Evidence-based body recomposition strategies for beginner, intermediate, and advanced lifters - Pt. 2 - With Dr. Eric Helms - Ep. 215

[outro music] So what I'm hearing you say is that if we want to make body recomposition more likely, especially the more trained we are, we need to appreciate a longer timescale, first and foremost, so that will occur.

And then within, in that time, we don't want to get shredded.

We want to stay at a, uh, at amount of body fat where we, we can function properly as our body should.

And you said earlier at the beginning of the podcast that between, uh, body recomposition in a surplus and body recomposition in a deficit, it's much more likely to achieve body recomposition in a deficit.

So from there, my understanding is if we want to achieve body recomposition, it makes sense to go into a bit of a deficit while keeping it moderate, because as you mentioned, and as I discussed with the good doctor Eric Trexler, there is-- there seems to be a point, uh, or an, uh, a, a magnitude of deficit beyond which muscle gain can no longer occur.

So in summary, what I'm saying is we want a longer n- a long enough timescale, a moderate deficit, while also, um...

while also what? I keep losing my train of thought tonight.

For me, it's like almost 11:00 PM audience, so please understand.

[laughs] Anyway, so longer timescale, moderate deficit.

Oh, yes, and maintaining a, uh, an adequate amount of body fat.

Now, when you say moderate deficits, what are we talking about exactly?

[lip smack] I think generally as a heuristic, probably less than 500 calorie deficit.

Um, and probably more often from some of the studies that I've seen in kind of the 100 to 300 calorie range is, is, is a decent gauge.

Um, and this does depend upon the actually the absolute amount of fat mass someone's carrying.

So if, if you're talking to someone who's like 110 kilograms and they're, you know, 6'2" and they're, uh, you know, in the 20s, like they're not-- no one would say, "Hey, you're obese," right? Um, and actually, I, I don't know, I didn't do the BMI calculation, but that's not an unreasonably high or even necessarily unhealthy level of body fat for someone who's male at that height and weight.

Um, but you probably could have a larger deficit, right? Because there's a lot more fat to tap into than if you were 5'2" and you were 55 kilos, right? Even if you weren't super low in body fat.

So the deficit does need to be considered a little bit.

Um, there are probably people like that latter example, the person who's, you know, 52 kilos, 300 calorie deficit's a lot.

It's big.

You know, that, that's, um, effectively like a 600 calorie deficit for someone in the other example I gave.

So I think that just needs to be contextualized a little bit.

We often think of deficits as kind of the relationship to like the, the losing a pound or half a kilogram, like the 3,500 calorie heuristic.

But there does need to be some consideration to what is someone's TDE and total size.

Um, if your TDE, because you're only 52 kilograms, is 2,000 calories, um, a 500 calorie deficit is a big drop.

That's cutting your, your total intake in a quarter, and it looks very different as what is your lifestyle, right? A 2,000 calorie deficit kind of feels normal-ish with small portion sizes for most people.