Good idea.

Yes sir.

Can you clarify what you mean? Do you think the average novice needs to switch their routine up with regards to resistance training each month, speaking strictly physiologically?

I agree, you need to progressively overload the body with whatever you are doing, from cardio to weights.

But I'm not too sure about having to switch up the routine every month. But than again, I'm not too sure in what context you meant.

Definately. Intervals are great. Definately worth a shot if you haven't tried them before. Give them a go for a month or two and see how your body responds. Report back and let us know what works for you.

Well compared to you, almost all of us are average novices. the routine "switching" is physiologically as well as psychological. I'd be bored with my routine within a month or so if I did the same speed with same incline, same weights, etc. And if i did the same cardio with same resistance for a couple months the weight loss would probably stop (and it did).
now speaking strickly physiologically and only with resistance training, i suppose the routine could be mostly static (although my routines are pretty dynamic). but that is natural for me because the closer a person gets to their target weight, the harder the weight will be to lose....something has got to change, whether its nutrition and/or training.

Keep in mind that I am on Atkins, so my exercise may differ slightly to greatly to most of you.

I'm not far past novice stage.

Stage of training readiness is NOT determined by size or years in the gym. Rather, it's determined by how quickly your recover from the stress of training. This rate of recovery dictates the need for complexity in periodization.

And how quickly we progress from novice, to intermediate, to advanced, to expert will vary from person to person.

This need to feel like you have to change something in the novice stage is the biggest mistake I see people make, in reference to strength training.

You say "same weights." A novice should never be working out with the same weights.... and if they are, something is very wrong with their programming.

You see, being a novice, you are able to recover very quickly, locally and systemically. Neural fatigue does not set in as *hard* as a novice simply b/c you are not working with weights at such a young *training age* that will promt massive set backs in fatigue.

That said, the stress/fatigue/supercompensation curve for a novice is very short. This translates into a very useful way of training that we know as straight linear periodization.

Because of this, we should be increasing weights on the major lifts pretty much every single workout, assuming we are using something like a full body routine 3 times per week.

I say this to some people, even some professionals in the industry, and they don't understand it. It sounds complicated, but it really isn't. Novices don't create major stress, hence, they don't experience major fatigue, hence, the most efficient way to get stronger (which is very important in the novice stage) is to optimally train during supercompensation periods. And for the novice, these periods peak every 48 hours or so.

I'm not quite sure what you mean in terms of physiology. Read above and correlate your line of thinking to what I say above please. If you don't mind that is.

On the cardio side of things, it's a totally different story. I have no issue with switching things up at will.

I'm speaking for anyone really, no matter of dietary patterns.

[QUOTE=Steve;291739]No, your experience is normal. It's the law of thermodynamics. You can neither create nor destroy energy. Calories are energy. If you are dieting, that means you MUST be in an energy deficit. Building muscle is a very intensive process, energetically speaking, meaning.... it requires a lot more energy above and beyond that which would maintain your current weight. You need to travel into the surplus range of energy balance in order to provide sufficient "fueling" of new muscle growth.

I have been wanting to gain muscle, and according to calorie calcs I need 2500 cal/day for muscle growth..but that number scares me because now I eat 1700. However 1700 is the amount I need for weight loss, while 2200 is my maintenance amount. I've NEVER eaten that much on a daily basis. I have to say, while on 1700 for 3 month I gained a LITTLE muscle, but I had also vastly changed my diet to include much more quality protein. In your opinon, if I am on the high end of the healthy BMI, would it be more beneficial to aim for fat loss or muscle growth? And if muscle growth- is it really necessary to eat 2500 cal/day?

[QUOTE=jk123;296722]I really suggest copying this question and pasting it in my journal. I'll reply to you there, so that we are not hijacking this thread that's already been beat up enough.

Oh okay, sure. I didn't see a "journal" area, just the weight loss diaries- where is your journal? Thanks.

http://weight-loss.fitness.com/weigh...tml#post296746

i am very confused about the whole strength training to lose fat controversy. Some say you can build muscle while losing fat, others say it's impossible. I have been strength training for about seven months now, and have lost 36lbs. My legs look very muscular, and while they have always been on the muscular side, they are more so now than they ever have been. Certainly when I weighed 90lbs less, they were not nearly as muscular as they are now. And I didn't gain the muscle in the 6yrs that it took me to put on the weight--I wasn't lifting any weights at all, and did very little exercise. If i had been, I wouldn't be as fat as I now am..lol

So I find it hard to believe that it's impossible or unlikely to gain muscle while losing weight. And when you have very reputable trainers and professionals saying that you CAN do both, I think I have to agree with them from my own personal experience.

