitivity without impacting on skeletal muscle (and even that isn't entirely true).

So take a fat beginner with whole body insulin resistance. He starts training and dieting. Voila, magic happens. His fat cells are releasing fatty acids like crazy into the bloodstream, which are being burned by the muscle (sparing glucose for the brain). With training skeletal muscle increases.

But as he gets leaner this all starts to reverse, fat cells start to become more sensitive to insulin as you get leaner, fatty acids don't get released as well, less fat is used for fuel, more muscle starts to be lost (especially without training and adequate protein).

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=38351&postcount=267

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=2263&postcount=6

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=2306postcount=17 (http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=2306&postcount=17)

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=2310&postcount=18

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=6174&postcount=57

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=1691&postcount=6

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=1965&postcount=17

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=1980&postcount=21

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=1672&postcount=8

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=1754&postcount=19

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=1766&postcount=21

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=10700&postcount=35

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=17090&postcount=59

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showpost.php?p=17219&postcount=63

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/insulin-sensitivity-and-fat-loss.html

And I'm sure that if I've glossed over anything of relevance, or misinterpreted anything that Lyle has written, a certain Mr. Perryman will correct me :)

[Raskolnikov]

Good stuff, nisora33. Thanks for posting it. That certainly seems to explain what my friend experienced.

[Gary Gibson]

Good stuff, nisora33. Thanks for posting it. That certainly seems to explain what my friend experienced.

Seconded. Thanks much for all your efforts.

[msingh]

I started doing SS while overweight (at 207lb, 25% bf) and 3 months later while doing SS become 243 lb. I ate a lot of calories, probably far too much but it made it easier in the gym, and I made good consistent progress. Wish I had brought my bodyfat down to below 15% before starting SS now. There is something about being fat which makes it really easy to get even fatter. I've been a skinny dude all my life, used to weigh 165 lb 2-3 years ago, now i'm just a fat fuck. I wouldnt recommend doing the program if you're obese.

[RobertFontaine]

I followed the SS program religiously for about 18 months.
I started around 210 @ 20% BF and tried to eat about 500-100 calories per day over maintenance throughout.

I maxed out at about 250 and then dieted down over 20 weeks to 210 @ ~10%. At the end I was the biggest, strongest and leanest that I have ever been.

If I had taken the diet first route I would have had to have dieted down to about 165 pounds which would have put me at a weight lighter than I have been since I was 12 (stupid skinny) and I am 43.

The additional muscles and the intense exercise program moved me from a maintenance calories requirement of around 2500 calories a day to a maintainance level of about 3200 calories a day (give or take). This big difference in maintenance calories made losing fat far easier. It meant I could lose fat easily while taking in 2700'ish calories a day rather than 2000. Personally I find it easy to constrain myself to 2700 calories and crushing to try to eat 2000.

This is just my experience

[msingh]

How did you determine your maintenance level?

[confuzzl3don3]

Seconded. Thanks much for all your efforts.

Agreed. So Stacey, basically an obese (probably insulin resistant to some degree) person who starts SS should be looking to attempt a more maintenance style diet originally and after a certain level of progress is reached with the person having less isulin resistance, would need to switch to a higher calorie, carb and fat filled diet to continue having a good rate of progress? Am i correct in this assumption or just incorrectly pulling shit out of your post earlier?

[GdMisfits]

I just want to add that general health does effect recovery, so it's probably good for an obese trainee to do light cardio 3x a week. At that weight, no doubt a 30 minute brisk walk on your off days would greatly improve your recovery both between sets, and between workouts.

[RobertFontaine]

How did you determine your maintenance level?

I logged my food in Fitday pretty religiously until I had a pretty good hang of what I was eating so that I could be sure I was eating enough and getting adequate protein.

[Koalala]

I just want to add that general health does effect recovery, so it's probably good for an obese trainee to do light cardio 3x a week. At that weight, no doubt a 30 minute brisk walk on your off days would greatly improve your recovery both between sets, and between workouts.

Everyone should be running.
If you can't run 5k in less than 20 min you're never going to be an athlete.
Plus it helps your blood circulation and thus growth.

[Mike O.]

I maxed out at about 250 and then dieted down over 20 weeks to 210 @ ~10%. At the end I was the biggest, strongest and leanest that I have ever been.
Robert,

How well did your strength hold up during your diet phase? Were you able to continue making progress or did you just try to maintain? Did you make any changes to your lifting schedule while dieting?

