Weight Loss is Simple…but not Easy

I'll Bet Even Simple Jack Understands Calories In vs Calories Out for Weight Loss.

Weight loss is simple…but that doesn’t mean it’s easy.

A caloric deficit (no matter how you arrive at it) is all you need to lose weight. Achieving a caloric deficit seems to be difficult for many people for a host of reasons including emotional control, social eating, the routine of eating at a specific time of day, social pressure, and just marketing campaigns convincing you otherwise.

All of these external pressures can lead you to believe that weight loss is more complicated than just calories in vs out…but it’s not.

Just because something is simple doesn’t mean it’s easy. For example:  When bench pressing 400 pounds, the movement is simple, but the amount of weight is tough.

Lets not make weight loss more complicated than it needs to be.

John

Posted by johnbarban in Weight Loss
Tags: Fat Loss, Weight Loss |32 Comments

32 Responses to “Weight Loss is Simple…but not Easy”

  1. Jennifer Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 10:38 am

    You are so right! And because I have been listening to both you and Brad I am losing like crazy! Wish I would have started listening to you at the beginning and I probably would have been done by now. Have gone from a size 12 all the way down to a 4 and have kept all the curves in the right spot to boot. THANK YOU!!

  2. Wood Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 12:17 pm

    everyone says weight loss is simple, but fat loss is the difficult thing say the “experts”

  3. johnbarban Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 12:43 pm

    Wood, that is marketing speak and it’s total BS

  4. johnbarban Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 12:46 pm

    Jennifer,

    That’s fantastic! Congrats on your progress…hey better late than never!

    JB

  5. Bart Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 1:40 pm

    I do agree with you, but to some degree. I have been trying to get my six pack for a long time and I noticed that weight looss is really simple to some point. (11-12 body fat) Once you reach that point it is harder and i am not sure why? I am doing ESE twice a week and i still have problems with completely getting rid of that last stubborn fat. Why? Why if it just a simple equation?
    I train hard and i still feel like my body can only do that much.
    How would you explain that? Should it not be as simple as just creating more deficit to get visible abs once you have the muscles?

  6. johnbarban Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    Bart,

    Yes it is that simple. You need to create a bigger caloric deficit to lose more fat. Try it for 4 weeks and see if you can lose more fat. Once people are down to 10-12% bodyfat my guess is they are happy with the way they look and don’t have enough of an incentive to try and lose even more weight to get a 6-pack.

    I think the issue with losing the last few pounds is more psychological than physiological. Most people just don’t want to accept how much lower their calories really have to go before they lose more weight.

    My buddy was a 6’5 350lbs bodybuilder on lots of drugs and he had to drop his calories to 1600/day in order to get a 6-pack…So unless you’re as massive as he is and working out 6 times per week I think you will need to go significantly lower than 1600/days in order to see your abs.

    This is just an example of how low your calories need to be even if you’re a really big guy.

    JB

  7. Bart Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 2:59 pm

    i will try that, i am not that big
    i am 6.1 and i weight 175 and i see my abs but i must either flex or play with the reflection in the mirrir which is sad !!!
    i always think that i am already at a very low calorie intake (not even counting ESE twice a week) , but you never know, you right, it is possible i still get too much food somehow and this is what amazes me, we actually do not need that much, i will try go lower, but then i will be a moving hungry object!!!

  8. Josh B Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 3:17 pm

    Bart,

    Do you mind if I ask what your measurements are? Waist, shoulders, arms. I’m also about 6’1 – 180 lbs, and going for a six pack. Also how many calories you’re taking in per day. I cut all the way from 205, thought for sure I’d have a six pack by now lol but I’m going to continue to cut calories as well until I get there. I’m averaging about 1400 calories per day now.

  9. Keith Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 3:27 pm

    Lower than 1600 to get a full 6-pack? That seems a but ridiculous. What about people like Rusty Moore from fitnessblackbook, or Martin Berkhan from Leangains who both practice intermittent fasting, both maintain single digit body fat levels while consuming more than 1600 a day?

  10. Josh B Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 4:07 pm

    Keith,

    I’m assuming that your question was pointed toward John but I’m gonna take a guess and say that either exercise brings them (Rusty and Martin) to a higher deficit then eating alone does, or that eating over 1600 calories is just what they eat for maintenance and during fat loss they went much lower.

