Hypothetical Situation: All Sugar Diet with caloric deficit. What happens?

I know many people on this subforum are in the Calories/Calories Out fat loss ideology.

So I pose a question:

Person A eats 1500 calories (his maintenance calorie rate is 2000) but eats at a ratio of 80 percent carbs, 10 percent protein, 10 percent fat.

Person B eats 1500 calories (maintenance 2000) but eats at a ratio of 45 percent protein, 25 carbs, 30 percent fat.

They both exercise 3-4x a week with moderate intensity. All other conditions are the same.

Will one or the other lose more weight, or will they lose equal amounts of weight and why? What about muscle mass? Will Person A lose muscle mass due to his diet? I just want to see the specifics of our members' opinions on the calorie in/out equation.

i think A loses more "weight" because of the combination of caloric deficit and muscle loss, but makes up for the difference with bloating from all the carbo water retention.

No protein = loss of muscle mass.

That would be roughly how most vegans eat. Those people are almost all really skinny.

What I'm seeing so far then is that it's not just about calorie deficit when it comes to being healthy as opposed to losing "weight(muscle mass included". Anyone saying that it only has to do with calorie in/out?

From the thread title, I guess apart from getting diabetes within a week you'd have to keep eating every half hour to get some energy, but you would be buzzing.

From the post, I guess the same as everyone else, you'd just get really thin.

Originally Posted by Saltricks

Click to expand...

What I'm seeing so far then is that it's not just about calorie deficit when it comes to being healthy as opposed to losing "weight(muscle mass included". Anyone saying that it only has to do with calorie in/out?

Healthy is not just being thin or the right weight.

Originally Posted by munchausen

Click to expand...

That would be roughly how most vegans eat. Those people are almost all really skinny.

You meant to say Satan's little helpers.

To answer the question: Person A will lose weight--that is, for as long as he can sustain such a diet--but most of that weight will be lean muscle mass. Person B might lose less weight than person A, but he will be losing more fat, and most likely, gaining more muscle mass, simultaneously. Although, there's really no reason person B should limit his caloric intake to 1500 per day, as that is just silly.

I know; I used to be person A, and now, essentially, I'm person B, but I don't count calories, and I eat more fat and protein.

What do you mean when you say "healthy"?

What kind of "moderate exercise" 3-4x/wk are we talking about here?

How much lean body mass does your hypothetical individual have to start out?

at 1500kcal per day? with moderate exercise?

both would be be losing a ton of weight like a motherfucker. you're basically putting them in old world style fat camps (like that fat camp movie with ben stiller).

lets just put the average male basal metabolism rate at 2200kcal/day (person who basically weighs 170lbs and is in between 5-7 and 6-0ft tall) as a extremely rough estimate.

they'd be at least at a 700kcal deficit regardless. on days of exercise you bump that to at least 1000kcal.


it might be more interesting to do the opposite and create a study with a guaranteed caloric surplus. something where you'd come up with a null hypothesis stating what you think might [not]happen.

comparing two groups forced fed 4000kcal/day -one with your preposed high carb diet/one with the more balanced diet you mentioned.

Originally Posted by Hartmann

Click to expand...

What do you mean when you say "healthy"?
I'd define healthy as someone with a proportionate amount of muscle for their build, low resting insulin levels, and a fair amount of essential ***** acids in the diet.

The study I would like done is one that compares the long term effects of a low carbohydrate, ad libitum diet to a low fat, calorie restricted diet.

healthy: under 18 percent body fat (as a man), free from diabetes, heart disease and other chronic illnesses
moderate exercise as defined by: anaerobic (weight lifting) and aerobic exercise that is moderately strenuous (lifting sets with higher that 5 reps but under 10, swimming/tennis/basketball)
LBM, Lean Body Mass: For this example, some number higher than 82 percent of body weight. Lets say, 70 percent LBM looking to slim down.

I made this post to allow people to discuss the specifics of the calorie in/calorie out equation and in order to show the uninformed that just "losing weight" is not enough to be "healthy".

Originally Posted by mgm9128

Click to expand...

The study I would like done is one that compares the long term effects of a low carbohydrate, ad libitum diet to a low fat, calorie restricted diet.

My personal experience with this when I did low carb, "at will" diet (Atkins): Lost a **** ton of weight (about 20 percent of my body weight: 40 pounds) within 3 months. I probably had a caloric deficit anyway, just because I really couldn't eat a lot of the things I like. Lean muscle mass, however, was also lost. I had wrestled a lot in high school and had a good amount of LBM, but after the diet my wrists were rail thin, and I looked a little soft.