I've been taking a similar eating approach, though I've only been doing SS for 3 months so far. I started at 190 and around 23% bodyfat, now 206 and around 25%. I've gained more muscle than fat and I'm a lot stronger, so I'm very happy with this progress. But obviously I'll need a diet phase at some point. Most of my lifts are still progressing, so I'll probably try to hold off for a while and just accept getting a bit fatter (and stronger).

[RobertFontaine]

I answered this in msingh's other post...

http://startingstrength.com/resources/forum/showpost.php?p=85944&postcount=9

Note I'm not an expert, a nutritionist, or a coach. This is purely and experiment with a sample size of 1.

[WKen]

Everyone should be running.
If you can't run 5k in less than 20 min you're never going to be an athlete.
Plus it helps your blood circulation and thus growth.

How exactly does running equate so strictly to being an athlete? Surely we're passed this connotation by now, aren't we? Or are we also going to apply squat and deadlift parameters to the marathoners as well before we don them to be athletic?

[nisora33]

How exactly does running equate so strictly to being an athlete? Surely we're passed this connotation by now, aren't we? Or are we also going to apply squat and deadlift parameters to the marathoners as well before we don them to be athletic?

He's a troll. This has been established. I'm going to see if I can't get something done about him.

-Stacey

[Koalala]

I was cynical, the recently started thread where a guy flamed back stats did not help to make that obvious?

[drecar]

Well I am gonna risk it. Why, cuz Ive never been strong but Ive been fat.

I was a fat 270lb last year. I did what the doctor said. When I started to lose the weight it was a snowball effect encouraging me to lose more. The lightest that I got to was 210lbs, however I felt I didnt look right. Googling to figure out how to lose belly fat lead me to strong lifts, they lead me here.

I have skimmed 173 pages of this forum and am applying what ive learned which is mainly to eat and drink a truck load of calories while lifting heavy. I am doing this although I was previously big and fat, starting out older and pretty much clueless on what to expect on the way to getting stronger. I am currently 245lb (BW squat has been a moving target) and like my appearance better but still have not achieved my strength and appearance goals. I believe they go hand in hand and once I achieve a certain strength my appearance will be stellar. Besides whats the worst that can happen? I know how to lose weight already.

[nisora33]

I am doing this although I was previously big and fat, starting out older and pretty much clueless on what to expect on the way to getting stronger. I am currently 245lb (BW squat has been a moving target) and like my appearance better but still have not achieved my strength and appearance goals. I believe they go hand in hand and once I achieve a certain strength my appearance will be stellar. Besides whats the worst that can happen? I know how to lose weight already.

Let us know how it goes. At least you're going into it with eyes wide open.

[MAD9692]

I have had a similiar experience as Robert.
I was a 185lb regular gym goer. Although I never heard of Rip, crossfit, olympic lifts, metcons, etc, I was in great shape with a pretty low body fat % (i'm guessing 8-9%) I deadlifted, did half squats with 275lbs and benched 225lbs for reps 2x a week and I ran a few miles every other day. In other words I did typical globo gym muscle mag workouts becuase thats all I knew. Then I found out about crossfit and trained at a local crossfit gym because I thought this was what was the correct way to train. I shrank down to 173lbs at one point and my body fat dropped lower. I looked like a crackhead, felt like a weakling and around the same time I found out about Rip, SS etc and went to work immediately. I shot up to 200lbs in a few weeks and I hit 220lbs in less than 5 months. I ate everything in site with GOMAD. I didnt measure, count, or do anything special. I ate "normal food" in large quantities. Think footlong subway sandwiches, ice cream milkshakes, eggs, oatmeal , peanut butter, tons of cheeseburgers, etc. I was probably consuming anywere between 4-7k of calories day. This doesnt mean that I ate pizzas dripping with oil or snickers bars all day. (Again I do not (and never will) measure, cause I really dont give a shit. I base it on my gut size). Now heres what I experienced so far this year:
When I was first on my way to 200lbs - very little noticeable increase in BF%. I looked jacked and was often complimented by family, friends co workers,etc
As I increased my weight to 220lbs i became noticeably fatter and all of a sudden I had a gut. I trained through it and the gut wouldnt go away. It felt like that the 20lbs of gain was all gut. It felt as as my lifts increased my gut increased. All of a sudden I didnt even look like I lifted anymore. I looked and felt like a fat fuck. To get rid of my gut I figured my lifts would have to decrease abit until I figured something out. All I did was not eat carbs and GOMAD and I lost 15lbs in 2 weeks. Just like that my gut was gone. My lifts suffered but not by much. After the holiday break I plan on trying to figure out how to keep increasing my gains without increasing my gut.
My lifts at 215lbs were:
SQ 3*5 @ 375lbs
DL 1*5 @ 415
Press 3*5 175lbs
Bench 3*5 265lbs
PC 5*3 205lbs

[brobinson]

I'm obese. I've been fat since I was about 10 years old- I'm 32 now.