  11. Bart Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 4:22 pm

    That’s the good question, i never measured myself because i always believed that once i see it in the mirror i will know what is good.
    I will get that tonight, my waist is 31 , shoulder ???, arms ???
    How do i measure the shoulder and arms? Just the length around them?
    I hate counting, because this is all i have been doing for last three years until i discovered you and Brad. I would say around 1600-1900 a day and 2 days of fast.Here is a photo:
    http://yfrog.com/1gfrontbackfj

  12. johnbarban Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 4:24 pm

    Keith,

    You’re making the mistake that ‘maintenance’ is the same as ‘losing’

    It’s a BIG difference.

    My maintenance calories are probably around 1900, but I have to be way below that to lose fat.

    I was estimating my calories at around 1200 per day when I was dieting down from approx 215lbs.

    I’ve leveled off at 184ish eating at maintenance around 2000 per day (this is probably where Im at most days)

    For me to go lower (which I’m starting again) I gotta drop the calories again. I’ll go back to 1200-1500 cals as my daily target until I get down another 10lbs.

    JB

  13. Bart Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 4:38 pm

    Keith, i think John is right. It is amazing how much less you need to eat to cut. Every know body builder will tell you that it comes to calories in versus calories out. It is just hard to eat that little and thats where i have problems. I think i eat little but i dont!!!

  14. Jason Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 5:07 pm

    Hi John,
    I’m well at Adonis Index shoulder-to-waist ratio and have a bodybuilding competition in less than 6 weeks.

    2 Questions:
    1) If fat stores toxins then do you think this is why “clean” calories can have a different effect than the same number of “junk” calories?

    2) Is there any detriment (aside from psychological) to maintaining sub-10% (bodybuilder-levels) year-round when trying to build muscle? Basically an issue of eating at BMR at low levels of body fat (but before starvation).

  15. FitXcel Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 5:44 pm

    JB -

    Why are you looking to lose another 10 lbs? I thought your last pics looked fantastic @ about 175-ish (at least, I think that’s where you said you were).

    I totally agree that getting those last 2-4 stubborn pounds off is more mental than anything else. It’s so much harder to keep those calories restricted when you can already see such great definition in the mid-section.

    -Drew

  16. Chris R Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 7:17 pm

    I pretty much agree with everyone here. If you had of told me 6 months ago when I started this journey at just under 200lbs (at 5’11″) that I would get all the way down to 173lbs and still not be able to see my abs, I’d have said you were nuts! It’s amazing how low you have to go to get there. I now figure I need to go to probably about 165-168lbs to actually see them. Also, it’s amazing how low you have to go calorically to LOSE vs maintain. It’s so easy to lose track of the calories and start to stall out. Especially when you get down to that 32 -33″ range.

  17. Clement Says:
    April 23rd, 2010 at 9:16 pm

    Hi John, if I love training and do it at least 5 times a week, would ESE still be for me? Fact is, I love eating. I have a weakness for roti prata (not sure if you know what that is) and can chug down a foot-long sub for lunch, with 3 of those cookies! However, I’m certainly not fat.

    I weigh 127Ibs and am 168cm tall. I have 13-15% bodyfat but have resonably food definition all over except my cheeks and abdominal area. I’m looking to build muscle and achieve the Taylor Lautner physique but not gain fat at the same time (maybe lose it/get down to 8% bf in the process). I’m currently following jay ferruggia’s triple threat muscle (3 times a week) and play soccer for 2h on Saturdays. I also do a 1h session of sprints. In the view that i hope to make the most athletic gains from the programme as well, do you think I can use ESE to achieve a “clean bulk”, so that I can continue eating the foods I love in moderation while not feeling lethargic throughout the day? Or do you think I should focus on eating cleaner and achieving a caloric surplus? Thanks, and great post.

  18. johnbarban Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 12:00 am

    Clement,

    All I can tell you is that extra calories don’t have anything to do with building muscle. Keep training hard and the muscle will come.

    JB

  19. johnbarban Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 12:00 am

    Drew,

    Thanks for the compliment. I’m just looking to drop a couple more pounds of fat for a bit more defined look.

