Grossly Overweight Diet 2

[Al_Orange]

Sorry to start another thread but there's not a huge amount on fatties that are trying to get strong.

My head is hurting from trying to figure out the diet I should be having. I'll try to keep it brief.

32yrs old. 5'9", 245lbs, very fat. Squat 165, DL 210, BP 132, Press 90.

Primary aim - to get as strong as possible without putting on much/any more fat. Then after I finish the novice program try to maintain strength whilst losing fat.

Now I understand the SS plan and diet = lift big, eat big, get strong

I've previously lost 100lbs of weight and then put most of it back on so I'm very used to counting calories etc. what I don't think I appreciate is how much you need to eat to grow. I find it hard to accept that I can eat 3500 calories and lift 3 times a week and not get really fat. To top it off, I just read the "eat your way past sticking points" article!

At the moment I'm on 2500, 40/30/30 Prot/Carb/Fat. So I think I need to up it a bit but not if I'll get really fat.

My question is - where is a good balance of gaining strength and muscle but not getting too fat? I'd rather get modest gains and not fat than super gains but loads of fat because I'd end up quitting the program.

Thanks - and sorry if this is something that does come up a lot. I just can't find much on it.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

Now I understand the SS plan and diet = lift big, eat big, get strong

I've previously lost 100lbs of weight and then put most of it back on so I'm very used to counting calories etc. what I don't think I appreciate is how much you need to eat to grow. I find it hard to accept that I can eat 3500 calories and lift 3 times a week and not get really fat. To top it off, I just read the "eat your way past sticking points" article!

At the moment I'm on 2500, 40/30/30 Prot/Carb/Fat. So I think I need to up it a bit but not if I'll get really fat.

My question is - where is a good balance of gaining strength and muscle but not getting too fat? I'd rather get modest gains and not fat than super gains but loads of fat because I'd end up quitting the program.

Thanks - and sorry if this is something that does come up a lot. I just can't find much on it.

This is a fine line to walk and in reality, I think it'd be prudent to not gain any weight right now but rather slowly lose weight as you get stronger. You "shouldn't" be limited in your recovery any time soon because simply put, you have a lot of stored fuel that will aid in facilitating these processes. That being said, I think you need to find out just how high you can keep your caloric intake whilst losing 0.5lbs-1lb per week. Of course you could lose weight faster than that if you wanted, but if you want to get strong whilst losing weight we need to take a more moderate approach. Additionally, you might have to switch to advanced novice programming sooner and then later, intermediate programming.

I'd try to hit 250g protein, 200g carb, 75g fat day in and day out for the next 2 weeks and see what happens. Then I'd add a HIIT session after day 3. Then I'd start manipulating carbs and fat in very small increments if needed to get your weight to go down. In my opinion, doing it this way will serve you better in the long run.

[Al_Orange]

Thank you very much! That's really encouraging - mainly because I've never eaten so much on a "diet"! I'm always full and have to make myself eat. Now I know that when I do try and cut weight I can knock off 500 or so cals easily.

I'll stick at it and update with progress over the next few weeks.

Thanks again.

[stef]

Now I understand the SS plan and diet = lift big, eat big, get strong

No. Fat guys don't get to eat like skinny guys need to eat. This is covered in the book and has been covered in many other places. Fat people already have their "eat big" reserves topped off.

[Al_Orange]

Note: sorry, this reply started short and just got longer - not as an argument but to explain my thought process and to help other fatties that must have the same sort of questions.

No. Fat guys don't get to eat like skinny guys need to eat. This is covered in the book and has been covered in many other places. Fat people already have their "eat big" reserves topped off.

It's not actually that clear for someone just picking up the book and with basic searching of the forum. If you eat big and lift big you WILL get stronger - that's the message from the book. There's not a lot about limiting the amount of fat gain - presumably because the program seems to mainly benefit for 18-20 year old skinny novices and that it implies that fat gain is an integral part of getting stronger. It does say that fat guys can expect to lose BF though but there's not a lot of figures to shoot for except 6000 or 3500 calories. Which when you are already massively fat is a bit of a worry.

The program is brutally simple and seemingly effective as long as YOU FOLLOW THE PROGRAM. I particularly like the YNDTP bit. Therefore, who am I to think that I can eat 2500 calories and still think that I'm following the program?

I wasn't aware that the ample fat stores I have will actually contribute to recovery from lifting. That sounds a lot like "turning fat into muscle" which goes against a lot of common theory.