I'm currently weighing in at about 275-280 lbs at 6'2". I was about 250 lbs this past August prior to starting the SS program. My squat has gone from about 135/155 lbs to 290 lbs for 3x5 and my deadlift from 135 to 320 for 1x5. I've put on some more fat, but mostly muscle.

Along with following the lifting setup, I've been eating pretty big as well. I started off tracking overall calories ranging between 4-5000/day. In the past month I stopped counting but have been eating mostly paleo along with a gallon of 1% milk daily. I've always been scared to consistently eat at this level, not because of losing abs (I've never seen them, nor really care to), but because I was already way too fat.

I really want to get some of the fat off now, but wanted to get a strength base built up first. In the past when I've tried to lower calories to 2200-2400 and keep lifting I would always lose some fat and maintain my level of strength (what little I had) but then within weeks I would get very flu like sick and fail and give up. If I ate slightly above maintenance at about 3200-3400 (500 above as frequently recommended on forums) I wouldn't get sick, but my lifts would stall fast.

With that being said, I'm hoping I'm doing it right this time. I feel I still have plenty of strength increases to come following the linear progression but this is my plan as of now;

- take this week off from lifting (first break in 4 months)

-start back with the same diet only cutting the milk from 1 gallon to 1/2 gallon daily

-try to continue increases on all lifts or at least maintain current strength

I'm hoping that I can get my overall body weight back around 250-235 lbs while keeping most of the strength and lowering my BF%.

So, to answer Gary's question, I think it's worked well for me so far. I've put on some more fat with my 30 lb gain, but can't complain since I'm still wearing the same size pants and most of my shirts still fit (the tighter ones are now too snug around the shoulders and the belly).

Although I can see how folks on the board think the 70's big diet is 8000 calories/day based on some of the regular comments on the site, Justin Lascek has stated more than once that the 70's big diet is the diet that continues to drive progress. In my case, even starting out fat, 500 over daily maintenance calories wouldn't drive progress. It's an individual factor, if a lifter can make progress at a slight caloric surplus they should do so, I couldn't, and don't think too many can.

[msingh]

I'm currently weighing in at about 275-280 lbs at 6'2". I was about 250 lbs this past August prior to starting the SS program. My squat has gone from about 135/155 lbs to 290 lbs for 3x5 and my deadlift from 135 to 320 for 1x5. I've put on some more fat, but mostly muscle.

You can measure the weight added to the bar easily enough but how are you measuring the proportion of muscle to fat gained? Also, you're 280lb, aren't you worried about your weight?? I see your clothes haven't changed which sounds promising at least. I've gone from being able to wear 32 jeans a few years ago with a belt to, 36 without a belt to wearing 46 without one.

[brobinson]

I'm not measuring the muscle/fat ratio. I think if I added 30 lbs to my already large self and it was even half fat I would notice it in my clothes more and I would look like shit. While I obviously still am fat, I look more like a big wrestler/football player than couch potato fat.

I'm seeing the current weight gain as a means to an end, I don't plan to stay this big, but it was required to make progress on the program. I've managed to get my weight down to around 210 lbs in the past and I certainly didn't like what I saw.

I'm still pretty young and don't have any medical condition, so I don't see short term weight gain being cause to worry.

[msingh]

That's not too bad. Try being skinny fat!

[brobinson]

No thanks,
That's the exact reason I'm attempting to do things the way I am.

[msingh]

What's your waist size, just curious?

[brobinson]

Here, I just snapped a picture a few minutes ago. The first one I weighed about 240, this past April. The new one I weigh 283 with a full belly of beef, milk and fully clothed. I wear my jeans around the hip, because I've always carried most of my fat around the natural waist/navel. Pant size is 42" waist both pictures, I measure 49" at the navel.

I'm still huge around the middle, but there is over 40 lbs between these two pictures. My eyes see most of the weight in thicker shoulders and broader chest. My legs also have much more shape and size.