    JB

  20. johnbarban Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 12:02 am

    Jason,

    1. What ‘toxins’ are you referring to and what dietary sources of fat are you suggesting they might be contained in?

    2. I think it’s mostly psychological

    JB

  21. Wood Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 6:36 am

    John you said no need calorie surplus to build muscle. The “experts” coaches, the “common sense” says you need blocks (protein) and workers (energy surplus) to build the house (muscle)
    Than how is muscle “made”.

  22. Jason Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 9:23 am

    John,
    1. Not dietary sources of fat solely; but toxins from the environment, the food you eat, and what your body produces.

    2. That is great – other than being cold due to minimal insulation, with enough dietary discipline I can maintain the ripped look that I like while other guys in the gym are chasing the massive, bloated look (intentionally or not).

  23. Jason Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 11:15 am

    …Oh yeah, to clarify from earlier, I was referring to body fat storing toxins, not dietary fat.

  24. johnbarban Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 11:45 am

    Wood,

    those people don’t know what they’re talking about, and muscles are not built the same as house like blocks, this is incorrect thinking and displays how little most people know about muscle physiology.

    JB

  25. johnbarban Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 11:46 am

    Jason,

    Define “toxin” and which specific “toxins” you’re referring to.

    JB

  26. Jason Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 2:23 pm

    Toxins = chemicals that the liver does not recognize as useful for the body.

    Examples:
    Xenoestrogens
    Bisphenol A
    Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB’s)
    Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDE’s)
    DDT
    Alloxan

  27. Wood Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 3:24 pm

    there was some word about Tom Venuto. I got his email and i cant help to quote some of them. I dont want you to disprove it or something and feel free to delete or moderate it, but he is the perfect example of the common view i think. So:

    “Paradoxical as it seems, the most effective approach of all is to eat more and exercise a LOT more (as long as you still keep your calorie deficit). Nutritionist and exercise physiologist Dr. John Berardi calls this a “HIGH ENGERY FLUX,” which simply means, higher energy input, higher energy output. The result is a high level of nutrition and a turbo-charged metabolism.

    Top 10 reasons why exercising (“burn”), not dieting (“starve”), is the superior method of losing body fat:

    The most effective fat-burning programs in the world always contain two types of exercise – weight training and cardiovascular training. The reasons to include both could go on for pages, but here are the top 10:” (the 10 can be true so doesnt matter)

    And some scientific bs from 1989 and 2006.

  28. Leonardo Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 5:09 pm

    John, where can I find your contact info please?

  29. johnbarban Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 5:18 pm

    Jason,

    I’m unfamiliar with the research and how the body specifically deals with each of these items (although I do have a friend who studied xenoestrogens) Perhaps I will give her a call and at least find out what the deal is with exogenous estrogens.

    My best toxicologist contact just took a leave of absence from her job and is touring the world for the next 9 months or so…so it might be a while before I can get her input on the others.

    The short answer that I can provide is that I have no idea how dietary fat will have any effect on these items unless they are also stored in the fat in various dietary items.

    My background is not in toxicology so I can only speculate on these items, but speculation doesn’t do any of us much good. I’ll see if I can shake down some of my toxicology people and find out what they know about this whole ‘toxins in fat’ idea.

    JB

  30. René Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 5:20 pm

    Top 10 reasons why exercising (“burn”), not dieting (“starve”), is the superior method of losing body fat

    … Yeah right :P

    In the last month i lost 22 Lbs of fat, and did still grow 2 cm around my shoulder girdle(circumfance wise). I did no cardio, just “starving”(how he calls it) myself and weight Training.

    And he wants to tell me that it´s inferior… lol funny world xD

  31. Leonardo Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 6:36 pm

    oh ok I found your email, got it.

  32. Jason Says:
    April 24th, 2010 at 8:30 pm

    That’s great, John.

    By the way, think a couple of good ideas for podcasts would be:

    -Water & glycogen for the competition physique. What bodybuilders and fitness models do to maximize muscle fullness and minimize subQ water before a show/shoot, vs. how a natural athlete would.

    -Exercise recovery. What are the factors in recovery (i.e. nutrition). Does weight training for aesthetic purposes (i.e. during a cut-down) necessitate full glycogen levels, and is this even practical when calories are necessarily low (on a cut). Also, too many guys pound down the protein shakes around workouts and I think this is unnecessary.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>