alright so recently I have been reading a lot on John Berardi's G flux theory for optimal fitness and health. its basically outlines to create a caloric deficit, but not by diet, through 100 percent exercise instead.
a typical cutting calories approach insists that lets an individual's maintenance level is 2000 calories a day, and through some exercise your burn 300 calories, and you eat 1800 a day to make a 500 deficit, which leads to weight loss.
Berardi's theory insists that however that same individual instead raise his maintenance to 3000 calories a day through exercise, and to eat 2500 to reach a 500 caloric deficit, hence eat more, burn more. also some benefits are that one is eating above their typical maintenance so they dont feel deprived even though they are on a deficit, also all the excess exercise stimulates an even high metabolism and stimulates the maintenance and growth of lean mass tissue. the approach also doesnt let the body go into starvation mode because more than enough calories are given to meet basic demands for energy, and the body is receiving a larger percentage of macro nutrients overall.
even though both approaches give a 500 caloric deficit, apparantly creating a deficit by pure exercise and eating more to make sure that deficit doesnt get to big has way more benefits than just creating a 500 deficit by simply cutting calories. most people of course are ok with the eating more part, but not so much the exercising more.
This is also basically the same method emphasized in Tom Venuto's best seller E-Book "Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle" (GREAT BOOK BTW, I RECOMMEND IT TO EVERYONE)
so far I have stopped cutting calories and tried this approach to fatloss to see if there are any benefits, and personally I find that my overall fitness has increased, i dont feel sluggish, and the extra caloric intake balanced out because it gives me way more energy to carry on with longer and more intense workouts, or shorter and EVEN MORE intense workouts.
Berardi's theory insists that however that same individual instead raise his maintenance to 3000 calories a day through exercise, and to eat 2500 to reach a 500 caloric deficit, hence eat more, burn more. also some benefits are that one is eating above their typical maintenance so they dont feel deprived even though they are on a deficit, also all the excess exercise stimulates an even high metabolism and stimulates the maintenance and growth of lean mass tissue. the approach also doesnt let the body go into starvation mode because more than enough calories are given to meet basic demands for energy, and the body is receiving a larger percentage of macro nutrients overall.
even though both approaches give a 500 caloric deficit, apparantly creating a deficit by pure exercise and eating more to make sure that deficit doesnt get to big has way more benefits than just creating a 500 deficit by simply cutting calories. most people of course are ok with the eating more part, but not so much the exercising more.
This is also basically the same method emphasized in Tom Venuto's best seller E-Book "Burn the Fat, Feed the Muscle" (GREAT BOOK BTW, I RECOMMEND IT TO EVERYONE)
so far I have stopped cutting calories and tried this approach to fatloss to see if there are any benefits, and personally I find that my overall fitness has increased, i dont feel sluggish, and the extra caloric intake balanced out because it gives me way more energy to carry on with longer and more intense workouts, or shorter and EVEN MORE intense workouts.