I should also mention I had been lifting with poor programming, too little food, squats and deadlifts not increasing much at all six months prior to the first picture. I think it's working.


http://thumbnails19.imagebam.com/6076/43961060759414.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/43961060759414) Free Image Hosting by ImageBam.com (http://www.imagebam.com)

[hatmanii]

You've definitely added some lean muscle mass. That's some pretty noticeable progress, good job and keep up the good work!

[msingh]

Yea he has added some meat to his shoulders but also a lot of fat to his gut! And if those same jeans fit him then his legs havent grown much either. But either way, good luck to you my friend, we are in the same boat.

[brobinson]

Thanks Hatmanii,
Of the 40 pounds, most, if not all of the fat portion does appear to have gone to the love handle region I agree. And although my hip circumference hasn't changed, my legs have. I can't see how they wouldn't eating at a surplus and increasing my squat by about 150 lbs.

I'll just have to see how things go in the months ahead with the fat loss. I'm hoping the increased strength will help.

[hatmanii]

While you may have gained some weight in your midsection, your overall appearance seems to have improved. Good trade off IMO.

[skinny99]

I don't know! There are lot of different views here. Let me relate my story. I am a fat pig! I started out 5 months ago at 305 pounds with a size 50 waist and was weak as puppy piss! I dieted and did some cardio and got down to 261 pounds and size 44 waist. Looking for more I found SS and learned a lot. Still had a desire to lose more weight so I did the SS lifting protocol and stayed on calorie deficit. I know that is not the program but the work made sense to me. I started SS Benching 155,Squatting 125 and Dead 205. 39 sessions in I am down to a 40 waist,251 pounds and can now do 235 Bench,260 squat and can Dead 380 all for reps. I did it by cycling low carb weeks with high carb weeks and it has worked for me! I have found it is tough to lift hard with out the energy that carbs/calories provide and harder to recover.
One thing you skinny guys need to understand is that being fat really sucks. Once you go down in weight/size it is really hard to see yourself gain any of it back! I dont care if I cant lift the bar I aint gettin fat like that again. The truth is the SS lifting program is real solid and gains can be made either way but I am sure eating in a consistent calorie surplus makes the program so much more effective. IMO

[ZKP]

To cut through all the flaming, trolling, and whatever the hell else is going on I think the thread can be broken down into a few simple ideas.

1) Nobody says that if your fat you should eat too much. Their saying you should eat [I]the right amount[I] and for novice trainees that's a lot more that their eating 99.99999% of the time.

2) the typical diet is shit full of refined starches and sugar so by "eliminating carbs" you are in effect, just cutting garbage out of your diet, therefore you lose weight. All that fucking brown rice and Brocolli you put down isn't the culprit here.....

3) Gaining muscle/strength and losing fat at the same time is precarious at best. Reguardless you should be squating, pressing, cleaning deadlifting, etc but you need to define your goals and eat accordingly. Eat more=gain weight. Eat less=lose weight. Max strength gains and a restricted diet rarely come together but it's on you to weigh the balance and decide what needs to be taken care of.....The best exercises are still the best exercises and if cutting 30-50 pounds of slop means not being too fixated on strength gains for 6 months or so.... Who cares.

JMO

[skinny99]

Yup ^

[Gary Gibson]

To cut through all the flaming, trolling, and whatever the hell else is going on I think the thread can be broken down into a few simple ideas.

1) Nobody says that if your fat you should eat too much. Their saying you should eat [I]the right amount[I] and for novice trainees that's a lot more that their eating 99.99999% of the time.

2) the typical diet is shit full of refined starches and sugar so by "eliminating carbs" you are in effect, just cutting garbage out of your diet, therefore you lose weight. All that fucking brown rice and Brocolli you put down isn't the culprit here.....

3) Gaining muscle/strength and losing fat at the same time is precarious at best. Reguardless you should be squating, pressing, cleaning deadlifting, etc but you need to define your goals and eat accordingly. Eat more=gain weight. Eat less=lose weight. Max strength gains and a restricted diet rarely come together but it's on you to weigh the balance and decide what needs to be taken care of.....The best exercises are still the best exercises and if cutting 30-50 pounds of slop means not being too fixated on strength gains for 6 months or so.... Who cares.

JMO

Impressive.

[ZKP]

Not nearly as impressive as that squatting in your underoos..........:D