To be honest, the program is what it is so I don't expect it to achieve something that the program isn't designed for. If the answer was "fatties should lose weight first" or "no, you still need to eat a lot" then I would understand. I guess I'm just afraid of wasting my time/effort on the holy grail of strength gains whilst not getting fatter (which is subtly different to losing fat)

The reason the forum is an amazing resource is that it draws on the practical and real world experience of many different people, that have used and manipulated the program over many years. Therefore, most permutations have been explored.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

It's not actually that clear for someone just picking up the book and with basic searching of the forum. If you eat big and lift big you WILL get stronger - that's the message from the book. There's not a lot about limiting the amount of fat gain - presumably because the program seems to mainly benefit for 18-20 year old skinny novices and that it implies that fat gain is an integral part of getting stronger. It does say that fat guys can expect to lose BF though but there's not a lot of figures to shoot for except 6000 or 3500 calories. Which when you are already massively fat is a bit of a worry.

While the bolded part is certainly true, there is a caveat to that. If you're carrying a lot of body fat you don't need to do stuff like GOMAD or the see-food diet. Great progress can be made with a more sensible approach, however the problem is that some people don't actually do this moderated approach, but instead go on a super low calorie diet and screw the whole thing up. I get what you're saying though, it isn't abundantly clear.

The program is brutally simple and seemingly effective as long as YOU FOLLOW THE PROGRAM. I particularly like the YNDTP bit. Therefore, who am I to think that I can eat 2500 calories and still think that I'm following the program?

Yes, but part of the clarification article (and the book) talks about exceptions to the "program" and who needs different recommendations, i.e. you. Interestingly enough, obese/overweight people tend not to actually eat any more than their lean age-matched controls and eating 2500kCal may actually be "eating a lot more" than usual, irrespective of body weight.

I wasn't aware that the ample fat stores I have will actually contribute to recovery from lifting. That sounds a lot like "turning fat into muscle" which goes against a lot of common theory.

Well we're not turning fat into muscle, as you're right, that DOES NOT happen. What I'm saying is that you have ample energy stores in your body and that by accessing them, they will contribute to recovery when compared to someone who does not have that amount of energy just hanging around.

To be honest, the program is what it is so I don't expect it to achieve something that the program isn't designed for. If the answer was "fatties should lose weight first" or "no, you still need to eat a lot" then I would understand. I guess I'm just afraid of wasting my time/effort on the holy grail of strength gains whilst not getting fatter (which is subtly different to losing fat)

I'm gonna shoot you straight on this one, you're results at the end of a year strength-wise (provided you're consistent, form is good, and your programming changes accordingly...3 things that often get overlooked) will be about the same whether you actually start eating like I suggested or continue to eat the way you had been before, i.e. the way that got you to 245. Just with the way I'd have you do it, you'll actually look like you lift at the end of 12 months and you'd have better control of your nutrition and how to tweak it to increase LBM, lose more body fat, etc.

The reason the forum is an amazing resource is that it draws on the practical and real world experience of many different people, that have used and manipulated the program over many years. Therefore, most permutations have been explored.

[/QUOTE]

I agree. I do love this forum 95% of the time. :-)

[GrimmThing]

The Nutrition section in SS very clearly tells fat guys to not overeat.

[konkoba98]

The Nutrition section in SS very clearly tells fat guys to not overeat.

SS 3 maybe

[Paul1]

I think that it's a very underemphasized point, and I'm glad it appears here, that body fat stores are a source of energy. Every pound of body fat is (potentially!) up to 3500 kcal of energy (though in reality we aren't that efficient). That means that it's actually hard for someone with a lot of excess fat to be in a total body caloric deficit. The deficit issue will come in if you restrict your diet so much that you don't repair your 'damaged' muscles from workout to workout; and also if you are not able to replenish glycogen stores. Glycogen is critical, because weightlifting is anaerobic, i.e. it's very dependent on quick availability of glucose. The issue is not so much that you'll trash all your glycogen in a starting strength workout, but over time you're going to deplete stores faster than you maintain them. So trying to be isocaloric or no worse than a SMALL deficit is probably going to do you well. In the meantime feed yourself good stuff. Low glycemic index foods, make your carbohydrates as complex as possible, try and identify empty calories and slash them -- or at least replace them with healthier calories.

[Al_Orange]

Thanks for the reply. My opinion (for what it's worth as a fat novice) is that it is under emphasized - which is fine because the principles of SS are about strength gain for novices not about fat loss/maintenance - which is the reason for my original post.

I've done many years of diets and conditioning etc. and not once have I ever heard/read/thought about the fat stores as being beneficial for recovery so I'm glad I asked this. I've only been going 8 days on this plan/diet and have eaten really clean (with the exception of whey protein and protein bars). I've stuck to 250/200/75 +/-10% (although my first few days were 250g carbs.) - it's WAY too early for any meaningful measures but the lifts are going up as expected, my gut is 1 inch smaller, my thighs are 0.5 inch bigger and I'm a pound lighter. I honestly thought that I'd be heavier and bigger around the middle because I've never put so much effort into eating so much food before!!

Hopefully things will continue this way for a bit.