http://bayesianbodybuilding.com/the-...-bodybuilders/

Unlikely to make a big difference

It's widely recommended by a lot of smart people to be even more strict on protein intake when cutting. I think the logic is that when you're consuming lower calories overall it is more likely for your body to utilize protein for energy than if you're consuming a surplus.

So, try to hit the protein recommendation, IMO. The consensus is 0.82g/lb (1.8g/kg) of total bodyweight.

Ah I missed you were only eating .75g per lb of lean body mass, not total. You should probably up the intake just a bit. Meat is expensive but eggs and milk aren't. Also it's not "too early" to start taking whey if you have trouble hitting your protein goals otherwise.

Also, it's impossible to turn fat into muscle, it doesn't work that way. You've got to lose the fat, and build muscle (but maybe that's what you meant) Since you're a beginner you may build a small amount of muscle while in a deficit, but don't expect any miracles. Your best bet is going be to focus on losing body fat while maintaining what muscle mass you have, and then once you're at a low enough bodyfat %, start building up to a modest surplus. Any muscle built while cutting will be a bonus.

Lastly, if your results are poor/slow, it just means that your TDEE may not be as high as you thought, and you have to adjust your macro's/calories accordingly. Weightlifting in itself has little to do with weight loss. You may burn a few hundred calories in a lifting session, but the vast majority of your weight loss will come from your diet.

Thanks man, appreciate.

I wish you wouldn't repeat this urban myth as truth in a beginner thread. Most novices who're skinny fat will see a substantial recomp.

so ive been doing a upper/lower body split for probably 6months and ive changed it to single body part like back/bis etc and the thing is i fatigue so quickly when i go lower weight higher reps is it normal and the body just needs some time to adj?

I cant say what is or isn't normal. But, if you have been training higher weight, lower reps than yes lower weight, higher reps could be more fatiguing. And yes you will adapt.

True beginners might think they are gaining muscle when in reality its just CNS strength gains.

Heck I guess that applies to all levels - but moreso for the completely untrained.

Well I did say he may build some muscle, but he shouldn't expect to look jacked after leaning down. From what I hear and also from my personal experience a lot of skinny fats are disappointed with their looks once they cut down, expecting to look a lot better/more muscular. I certainly didn't, I looked like I walked straight out of a North Korean labour camp. Obviously different factors play a role, genetics being a pretty substantial one.

In the very beginning this is correct. I would dispute that most people who are intermediates who are reducing body fat while gaining strength are simply getting CNS gains. Bodypart measurements generally bear this out. (Magical arm fat storage or smth.)

I'm sure most people at his weight expect to lose 30lbs of fat and gain 20lbs of muscle and look like Adonis. But that doesn't mean that -40 and +10 isn't possible (or more reasonable expected). Granted this would be a long term process that would extend past his beginner phase into his intermediate.

I don't think its reasonable for a sedentary person at any age/level who is carrying 5-10% extra bodyfat to un**** their diet and begin some semblance of exercise and not expect to gain muscle/lose weight barring a few extreme exceptions.

Any opinions on supplementing Vitamin D particularly during the winter months?

I'm pretty sure that almost nobody gets enough vitamin D. Even though I live in a tropical climate, I still take 6000IU daily.

That is a potentially toxic dose. I've seen little evidence that super dosing vitamins provides any positive effect in virtually any setting. I think the general recommendation is that taking supplements to like... supplement normal diet/activity is standard.

I've considered supplementing Vit D in winter. Many fish oil supplements contain Vitamin D as well. Along with actual oily fish. Traveling to the tropics is my goto winter move. I'd prob just rely on fish/fish oil in part of a balanced diet to handle any Vit D woe.

I've been supplementing 5,000-10,000IU/day of Vitamin D on and off for years and actually never notice a thing.

https://examine.com/supplements/vitamin-d/

On a less scientific note:

Yes. You're taking 6k while also being in an area where most people consider supplementation unnecessary and aren't including any endogenous Vit D in your diet.

Solid random quote selection btw:

Maybe I should take 4k, but I don't go outside much and I have dark skin. Also getting very little if any from diet. Meh.

Why do you think you need 2-4x what is recommended? It seems you're just trying to justify a non-scientifically based stance. Keep in mind that regular Vit D production is essentially 15min of being outside with shorts/tshirt per day with a UV Index >3 (proportionate to some adjustment for skin color/etc). Basically if you are going outside at all in the tropics you're probably gonna be able to get sufficient Vit D on your own.

http://www.naturemade.com/fish-oil-a...MK6FRb8AkrA.97

Is an example of 1000IU of supplemental Vit D within Fish Oil of 300mg. Not really sure what you're on about with mega-dosing Vit D to potentially toxic levels.

First of all, you're exaggerating. 4-6k IU is not "mega-dosing." It's the higher end of the recommended range. Second, the RDI for vit D is most likely a severe underestimate according to a lot of research (compiled on sites like examine.com). Kind of like how the RDI for potassium is probably a significant overestimate of what we need (who is eating the 2kg of vegetables/day required to hit that number?). My "random" excerpt from examine was chosen to display that the upper limit is most likely at least 10k, which my intake falls well under.

Its 10-15x the recommended daily intake in just exogenous supplements. Its 3x the high end of recommendation from Examine, and considered above the TUL in US/Canada. It is within the 10k range with some stupid supplemental choices and a normal diet. (Additional fish oil and a normal protein heavy diet for someone Aidan's size.)

You have literally zero evidence to support the range of 6k+ except that it *might* be safe, which is pretty much the pinnacle of dishonesty/equivocation.

But hey, this is the beginner thread, and instead of going with a standard of "this is a recommended dosage from a standard source, that is in line with common supplementation you may already be taking" you go with "I'm taking some totally unsubstantiated amount, then will retrench and post hoc attempt to justify this as a good idea". So ya... I don't think trolling the **** out of n00bs with potentially dangerous supplementation advice is good.

With the advent of quite cheap blood work, I see no reason why if someone thinks they have a deficiency, get it checked, then dose accordingly, then get it rechecked after a month or so.

Wife gets a prescription for it (50,000 iu 2x/wk and gets tested, obviously), but I think of it as the last last gasp effort to avoid further brain surgery: "Sure, doc, maybe it's the vitamin D deficiency instead of the stuff you can see on the MRI." Can't believe I haven't murdered any of these people.

There are some mushrooms treated with sunlight or UV lights that have high vitamin d levels, like "RDA levels". In my grocery store they're labelled as such and cost the same (baby bellas). It looks like they may be available in Australia. Their out-of-the-blue claim:

Neither of the fish oils I currently have on hand list Vitamin D content, btw, but they do list vitamin E which is very close alphabetically.

Levels that make symptoms of deficiency appear are usually markedly lower than where levels of acceptable are at for optimal "performance"

Just look at Testosterone. No one is going to argue that 350 is in the normal range, but if it was 500 the guy would feel better, look better and perform physically better.

The above is total bull****. Please take that **** to whatever natural news quackery you indulge in during your free time.