Ok Steve, now you can trash my ideas...lol

Its not that losing fat and gaining muscle is impossible per se, so much as it is unlikely and very short-lived. There is a small window so to speak of time when a person who has been sedentary suddenly starts exercising and they can practically trick the body into creating some muscle while in a deficit. The strength training is realized much more quickly by the body as a stress and indicator for change than a reasonable deficit in calories is. So it might begin to make the adaptions for muscle and strength gain initially, but once the stress of caloric deficit kicks in, say goodbye to muscle gain.

There is also a bit of an issue with perspective here. Firstly, just because you appear more muscular after losing weight does NOT mean that you have actually gained muscle. You have simply lost the fat around the muscle which makes it more visible. It is a lesson in relativity. If there is less fat hiding the muscle it looks like there is more muscle overall, but there isnt neccesarily. My cousin looks like he is stronger and more muscular than me, but he weighs about 120 and has about 1/3 the lean body weight that i do. and yet he looks more muscular. Not to mention that his strength levels are about 1/4 of mine as well.

Strength is another issue people seem to confuse with muscle gain. Just because you have gotten stronger does not neccesarily mean that you have built more muscle. While the two are related, it is not a direct proportional relationship. You can increase strength without creating new muscle. From my understanding, alot of strength gain is a matter of improving neuromuscular efficiency and effectiveness. Which can be done while on a reasonable deficit, though generally more difficult.

A trainer who says you can increase muscle and lose fat at the same time is technically correct. If he says you can do it on a long term and substantial basis, he is full of shit. He/she is either ignorant, or knows how to play the mind games to keep himself making a living. Sadly, a fairly large portion of the health/fitness industry is pretty darn corrupt and/or ignorant.

I always have periods where I can't loose any weight. I talked to my doctor and she recommended a one week low carb diet when your weight won't drop anymore. She told me that its a good boost when your stuck.

I didn't read much of the thread, but I have to say that walking an hour a day has seriously boosted my metabolism. Before, I could look at something and gain ten pounds, but now I can totally pig out for a week and only gain a pound or two!

I'm not trashing your ideas at all.

And truthfully, we all have different experiences. If you've gained muscle and lost fat simultaneously for an appreciable length of time.... I believe ya. But that doesn't mean it's something that should be said to hundreds of people.

If you've experienced said circumstance, you would be considered a genetic elite/superior.

I've met many in my life. However, it's a very small percentage of the people I've worked with. 2-3% maybe.

For the genetic average and below, which makes up 98% of the world, they are governed by the laws of thermodynamics.

And that's that.

You pick a random sample of people and put them through the ropes of a high protein diet, caloric deficit, strength training, and maybe some cardio and they'll lose weight alright. A handful of them will even gain some muscle... but that will be short-lived. After a while their body will *figure out what's going on* and there won't be much more chance for muscle creation. That's not me spouting off my idea. It's what I see on a daily basis. It's what makes sense knowing what we know about the human body scientifically speaking.

So again, maybe you do lie within that upper echelon of people, genetically speaking. If so, lucky you!

I might add that the majority of people that claim impressive muscle gains while dieting over an appreciable length of time simply confuse muscle exposure for muscle gain.

You lose fat, you uncover muscle that's been there all along. It gives a very vivid picture of muscle gain, when in reality, you didn't. This could be what's going on too, unless you tracked the specific measurements required to say for fact, you gained muscle.

And one last point to add, it's been my experience from working with quite a few people that the fatter you are, the more likely you are to experience *good* body recomposition (lose fat, gain muscle simultaneously).

The closer you are to your set-point weight, the less likely.

ETA: I read coach's post after my own. He covered it well.

I highly doubt I'm in some "elite" genetic group..lol Perhaps it just looks to me like I am more muscular. I think my main concern was that we hear all the time that you should make sure to add strength training to your workouts when you're trying to lose weight. And then to hear people say that you cannot gain muscle while in a caloric deficiency, it's very contradictory. But now that I realize that the stregth training is important to maintain the muscle that one already has (so that we lose fat, not muscle), I feel less confused. Ok...I think I get it now. Thanks.

Many people have problems differentiating between physique-improvement and muscle gain.

Or, they eat in a deficit one week and a surplus the next, thus netting out to some muscle gain and fat loss if things were done properly.

OR, they really did experience appreciable recomp and this usually means they're a genetic superior.