This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Programming while losing weight quickly: realistic expectations are crucial. Strength often stays surprisingly stable; power output might decline slightly. Expecting gains during an energy deficit sets yourself up for disappointment.
Post-weight-loss training: once weight loss is complete and energy deficit ends, training can shift to building again. The transition from preservation mode to building mode is real and worth planning.
Coming back to post #91, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Maintenance is the goal: preserving lean mass and strength during weight loss is the goal of resistance training in this context, not building new muscle. That goal is usually achievable with consistent, moderate training.
Picking up post #91: that is the part I would want checked first.
Recovery: heavier training on a energy deficit and on a compound that slows gastric emptying requires attention to recovery (sleep, nutrition, stress). Recovery capacity declines with deficit, so training volume might need adjustment.
Intensity: using weights that allow 6 to 12 reps before fatigue is a reasonable range for preserving muscle. Heavier weights with lower reps can work but require more recovery.
Adaptation and plateau: if strength does not change for weeks, that is stability, not backsliding. Expecting continuous progress during weight loss is unrealistic.
This follows post #95 rather than contradicting it.
I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.
The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient.
On post #95 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
Volume: the number of sets per muscle group per week that supports muscle maintenance is roughly 12 to 18 hard sets. That varies by individual but gives a target range.
post #99 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.
Cardio and resistance: the interaction between energy-intense cardiovascular training and resistance training is real. Moderate cardio is fine; excessive endurance training can interfere with muscle maintenance.
Practical note that does not fit anywhere else. Whatever you conclude from this topic, write down what you did and when. The single most useful thing in your own records is not any individual result; it is that they are dated and consecutive.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Recovery when intake is low: what to cut first
Recovery when intake is low: what to cut first Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Longitudinal report with the method stated, because a number without a method…
|
+85 | 91 | 1.2k | 18mo |
|
Follow-up: Recovery when intake is low: what to cut first
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Recovery when intake is low: what to cut first Everything below is what sits behind that. Longitudinal report with the method stated, because a number without a…
|
+36 | 40 | 38k | 20mo |
|
Programming during a large energy deficit
Programming during a large energy deficit — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Maintenance rather than loss, which is the part of this that almost nobody writes about. I have…
|
+39 | 49 | 36k | 2d |
|
Realistic expectations for strength while losing weight quickly — does this still hold?
Realistic expectations for strength while losing weight quickly — does this still hold? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Maintenance rather than loss,…
|
2 | 11k | 10mo | |
|
Training through a dose escalation week
Training through a dose escalation week — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Maintenance rather than loss, which is the part of this that almost nobody writes about. I have…
|
4 | 42k | 20mo |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Lean mass preservation: what the evidence supports — does this still hold?
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Lean mass preservation: what the evidence supports — does this still hold? Maintenance rather than loss, which is the part of this that almost…
|
+112 | 122 | 5.2k | 20h |
|
Coming back to: Training through a dose escalation week
On the subject in the title: Training through a dose escalation week Working notes rather than a conclusion. Longitudinal report with the method stated, because a number without a method is not a measurement.…
|
+68 | 74 | 46k | 4mo |
|
The nausea timeline across the first four weeks, with a tabulated log
The nausea timeline across the first four weeks, with a tabulated log — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Reporting something rather than asking about it, in case the pattern…
|
+118 | 134 | 1.8k | 10mo |
|
Second pass at: Sodium, potassium and magnesium when intake drops
Second pass at: Sodium, potassium and magnesium when intake drops Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Longitudinal report with the method stated, because a…
|
+132 | 142 | 12k | 22mo |
|
Micronutrient adequacy at low total intake — does this still hold?
Micronutrient adequacy at low total intake — does this still hold? — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Longitudinal report with the method stated, because…
|
+21 | 25 | 45k | 10mo |